god

this is what i like believe:

science is confuses me, faith doesn't. at least for the most part it doesn't.

spectral wrote: stonebeard wrote: this is what i like believe: science is confuses me, faith doesn't. at least for the most part it doesn't. I have the opposite thoughts to you.  Science is easy to understand, but I cannot fathom what makes people believe (sometimes vehemently) in God.  Something that doesn't exist and which can never be proven to exist.  On a very basic level, it seems to be that a lot of what was written in the bible can now be explained (a lot of it through science).  God is an outdated concept.

you cannot prove that god exists or doesn't exist. that's what faith is.

stonebeard wrote: spectral wrote: stonebeard wrote: this is what i like believe: science is confuses me, faith doesn't. at least for the most part it doesn't. I have the opposite thoughts to you.  Science is easy to understand, but I cannot fathom what makes people believe (sometimes vehemently) in God.  Something that doesn't exist and which can never be proven to exist.  On a very basic level, it seems to be that a lot of what was written in the bible can now be explained (a lot of it through science).  God is an outdated concept. you cannot prove that god exists or doesn't exist. that's what faith is.

This is true.  But I can't comprehend the motivation behind wanting to put your faith in what is essentially an illogical notion.  The idea of an almighty being governing our existence.  A being we can't see or hear.  It defies logical understanding.  Especially when you consider what science has taught over the past 2000 years.

I'm very sceptical and cynical about religion.  I think it causes more problems than it solves.  But I don't to put down people's beliefs, so if people embrace it, then that's great for them.

my understanding of God is NOT of an "almighty being governing our existence". as to seeing God: what would you want God to look like? and how do you know you are not already perceiving God?
it seems to be a side-issue, but I'd like to ask you a question: where do you think your consciousness comes from? and no, don't think I am about to tell you it comes from God. but where do you think it comes from? from that 1300-1500 grams of grey matter in your skull? but how can this grey matter evoke something like a consciousness?

BaldJean wrote: my understanding of God is NOT of an "almighty being governing our existence". as to seeing God: what would you want God to look like? and how do you know you are not already perceiving God? it seems to be a side-issue, but I'd like to ask you a question: where do you think your consciousness comes from? and no, don't think I am about to tell you it comes from God. but where do you think it comes from? from that 1300-1500 grams of grey matter in your skull? but how can this grey matter evoke something like a consciousness?

Well why the hell shouldn't it!

yes, indeed, why shouldn't it? but if that little bit of complicated structure can evoke a consciousness, then why shouldn't a much more complicated structure like the universe be able to evoke a much more complicated consciousness?

It is generally recognised within the field of neurological science that the human consciousness is poorly understood; yet the research and "exploration" is ongoing.  This includes a study into the claustrum, a thin sheet of brain matter hidden beneath the cerebral cortex (cortex being responsible for higher brain functions - thought, sensation, memory etc.).  A recent study claimed the claustrum essentially interacts with the cortex and the structures involved with emotion, and are bound together into one cohesive, synchronised, conscious experience by the claustrum.

What I'm trying to say is that we are still trying to understand the brain.  The above is one area of ongoing scientific research.  I'm much happier putting my faith in science and tangible evidence than a range of spiritualistic notions that can probably never be proved.

goose wrote: Until I was about fifteen or sixteen I believed (for want of a better word) in determinism (and still, I find it far more logical than the notion of free will). If you truly disbelieve in the notion of a God, and that the entire universe is governed by scientific (mathematical) processes, then surely free will is just an illusion, and we're just following "statistics" in all our actions?

Actually it is not that easy. The universe is deterministic only on a macroscopic level. On a microcosmic level it is probabilistic and not deterministic. Something that had always worried Einstein and which he fought throughout his whole life, but the results of quantum mechanics hardly leave us any choice.
There is abolutely no contradiction between the idea of a God and science. In fact a lot of scientists believe in God, and some developed their belief BECAUSE of the results of their research.

No, it is not that easy. If it were that easy scientists would not have a problem with it. What you refer to is Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. But that is only one of the many problems of quantum physics.

Edited by BaldFriede

maani wrote: Goose said, "There's no point in using science to try and prove or disprove the existence of a higher being since science is within what the higher being (or lack of) created. It's like trying to break open a box with a crowbar that's already inside the box." Absolutely brilliant!  I also notice that tangerine - and all the other rabid atheists in the group - have chosen to ignore my post.  Could that be because they realize they cannot answer the question?  That all they can do is continue to resort to tired old atheist mantras, and simply repeat them over and over? Ah well.  I had hoped for more stimulating discussion and debate, and not just a bunch of mealy fundamentalist atheists...() Peace. <!-- Message ''"" -->

I'm sure you believe in miracles maani. Well here's one for you: I agree with you!