Page 4 of 31 FirstFirst 12345678914 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 302
  1. #31
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    8,335

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    Should I take this to be a bit a razzing from a momentarily overzealous member of the fundamentalist team, or do the multitude of sects to be found within the various religions represent an irreducible compartmentalization of religious thought?

    Sounds like a fringe element in science disputing the evidence on climate change....



  2. #32
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,027

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    Quote Originally Posted by Stavros View Post
    Should I take this to be a bit a razzing from a momentarily overzealous member of the fundamentalist team, or do the multitude of sects to be found within the various religions represent an irreducible compartmentalization of religious thought?

    Sounds like a fringe element in science disputing the evidence on climate change....
    Touche'. But even those climatologists who seriously dissent from the consensus of anthropogenic origin argues (perhaps incorrectly) from the basic principles of physics, atmospheric chemistry etc. The anthropogenic origins of terrestrial energy imbalance is not a dispute about basic principles but about higher level effects of those principles, and the interpretation of data and models.

    To my mind the differences between Gnostics, Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholics, Baptists, Charismatics, Pentecostals, Presbyterian, Mormonism etc. seem rather basic, at least it seemed that way to the original practitioners who felt the need to separate from the branch off which they schismed.

    Do you really think the various sects of Christianity cohere in the same way as the various disciplines of science.


    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  3. #33
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    8,335

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    The strength of science is that is based on rational thought backed up by evidence, and that with patient explanations most people can understand what science tries to do, even if in some cases the explanations seem too complex or obscure. The weakness in science is that in some cases the same evidence is used to produce contrary explanations, and that some discoveries and developments of science have produced weapons that can destroy the planet ten times over, assuming we can agree that is a negative outcome of positive action. I recall an article that Jeremy Bernstein wrote about the reactions of the nuclear scientists working on the Manhattan Project to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and they were shaken to their core. I don't think they ever thought their work would result in such destruction.

    Christianity does not speak with one voice because it developed in so many different places after originating in a small segment of the Roman Empire, something it shares with most religions. It might be possible to isolate and identify the key principles of Christianity, but I doubt there would be universal agreement on them among Christians. It may therefore be pointless in drawing attention to a standard feature of religion as if it were exceptional, much as there are liberal and orthodox Jews, Muslims who claim to be Sunna or Shi'a, not to mention the differences between Buddhists in India, Thailand and Japan.

    The irony, if there is one, of an American drawing attention to this, is that it is precisely this freedom to be different that was part of the motivation for 'Pilgrims' to leave Europe and settle in North America. Just as the settlers rejected the Church of Rome or indeed, any established church, so in America they were free to create their own churches, and they have. Somewhere in de Tocqueville's study of America he comments on how Christian a county he feels the US is, and it is intriguing that the USA has been -and continues to be- one of the most exciting places in which to be a scientist, yet contains within it a substantial number of people, around 30% who think evolution is rubbish and that everything we see is part of 'God's design'; and as we have discussed before I think, it would probably be impossible for a man or woman who does not believe in God to be elected President.

    Perhaps it is this diversity which makes life interesting; perhaps it would be better if in the case of much religion, and some science, it was not also such a vexatious challenge.



  4. #34
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,027

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    Quote Originally Posted by Stavros View Post
    The strength of science is that is based on rational thought backed up by evidence, and that with patient explanations most people can understand what science tries to do, even if in some cases the explanations seem too complex or obscure. The weakness in science is that in some cases the same evidence is used to produce contrary explanations, and that some discoveries and developments of science have produced weapons that can destroy the planet ten times over, assuming we can agree that is a negative outcome of positive action. I recall an article that Jeremy Bernstein wrote about the reactions of the nuclear scientists working on the Manhattan Project to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and they were shaken to their core. I don't think they ever thought their work would result in such destruction.
    I think the phenomena of contrary explanations is not peculiar to science, nor even as frequent in science as perhaps in other areas of inquiry. Contradiction, is a negative when it fails to inspire honest resolution. A couple years ago scientist working on OPERA suggested their work showed neutrinos could travel faster than light, contrary to special relativity. When a flaw was uncovered in the analysis of the OPERA data, the contradiction was resolved. On the other hand, the disagreements between General Relativity and Quantum Field Theory have persisted for several decades. It’s clear to physicists that one or both of these theories will eventually have to be modified before the conflicts can be resolved. It’s generally considered to be an exciting time to be working in either or both of these areas.

    That science has produced weapons of unfathomable destruction is an undeniably Faustian aspect of real knowledge (of how the physical world works). It is a strong argument that such knowledge shouldn’t be pursued, or if it is, that is should be regulated in some fashion.

    If there were such a thing as real knowledge of how religio-metaphysical things like souls, angels, demons and gods worked, I can’t help but think such knowledge might be equally dangerous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stavros View Post
    Christianity does not speak with one voice because it developed in so many different places after originating in a small segment of the Roman Empire, something it shares with most religions. It might be possible to isolate and identify the key principles of Christianity, but I doubt there would be universal agreement on them among Christians. It may therefore be pointless in drawing attention to a standard feature of religion as if it were exceptional, much as there are liberal and orthodox Jews, Muslims who claim to be Sunna or Shi'a, not to mention the differences between Buddhists in India, Thailand and Japan.
    I doubt that the rapid diversification in beliefs, creeds and practices is due entirely to the rapid spread of Christianity into all parts of the globe. The spread of science since Newton was probably even more rapid. It seems to me that Christianity, and religion, lacks a real desire to confront contradictory religious believes and resolve them honestly. Is the Eucharist a metaphor for Christ’s body, Christ’s body in substance or Christ’s body in essence? Does the soul enter the egg at the moment of conception, or not? Or are these questions nonsense? Is killing a human being abhorrent in the eyes of God or not? Will our soldier’s spend eternity in Hell? Purgatory? Is God three entities, five or one? All questions worth starting a new Church over. Why is there no progress on religious issues? I would contend it’s because there’s no substance there to agree upon.



    Quote Originally Posted by Stavros View Post
    The irony, if there is one, of an American drawing attention to this, is that it is precisely this freedom to be different that was part of the motivation for 'Pilgrims' to leave Europe and settle in North America. Just as the settlers rejected the Church of Rome or indeed, any established church, so in America they were free to create their own churches, and they have. Somewhere in de Tocqueville's study of America he comments on how Christian a county he feels the US is, and it is intriguing that the USA has been -and continues to be- one of the most exciting places in which to be a scientist, yet contains within it a substantial number of people, around 30% who think evolution is rubbish and that everything we see is part of 'God's design'; and as we have discussed before I think, it would probably be impossible for a man or woman who does not believe in God to be elected President.

    Perhaps it is this diversity which makes life interesting; perhaps it would be better if in the case of much religion, and some science, it was not also such a vexatious challenge.
    It’s true that religious dissenters flocked to America in droves for the promise of religious freedom. I don’t think it was the threat of excommunication that pushed them across the waters to the colonies. After all, once they got here they essentially excommunicated themselves from the old religions and started their own. It was the fear of torture and death. Of course we burned witches in the Americas as well, but that was before the First Amendment. Now we have all manner of sects, each one crazier than the last.

    Indeed, the U.S. is a wonderful chaos. I don’t know if that’s a strength or not.

    I do enjoy our discussions, Stavros. I’ve been told on a number of occasions that I can be a bit annoying at times...perhaps they meant vexatious. If so I apologize. I’ve got a point of view and a argumentative gene embedded somewhere in my code. Have a good one.


    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  5. #35
    Senior Member Platinum Poster
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    8,335

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    I agree with the points you make about science. If there are ways in which religions adapt, it might be found in the connection between core beliefs and social change. The ancient prohibitions against abortion, masturbation, homosexuality, marital fidelity etc have been a significant challenge to organised Christianity and as we see today there is a major problem with same-sex marriages even if the same churches -the Anglican and the Roman Catholic, have softened their attitude towards homosexuality and divorce, but not abortion. Judaism I think has also moderated its attachment to ancient rules, I don't believe adulterers are stoned to death, if they ever were, and I am not even sure if the 'ultra-religious' Orthodox sects believe stoning a just punishment (although in Israel youths are known to throw stones at cars driving through their neighbourhood on the Sabbath but that is hardly on the same level).

    So, institutionally, change is possible, but it is not without controversy because either the scriptures mean one thing, or they can be interpreted to mean anything. This then leads to the problem that by adapting to modern behaviour, Christianity ceases to be what it is supposed to be and cannot be called Christianity; it becomes a moral supermarket, it replaces the principles of the gospel with the principles of marketing in order to retain the loyalty of its customers.

    However I do think it is possible for this to happen with individuals; the beauty of the privatisation of religion is that you can claim to be a Jew, a Christian, a Muslim without having your beliefs endorsed by a community of believers; orthopraxy is replaced by autonomy. On another level, there are people who for one reason or another experience a crisis in their lives which conversion to a religion resolves, giving them a structure of belief, values, maybe rituals which they did not have before, thereby proving that even if religions are institutionally unable to adapt and change in the way scientific ideas impact society, change can take place at the individual level, and that may be the only way in which these religions can survive, other than through the inculcation of religion in childhood and school.


    1 out of 1 members liked this post.

  6. #36
    5 Star Poster dderek123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,866

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"



    Konrad Von Hochstaden was awarded a statue for being able to suck his own dick.

    He once was the Archbishop of Cologne too.


    .
    Konrad von Hochstaden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



  7. #37
    5 Star Poster dderek123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,866

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"





































    2 out of 2 members liked this post.

  8. #38
    5 Star Poster dderek123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,866

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"



    1 out of 1 members liked this post.

  9. #39
    Hung Angel Platinum Poster trish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    The United Fuckin' States of America
    Posts
    13,027

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    It doesn’t require faith in a divine entity or communion with a cosmic being to understand thermodynamics. No such faith is required to understand how the entropy facilitates (rather than obstructs) the chemistry of life. It only requires faith in yourself. Faith that you can do algebra, calculus and elementary physics up to and including atomic theory of matter; all topics of an undergraduate education in science and or engineering. Anyone can do it. You don’t have to be a genius. Just diligent and critical.

    This is in fact Jamie’s claim. Her thesis is that belief in the Christian God no longer requires faith in anything other than your own ability to learn mathematics and follow the logic of Tipler’s proof step by step. (That, or you can accept the authority of the mathematicians and physicists who have done so.)

    Whether you do this or not depends on how worthwhile you think the project of reading and checking every point of Tipler’s argument will be for you. If you already have the required skills this may be relatively trivial. If not, it can be a years long project.

    If the question, “Does belief in the Christian God require faith in God? is not all that important to you, (perhaps because you already have that faith, or perhaps because you already have sound reason to disbelieve), Tipler’s contribution may not require all that much attention on your part. Professional mathematicians still get mail from cranks who claim to have squared the circle, trisected an angle with ruler and compass etc. A quick glance down the page usually lands the communication in the trash in less than two minutes.

    What I find curious, is that anyone would believe Tipler’s “proof” without attempting to critically and honestly analyze it in every mathematical detail. A proponent of Tipler who doesn’t give his argument that attention is merely replacing faith in the divine with faith in less than a handful of fringe physicists. Perhaps I understate their predicament: rather they are allowing their faith in the divine to inform and amplify their faith in the omega fringe.


    0 out of 1 members liked this post.
    Last edited by trish; 02-08-2014 at 05:28 PM.
    "...I no longer believe that people's secrets are defined and communicable, or their feelings full-blown and easy to recognize."_Alice Munro, Chaddeleys and Flemings.

    "...the order in creation which you see is that which you have put there, like a string in a maze, so that you shall not lose your way". _Judge Holden, Cormac McCarthy's, BLOOD MERIDIAN.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Silver Poster buttslinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,370

    Default Re: The Concept Of Being "God Fearing"

    There is no before the big bang there is only after. If the light from the sun can travel 90 million miles through space to warm the earth's oceans and spark life, even imagination cannot conceive of the POWER of the entire universe crammed into a space the size of a softball. No time, no space, no edges.

    This could be a very good description of GOD. Self evident like a mofo.
    Nobody really speaks for God, they point the way.

    The Big Boys of Religion say it is your own attachment to the world that blinds you to a God that is standing right before your eyes. The only sin that exists is yours: pride, arrogance, sloth, all the good stuff basically. Even while Jesus spoke of God, the people all wanted to see him do magic tricks like walk on water and raise the dead.

    I found a Physics test from high school, I couldn't even understand the answers I wrote!!
    But I'm afraid I have to agree that Jamie Michelle's article will not be an amendment to the Bible. But even if you argue that Jamie Michelle is wrong, you cannot argue that she is not smart. The big boys of Cosmology have bitter fights all the time!! I do agree that God has many characteristics of the Mother of all black holes, power beyond your dreams, but I don't think you get there through physics, I think you get there through prayer. Meditation. Breath Control. The non-questioning faith of a child. And even then your chances of success are about the same as becoming an internationally known transsexual porn star. Better than the lottery, though.

    I'm just rambling, here, I think discussing God on the internet.........you get what you pay for. ha ha
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	God-Balkrishna-HD-Images.jpg 
Views:	96 
Size:	79.0 KB 
ID:	687935  


    World Class Asshole

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-27-2012, 09:33 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-18-2012, 04:39 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-27-2012, 11:01 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-15-2011, 03:56 AM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-08-2011, 12:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •