The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Originally Posted by Philip Lacroix Of course some of the followers of this thread will dismiss "numbers" and, perhaps, entertain us again with some kind of belittling argument.

Originally Posted by Arcane Just LOL! And playing with AI and science is not playing God? Soon we will have biorobotic features like shown here or android robots like shown here and we still can't imagine the other way around that someone might have done the same for us? Remember that most past fiction is cold water for us in present so it is same for future.

Quod erat demonstrandum

So, Arcane, you are attacking your personal "science straw man" once again, with zero evidence in support of your fantasizing, other than some random entertainment movies.

One of the few times I consider god may have stepped down to earth.

http://www.history.com/topics/world-...-truce-of-1914

Lets see if he/she shows up this year.

Perhaps we could settle at least one point in here even though the odds seem dismal. Regarding the subject of "Playing God" it can be seen that since this is only two little words yet is used in very different ways by the scientific and the faithful, the problems that come with words, especially when unaccompanied by precise defintions and just how different and unreliable words are compared to numbers.

It seems to me that when a person of faith uses the term "playing god" it is assumed that this is a bad thing, perhaps because it comes down to us from it's use to describe heresy and blasphemy, not to mention human arrogance. In this form it is always "acting above one's station" and automatically a pejorative. One doesn't have to present any evidence since it is assumed it is at best ill-conceived, and at worst punishable by death.

To a religious scientist it simply means that one should consider ethics before one even begins. We've all heard the statement that existed well up into the 20th Century and maybe is still thought by some even if they are not Mennonites - "If God wanted man to fly, men would be born with wings". Any ethics in this is merely an assumption that it is somehow a disrespectful affront to God to strive to do anything beyond what the lowest common denominator can imagine. The only place where real ethics is concerned is in situations like those surrounding the development of the atomic bomb, such as concerned Albert Einstein and J. Robert Oppenheimer paraphrased as "should I hand a loaded gun to a child?" who essentially considered answering "Possibly if the innocent child is threatened by a grizzly bear". The point is that the difference is that evidence must be considered and the outcome isn't assumed in the premise.

To the atheist scientist this term has no meaning since even if we assume there is a god it is surely far more arrogant to assume we are even capable of knowing he/she/it's mind and drawing any meaningful conclusion as to what he/she/it considers "playing" and if and when it crosses the line from cute to offensive. There is no such thing as "unnatural" since if it can occur, it is by definition, natural. The only "playing god" with any obvious offense is deciding another man is not worthy of living and even that has fuzzy edges as in the above example it could be said that who are we to decide that the child's life is inherently more worthy than the bears. Who are we? We are humans and therefore justified in siding with humans instead of bears (unless of course one is from Chicago )

We don't know if any "who" created this world but we know we certainly didn't. We just arrived here with the rules already in place. We can't live for long eating rocks. Something must die for us to live. The best we can do is to try to be smart and judicious in how we accomplish this.

In that vein, maybe we can agree here to not use the term "playing god" as if it was some self-evident, blank check truth for automatic condemnation.

Originally Posted by Arcane ... And playing with AI and science is not playing God? ...

It is when there's no god!

You know to some of us non theists this poll looks a little ridiculous. Every answer except the first option is either a statement of belief or disbelief in god.
You might as well just call the poll "God Whether You Like It Or Not" and have one response button, "OK, then."

I mean seriously, when are the theists going to get used to the idea that god is not the answer he is the problem (and i mean the fantasy of him) and that to most of us who are a little more spiritually mature, this big daddy in the sky fetish seems like a destructive childrens fantasy.

We can stop debating god now, he is an irrelevant anachronism, god is over, no need to pretend belief or disbelief any longer.

Originally Posted by enorbet {...}We don't know if any "who" created this world but we know we certainly didn't. We just arrived here with the rules already in place. We can't live for long eating rocks. Something must die for us to live. The best we can do is to try to be smart and judicious in how we accomplish this.{...}

Very good quote! Just don't bring crucifixion into this. There is always 3rd option.

Originally Posted by fogpipe {...}I mean seriously, when are the theists going to get used to the idea that god is not the answer he is the problem (and i mean the fantasy of him) and that to most of us who are a little more spiritually mature, this big daddy in the sky fetish seems like a destructive childrens fantasy.{...}

O rly? Once again i find that people don't bother reading everything(including context) but just cherry pick. True nature of God is unknown to us! This is exactly the reason why we should ask questions about God! If there is no God then i agree that "Power is ours!" but at the same time we still should be curious about the possibility and concept of God because if it will turn out to be real deal we actually could use God's help! Besides once again - we don't know why if there is God we don't have access to God or access to communicating with God or whatever. Ever accured to you that there might be reason why God could exist AND be lost to us at same time? As said before "God could be inside of us" for all we know OR God could have perfect excuse to not involve in our acitivities. Afterall God possesses far more skill and knowledge of world than we - maybe it is supposed to be this way. Just explore on your own!

Here is nice article about belief recently found surfing web. Cheers.

*sigh* Thank you for pointing out that i should know better than to get involved in these kinds of discussions

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ry?id=27811605

We are god and know better than none(.) but believing or teaching to can be fun***

Love how gaudy a church can be especially the seemingly infinite space to the ceilings...

Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet View Post
{...}We don't know if any "who" created this world but we know we certainly didn't. We just arrived here with the rules already in place. We can't live for long eating rocks. Something must die for us to live. The best we can do is to try to be smart and judicious in how we accomplish this.{...}

Originally Posted by Arcane Very good quote! Just don't bring crucifixion into this. There is always 3rd option.

It's not a quote. It's just part of my thought process. however it doesn't seem you practiced what you're preaching here since you are twisting it in order to setup some nebulous point you want to make (again and despite the evidence). I not only did not even hint remotely at crucifixion I made no mention of any crucifixion of anyone let alone any specific one which may or may not have actually happened other than within the pages of fiction.

Originally Posted by Arcane O rly? Once again i find that people don't bother reading everything(including context) but just cherry pick. True nature of God is unknown to us! This is exactly the reason why we should ask questions about God! If there is no God then i agree that "Power is ours!" but at the same time we still should be curious about the possibility and concept of God because if it will turn out to be real deal we actually could use God's help! Besides once again - we don't know why if there is God we don't have access to God or access to communicating with God or whatever. Ever accured to you that there might be reason why God could exist AND be lost to us at same time? As said before "God could be inside of us" for all we know OR God could have perfect excuse to not involve in our acitivities. Afterall God possesses far more skill and knowledge of world than we - maybe it is supposed to be this way. Just explore on your own! Here is nice article about belief recently found surfing web. Cheers.

There can be no "true nature" of anyone until AFTER there is compelling evidence that they even existed at all. Once it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that the human existed then maybe we can attempt to go about gathering evidence supporting that he may be more than just human. One follows the other. We don't get to just move on to step 3 before step 2 is solid ground when they depend on each other.

Much more importantly we don't get to say "Well that is highly improbable, therefore nothing is provable, anything could be possible, therefore speculation and "ancient knowledge" is just as good as modern research and peer review and one opinion is as good as any other". Science stops at what it cannot know and no evidence = no knowledge = no effert. It is Not only that we don't know... it's that we cannot know. Next!

Once we know we can not know some of us can let go and no; but, there's a grape vine on the mary go round.

Oh and people who say God does not exist are expected to not believe in any other specific form or power either, like opposite - do you?

Satan? What a naughty boy.

Evolution will decay devils and gods, they transcend rationality.

Originally Posted by enorbet How can one equate "most reliable" to "no longer reliable", and "most objective" to "not objective"? Decimals, fractions and percentages exist for a reason. ... At worst and quite common evidence was ignored in the interest of forcing a square peg in a round hole to support a preconceived sacred cow notion or even to serve some far uglier, worldly action disguised as justifiable religious dogma such as declaring some lonely old lady a witch in order to confiscate her land.

52 The Quantum Mechanical Universe (P.s: you can download then use VLC to speed it up a notch and save "time." )

Kansas - Dust In The Wind Live in Chile 2006 Legendado

Originally Posted by enorbet If Science and the rules of evidence weren't demonstrably both superior in accuracy and more justly humane, the separation of Church and State wouldn't be the obviously huge leap in Jurisprudence that it was and is.

Would be nice!

Chapter One Putting It Mildly