What church should I try?

[Cris]

davewhite,

To be fair, both theists and atheistic scientists can come across as being full of self belief, to the point of being stubborn. I agree that scientific theories aren’t presented as assertions of truth, it’s just the people who talk about these theories that do present them as assertions of the truth,

Then they are simply bad scientists. The good ones will take great care with what they say. And remember the media will jump to the next incorrect conclusions for public consumption. Try reading some real scientific papers and you will see the massive number of qualifications and justifications for their research.

I see what you are saying and it is a fascinating subject. But just because a light bulb is made of something that already exists, doesn’t mean its any less complex.

Yes but it wasn’t a single intelligence that created the complexity. The resultant complexity of the final result evolved over a long series of smaller simpler stages. That is the essence of evolution.

I agree there is little difference. It is a good question regarding the Egyptians though… So I guess that if intelligence is a part of the evolution process then we need a few thousand or million years yet to notice a significant change in intelligence? But judging by your hopes of living forever, we are pretty much intelligent enough now to concentrate on conquering the universe possibly. Doesn’t this sudden surge of knowledge go against the theory of evolution btw?

Evolution doesn’t necessarily have to be a slow process. Throughout time there have been some cusp points that have forced rapid changes. The collapse of the dinosaurs allowed mammals to become dominant, ice ages forced other adaptations, etc. If the environment never changed then a stagnant balance would result. Man’s intelligence is changing the largely random and undirected process of our evolution to something of his own making. For example genetic manipulations are likely to massively alter our abilities and properties; the encouragement of larger brains and higher intelligence will likely result from those changes. But I suspect the biggest changes will come from technology and the development of AI. When this occurs then AI will most likely quickly supersede man as the most intelligent species on the planet. Our choice will be to be either subservient or join them. This massive change in our future evolution is better known as the singularity -

http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Global/Singularity/

That was one web ref but there are many on the topic. My personal choice is mind uploading and shed the inadequacies of biology altogether.

Do you think it is possible to predict the future? I would think not… so consider the following.

If we knew all the variables perfectly then yes we could predict the future since everything appears to be the result of cause and effect. The challenge of course is to know everything there is to know perfectly.

If faith simply meant the definition of irrationality then we could remove one word from the dictionary.

Not quite, the word faith, like many words has multiple meanings. And many words often refer to the same thing. It is the curious nature of our language.

 

[davewhite04]

Godless,

Which Jesus was that, there were several BTW.
click


The Jesus in the New Testament. If you want to get more specifics read the genealogies in Matthew and Luke.


Jules Verne; From the Earth to the Moon
H.G. Wells; The War in the Air (BTW this book was written before the airplane actually was invented)


Yes, these had great scientific vision, as have many non authors. Do you believe the authors of the Bible existed, or did it appear from thin air?


Heck when it comes to predicting the future, Nostradamus predicted lots more things than the bible.


Really, like what?

 

[davewhite04]

Cris,


Then they are simply bad scientists. The good ones will take great care with what they say. And remember the media will jump to the next incorrect conclusions for public consumption. Try reading some real scientific papers and you will see the massive number of qualifications and justifications for their research.


Maybe I should have said atheists who 'think' they are scientists.


Yes but it wasn’t a single intelligence that created the complexity.


Yes it was, Thomas Edison.


Evolution doesn’t necessarily have to be a slow process.


Yes, this has been proven true I believe.


This massive change in our future evolution is better known as the singularity -

http://www.aleph.se/Trans/Global/Singularity/

That was one web ref but there are many on the topic. My personal choice is mind uploading and shed the inadequacies of biology altogether.


We shall see what the future brings I suppose.


If we knew all the variables perfectly then yes we could predict the future since everything appears to be the result of cause and effect. The challenge of course is to know everything there is to know perfectly.


Do you think the author of the said Gospel was a scientist?


Not quite, the word faith, like many words has multiple meanings. And many words often refer to the same thing. It is the curious nature of our language.

How foolish of me.

 

[Godless]

Really, like what?

Though I'm a skeptic Many seem to believe or interpret some of his prophesis. I'd leave that to your own conclusions.
click

Yes it was, Thomas Edison.

You still don't get it. It was not Thomas Edison who invented glass, nor did he discover ellectricity, nor did he invent the firmament material used to light up inside a vacum. Basically he used previous knowledge to arrive at the end result of his new invention. The light bulb. But regardless of the task of inventing the light bulb, it was the genious of marketers, the traders who sold the idea of placing the light bulbs through out the nation that was truly remarkable. Without the traders of market, the light bulb would have been basically deemed a useless item. The enormous task to install and generate electricity to power the light bulb was the real challenge after the invention of the light bulb.

We shall see what the future brings I suppose.

We hope the end of mysticism, that men finally realize that there's no savior, no hell, nor heaven, and an end to religious rhetoric.

Godless

 

[davewhite04]

Godless,

Though I'm a skeptic Many seem to believe or interpret some of his prophesis. I'd leave that to your own conclusions.
click


So you use examples that you personally don't understand or believe to counter attack an argument you don't understand or believe...


You still don't get it. It was not Thomas Edison who invented glass, nor did he discover ellectricity, nor did he invent the firmament material used to light up inside a vacum. Basically he used previous knowledge to arrive at the end result of his new invention. The light bulb. But regardless of the task of inventing the light bulb, it was the genious of marketers, the traders who sold the idea of placing the light bulbs through out the nation that was truly remarkable. Without the traders of market, the light bulb would have been basically deemed a useless item. The enormous task to install and generate electricity to power the light bulb was the real challenge after the invention of the light bulb.


When did I say that Edison invented glass? or electricity? It seems you're the one who doesn't get it, and I can't believe why you or Cris cannot agree with something obvious.

Your brain is made up of cells or tissue that has existed for many years, does that mean it isn't complex?


We hope the end of mysticism, that men finally realize that there's no savior, no hell, nor heaven, and an end to religious rhetoric.


You do not know that God doesn't exist, so why talk as if he doesn't? Just accept that you do not know.

 

[Cris]

Davewhite,

Maybe I should have said atheists who 'think' they are scientists.

Doesn’t matter what they believe. The scientific method is independent of beliefs.

Yes but it wasn’t a single intelligence that created the complexity.

Yes it was, Thomas Edison.

Pity, I thought you were beginning to understand. He built on top of the complexity that had been developed over thousands of years – he did not create that complexity but added a minute part to it.

Do you think the author of the said Gospel was a scientist?

No, but I’m not sure why the question is relevant.

 

[davewhite04]

Cris,


Doesn’t matter what they believe. The scientific method is independent of beliefs.


Agreed, and noted.


Pity, I thought you were beginning to understand. He built on top of the complexity that had been developed over thousands of years – he did not create that complexity but added a minute part to it.


Can you explain to me the flaw in my logic as follows:

We start of with two components which are independantly complex. We will call them A and B. C does not exist, and it cannot be proven whether or not it could have existed without some intelligence to connect A and B together.

A and B cannot connect themselves together.

A man connects A and B together and creates the first ever C, which is more complex then either A or B.

So if intelligence didn't connect A and B together, what did? And also, what makes C any less complex? You're saying that it's because it was just a byproduct of putting together existing complex components, but this does not make it any less complex!

I think if you said something like man cannot create something complex out of nothing, then yes, that is fine and impossible, but it's obvious that existing material has to be present to create anything.


No, but I’m not sure why the question is relevant.

It's relevant because someone wrote the New Testament and predicted the future 100%. You said that it was possible to predict the future, and you used an analytical mind to present your reasoning. Hence the reason I used a scientist as an example. Basically this fictious character (in your eyes) predicted what the behaviour of some human beings(on an individual level) would be in almost two thousand years time after He was crucified. Now if he didn't exist then how did this author have the insight that would be required? On the other hand, if Jesus did exist and was who He said He was, then there's no problem.

If we compare someone like Da Vinci, who designed flying objects well before they actually turned up then we can go back to your complex argument, and say it wasn't anything special as birds existed or something.

 

[Godless]

So you use examples that you personally don't understand or believe to counter attack an argument you don't understand or believe...

I used an example of which I don't believe. YES! But it also demonstrates that others have predicted future events or Better yet that some "believe" the events were predetermined.

It's relevant because someone wrote the New Testament and predicted the future 100%.

That is BS and you know it!. click

Bible contradictions

The New Testatement is riddle in contradictions, it predicted nothing other than a non-existent entity "jesus" claiming that others will come and claim to be him. But Like I've mentioned before "Which Jesus" there were many, but non were from Nazareth.

It is a fabricated fable, that you and unfortunatelly millions of others believe by "tradition, indoctrination, and lazziness". The buybull has been PROVEN to be unreliable to predict future events!. It's only how it's interpreted after the fact, much like believers of Nostradamus do indeed.

Godless

 

[davewhite04]

Godless,

I used an example of which I don't believe. YES! But it also demonstrates that others have predicted future events or Better yet that some "believe" the events were predetermined.



That is BS and you know it!. click

Bible contradictions

The New Testatement is riddle in contradictions, it predicted nothing other than a non-existent entity "jesus" claiming that others will come and claim to be him. But Like I've mentioned before "Which Jesus" there were many, but non were from Nazareth.

It is a fabricated fable, that you and unfortunatelly millions of others believe by "tradition, indoctrination, and lazziness". The buybull has been PROVEN to be unreliable to predict future events!. It's only how it's interpreted after the fact, much like believers of Nostradamus do indeed.

Godless

Did I hit a nerve? I showed an example of Jesus predicting the future, that cannot be refuted no matter how many insults or dodgy websites you throw into the mix. If you have anything that adds value to this discussion, then let me know.

 

[Godless]

Dadgy websites, or perhaps your dodgy logic.!

The Testatememt was shown to be written 300 some odd years after so called crusifiction of Jesus, thus unworthy of even discussion if the subject jesus even existed, yet alone make any future profecies.

 

[davewhite04]

Dadgy websites, or perhaps your dodgy logic.!

The Testatememt was shown to be written 300 some odd years after so called crusifiction of Jesus, thus unworthy of even discussion if the subject jesus even existed, yet alone make any future profecies.

You seem to be missing the point. Lets go through this as logically as possible. Lets say the New Testament was written in the 20th century.

Matthew 24:5
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Mark 13:6
For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Luke 21:8
And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.

The above prophesy has come true 100%, no one can refute that.

Here are some who definitely came AFTER the New Testament was written.

maitreya

Jerusalem Syndrome

They’ve even given a name to the behaviour expressed in the second link, Jerusalem Syndrome.

Some of the tourists think they are Moses or King David but only Jesus predicted that anyone would come in His name, or the elusive author(in your view).

Let me ask you a question. How many authors do you think wrote the gospels?