Collins: Why this scientist believes in God - Page 6

[Chaky]

I am an atheist. (both of my parents are)
No scraments, not baptised, not circumcisized, no nothing.
Does that make me evil or something? I think not. (Haven't killed anyone. Yet.)
I think it makes me OBJECTIVE regarding religions.
And guess what, people. I DO think that there is a superior being that is responsible for all this. Only, I'm not sure should I call it Shiva, Buddha, Yahve, Allah or whatever. I think that He doesn't have name, since names are "human call signs", a means to differentiate between individuals and God is only one (Monotheism), but I could be wrong.

I think that people that take words for granted are living in illusion. Bible was written by a men too, you know. Only, ones that wrote the scripts claim that those are words of God.

You should all read one Eric Von Deiniken's "God and Astronauts". He asks all sorts of questions about religion, false gods and such, and not all of them are rediculus.

Here are couple of my thoughts:

Evolution
Christina, evolution is not a religion nor fact. It is a path that the history took. It is a set of events in chronological order. And I don't mean history as last 5000 years of history on this piece of rock we call Earth, I mean EVERYTHING, EVERYWHERE and since EVER. If you want proof, just take a look around you, close your eyes, open them and take a look around you again. What you would see is the CHANGE. That's evolution in it's true form. Gene changes (Darwin's concept of "Natural Selection") are only drop in the water.

Science vs. religion

Those two MUST complement each other. Both are in pursue of same goal: TRUTH.
Science is not all about PROVING stuff. Proving stuff is the way to establish undeniable truth. Religion takes a different approach to the undeniable truth. Problem is that the religion is being interpreted differently from person to person and it is being incorporated in lives differently from culture to culture. Those differences in interpretation made different religions altogether possible. If you familiarize your self with some of them (or, should I say "more than one" for most people here), you would understand that the main message is same all over the world. That doesn't prove that the God exists as you imagine Him. It only proves that people all around the world are more similar than are different.

Since when God has to prove that he created it all? If he did, that's the only proof you need.

And Christina, I'll quote Robin Williams:
"Fundamentalists are people that take words for granted. For example if the Bible says that 'in the beginning there was light', could that be a metaphor for the big bang? The fundamentalists would say 'No. God just went *click*'"

For all catholics (especially roman):
Religion and institution of church are NOT THE SAME!.
The FACT is that the Vatican is rejecting words of Jesus Christ. The rejected part says something like "God is everywhere."
Why? Church doesn't like the idea that you don't need to go to church (and give them some money, while you're there) to pray or hear the mass. Church likes to be a middleman between population and God.

[joshSCH]

First off, religion has evolved over time. From polytheism and pagan ideas to christianity and islam... Humans gradually developed more logical views of religion and purpose. Christianity has adopted a great deal of pagan ideas and scriptures... Religion will continue to evolve as long as humans feel discontent with their religious beliefs or feel their religion can not answer all their questions. And even though christianity grows rapidly in the west (over 250,000 people became members of the catholic church at the easter vigil mass), Christianity has failed miserably in the east.. (Asia in particular).

Buddha may have withheld himself from Nirvana, but is that really big enough to compare with the crucifixion of Jesus? He laid His life down for His friends.... who else would do such a thing???

The Buddhists think of Buddha in the same exact way as the Christians think of jesus. Buddha became the 'enlightened one', and was able to escape from the cycle of death and rebirth. Buddha achieved nirvana.. something that had been sought for many years. Christians understand none of this, and do not believe buddha and jesus are similar in any way. However, they both did very similar things in their lifetimes, and they both managed to create entire religions modeled after themselves. And although the idea of karma and reincarnation are ridiculously idiotic :p , many people fall for buddhism the same way that people are brainwashed into christianity.

Guys, I give up.

We all know that nobody's stance on anything will change a smudgeon, as shown by everybody's very last post. Everyone is using the same old ignorances, criticizing others who don't agree with their own beliefs, and simply bashing other religions needlessly.

WHY? Why does it matter what someone else believes? Why do we need to so vehemeously defend our own beliefs?

Well, it obviously doesn't matter at all. However, these debates are good.. we (those who are actually open-minded) can see how others think, and why they believe what they believe. Hopefully in the future, we can someday resolve this dispute.

However, most christians are unyielding.. they hold onto blind faith and simply hope for the best. But why believe in something that may be false? I simply ask that all of you stop immediately trying to defend yourself and your religion. Just think about it... Use logic, don't try to reason something simply because you want it to. Just think, and I believe you will make the same reasonable conclusion that so many other intelligent people have. Ask yourself this, what would happen if there hadn't been a god? What if everything came into being through science?" Logically reason out what would happen.. how humanity would react.. I'm just asking for a little thought... :idea:

[John A]

Guys, I give up.

We all know that nobody's stance on anything will change a smudgeon, as shown by everybody's very last post. Everyone is using the same old ignorances, criticizing others who don't agree with their own beliefs, and simply bashing other religions needlessly.

WHY? Why does it matter what someone else believes? Why do we need to so vehemeously defend our own beliefs? Why does it matter what somebody else thinks of you?

This argument is going in circles, with nobody changing.

It was stupid of me to even partake in any of this, I'm sorry.

Agreed. I'm beginning to get sick of this discussion, to be honest...

[WaltP]

"The gospel itself is anonymous, but as early as Papias in the early 2nd century, a text was attributed to Mark, a disciple of Peter, who is said to have recorded the Apostle's discourses." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

"today the majority [of scholars] agree Matthew did not write the Gospel which bears his name." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew

"Although the author of Luke is generally considered to be anonymous, there is some suggestion that the author of Luke also wrote the book of Acts."
"Nowhere in Luke or Acts does it explicitly say that the author is Luke, the companion of Paul." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke

"The authorship has been disputed since at least the second century, with mainstream Christianity believing that the author is John son of Zebedee. Modern experts usually consider the author to be an unknown non-eyewitness..." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

Seems authorship is a little vague. Even the scholars aren't sure.

So? If anything this would prove accuracy, otherwise the writings would have never made it public, as Mathew, Mark, Luke, John and whoever else would have made it known that the writings were false.

My point was not the accuracy of the Gospels, it was that "The Gospel According to [name]" may not have been written by the man who's name is on it. Nothing was said about the veracity of the writing. Ghostwriting is an approved vehicle for authorship. It's better to put someone's name as an author credibility rather than naming it "The Gospel According to Irving" just because he wrote it.

See my links above. It seems not that long after. I too thought they were written quite a while after. But it seems, not so. Although the first proven records seem to date from around 400AD and after.

Nope. The writings of the New Testament were completed within 70 years of Jesus's birth (so 70AD).

Not so. See the links.

Mark: 60-70 AD
Matthew: 70-100 AD
Luke: 70-100 AD
John: 90-100 AD

So within 100 years. Which to me make it somewhat clear that eyewitnesses may not have written them.

What?!?!? Jesus is the reason Pilate and Herod existed? Absolutely illogical, my dear. That's like saying that oxygen exists simply because we breath it. It's proven that they both existed. They are in historical records. Facts prove you wrong here. Whether or not Jesus existed has absolutely no bearing on whether Pilate or Herod existed.

You really think we would say Jesus is the reason for Pilate and Herod existing?? lol

That's what she said... It surprised me, too. I will agree that Pilot would probably not be known today without the Gospels.

You're right, both Pilate and Herod lives have been proven; and surely you wouldn't argue with the life of Tacitus? Surely not!

No clue. Never heard of him. ;) At least I don't remember if I had.

Interesting excerpt. What's interesting about it is he obviously wrote it at least 40 years after the incident.

Exerpt from Tacitus's writing on Nero's persecution of Christians:

“Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, . .”

Christ's life = proven.

You sure?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Jesus:
"Some scholars have suggested that this passage could be a later addition by Christian scribes. This is supported by the fact that no early Christian writers refer to Tacitus even when discussing the subject of Nero and Christian persecution"
They (possibly) did it with the writings of Josephus, too.

But then again:
"On the other hand, some argue that the passage is far too critical of Christians to be added by Christian scribes."

So again, outside references are in question, not a certainty.

Christina, you need to look at the logic of your arguments. The fact that you believe does not make your beliefs facts. You believe because it makes sense to you.... Don't make illogical arguments to attempt to prove points. ...

Believe me, I'm not trying to bash your beliefs. Just your arguments that attempt to prove the beliefs are facts. They aren't.

you too.

I haven't made unsubstantiated claims, have I? Did I say anything as fact that I didn't at least attempt to substantiate? Were the other statements not obvious as opinions? These are real questions. I cannot judge accurately since they are my own words.

We all know that nobody's stance on anything will change a smudgeon, as shown by everybody's very last post. Everyone is using the same old ignorances, criticizing others who don't agree with their own beliefs, and simply bashing other religions needlessly.

It was stupid of me to even partake in any of this, I'm sorry.

I for one am not trying to change stances, and I was not bashing anyone's beliefs. And I don't see any attacks, as you obviously do. Who was the bad guy here?

[mattyd]

Guys, I give up.

We all know that nobody's stance on anything will change a smudgeon, as shown by everybody's very last post. Everyone is using the same old ignorances, criticizing others who don't agree with their own beliefs, and simply bashing other religions needlessly.

WHY? Why does it matter what someone else believes? Why do we need to so vehemeously defend our own beliefs? Why does it matter what somebody else thinks of you?

This argument is going in circles, with nobody changing.

It was stupid of me to even partake in any of this, I'm sorry.

Again with your pronouncement of other's "ignorance"-- sounds very familiar. Why is someone ignorant who stands strongly by their beliefs and does not "change" just because you or someone wishes to encourage them through a post on a website? Please let it be known, and I speak for myself: I am not trying to change you nor convince or persuade-- I find that fruitless. Yes, I wish to spread the living Word with those open to hearing and learning about it, but I am not the kind of Christian that feels the need to convert through word or sword.

It is the norm in Western culture to bash Christianity as "ignorant", closed-minded, superstitious, and certainly some of that does exist in certain Christian sub-groups. The Christians I know, though, speak Hebrew and read Greek. They are programmers, artists, writers, doctors. These are not uneducated backwater folks hoping to pull you into a tent revival but instead offer to discuss views and truths (yes, truths) with you should you wish. I could care less if you are Christian, Agnostic, or other. That is your business.

But, I shall not digress from what I know is correct, proper, and the truth. You may feel free to present one-sided attacks cloaked as philosophical debate if you wish to. We of the faith are used to this tactic. I try to surround myself with open-minded people in my personal and business life (I work for a game design company as a programmer and the owners and most of the staff are Christians and they are totally cool anime nerds) but I prefer to be with the like-minded as I am sure you and every person of any belief system or lack-there-of prefers.

You battle cry of ignorance: save it for a foe you have a chance against. True Christians will ignore this and move on as we always do.

Besides that, I think seeing members here discussing religion, faith, evolution, etc is healthy and refreshing. I get tired of reading about C++ and hardware issues. That stuff means nothing compared to God.

I am myself done with this thread. Thank-you for reading my thoughts and for sharing your own. :);)

Sincerely,
Matty

[~s.o.s~]

Hmm...interesting thread -- its a pity in my old days I didn't like Biology, so no evolution for me. :D

But seriously, my belief is that don't believe in anyone and you would be better off. That way, you can be rest assured that its you who is responsible for your actions and their results and not some so called divine power called put_whatever_you_like_here. First and foremost, believe in what you want and I guess it should turn out to be right.

"The light proves the shadow and the shadow proves the light."

[christina>you]

I am an atheist. (both of my parents are)
No scraments, not baptised, not circumcisized, no nothing.
Does that make me evil or something? I think not. (Haven't killed anyone. Yet.)

Evolution
Christina, evolution is not a religion nor fact.

And Christina, I'll quote Robin Williams:
"Fundamentalists are people that take words for granted. For example if the Bible says that 'in the beginning there was light', could that be a metaphor for the big bang? The fundamentalists would say 'No. God just went *click*'"

Ok... first off, just because you are an atheist doesn't mean I hate you or resent you. And that goes for all of you....
It just means that I will pray for you. That's what being a Christian is about my friend.

2. I never said evolution is a religion nor did I say it was a fact.... :?:

3. I honestly don't care what Robin Williams has to say about my faith. Sorry...

[christina>you]

If that's what she was saying, sorry. That's not what she wrote, though.

(about Pilot and Herod)

Yes, that is what I meant.

[Chaky]

Ok... first off, just because you are an atheist doesn't mean I hate you or resent you. And that goes for all of you....
It just means that I will pray for you. That's what being a Christian is about my friend.

No need to, but thanks

2. I never said evolution is a religion nor did I say it was a fact.... :?:

You almost did.

3. I honestly don't care what Robin Williams has to say about my faith. Sorry...

Have to admit that it's funny, though.

[christina>you]

You almost did.

Umm no, actually I was defending the fact that evolution is just a theory. So you are completely wrong. And I never said it was a religion... that is absurd. I don't know where you're getting your information from... =/

[Chaky]

You were comparing Bible and Darwin's "natural selection" theory. It, kind of, sounds like you're referring to evolution as a religion of some sort.

But, never mind that. That is not my point. My point is that the "evolution" is the way things develop (or EVOLVE). It is ongoing process.

[christina>you]

You were comparing Bible and Darwin's "natural selection" theory. It, kind of, sounds like you're referring to evolution as a religion of some sort.

Yes, you are correct I was comparing the Bible with Evolution... but I was using the Bible as a reference for Creationism. So really I was comparing Creationism with Evolution... the two theories. Not religions.

[Chaky]

Can't compare those two. No way. It is a waste of time and energy to even try. All you (or me) can do is to preach, and that is not a two way communication.

I guess my point here is that no point can be made on his topic.

[christina>you]

Can't compare those two. No way. It is a waste of time and energy to even try. All you (or me) can do is to preach, and that is not a two way communication.

I guess my point here is that no point can be made on his topic.

I wasn't comparing them now... :rolleyes:
I had already done that on page 1 or 2.

Right now all I am doing is taking up for the Truth of Jesus Christ.

[Chaky]

Page 1 and 2 is all I read of this soap opera thread.

Sounds more like you're fighting for the Truth of Jesus Christ. That is something that only religion-sensitive people would do. If you are one, than you must be aware of Jesus Christ's message that says something like "Live your lives, people. Not your believes." (or something like that)
No disrespect intended.

Btw, nice signature.

[joshSCH]

Page 1 and 2 is all I read of this soap opera thread.

Sounds more like you're fighting for the Truth of Jesus Christ. That is something that only religion-sensitive people would do. If you are one, than you must be aware of Jesus Christ's message that says something like "Live your lives, people. Not your believes." (or something like that)
No disrespect intended.

huh?? I don't think jesus ever said that.

Can't compare those two. No way. It is a waste of time and energy to even try. All you (or me) can do is to preach, and that is not a two way communication.

um, why can't you compare creationism and evolution? The christians sometimes tend to link them together.. God created science, and through science created everything. Evolution is just the idea that everything has evolved through natural selection. To me, evolution can not be argued.. It has pretty much been proven true. But, evolution has absolutely no effect on religion whatsoever. You can still believe in both, as the doctor from the article does.

[Chaky]

Creationism claims that a man has been created to the God's image. Natural selection theory claims that the image of man is product of environment/laws of physics over millions of years and it gradually evolved to this today. That's why those 2 can't be compared. One denies the other.
If BOTH were true, than the God wouldn't really be a God, but a man. (evolved and stuff, not perfect)

[joshSCH]

Creationism claims that a man has been created to the God's image. Natural selection theory claims that the image of man is product of environment/laws of physics over millions of years and it gradually evolved to this today. That's why those 2 can't be compared. One denies the other.
If BOTH were true, than the God wouldn't really be a God, but a man. (evolved and stuff, not perfect)

actually, the theories do not necessarily contradict each other. You can believe in both. As I said before, what if this god created men through science. God used evolution and science to create the human race. Christians do argue this point, and it is valid.

But evolution is very complex.. and unlikely to simply be 'created'. The human body is a VERY complex system.. the eyes, circulatory system, etc. However, the body is flawed. There are many characteristics of the human body that would not be considered 'perfect'. These imperfections lead us to believe that humans may some day evolve into something more adept for life.

[Chaky]

They don't necessarily contradict each other if one is open-minded enough to accept possibilities of different interpretations of couple of sentences and possible (and probable) mistranslations of the same.

[WaltP]

They don't necessarily contradict each other ...

Of course not. A possibility is that through natural selection, trees, animals, birds, fish, corn, etc. evolved. Then when the time was right (or He was bored) He created man.

[Chaky]

Maybe He created man trough the evolution. He IS almighty, after all.

[christina>you]

Page 1 and 2 is all I read of this soap opera thread.

Sounds more like you're fighting for the Truth of Jesus Christ. That is something that only religion-sensitive people would do. If you are one, than you must be aware of Jesus Christ's message that says something like "Live your lives, people. Not your believes." (or something like that)
No disrespect intended.

Fighting for, standing up for... what's the huge difference? I'm not a "religion-sensitive person" as you would say. And I'm sorry that you have to judge me like I am.

Wow... Jesus never said that... :confused:
It doesn't even make sense....

[Chaky]

It is not a judgment. It's an impression.

About those Jesus words... It is not something I read somewhere, but someone (one religious fanatic guy) told me that. If he's lying then I'm lying. And it makes sense. At least to me.

[joshSCH]

Maybe He created man trough the evolution. He IS almighty, after all.

I thought you were atheist.

haha.. Wow, can you believe that we have talked about this for 12 pages?:!: And I don't think anyone has switched sides lol.. That's good, everyone seems to be very firm in his/her own beliefs.

[Chaky]

I like to call my self a by-product of communist regime. Atheist by force, not by choice.

[joshSCH]

lol.. ic

[christina>you]

I just want to add another thought. Even though this has been going on for 12 pages as Josh said... I'm just going to say that I have enough proof within archaeology and history together to back up my faith, but again... that is enough for me. And it's not just the proof in history, it's the proof in my life... the love and the hope that I have found is absolutely amazing to me. For everyone else, it's a what if question. And it reminds me of a song from Nichole Nordeman....

What if you're right,
He was just another nice guy.
What if you're right,
What if it's true...
They say the cross will only make a fool of you.
And what if it's true?

What if He takes His place in history
With all the prophets and the kings,
Who taught us love, and came in peace,
But then the story ends.
What then?

But what if you're wrong?
What if there's more.....
What if there's hope you never dreamed of hoping for?
What if you jump,
Just close your eyes,
What if the arms that catch you, catch you by surprise?
What if He's more than enough,
What if it's love?

What if you dig,
Way down deeper than your simple-minded friends?
What if you dig?
What if you find,
A thousand more unanswered questions down inside?
That's all you find.

What if you pick apart the logic
And begin to poke the holes?
What if the crown of thorns is no more than folklore that must be told
And retold?

'Cause you've been running as fast as you can,
You've been looking for a place you can land
For so long.
But what if you're wrong?

What if it's love?

[Chaky]

http://www.encycmet.com/lyrics/lyr-meta.shtml

(joke)

[christina>you]

Not really =/
It's pretty mean. But I guess I'm used to it.
That's ok. My God has never failed me.

[Chaky]

It IS a joke.

But, I'm sure I'll burn in hell for it.