Evidence for God from Science

Seriously44 wrote:I don't understand how any of you (Christians) can question anything when you believe in a medieval ideology created to control the ignorant masses. You follow a bible that's creation was by man, and reprinted by man. The storybook you follow has constant contradictions of itself and is logically flawed in any light you look at it. To speak of any brilliant mind and still refer to god in any way is blasphemy. To believe in god you need to be hopeless, foolish, and mindless.

Way to tar every believer with the same brush.

Seriously44, My response to you is that I have studied both sides fervently. During college I was agnostic. I studied, science, philosophy, sociology, history (including ancient and present) many religions, all in the search for truth. Comparing Christianity to Santa Clause is not a logical comparison as I am sure you already know that. So by your threads, you are not putting forth logical counterpoints, just insults. This forum is a great place if you would like to have a logical discussion, and if you read several, you will notice that we discuss many issues with people who want to have a conversation. Touching Cloth is one such member who keeps us on our toes, but doesn't use insults to make his points. I would suggest you use specific points on here to counterpoint if you feel you have something to say. Other wise you just appear to be someone who isn't intelligent to discuss, using insults as your only defense.

cslewislover wrote:


(I felt I had to explain so that no one would seriously think that the negative I meant was merely being male. Didn't want to get into trouble . . . )

CS, are you saying that you are not male but are female?

robyn hill wrote:Seriously44, My response to you is that I have studied both sides fervently. During college I was agnostic. I studied, science, philosophy, sociology, history (including ancient and present) many religions, all in the search for truth. Comparing Christianity to Santa Clause is not a logical comparison as I am sure you already know that. So by your threads, you are not putting forth logical counterpoints, just insults. This forum is a great place if you would like to have a logical discussion, and if you read several, you will notice that we discuss many issues with people who want to have a conversation. Touching Cloth is one such member who keeps us on our toes, but doesn't use insults to make his points. I would suggest you use specific points on here to counterpoint if you feel you have something to say. Other wise you just appear to be someone who isn't intelligent to discuss, using insults as your only defense.

My apologies, I just kinda went on a rant when I read through this board. I should really express myself better. I think I fail to understand the thought process that people that do follow the lord have. I just can't understand it no matter how many ways I look at the subject and try to rationalize. I think of religion as a wonderful tool, and haven't found a way to fully understand it. I've studied psychology all my life and am an active psychologist, although still young in the field. I just can't fathom how someone can follow the belief. Although a vast majority of my misunderstand is certainly from personality, I really would like to find out how and why?

What's the benefit? What makes religion better than existentialism?

I'm sure your apology will be welcomed, seriously44.

Are you a psychologist under/postgrad then?

Seriously44 wrote:

robyn hill wrote:Seriously44, My response to you is that I have studied both sides fervently. During college I was agnostic. I studied, science, philosophy, sociology, history (including ancient and present) many religions, all in the search for truth. Comparing Christianity to Santa Clause is not a logical comparison as I am sure you already know that. So by your threads, you are not putting forth logical counterpoints, just insults. This forum is a great place if you would like to have a logical discussion, and if you read several, you will notice that we discuss many issues with people who want to have a conversation. Touching Cloth is one such member who keeps us on our toes, but doesn't use insults to make his points. I would suggest you use specific points on here to counterpoint if you feel you have something to say. Other wise you just appear to be someone who isn't intelligent to discuss, using insults as your only defense.

My apologies, I just kinda went on a rant when I read through this board. I should really express myself better. I think I fail to understand the thought process that people that do follow the lord have. I just can't understand it no matter how many ways I look at the subject and try to rationalize. I think of religion as a wonderful tool, and haven't found a way to fully understand it. I've studied psychology all my life and am an active psychologist, although still young in the field. I just can't fathom how someone can follow the belief. Although a vast majority of my misunderstand is certainly from personality, I really would like to find out how and why?

What's the benefit? What makes religion better than existentialism?

Well if for no other reason then because religious people flourish and always have done. Atheism seems like a kind of by-product of humanity; there appears to be no adaptive benefit to it whatsoever. Religious people see a purpose to life, they have more children, they view every action as accountable; atheists, on the other hand, are not really sure why they exist at all, many are extremely bitter, they have fewer children. Given long enough time I think atheists would probably die out. I see no adaptive advantage to atheism at all. You may fair better by turning your focus onto this listless tribe...

Seriously44 wrote:

robyn hill wrote:Seriously44, My response to you is that I have studied both sides fervently. During college I was agnostic. I studied, science, philosophy, sociology, history (including ancient and present) many religions, all in the search for truth. Comparing Christianity to Santa Clause is not a logical comparison as I am sure you already know that. So by your threads, you are not putting forth logical counterpoints, just insults. This forum is a great place if you would like to have a logical discussion, and if you read several, you will notice that we discuss many issues with people who want to have a conversation. Touching Cloth is one such member who keeps us on our toes, but doesn't use insults to make his points. I would suggest you use specific points on here to counterpoint if you feel you have something to say. Other wise you just appear to be someone who isn't intelligent to discuss, using insults as your only defense.

My apologies, I just kinda went on a rant when I read through this board. I should really express myself better. I think I fail to understand the thought process that people that do follow the lord have. I just can't understand it no matter how many ways I look at the subject and try to rationalize. I think of religion as a wonderful tool, and haven't found a way to fully understand it. I've studied psychology all my life and am an active psychologist, although still young in the field. I just can't fathom how someone can follow the belief. Although a vast majority of my misunderstand is certainly from personality, I really would like to find out how and why?

What's the benefit? What makes religion better than existentialism?

What makes religion incompatible with existentialism? If we are determined - mere products of our environment, atoms and physical laws - then where does a "you" or "me" even fit into the equation of our own existence.

Thank you for your apology and here is my response.We are equipped with many intellectual skills as humans. We have many skills to allow us to think through many lenses. We can see life through many perspectives: philosophical perspective(trying to answer why), a mathematical perspective(seeing numerical truths),scientific perspective (proof) logical or reasoning perspective (puting it all together and being able to discern, and experience (subjective truths)
Phiosophically, I see God as the only explanation with why we would have all these skills that differ from animals,and a whole other slew of reasons which I've already bored many with on this site. Mathematically, I know we live in a solar system that defied the odds of living on a planet that sustains life, we have yet to find another. Through experience, I have read a bible that seems to hold universal truths,has never been disproven, has prophesy, and would seem absurd that someone would have been bored and yet sensible enough to write a book that has stood the test of time.I have had uncanny experience with prayer as well. Science perspective (proof) is the one perspective that doesn't fully, and I mean 100%, because I do see proof, but not 100% support God which is why it is not scientific in nature. So then I pull out my reasoning and logic lens and can only deduce that all of these point to a God EXCEPT the science perspective. If i were to put them on a scale, all the others would far outweigh that of science. Why would I put my ability to prove at a higher value than all the other skills I have as a human? Is that logical, is that reasonable?