yea i agree wit some stuff you said but there is i hell(i think anyway and wat the bible says) and there is physical pain you suffer with forever. You will also be scared out of your mind from devils and demans and stuff. But ive also saw someone of i think on opra or sumthin like that that said he was in an operating room gettin surgery or he will die( and he wasnt a christian or anything) and in his sleep while they were operating on him and he said he saw a little bit of hell that scared the poop out of him. He said there was screems and devils oround a huge hole in the ground that was like supose to be hell i guess and it had a sound like fire burning. He woke up and was a changed man and now a christian.
Oh snap some one make fun of me… Hahah it was a silly mistake what I really ment it was something more along the lines of being a fact but what ever. Oh yeah I passed fine.
Here’s a question: “Is it safer to believe in evolution even if there is no proof that it exists?”
Its not easy being a believer. Its not like “Oh hey I might go to hell so I might as well go to church.” not at all. I walk the walk and talk the talk. I get ridiculed for my beliefs. Its no walk in the cake.
senses are a good source of knowledge, but again it’s not the best way to “know” things. our senses are hardly repeatably accurate ways of measuring things. While true that logic and reason are only as good as the system they are applied to, when you apply logic, particularly math, to the whole universe, or at least the eart, you get things that are logically sound. epistemology is a tough thing to get into. even in physics they admit that holding an object out and letting it fall is only very very likely to happen. when you get down to it, all you know for sure is that the object fell this time, and all the times before, nothing makes the next time certain, just highly likely. and that’s assuming that we are actaully perceiving the object drop and our instruments are measuring the speed, etc etc.
tim, meant no offense.
there’s TONS of proof for evolution. just not a super detailed line from rats and early mammals to chimps or other primates. but i think the evidence points towards evolution more than it does a creator. there’s not a arithmetic proof for evolution, but when you examine the fossil record, and vestigal organs, i think that points to either evolution or a creator that made some mistakes, something that most religious folks don’t like.
whales have massive hip bones that do nothing. decended from land mammals? or did god accidentally give them hips?
i know from experience that it’s easier to be a christian in the country than to be an atheist. i’d bet most the people that make fun of you for being a christian are also christians, just less devout than you. or even if they aren’t christians, you’re still in the majority(vast majority if you go with just believing in a monotheistic religion). I try, as best as i can, to allow others to have their beliefs if they let me have mine. i just like to raise questions when the opportunity arises to have a friendly discussion. if you’ve followed the epistomological discussing, it’s getting semi-deep and is a whole lot of fun. talking about stuff i haven’t discussed in ~2 years since i had a class on it. woo.
So then what do you consider the best way to “know” things (about reality)? Sensory experience isn’t only the basis for many religious claims, it is also foundational to science - the main difference being that there are universally agreed upon objective measuring tools used to measure scientific observations. (“Universally agreed upon” does not necessarily imply truth, depending on what kind of truth or how truth is defined.)
So then it seems that you agree with me that there will always be some amount of uncertainty in the validity of knowledge claims. That is the crux of my issue with those who regard science as an absolutely certain way of knowing the truth, as if those of us who hold religious beliefs are living in the dark ages. Science too is filled with dogma. For example, the scientific method (as if there is just one) must be taken on faith. Also, the scientific community only allows for one possible explanation, which is not necessarily the one “true” explanation. Additionally, science often measures the validity of a claim or result by its usefulness to the scientific enterprise, and utility does not always correspond to absolute truth.
I recognize that science is very compelling and that it has provided us with many useful results, but it certainly isn’t even close to explaining all that constitutes the human condition. So sources of knowledge other than scientific reasoning must be considered. If one claims that scientific reasoning is all that guides one’s belief system, then one is either missing a whole lot of life or one is carelessly lumping other non-scientific claims (such as, “there is no God”) in with science.
I dont see any more evidence that gosd is real than the lock ness monster exists. They have both been written about for a vey long time and people claim to have them, but threres no real evidence.
… that you know of.
Others have evidence, which may not be sufficient in your view, but how can you judge what others find reason to believe? Do you have access to some transcendent, objective perspective that the rest of us don’t? 
phlegm–
i think we’re in a similar boat, you just choose belief and i don’t, nothign wrong with either. the biggest difference i see between how religion views knowledge and how science views it, is that science admits when its wrong and is constantly changing/cahllenging/refining its theories and religion has changed little since each one was founded. sure the culture around a belief system has changed, women can wear pants and whatnot, but the core beliefs are the same now as 200, 2000, or even 4000 years ago.
i think that there is tons more to the human condition than just logic and reason, but they make the most sense. at least to me. i think when you take psychology into the equation, the possibilities that arise as we begin to unlock to potential in the human brain/mind, is staggering at least and amazing at best.
u left out the fact that they’re both pretty impressive money-spinners and that not knowing either way allows this to continue
markf wrote
i think we’re in a similar boat, you just choose belief and i don’t, nothign wrong with either. the biggest difference i see between how religion views knowledge and how science views it, is that science admits when its wrong and is constantly changing/cahllenging/refining its theories and religion has changed little since each one was founded. sure the culture around a belief system has changed, women can wear pants and whatnot, but the core beliefs are the same now as 200, 2000, or even 4000 years ago.
If something was organized by god, wouldn’t it work the first time? Why change change something that works? Another thing. How do you explain the earth and all thats here without there being a god? Believing the big bang theory is like putting all the pieces of a clock in a big bag, and shaking it all up. then dumping the bag out and hoping that it will have sild together. Even a preschooler know this is imposible.
Statistically speaking, it is still possible. Actually, the Big Bang Theory is like shaking a bag of clock parts zillions of times and having a clock pop out at least once. I’m still hoping to stumble across an expensive watch some day while riding along a wilderness trail. 
mark, I agree that we’re writing from a similar stance.
Yet I’m not so optimistic of science’s willingness to change. Perhaps in its infancy, changes were more prevalent. However, I think currently there are other factors that motivate science’s pursuits much more than they should. Two factors that come to mind are peer pressure within the scientific community and the power of money and politics.
If something flies in the face of scientific orthodoxy, then scientists that pursue it risk losing all merit and credibility. Consider the Intelligent Design movement. (I’m not going to try to defend or refute it, just consider it.) There are scientists that believe in it and are doing experiments to explore it, yet they remain anonymous for fear that they’ll lose their ability to be employed as scientists.
Secondly, disregarding the “evolution issue”, a lot of science today happens because the government funds it, which means that, whether we like it or not, a lot of science happens to develop technology to be used in warfare. That’s obviously a very limited scope, but that’s where is the money is. So this science is no longer focused on pursuing some sort of truth for the sake of truth, but rather finding results that can be used in war. And since large sums of money are behind it, I’d tend to believe that results could easily become more important than the rigor that is ideally required by science.
You are so right on. Just look at teh so-called “studies” the drug companies have been doing–and burying undesirable results–like suicides in antidepressant studies, and the recent pain reliever studies.
But even setting that aside as scientists who are just corrupt practitioners, religion is the predominant religion of the 21st century. It’s just another belief system, just another way of establishing THE TRUTH. It’s not “because the Bible tells us so,” it’s because the results of the experiment were significant at the .01 level (or for “social science,” at the .05 level).
Billy
Oh yeah! Are you saying the Christians spend Saturday night drinking and atheist bashing???
Billy
i belive God spelled backwards is goD.
BOB spelled backwards is still BOB. we can rely on BOB.
im a believe
yea i believe in god i even go to church every weekend
God is a Concept by which
we measure our pain
I’ll say it again
God is a Concept by which
we measure our pain
I don’t believe in magic
I don’t believe in I-ching
I don’t believe in Bible
I don’t believe in Tarot
I don’t believe in Hitler
I don’t believe in Jesus
I don’t believe in Kennedy
I don’t believe in Buddha
I don’t believe in Mantra
I don’t believe in Gita
I don’t believe in Yoga
I don’t believe in Kings
I don’t believe in Elvis
I don’t believe in Zimmerman
I don’t believe in Beatles
I just believe in me…and that reality
The dream is over
What can I say?
the Dream is Over
Yesterday
I was the Dreamweaver
But now I’m reborn
I was the Walrus
But now I’m John
and so dear friends
you’ll just have to carry on
The Dream is over
Quiz
10 points to the first person who knows who Zimmerman refers to.
On a related topic, I was discussing the 2 16-year-old female “suicide bombers” who, according to the NYTimes yesterday, are being held in a USA prison despite the fact that there is no evidence against them.
This person had no idea how routine this has become in the USA, claiming whe was too busy to keep up.
I replied: I don’t need a weatherman to know which way teh wind blows.
10 more points to the person who can identify that quote [without googling].
10 more points to the person who can identify the faction that took its name from that quote, and what organization they split off from.
Billy
God is a variable interval reward system. --B.F. Skinner
God is a variable interval reward system. --B.F. Skinner
10 points to the first person who can explain what B.F. Skinner meant by this, as well as the concept of “extinction.”
Billy