Joney and the Bishop

[Malik]

11 minutes ago, woolley said:

Well there is freedom of speech, but the problem is when some people expound their unlikely beliefs about the nature of existence and creation as though they were fact, often coupled with a zeal that brooks no denial or even doubt. I appreciate you are not doing that, but it has been known in the past.

Richard Dawkins and others have done that as ‘though it were fact’ , etc.
I am a chemist and know chemicals do not self assemble themselves in nature. Atoms and small molecules are just like Lego, they have no conscience and don’t self assemble. Then consider dna is made up of billions of atoms.

I am only discussing creation.

[woolley]

11 minutes ago, Malik said:

Richard Dawkins and others have done that as ‘though it were fact’ , etc.
I am a chemist and know chemicals do not self assemble themselves in nature. Atoms and small molecules are just like Lego, they have no conscience and don’t self assemble. Then consider dna is made up of billions of atoms.

I am only discussing creation.

Of course, and there is nothing wrong with that. I appreciate that some scientists are religious, but I think you are confusing our lack of scientific knowledge for proof of some kind of deity. It would be interesting to discover what percentage of all there is to know we currently do know. I suspect it's vanishingly small, but I don't see any justification for the leap from our lack of awareness to making up gods to suit our tastes. It's like we cannot bear our ignorance about the nature of our own existence and the limitations of our mortality, so we need to fill the gap with something.

[Malik]

10 hours ago, woolley said:

Of course, and there is nothing wrong with that. I appreciate that some scientists are religious, but I think you are confusing our lack of scientific knowledge for proof of some kind of deity. It would be interesting to discover what percentage of all there is to know we currently do know. I suspect it's vanishingly small, but I don't see any justification for the leap from our lack of awareness to making up gods to suit our tastes. It's like we cannot bear our ignorance about the nature of our own existence and the limitations of our mortality, so we need to fill the gap with something.

Science doesn’t know where matter comes from and how atoms self-form immediately after the Big Bang, which are made up of as many as 37 sub-atomic particles. They are the basic building blocks of life and this physical world. Science says atoms make up 5% of this world, the other 95% they know nothing about. It’s impossible and proven mathematically improbable for atoms to form dna without it being created by a creator. Atoms are inanimate and have no consciousness, where does that come from? 

I don’t believe we evolved from apes. Apes don’t look at the sky and have never prayed, however, every tribe in the history of mankind have believed in spirits. Mortality didn’t invent God, God invented mortality. Science has its positives but on creation and existence it has led people into a cosy delusion. Sorry to go off topic.

[Gladys]

12 minutes ago, Malik said:

Science doesn’t know where matter comes from and how atoms self-form immediately after the Big Bang, which are made up of as many as 37 sub-atomic particles. They are the basic building blocks of life and this physical world. Science says atoms make up 5% of this world, the other 95% they know nothing about. It’s impossible and proven mathematically improbable for atoms to form dna without it being created by a creator. Atoms are inanimate and have no consciousness, where does that come from? 

I don’t believe we evolved from apes. Apes don’t look at the sky and have never prayed, however, every tribe in the history of mankind have believed in spirits. Mortality didn’t invent God, God invented mortality. Science has its positives but on creation and existence it has led people into a cosy delusion. Sorry to go off topic.

How can you, as a scientist, accept that science does not know and cannot explain everything and then conclude that, thefore, a god must have been behind creation?  Has science got nothing further to explore?

A simple explanation of why every tribe in the history of mankind have believed in spirits is because there were things they observed which could not be explained by their simple understanding of the world, so they filled in the gaps.   Belief does not equal existence.  Science has explained many of these "mysterious phenomena".  

In your view, therefore, where is god, in the 5% of atoms or the 95% of unknown? 

 

[The Voice of Reason]

From the National Academy of Sciences 

re Religion and Science 

 

“So they are different ways of understanding the world?

Yes, and they focus on different kinds of questions. For example, science is a powerful tool for understanding and explaining the mechanisms and dynamics of the physical universe. But science can’t examine or explain the purpose of the universe. That’s a question that falls under theology or philosophy.

Pitting science and religion against each other makes both less able to contribute to a more meaningful experience of the world.“

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Even if there was some creation involved, where we found that the universe and living creatures were created that certainly doesn't imply a God must have done it. And then it's another gigantic step to think that the God of the Bible exists and did it.  

The delusion is filling the gaps in our knowledge with the ignorant supernatural beliefs of desert-living nomads who lives over two centuries ago.  

As for evolution, there is plenty of evidence for that.  And, as far as I am aware, they have found that amino acids can form under certain conditions. And science doesn't know a lot things.  We have theories that provide a possible explanation but nothing is concluded or definitive.  That's science.

Religion, on the other hand, is about claiming to know things and thinking things true.  If people don't have evidence to back these things up then they shouldn't carry any credibility.  Unfortunately, we can't seem to shake religion off.  It's a flaw of our humanity, I think.

But anyway, dismissing evidence for these things isn't really important.

You have to provide evidence that your God exists to have any credibility for your beliefs.  Considering you beliefs in the Christian God, I very much doubt you can do that.  And, I don't want to write anyone off, but considering you seem to put weight on the Bible, I am sceptical about you being rational in any discussion about these things.  

 

[La_Dolce_Vita]

8 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

From the National Academy of Sciences 

re Religion and Science 

 

“So they are different ways of understanding the world?

Yes, and they focus on different kinds of questions. For example, science is a powerful tool for understanding and explaining the mechanisms and dynamics of the physical universe. But science can’t examine or explain the purpose of the universe. That’s a question that falls under theology or philosophy.

Pitting science and religion against each other makes both less able to contribute to a more meaningful experience of the world.“

I disagree. I wonder who has written this, why they have and in what context.

Science is possibly the best tool to examine and explain the universe in such a way that it might allow for any purpose to be discovered.  But there has not been any evidence that points to any purpose, in the sense of a plan.

But religion doesn't examine and it's explanations don't seem to offer any evidence of there being a purpose.  It's no different to me making up something right now about some being creating things and making a plan.  

Science and religion could be pitted against each other and this has happened to good effect. Myths and ignorant beliefs in the bible have been rejected because of scientific discovery.  The order of creation in Genesis is not correct and the earth isn't at the centre of the universe, for example. 

But again, a religious person arguing against scientific evidence thinking that this backs up their beliefs is ridiculous when they can't offer anything to support their beliefs.

[Barlow]

1 hour ago, Malik said:

Science doesn’t know where matter comes from and how atoms self-form immediately after the Big Bang, which are made up of as many as 37 sub-atomic particles. They are the basic building blocks of life and this physical world. Science says atoms make up 5% of this world, the other 95% they know nothing about. It’s impossible and proven mathematically improbable for atoms to form dna without it being created by a creator. Atoms are inanimate and have no consciousness, where does that come from? 

I don’t believe we evolved from apes. Apes don’t look at the sky and have never prayed, however, every tribe in the history of mankind have believed in spirits. Mortality didn’t invent God, God invented mortality. Science has its positives but on creation and existence it has led people into a cosy delusion. Sorry to go off topic.

No, not off topic, not one bit.

In this somewhat deep context, science and religious philosophy are little different from each other.

Edited June 24, 2023 by Barlow

[Mr Helmut Fromage]

17 hours ago, Malik said:

If there were none, or only a minority of members practicing true faith in any government, legislation would be founded on immorality, bribery, lying, deceit, hatred, self-serving and perversion, exactly what it seen in British politics and why “In March the Commission on Political Power said the bishops are an "anomalous" presence in the House of Lords”. 

Nothing motivates a secular member of government to be righteous and upstanding in modern politics. Those I’ve observed aren’t bothered about integrity, being judged or legacy and only care about accountability if they can get voted back in.

A bishop elder would have had some role/influence in Tynwald from the start judging by the keeills. Most young Manx don’t seem to care about this heritage, mainly visiting churches in the parish walk. Persecuted religious immigrants might like it though.

 

To say Christianity is the benchmark of morality proves beyond doubt your stupidity- let’s take a little look at African and South American atrocities- glossed over as “spreading Gods word” 

Horrendous behaviour which you support.

Edited June 24, 2023 by Mr Helmut Fromage
He’s not real

[HeliX]

3 hours ago, Malik said:

Science has its positives but on creation and existence it has led people into a cosy delusion.

Er, which one is cosy? Existing forever in heaven, or becoming the void?

Anyway, you're welcome to your God of the gaps of course, but that does define your God as an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance.

[Mr Helmut Fromage]

2 hours ago, HeliX said:

Er, which one is cosy? Existing forever in heaven, or becoming the void?

Anyway, you're welcome to your God of the gaps of course, but that does define your God as an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance.

As Christopher Hitchens described the Christians version of heaven “A celestial North Korea”

[Malik]

6 hours ago, Gladys said:

How can you, as a scientist, accept that science does not know and cannot explain everything and then conclude that, thefore, a god must have been behind creation?  Has science got nothing further to explore?

A simple explanation of why every tribe in the history of mankind have believed in spirits is because there were things they observed which could not be explained by their simple understanding of the world, so they filled in the gaps.   Belief does not equal existence.  Science has explained many of these "mysterious phenomena".  

In your view, therefore, where is god, in the 5% of atoms or the 95% of unknown? 

 

The living God is everywhere and holds the universe together so the Bible states. Most of humanity today does not experience the same supernatural that all the world’s tribes would have experienced in the past. Many Christians experience God today but non-Christians are kept in the dark and science on creation helps to do this. It won’t be an excuse though.

[Malik]

33 minutes ago, Mr Helmut Fromage said:

As Christopher Hitchens described the Christians version of heaven “A celestial North Korea”

Do you think he said that because he was pro lgbt?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

14 minutes ago, Malik said:

Many Christians experience God today but non-Christians are kept in the dark and science on creation helps to do this. It won’t be an excuse though.

I find debating this sort of things rather weird and silly because it's jo different than debating whether Thor's or Zeus's existence.  

But anyway, if it were true that the Christian God exists then it isn't science that keeps people in the dark, it would be that God,as he would be either stupid or incompetent, possibly both.

If Man is ignorant of him then that's because God has failed to demonstrate his existence and beliefs.  The Bible is a mish-mash of beliefs written by men so communicating things through the writing of me who died long ago is ridiculous.  But even if God wrote and air-dropped the books across the world, of all the ways that a God could communicate his existence and intentions, a book has to be one of the most stupid ways of doing so.  

Anyway, something about you seems strange. I would think that anyone with much knowledge of chemistry would more than likely have an understanding of what science is and how it works rather rail against it. Either you are having some fun or you don't know much about science.

[Gladys]

25 minutes ago, Malik said:

The living God is everywhere and holds the universe together so the Bible states. Most of humanity today does not experience the same supernatural that all the world’s tribes would have experienced in the past. Many Christians experience God today but non-Christians are kept in the dark and science on creation helps to do this. It won’t be an excuse though.

You have to prove the very first assertion there, given that the Bible is a recording of the world order by monks and those with no scientific expertise, background or understanding, from an age heavily dependent on superstition to explain the world.  It is not a reliable source document  which has been subject to peer review.  

I understand that religion can offer comfort and reassurance to many people, and that is fine, but do not misconstrue belief with fact.  Some great stories in the Bible though, much like the Greek, Roman and Norse writings.