Some thoughts on Easter Sunday

[Wingates_Hellsing]

Wanting religion to validate itself scientifically is exactly the same as wanting science to validate itself religiously. Neither side need be beholden to the other, partly because there's no good reason, and partly because IMO the two systems are largely incompatible barring very specific compromise. (Such as, God works through science.)

[Nyoibo]

Why should they?

Because they demand proof of other peoples beliefs in science, they call on science to prove itself all the time, yet get defensive and refuse to prove the existence of god.

[Hobbs]

Because they demand proof of other peoples beliefs in science, they call on science to prove itself all the time, yet get defensive and refuse to prove the existence of god.

My priest is a meteorologist...I'm pretty sure he has proof of science. As do the other priests with scientific degrees.

[Ghel]

Bollocks to that. They don't have to placate people who ridicule them.

This isn't about ridiculing anyone. This is about honest inquiry. I've been trying for years to get somebody to explain to me why they believe, and why I should agree with them. "It's the religion I was raised with" is, at least, an honest answer, but not one that should convince anybody else to believe.

Wanting religion to validate itself scientifically is exactly the same as wanting science to validate itself religiously.

Not scientifically, necessarily, but logically. I'm just looking for an explanation of God that makes sense.

[Hobbs]

Haven't I already stated that I don't care if you believe or not?

You're arguments previously seem to say differently, where you ask for scientific proof. There's a quote by an Indian elder, I forget it specifically, but to paraphrase he says, "They told me about atoms being what we were made of; tiny things that no one could see with their eyes. I think I will continue to believe the Great Spirit created us; at least that makes sense."

[Ghel]

Haven't I already stated that I don't care if you believe or not?

Then why come on here of your own free will and try to correct others on what the church teaches? Why try to educate them about what you believe about angels and demons? Why teach us about your concept of Hell if you don't care whether we are going there?

You're arguments previously seem to say differently, where you ask for scientific proof.

If I ever used the word "proof" (besides when quoting someone else), I apologize. What I'm looking for is evidence. Verifiable, falsifiable evidence. Until that comes along, I will continue not believing in the god of the Bible.

There's a quote by an Indian elder, I forget it specifically, but to paraphrase he says, "They told me about atoms being what we were made of; tiny things that no one could see with their eyes. I think I will continue to believe the Great Spirit created us; at least that makes sense."

Maybe it makes sense to him, but he's still wrong. We are made of atoms. Every bit of matter in the known universe (except for certain sub-atomic particles) is made of atoms. That is something that can be easily verified using a variety of tests and equipment.

[Hobbs]

Then why come on here of your own free will and try to correct others on what the church teaches? Why try to educate them about what you believe about angels and demons? Why teach us about your concept of Hell if you don't care whether we are going there?

I've never tried to convert people here. You've asked me about my beliefs and religion, and I have answered. I don't see that as missionary work. I thought the angels and demons bit was an interesting sidenote to add. Again, you seemed interested, so I answered.[/QUOTE]

Maybe it makes sense to him, but he's still wrong. We are made of atoms. Every bit of matter in the known universe (except for certain sub-atomic particles) is made of atoms. That is something that can be easily verified using a variety of tests and equipment.

Just because he's wrong doesn't make you right. Just as you believe religious people don't have a right to convert you, you don't have a right to 'correct' indigenous people's beliefs.

[Fryk]

True, but the fact that we can use microscopes to SEE atoms does.

[HYHYBT]

What I'm looking for is evidence. Verifiable, falsifiable evidence.

That there must be such evidence for things to be true, or at least for it to be important to believe things to be true even if they are, is ITSELF a claim with no verifiable, falsifiable evidence. Why should you continue to believe it?

And a question I tried to ask in another thread a while back, with rather unhelpful results*: if a miracle were to occur, what evidence would there be? If, for example, someone had just now come along and instantaneously and unexpectedly (and it sure would be unexpected!) turned water into wine, how could it possibly be proven? I add "unexpectedly" because of course there are lots of things you might do if you knew precisely what was going to happen where and when in advance.

*I say unhelpful, because the answer I got last time was to restrict which miracles are acceptable; I don't remember the list, but it would have excluded, for example, a human regrowing an entire limb over the course of a week because it wouldn't be instantaneous.

[smileyeagle1021]

Just because he's wrong doesn't make you right.

As a general principle I'd agree with you on this one... that said, in this case, in the debate about being whether we are made of atoms or not there is no question of "making sense" we have scientific proof. It may be argued that the Great Spirit created atoms, but doesn't remove the fact that atoms exist.\

This same line of thought can be expanded to Christianity as well. There is fossil records to prove that evolution happened. There is still gray areas for the specifics of how and when, but no question of it happening. You may argue that an all powerful God used evolution as a tool, but you can't just say that it didn't happen because God created.
Sexual orientation is another area where science has proven that orientation is a hardwired part of our psyche and it CANNOT be changed through mere will power. Covering your ears and saying "but the Bible says it's a sin and all one needs to overcome sin is have the will and ask God for help". Nope, doesn't work like that, we have verified evidence to the contrary.

I know you will find it hard to believe, I do believe in God... I don't think he is the God of the Bible. I know that there is no proof of there being a higher power. I still believe in a higher power though because there is nothing to contradict that belief. There is so much though in Christianity (and other religions, I don't mean to pick solely on Christianity, that is just the one that I am most familiar with) that has been dis-proven beyond most reasonable doubt.

[Ghel]

I've never tried to convert people here.

Maybe not, but you have stated as truth things for which you have no evidence, such as the existence of angels and demons.

I thought the angels and demons bit was an interesting sidenote to add. Again, you seemed interested, so I answered.

I assume you mean "you" in general, because I hadn't posted to this thread when you began mentioning angels. Again, you stated the bit about fallen angels as if it were fact, without even listing a reference, such as "according to the Catholic Church," or some such. Plus there's the problem of the logical fallacy involved in any being not having free will, but then being able to rebel against their master. So there's no reason anyone else has to agree with your mythology, and it's great fun to point out inconsistencies in stories posted to forums such as this one.

Just because he's wrong doesn't make you right.

On the subject of atoms, I'm right. But not because he's wrong, true.

Just as you believe religious people don't have a right to convert you, you don't have a right to 'correct' indigenous people's beliefs.

I don't have the right? It's called freedom of speech. Look it up.

Of course, freedom of speech is usually invoked when somebody's stating an opinion. In this case, however, I was stating a fact when I said that "Every bit of matter in the known universe is made of atoms." But nobody has the right not to have their feelings hurt.

In the hypothetical situation that an old "indigenous" man came up to me and told me what you quoted, this is probably the response I would have. Although, depending on the circumstances (and my mood at the time), I might just think, "He's old. Let him have his comforting delusion," and just smile and nod. However, if it was a public figure saying this, I might ridicule him on a site like this, the same way that many of us have. Sometimes making fun of stupid or willfully ignorant people is the best way to bring attention to the fractal wrongness of things that they have said.

I know you will find it hard to believe, I do believe in God... I don't think he is the God of the Bible. I know that there is no proof of there being a higher power.

This doesn't bother me at all. You want to know why? You don't state as fact things for which you have no evidence. Your belief is not the sort that would convince you to try to force your beliefs on others, or force others to behave as if they believed the same as you do. I still don't agree with you on the subject of god, but that's no reason we can't have a decent conversation.

[Hobbs]

All right, let's dumb down free will so we can get this cleared up. Free will is basically the ability to choose whether or not to believe. Angels can't choose whether or not to believe because they know God exists; they're His attendants, after all. To put this in another way...

American citizens have the right to believe the outrageous 'birther' conspiracy theory. Those in the military do not have that right, because our sacred oath is to serve the named president. Any military officer who starts to speak disparaging or derogatory remarks towards the Hon. Obama is punished.

[Ghel]

Hobbs, I disagree with both your definition and your example. Free will is the ability to choose your actions. Whether you can choose what you believe is a separate question.

In your set of beliefs, if angels know that God exists, and know his nature, then how and why could they rebel?

Those in the military do have the right to believe the "birther" nonsense. What they do not have in so great a degree as the average citizen is the right to express their agreement with that nonsense. Their superior officers have no control over what goes on in the privacy of their own minds.

[Fryk]

Hobbs is technically right about the Catholic doctrine of free will. However, it still doesn't make any sense when you try to apply it to angels. Free Will is the opposite of predestination, that we are all free to choose, and that God does not preordain anyone to hell.

HOWEVER, since according to Hobbs and others, angels don't have free will, that means that they would not free to choose salvation. In other words, they would have to be predestined to hell. In OTHER other words, that means God preordained demons.

[Hobbs]

Hobbs is technically right about the Catholic doctrine of free will. However, it still doesn't make any sense when you try to apply it to angels. Free Will is the opposite of predestination, that we are all free to choose, and that God does not preordain anyone to hell.

HOWEVER, since according to Hobbs and others, angels don't have free will, that means that they would not free to choose salvation. In other words, they would have to be predestined to hell. In OTHER other words, that means God preordained demons.

Fryk, what are you talking about? Angels aren't predestined for anything. They simply exist. The Fallen are only demons because they rebelled against God and sided with Lucifer. They don't have to choose salvation because angels already exist in Heaven.