posted January 06, 2007 06:13 AM            

From reviews:

quote:

---

… Religion, as a sub-realm of anthropology, can be viewed as a natural phenomenon -- rather like language, custom, emotion, espression, etc. -- and as such should not be off-limits to the methods of science.
…
why, of all artifacts and actions, should human religious practice be shrouded from the light of scientific inquiry?
…
Religion … spreads not because it makes us stronger, faster or more cohesive -- its track record on the last is clearly mixed -- but because it hijacks us for its own propagation.
…
One might hope that this is the beginning of a resurgent enlightenment; a counter-attack by the "brights", who embrace knowledge and science over ignorance and superstition.

---

Another good book on the same: http://www.amazon.com/God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618680004/ref=pd_sim_b_1/103-7931238-4862244
From reviews:

quote:

---

… the collective irrational belief in "The God Hypothesis" is not only wrong ("intellectual high treason"), but pernicious in its resulting intolerance, oppression, bigotry, arrogance, child abuse, homophobia, abortion-clinic bombings, cruelties to women, war, suicide bombers, and educational systems that teach ignorance when it comes to math and science.

… not only portrays the "psychotic" God of the Old Testament as "arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully" (p. 31), but also challenges, quite convincingly, every major argument for God's existence, and shows that the Founding Fathers considered religion to be a threat to democracy. Thomas Jefferson, for instance, claimed "Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man". Benjamin Franklin said "Lighthouses are more useful than churches". A 1796 treaty signed by John Adams declares, "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion". Adams also said, "this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it". Even conservative icon, Barry Goldwater, threatened to fight fundamentalists "every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans".

---

posted January 06, 2007 06:48 PM            

If a Christian goes around talking about God, that is somehow trying to force their religion on you and all discussions of such should not be tolerated, at least not in public.

On the other hand, its just fine to call those who believe in God bigots, arrogant, child abusers, etc., etc., etc.?

You really don't see the irony in all this, do you?

---added---

You know, I really have to ask what your intended or hoped for reaction to posts like this is?

I don't know anything about you, but lets say you were all green and didn't hide the fact that you felt everyone should be green. What kind of reaction should you have if someone here kept posting topics saying that all green people where weak minded, rude, smelled bad, looked weird, had below average IQs and plain out were unhealthy to even be seen with. Then of course the person posting those comments claimed to "only do it to stimulate conversation". Would you buy that or would you see it for what it really was?

think about it.

------------------
* Americans: Fight for Right. Join the push for the Fair Tax!

posted January 06, 2007 08:23 PM            

What’s the definition of a “person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own?”

It’s interesting that a discussion on evolution can’t stand on scientific merit, but always evolves into an anti-Christian bitch-fest.

Bitch on.

posted January 06, 2007 09:00 PM            

quote:

---

When you stop believing absurd nonsense like;

---

There are many (thousands) of scientist (since that title seems to hold so much weight) who believe in a 6,000 year old earth and a great flood. The would also say that the idea of evolution is "absurd" and "nonsense". The difference however, is I don't see creationists constantly posting articles and stories that ridicule your beliefs. The one posted here goes beyond ridicule to the point of calling people who believe in God "child abusers". Do you really think making claims like this here in this forum, or even posting other peoples claims like this here, is appropriate, or more importantly, necessary?

What is the objective to posting things like this? The only two reasons I can think of is to perpetuate the ridicule of specific members on this forum, or to re-insight a heated "discussion" that will again end with discriminating and unprofessional remarks against fellow members on this board.

Please, if anyone can tell me another reason to make such a post, please do.

posted January 06, 2007 09:01 PM            

quote:

---

The idea of dismissing evolution and claiming a God-given intelligent design as the final truth is brainless.

---

quote:

---

Evolution is the creator of the intelligent design of life in all its aspects.

---

posted January 07, 2007 12:49 AM            

The point I am making is that as science keeps struggling to move
ahead, to find an explaination for something that present theory
fails to answer adequately. It is a work in progress. But now it
is reaching the point where more and more, the ideas involved
are beyond our ability to test reliably.

If some 94 percent of the universe is invisible, then why can't
we see it? Water may be perfectly clear, but in sufficient
quantity, the way it refracts light makes it visible. Air may
be clear for a distance, but the blue of the sky is from the
way it scatters light. We find it hard to conceive of anything
that refuses to be seen if found in sufficient quantity, and 94
percent seems like a lot.

For 94 percent of the universe to be out there, and yet not
showing up in an obvious way, that means that it must be spread
pretty evenly everywhere. That is, it appears that it must
permeate all existing matter and space. So how can we separate
it, when it is part of everything?

Now that is just dealing with something that scientists are
proposing that does exist. They believe that they may have some
evidence of this as well, as a consequence of studying the
collision of two galaxies, and a blow-back of surrounding
gasses.

The way I perceive God, is that the Universe is both surrounded
and permeated by his essence, and that God also transcends all
time, before the beginning of the Universe, and beyond its end.
Now at one time scientists thought the Universe was eternal and
infinite, but now we believe we know better, and that not only
did the Universe begin with the Big Bang, but that is has a
finite size, and that it will eventually fizzle completely out.
So as far as we know, nothing in this Universe is truly infinite,
but God has said that he is, and Jesus has said that there is
life eternal for those that believe in him.

So, over my sixty-odd years, I have seen science tack and correct
course many times, but the God I was taught about as a child is
still the same. If it comforts you to believe in science, and
a little course correction here and there does not bother you,
then that is your call. But science is not going to offer you
anything like the hope and promise that a belief in God offers,
so I'm inclined to believe you have the worse of it. If you
die, you expect no more. For me, death is expected to be just a
matter of leaving this world for the next.

If that seems insubstantial to you, keep in mind that there is
much solace in believing in God. First, that I have a shot at
eternal life, along with other believers. Second, that means
I have less to fear from this world. And third, that Good and
Evil are meaningful concepts, with God the final judge of who
will be spared and who will be punished in the hereafter.

Concepts of Good and Evil are not questions that science can
resolve, and much evil has been done in the name of science, or
even in technology. As I've pointed out before, science cannot
even give a definitive answer as to what is life. Science
believes that if they can find evidence of life elsewhere in the
Universe, that somehow this will be de facto evidence that God
does not exist. They also believe that if they can eventually
create an environment where life appears spontaneously, that they
will have ruled out Divine Intervention in creating life.

We don't know that this is the only place where life exists,
the Holy Bible does not specifically answer that question. And
if you can rub to sticks together to make fire, that does not
mean that you created fire, or invented fire - you just found a
way to make it. Fire existed before, and all you did was
illustrate that friction is one way to cause it to happen. Fire
is a consequence of bringing a fuel to its ignition point. But
what does it take to bring a life substance to its living point?

As to the people who believe that the earth is only 6,000 years
old, that belief is based on counting up the years of the lives
of men, who all descended from Adam and Eve. But Adam and Eve
were not the first of mankind created, as clearly stated by that
same source. It's just another case of people taking something
out of context. It's unfortunate when well meaning people take
something like that and create a make or break point around it,
but it happens. The error is compounded when someone seizes on
that particular point to try and discredit a whole system of
faith as a consequence.

Just because you've found sources to quote from that hold with
your views, and who speak in a derogatory manner concerning the
Holy Bible and the God that it speaks of, does not mean that
you or they are right in your beliefs. And since science does
not address the matter of their being a God, and cannot, since
if God exists, he cannot be singled out as separate from the
whole of the Universe, then it is irresponsible to claim that
science has proved that there is no God, because it has not.
Many people who profess to believe in science maintain that they
do not believe in God as a consequence, but that does not serve
as a proof, or even a valid test. I accept what science says,
with a bit of sceptism here and there, but it does not challenge
my faith in God, because I can see that science can only go so
far in its search for the truth.

posted January 07, 2007 05:53 AM            

the Universe is both surrounded and permeated by his essence
God also transcends all time, before the beginning of the Universe, and beyond its end.

posted January 07, 2007 03:35 PM            

Of all those who believe or not who post here, have read the bible (King James) front to back. I'm not talking about skipping around or avoiding those chapters or books you choose to avoid, but actually read it over a reasonable length of time to absorb the content.

posted January 07, 2007 03:55 PM            

That does not mean that I agree with your ideas. I think many of you are missing the point here. It is about religion and its manifestations here on earth - not about God. God is an idea of the human mind - not more than that. Therefore, it is not leading anywhere to talk about God. You are entitled to have any God you like - that is entirely your own business. However, in the universe any objective God remains elusive.

What is relevant to discuss is religion and how it is practiced here on earth. Any given religion is defined by specific elements of a community of believers: dogmas, sacred books, rites, worship, sacrament, moral prescription, interdicts, organization and interaction with society. The vast majority of the religious people are harmless, but the fundamentalists, existing in every religion, are problematic.

Religions are human fabrications. They are created entirely by human beings. The most important main religions include the following: Christianity 2.1 billion, Islam 1.3 billion, Hinduism 900 million, Chinese folk religion, Buddhism 376 million, Primal indigenous ("Pagan") 300 million, African traditional and diasporic 100 million, Sikhism 23 million, Juche 19 million, Spiritism 15 million, Judaism 14 million, Bahá'í Faith 7 million, Jainism 4.2 million, Shinto 4 million, Cao Dai 4 million, Zoroastrianism 2.6 million, Tenrikyo 2 million, Neo-Paganism 1 million, Unitarian Universalism 800,000, Rastafari movement 600,000. However, there are numerous branches within each of the main religions.

For example Christianity includes the following: The Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Churches, Oriental Orthodox Churches, Assyrian Church of the East, and others), many Protestant branches (Anglicans, Lutherans, Reformed/Presbyterians, Congregational/United Church of Christ, Evangelical, Charismatic, Baptists, Methodists, Nazarenes, Anabaptists, Seventh-day Adventists and Pentecostals), Restorationists (including Churches of Christ, Disciples of Christ, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Jehovah's Witnesses).

In Islam there are the following branches: Sunni, Shi'a, Sufism, Kharijites (Ibadi).

In other religions there are also many subdivisions. If all subdivisions are taken together they are more than thousand.

How will it be possible to obtain a lasting peace with all these man-made religious barriers? After all we are all human beings sharing the same chromosomes and the same biology.

There are many serious side effects to religious fundamentalism: irrationality, dogmatism (because free thinking can undermine belief), arbitrary restrictions (from a bygone era in regard to eating, drinking, marrying, wearing of clothes etc.), indoctrination of others including small children, strife, conflicts, even wars between various sects, religious terrorism, obstruction to human progress - in particular scientific results contradicting religious claims, escapism, fantasizing and neglect of the real present world and its problems instead focusing on the "afterlife", claiming to hold the universal truth, moral deficiency promoting racism, homophobia, domestic violence, sexism, and slavery, monopoly of virtue, opposition against democracy and equality between people, males and females, authoritarianism (wishing the society to be ruled by religious laws, prosecuting heretics, unbelievers and apostates).

It is all about power. The fundamentalist religious groups want power and influence in the community. They are dangerous because they think they have God on their side, and therefore they can apply any means for their ends, including terrorism.

If we are to have any chance of peace in the future, we need to tone down the religions and promote freedom, liberty, democracy, equality and human rights. If the religious leaders would have just a minimum of responsibility for the future of the world, they would try to unite the religions to one world religion. Instead they are just fortifying their individual positions and maintaining the barriers. Very sad.

posted January 07, 2007 05:34 PM            

------------------