Govt Buildings Bombed In Oslo

[quote name='jputahraptor']I never read the Koran so I won't debate it but there are terrorists who use it and terms like Jihad and the teaching of Mohammed to justify their actions, even though they are basically killings their own people more than anyone else. Surely that does not speak for all Islamic people. In the same way, you can twist things in the Bible if you want but the Bible doesn't condone the use of violence pretty much at all and surely not against people for reasons of different faiths or nationalities, or innocent people in general. Unless you can point to a passage spefically advocating the use of violence against others. If you do the exact opposite of what your religion teaches are you really true to that religion?[/QUOTE]

Ehh, the Bible/Torah and Quran all have passages that discuss violence, and how to apply it. I 100% agree with your message that it's up to people of those respective faiths to choose how to interpret it, and it would seem that only the fringe radical twist it for modern-day senseless killing.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I think his point was that there's not anything in An Inconvenient Truth that tells eco-terrorists to go bomb things etc., just like there's nothing in the bible that tells people to go blow up buildings and shoot people to protest muslim immigration.

Again, I hate religion but I think people are going overboard if they blame it for these kinds of incidents. Anything can be twisted by a nutjob to try to justify their evil.

Again, I get that religion is different in certain cases like stoning adulterers etc. as their are direct passages about that in the bible and koran etc. But I've never seen a compelling argument that anything in either text can support terrorism without an extreme amount of twisting of the text by extremists. And I don't see that as any different than people twisting science to support eugenics etc.[/QUOTE]

I get what you're saying. I'm mostly reacting to science and religion getting put in the same bucket. But in this narrow sense I can see your point, anything can act as the catalyst for a madman (that's why we call them crazy)

Do you really dislike religion, as in all religion? In full disclosure I generally enjoy reading the mythologies including those of the Abrahamic faith and I find that certain religions actually make some decent points.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']...the Bible doesn't condone the use of violence pretty much at all and surely not against people for reasons of different faiths or nationalities, or innocent people in general. Unless you can point to a passage spefically advocating the use of violence against others.[/QUOTE]


You mean like this:

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='camoor']
Do you really dislike religion, as in all religion? In full disclosure I generally enjoy reading the mythologies including those of the Abrahamic faith and I find that certain religions actually make some decent points.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I've just never been a fan of religion at all. I've just always found the notion of some kind of supreme being silly for lack of a better word. Add in all the evils done in the name of organized religion, and I've just never liked it nor had much interest in it.

It just seems to be to be a crutch to me. An easy explanation for the "unexplainable"--which is BS as it has the same creation problem as you're still stuck with explaining where god came from. A coping mechanism for people who can't stand the thought of not having an after life where they will be with their loved ones who passed away again etc.

I've just never bought anything that can't be proved with science or observed etc. So religion, afterlives and anything spiritual has just never appealed to me in anyway. I think everything can be answered through science, though who knows how long it will take for science, technology and human thinking to advance to that point.

I know that comes across as offensive to religious people, but I don't really mean it to be. Just explaining my disdain for religion. I don't have a problem at all with people believing whatever they want as long as they aren't forcing it on me, or trying to force it on society through legal changes etc.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Yeah, I've just never been a fan of religion at all. I've just always found the notion of some kind of supreme being silly for lack of a better word. Add in all the evils done in the name of organized religion, and I've just never liked it nor had much interest in it.

It just seems to be to be a crutch to me. An easy explanation for the "unexplainable"--which is BS as it has the same creation problem as you're still stuck with explaining where god came from. A coping mechanism for people who can't stand the thought of not having an after life where they will be with their loved ones who passed away again etc.

I've just never bought anything that can't be proved with science or observed etc. So religion, afterlives and anything spiritual has just never appealed to me in anyway. I think everything can be answered through science, though who knows how long it will take for science, technology and human thinking to advance to that point.

I know that comes across as offensive to religious people, but I don't really mean it to be. Just explaining my disdain for religion. I don't have a problem at all with people believing whatever they want as long as they aren't forcing it on me, or trying to force it on society through legal changes etc.[/QUOTE]

Instead of gods, heavens, and organized religions, let's talk spirituality.

Do you think the mysteries of the universe can be conquered with nothing but logical, rational thought? I have a great deal of respect for science but at the end of the day I think of it as just another perspective and one that is, for the time being at least, severely limited (IE we don't even know how much we don't know). I don't believe (or understand) the concept of a soul but I do believe that the human mind is so freakishly powerful that it can perceive beyond the bounds conventially accepted by the common man in ways most people scarcely understand. Not using this perspective seems like a waste to me.
 
A lot of the mysteries of the universe can eventually be answered by science I think. Maybe not just logical, rational thought. It will probably take a lot of technological advances and new ways of thinking.

But, in any case, there's always the "where did things begin?" question that I doubt can ever be answered by science or religion.

Take the big bang theory--where did the stuff that collided to cause it come from? Where did the universe it occurred in come from?

But religion is no better. If you say god created the universe, you're still stuck with no explanation of where god came from.

But beyond that creation problem, I think science can and will eventually explain everything. Whether human science can--barring some major genetic advance in intelligence over coming centuries and millennial is another story. It may well take a different type of science and intellect to explain the universe. Or it may just take time and new ways of thinking as we saw through the enlightenment etc. when science really moved forward for humanity.


Again, I don't have any disrespect for people who have spiritual beliefs. I just don't buy it and have always been an "I'll believe it when I see it" (or can read convincing scientific evidence about it) type. Plus I'm just not a philosophical person and don't much care about the mysteries of the universe anyway, and really only care about understanding our world and things that affect me and those around me in society.
 
I'll never forget the conversation between Bill O'Reilly and Richard Dawkins about basically the same thing you guys are discussing. It ended with O'Reilly saying that science couldn't explain everything, Dawkins saying "Well we're working on it" and O'Reilly saying, in the most blow-hard way possible "Well I'll stick with god"

See that's the point, whether science can explain everything is irrelevant, it's that people are using it to try, no religious figures do this because they think they already know, there's nothing left to discover to them. It's all "god did it" in the end.
 
[quote name='Clak']I'll never forget the conversation between Bill O'Reilly and Richard Dawkins about basically the same thing you guys are discussing. It ended with O'Reilly saying that science couldn't explain everything, Dawkins saying "Well we're working on it" and O'Reilly saying, in the most blow-hard way possible "Well I'll stick with god"

See that's the point, whether science can explain everything is irrelevant, it's that people are using it to try, no religious figures do this because they think they already know, there's nothing left to discover to them. It's all "god did it" in the end.[/QUOTE]

*turn Claks microphone down* ;) Seriously I think those debates are entertaining too but I would hope our debate is more civil and reasoned.

I share your disappointment with most conventional organized religions. However there are religions without gods, there are religions that don't advocate taking things on faith, etc. There are also what I guess I'd call spiritual groups or paths that specifically make a point of how much we don't know, and how much untapped spiritual exploration is out there. To use a cheesy movie quote, the way I see it most of the world takes the blue pill and believes whatever they want to believe, which is fine but kind of disappointing to me.

Edit: For clarification, I don't put scientists in that group - a good scientist is part-explorer.
 
To me science is very much the key group that emphasizes how much we don't know.

That's why we need constant research in every field. We haven't even scratched the surface of scientific knowledge in any field really. I mean modern science with the scientific method and all that jazz has really only been in the mainstream for less than 300 years or so (after the age of enlightenment). So serious science is really still in its infancy (if even out of the womb) in the scheme of human history.
 
*turns camoor's hearing aid up*;)

The argument is the same, whether more civil or not. Find me a scientist that says science can (currently) explain everything and I'll find you a crackpot.

And I take issue with the idea of a religion with no gods or faith, that would basically make it a shared philosophy.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']To me science is very much the key group that emphasizes how much we don't know.

That's why we need constant research in every field. We haven't even scratched the surface of scientific knowledge in any field really. I mean modern science with the scientific method and all that jazz has really only been in the mainstream for less than 300 years or so (after the age of enlightenment). So serious science is really still in its infancy (if even out of the womb) in the scheme of human history.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, if lack of knowledge wasn't emphasized no research would ever be done because there'd be nothing left to learn. Science basically wouldn't exist if we felt we knew everything.
 
[quote name='Clak']And I take issue with the idea of a religion with no gods or faith, that would basically make it a shared philosophy.[/QUOTE]

I was thinking about eastern schools of thought such as Zen Buddhism or certain schools of Taoism. Interestingly though you may be right - I looked up the definition of religion and it's horribly ethnocentric.
 
From dictionary.com the first definition of religion those things would fit, as none of the definitions explicitly require a god or supreme being.

1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2.a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3.the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
 
Yeah I went ahead and looked that up before I posted earlier since I knew someone would, but the problem is that science fits into those definitions as well, the 3rd I think. And even though I've heard people try and make the argument, science is not a religion.
 
[quote name='camoor']I was thinking about eastern schools of thought such as Zen Buddhism or certain schools of Taoism. Interestingly though you may be right - I looked up the definition of religion and it's horribly ethnocentric.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and systems like Shintoism for example are sometimes called philosophies and religions depending on who you ask. Even Confucionism is considered a religion by some, and I guess really it fits the definition maul posted. That's a really broad definition though, the modern use of the term religion usually would not include something like Confucianism.
 
[quote name='Clak']Yeah I went ahead and looked that up before I posted earlier since I knew someone would, but the problem is that science fits into those definitions as well, the 3rd I think. And even though I've heard people try and make the argument, science is not a religion.[/QUOTE]

I don't think number 3 would really fit science--unless you're just talking belief in the scientific method.

Otherwise, within pretty much every field, there are tons of competing theories and different interpretations of current scientific knowledge.

So there's not any consistent set of beliefs (beyond belief in the value of scientific research) that unites any area of science--much less science as a whole.

Where as with religion you have people mostly sharing the same set of beliefs, at least with in each sect/denomination.
 
I could make the argument, as others have tried to, but I don't believe it anyway so I don't really want to bother. But loosely I guess if you said that the common belief is that science can explain the mysteries of life, with the practice being the scientific method itself.

But like I said, I've never bought it myself, but others have tried. That's why I don't like those definitions though, they're too broad.
 
i just dont see how religion satisfies people. life is way too interesting to dumb it down to a selfish goal and petty ideas of being special. i mean, have you guys seen pics of outerspace? that will never cease to blow my mind. and to think that i'm part of such an infinite universe, a living entity of stardust -- i think that's more humbling and spiritual a feeling than any religion can provide.

and religions are interesting too, they are much of what cultures were built around and i love reading about all the different kinds and how it effective civilizations. and i think recreationally, they can still be a valuable part of every day society -- as long as people treat them as stories to learn from as opposed to actually believe in.

i'm convinced it's all just dependent on where you were born and how you were raised. a lot of people will never abandon the values their parents instilled in them.
 
Someone once told me that science took all the beauty and wonder out of life, I think it adds to it.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']i just dont see how religion satisfies people. life is way too interesting to dumb it down to a selfish goal and petty ideas of being special. i mean, have you guys seen pics of outerspace? that will never cease to blow my mind. and to think that i'm part of such an infinite universe, a living entity of stardust -- i think that's more humbling and spiritual a feeling than any religion can provide.[/QUOTE]
Obligatory...

calvin-significant.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top