A few thoughts on religion and God

[Polaris]

Being religious, does not make you an idiot. Being a Mormon, however does.
How can sane person believe in religion obviously made up by well known scammer about Jesus visiting Native Americans, end of the world...whatever. Mountain Meadows massacre was also really very interesting part of US history.

 

[Kadayi]

What the hell, kad? That's not a response. Seriously, about half your posts are, or end with, you using some banal argumentative witticism that doubles as a thinly-veiled ad hominem attack.

This here: -

If the horse falls at the first post there's no point waiting till the end of the race to see how it places.

Is a comment on the weakness of the original post. The Horse is the argument, not the poster.

Why do you act this way? As far as I can see, nobody's an asshole to you (except me to an extent, I'll admit), but time after time you all but outright attack people for having views or opinions that aren't yours. It's as if you push the envelope as far as tact allows, and expect that people will interpret it as nothing more than "hard love", so to speak. You're not fooling very many of us, and it makes your posts unpleasant. You're clearly intelligent, you have a lot to offer to discussions, and you could very well be nice in person, but your borderline insults and near-contempt for discussion drags everyone down.

I want you to know I don't hate you. I'd love debating with you, if you didn't act this way. Why do you do it?

If an argument or position is weak then I'll pursue it. That people don't like it when their half baked ideas come down in flames is beside the point as far as I'm concerned (a slap in the face is a slap in the face, regardless of whether you put a bow on it). If you're going to be so bold as to make declarative posts, you should at least have the ability to think them through in terms of intellectual rigour, and know what the counter arguments are likely to be, and if the original statements don't hold up against your own arguments then possess the humility to reassess or withdraw them.

Its all down to the application of critical thinking. Here are some links that explain the concept: -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking

http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/what&why2006.pdf

http://assets.cambridge.org/052100/9847/sample/0521009847ws.pdf


I rarely post at length on any subject with an opinion/conclusion/perspective unless I've critically thought through that opinion beforehand, and I am by far my harshest critic. I recommend you read some of that stuff, you'll be a better person for it.

The worst way to be anti-religious is to meticulously and laboriously find tiny flaws in religious texts.

This x 1000. It's the height of absurdity.

Meanwhile, the best way to be anti-religious is to burst into churches with wild eyes and shout "GOD IS DEAD! I KILLED HIM! I TOOK HIS PLACE!"

No I'd say ensuring there is a clear separation between Church & State as well as the promotion of the practical mental & social development of the individual in education Vs simply the ability to reiterate facts/apply common forumulas.

With a greater sense of self awareness as well as a deeper understanding of society as a whole there in would lie the opportunity for future generations to learn to live more socially fulfilling lives, rather than the majority spending their days in a reactive and selfish state if being.

 

[jverne]

to be short:

everything after the big bang (or some other true scientific theory) does not need a god to function. what happened before? well, no one will ever know.

so by inductive reasoning, god is not needed and therefore we could assume it might not exist. floods were once attributed to the acts of gods, we know today that's not the case.

 

[Viperidae]

The Big Bang Theory does not disapprove or approve the existence of God or a god according to this.

Utter balls logic. 'We don't know what was before it, so there's nothing that disproves that God didn't do it!'

Yeah just like there's no evidence to prove that unicorns aren't the ones monitoring the universe on a planck time scale, preventing us from measuring anything shorter. Conjecture into the unknown does NOT ADVANCE OUR KNOWLEDGE. It is a SCIENTIFIC UNKNOWN and will remain as such until a suitable theory based on evidence is put forward and agreed upon. Having a conscious omnipotent being as the instigator for the Big Bang is, given science's previous tendencies to explain the universe in a physical, non-magic way, unfathomably unlikely.

I'm fine with personal beliefs such as seeing a little something more in your fellow man/humanity or believing in abstract concepts that appeal to emotionality, but don't pretend you can jump into astronomic origin and say 'YO SCIENCE IMMA LET YOU PROVE EVERYTHING ELSE, BUT GOD STARTED ALL TIME. ALL TIME.' when on thousands of other levels we have so far been able to figure out how stuff operates without a God.

And no, I don't believe that science is the be-all to human understanding, as some of its more short sighted proponents believe. A perfect example is those who jump on the Dawkins bandwagon in saying that every religion is useless--a very simplistic, lab-like, not to mention self-serving, evaluation, as his only criteria is 'how much scientific progress was there [in pre-scientific times]?' disregarding of course historical as well as anthropological evidence that religion drove the advancement of knowledge philosophical and moral. I for one respect Uriel's defensiveness when it comes to these debates.

 

[CptStern]

Please keep in mind that being religious, does not make you an idiot. With education and intellect being highly valued in this particular forum, wouldn't you think that well educated, well rounded, brilliant men that believe in God have a good reason to?

I'm having a hard time accepting this. perhaps they are intelligent despite their beliefs? I think that's certainly plausible as any explanation; I mean you have to wonder how intelligent someone is if they're prone to believing fanciful stories about sky wizards controlling us all. certainly it's not a dominoe effect were one area of criticial thinking is sorely lacking in comparison to other areas, so surely they're not idiots but then again at one point intelligent men believed the world was flat. so maybe there is something to this idiot theory

 

[Sledgehammer]

Being religious, does not make you an idiot. Being a Mormon, however does.
How can sane person believe in religion obviously made up by well known scammer about Jesus visiting Native Americans, end of the world...whatever. Mountain Meadows massacre was also really very interesting part of US history.

Most cases of being religious are just a desire to fit into a social group. Just like being a teenager.

 

[Qonfused]

perhaps they are intelligent despite their beliefs? I think that's certainly plausible as any explanation

I'm pretty sure you just axed a lot of posting potential by admitting religious people aren't void of intelligence.