Little_Birdie
Registered Senior Member
it seems as though all the threads in the religion section are about atheistists are there any belivers of any religion that would like to compare and debate with other belivers on sci forums
not about atheism
- Thread starter Little_Birdie
- Start date
This is a science forum, so naturally the discussions about religion here would be centered on how religion and science relate or compete. Most importantly, discussions within a science forum should center on the scientific study of religion. Religion, after all, affects (afflicts?) the majority of society and, with economic globalization and the increased ability to offer global destruction, combined with the fact that religions of the past have been responsible for death and destruction, war and conflict -we need to understand religion thoroughly in order to be prepared for the cult that rises with the capability to cause global homicide or genocide.
Beyond that, most discussions on science boards should be expected to have atheistic opinions attached since most who are well-educated and of scientific mindset reject religious dogma.
Beyond that, most discussions on science boards should be expected to have atheistic opinions attached since most who are well-educated and of scientific mindset reject religious dogma.
being well-educated in science has absolutely nothing to do with religion. You can fully support science and know almost everything about it and still be a theist... maybe if you stopped being so close-minded you could see that instead of just attacked an entire , and rather large, group of people by calling them less-educated
Whether you care to admit it or accept it, most scientists are agnostic and atheist. Call it an attack if you wish (it isn't), but it *is* a fact.
true but around 45% of scientists beleive in a god who has no direct influence in the universe today ( according to an article i found on google, but then again its google)SkinWalker said:
My point was clear. Most scientists and the science-minded are agnostic and atheist. Therefore, it shouldn't be surprising to see that the majority of threads in the Religion subforum of a science board are about atheism.
Indeed, the point was so clear its interesting that you question it so.
Indeed, the point was so clear its interesting that you question it so.
Little_Birdie
Registered Senior Member
i was simply trying to more fully explore the feild of religion as a collection of thoughts for as science is natural philosophy and religion is theocratic philosophy and it seems as though such a disscussion cannot be had by belivers because of the seeming 4 to 1 ballpark of atheists to belivers of any kind i hoped to rope in some intellegent conversation about some unifying force in the universe as aposed to a handfull of comments made by belligerent rebels against their parents religion
Little_Birdie
Registered Senior Member
so adstar what is our take on religion i'd take it you are christian but what kind there are quite a few
Provita said:
Nature 394, 313 (23 July 1998)
Most who are well-educated and of scientific mindset reject religious dogma.
Little_Birdie
Registered Senior Member
Adstar said:
you belive in jesues. yay!! do you belive he is true god and true man? what are the particulars of your faith? what mysteries do you contemplate?
Little_Birdie said:
*************
M*W: You're asking Noah about the flood, you idiot. Jesus didn't exist! He's only a fig newton of your imagination. Grow the fuck up!
That's really fucking mature. fuck fuck fuck fjklsdnfkMedicine Woman said:
Mindless belief is irrational, childish and dangerous. Christanity is just another of the less benign cults that have existed throughout history. How many murdered innocents can christainity (or any major religion) tally in it's name?
It's disgusting.
It's disgusting.
urielswing
Registered Member
All right
Unfortunately most of the ardent atheists on these forums are fonder of angry rants than debate and discussion. Also the normal sciences (Geology, Biology …) and the reverse sciences (Theology, Philosophy) are not excusive but just looking at different ends of the same equation. The N.S.s looks from cause to effect, whereas the R.S.s looks from effect to cause. One day we will meet in the middle but till then we will have to respect each other lest posterity will place us in the same book as those that argued that the world is flat.
Unfortunately most of the ardent atheists on these forums are fonder of angry rants than debate and discussion. Also the normal sciences (Geology, Biology …) and the reverse sciences (Theology, Philosophy) are not excusive but just looking at different ends of the same equation. The N.S.s looks from cause to effect, whereas the R.S.s looks from effect to cause. One day we will meet in the middle but till then we will have to respect each other lest posterity will place us in the same book as those that argued that the world is flat.
C
charles cure
Guest
urielswing said:
philosophy and theology are not sciences. they do not employ the scientific method, nor do they collect, observe, or contemplate empirical evidence. out of curiosity, what effect is it that theology attempts to find a cause for, and how do you think it is that theologists go about looking for it in a way that even remotely resembles a scientific approach?