Who Cares If God Exists?

[PhanthomOps]

Gorgo,
Quote:
"I tell people they don't need god(s) because they don't have to put themselves down. Believing in god(s) is the result of the same confusion of self-worth that putting others down is. They are afraid of reality in some way, so they need to create a fantasy life in order to get self-worth. You hear it all the time, and we've heard it in response to some of my posts. "What if this is all there is?" "My life would be meaningless if there were no god(s)."
It's okay, people. You don't need that. You want it, fine. But don't ask me to tell you that it's a reasonable thing to do."

I live in a world that is all too real, with it's uncompromising attitude of inhumanity to man and desire to self destruction.
However, my belief in God (The Father, Son & Holy Spirit) is no fantasy. The self-worth I durive is personal and not used to belittle anyone, or to elevate myself to a false level of superioty. And by the way, I am not now nor would I ever ask you for approval.

[Gorgo]

I see. Then you'd be glad to find out that you were wrong and there are no god(s), no spirits, no afterlife. You'd be glad to find we all evolved from that primordial slime. Right?

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, I live in a world that is all too real, with it's uncompromising attitude of inhumanity to man and desire to self destruction. However, my belief in God (The Father, Son & Holy Spirit) is no fantasy. The self-worth I durive is personal and not used to belittle anyone, or to elevate myself to a false level of superioty. And by the way, I am not now nor would I ever ask you for approval.

[PhanthomOps]

Gorgo,

If you want to believe that you came from scum, be my guest. If as you say I am wrong, then so be it. I would rather believe in creation than being some blob of slime, slithering around in a sesspool

[Gorgo]

Thank you for once again proving my point. You would have no self-worth without god(s), so you need to create one (or more) in order to get it.

[PhanthomOps]

Gorgo,

Boy you are really reaching. My self-worth is from:
1) "unto thine own self be true"
2) doing the best I can for my family
3) doing what ever I am able to do for those less fortunate than me
4) keeping ethics, morals, honesty and integrity in my everyday life
5) keeping the faith, that after a long search I came to embrace

How's that sesspool? Nice and warm and juicy??

[Gorgo]

You don't need to keep repeating to prove my point. You've already made it.

[Gorgo]

You don't need to keep repeating to prove my point. You've already made it.

[PhanthomOps]

Gorgo,

Gee, you didn't answer my question - Boo Hoo

[Gorgo]

If life is a cesspool, then that's life. I don't need to create some fantasy that it isn't. However, life is not the cesspool that you think it is.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Waychel, My point was that there is no absolute truth to anything in personal philosophy because people make their own truths for themselves. It is pointless to claim your truth is absolute when the philosophy of creation itself is a purely speculatory one and any explanation requires some faith on every person's part to uphold in their minds.

As a Baha'i I agree strongly that there is not such a thing as absolute truth in science or faith.

As a scientist I disagree that a significant amount of faith is accept the results of scientific knowledge and research. Most scientist are not arrogant or atheists. They are mostly in the field and the lab doing research and not involved with the debate. Almost everthing in our lives today has its foundation in science from paper to computers, and yes evolution, because it is all tied to gether and you cannot seperate evolution from any of the other sciences that impact our daily lives.

One very sad impact of the Creationist movement is the US is we are falling behind the rest of the world in the sciences. Many interviews and polls of students has shown the majority totally lack a basic knowledge of science and their interest and concern for science is genuinely indifferent.

[PhanthomOps]

Gorgo,

Quote:
"If life is a cesspool, then that's life. I don't need to create some fantasy that it isn't. However, life is not the cesspool that you think it is."

I did not say that life is a cesspool - I was only inquiring as to your individual one.

You know there are many areas as far as evolution is concerned that are hard to believe. For instance, from the big-bang and/or the one-celled paramecium all forms of life developed. Personally, I feel it takes more faith to believe that, then in creation.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, Gorgo, Quote: "If life is a cesspool, then that's life. I don't need to create some fantasy that it isn't. However, life is not the cesspool that you think it is." I did not say that life is a cesspool - I was only inquiring as to your individual one. You know there are many areas as far as evolution is concerned that are hard to believe. For instance, from the big-bang and/or the one-celled paramecium all forms of life developed. Personally, I feel it takes more faith to believe that, then in creation.

The 'Big-Bang' is far off in reality and dealt with in science in many alternative viewpoints. The subject is complex and deep and often involves a subjective journey into very complex math and physics. I am not sure the debate over the 'Big-Bang' is fruitful.

The discussion of the reality of science and evolution is more down to earth where the heart of the debate is.

Creation is a simple choice of faith. You either believe in Theistic Evolution or the special creation of one of the religions/ Most commonly the 'Creation Science' of Christianity.

Science whether people believe in it or not, does not deal with the same issues of faith as religion. All forms of life did not likely evolve from the one-celled paramecium. A better understanding of science would greatly improve the quality of the debate.

[PhanthomOps]

Shunyadragon:

Quote:
"Science whether people believe in it or not, does not deal with the same issues of faith as religion. All forms of life did not likely evolve from the one-celled paramecium. A better understanding of science would greatly improve the quality of the debate."

Excellent point. Personally, I believe that human science is a study of God's creation.

[Pooeypants]

I find it hilarious how anyone can get Cosmology mixed with Biological theory, fair enough if you get bit abiogenesis (biochemistry) into the same bag...

Ofc, this isn't helped by the fundementalism that has recently swept across the US again, which is as in this day and age we own all our luxeries to science yet people are willing to doubt and deny it on basis of ancient scripture which were probably not meant to be taken literally.

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by Pooeypants, I find it hilarious how anyone can get Cosmology mixed with Biological theory, fair enough if you get bit abiogenesis (biochemistry) into the same bag... Ofc, this isn't helped by the fundementalism that has recently swept across the US again, which is as in this day and age we own all our luxeries to science yet people are willing to doubt and deny it on basis of ancient scripture which were probably not meant to be taken literally.

Some fringe scientists do mix and match saying our ancestors at one time or another are from the cosmos.

Maybe a new word would be better suited for dropping the ball for science. Fumble-mentalism.

[PhanthomOps]

Pooeypants,

Quote:
"in this day and age we own all our luxeries to science yet people are willing to doubt and deny it on basis of ancient scripture which were probably not meant to be taken literally."

On the subject of luxuries, which not being available to all, and would be considered by many a luxury - Is the water we have on earth, the fruit that was growing on trees long before man got into the act, the trees that provide oxygen and shade, the shrubs that provide berries, the cactus that provides water, the coconut that provides milk and food, etc. - all a product of science? And by the way, can you take literally everything that science claims??


Shunyadragon,

There are quite a number of scientists who although they are dealing with what man calls science, have very deep religious beliefs, and act accordingly.

Fumble-mentalism - I have to write that one down - it's great :) :)

[Pooeypants]

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, Pooeypants, Quote: "in this day and age we own all our luxeries to science yet people are willing to doubt and deny it on basis of ancient scripture which were probably not meant to be taken literally." On the subject of luxuries, which not being available to all, and would be considered by many a luxury - Is the water we have on earth, the fruit that was growing on trees long before man got into the act, the trees that provide oxygen and shade, the shrubs that provide berries, the cactus that provides water, the coconut that provides milk and food, etc. - all a product of science? And by the way, can you take literally everything that science claims??

I thank Nature for what what it have and what we are. As for latter question, I accept scientific claims with evidence, not every idea that has ever been proposed.

[PhanthomOps]

Pooeypants,

Quote:
"I thank Nature for what what it have and what we are. As for latter question, I accept scientific claims with evidence, not every idea that has ever been proposed."

Oh my gosh, we agree. :) :) :)

I too except that which has been proven to me, as do you. We do have common ground, with respect for the other, even if our opinions differ. I think they call this co-existance. Great !!!!!

[shunyadragon]

Originally posted by PhanthomOps, Pooeypants, Quote: "I thank Nature for what what it have and what we are. As for latter question, I accept scientific claims with evidence, not every idea that has ever been proposed." Oh my gosh, we agree. :) :) :) I too except that which has been proven to me, as do you. We do have common ground, with respect for the other, even if our opinions differ. I think they call this co-existance. Great !!!!!

Considering some of the statements you have made before concerning evolution it is not clear what you consider proven. Since science is so interconnected selecting what you consider proven based on religious conviction and not the matter of fact of science can considered selective and problematic.

[Elijah]

God created what science studies, science did not create god.