Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danny McCoyne)
    The irreducible complexity of the flagellum.
    thought it's very complicated, it was explained in Ken Miller's book http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/ev...2/article.html

    best off reading the whole thing if you want to truly understand everything in detail
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    do you need a book to tell you how to live a good and moral life? im an atheist and i do lots of charity etc.

    there are lots of horrible religious people, illustrated by all of the mass shootings in america and terrorism and homosexuality being illegal in many religious countries
    Like I said, I don't think I believe in the same God as most Christian do because I don't believe God who's love is supposedly selective.

    But these religious people you speak of often take quotes from holy texts and interpret them in a way that satisfies their own selfish desires and use their deity's name as a reason for their crimes. This doesn't mean all the religions preach that this is the right thing to do. Most if not all religions preach about peace, yet when someone commits a crime from a certain religion their religion is radicalised rather than the person themselves e.g Islam

    And exactly, you don't need a book to tell you how to live good, which is why I emphasised that science (man's understanding of things) is not always necessary in moral situations.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    i wouldn't accept you quoting any holy book without first proving the validity of that holy book if that's what your asking.

    give me an example of an animal which is too complex to have evolved by evolution and natural selection, for example. or show me evidence of a part of the universe which can only be explained by god.

    ( and by "can only be explained by god" i don't mean "hasn't yet been proven by science"
    So if you don't mean, "Hasn't yet been proven by science", then what do you mean? You have a circular argument - What is an example of something that can only be explained by God and can't be adjusted by the argument, "Hasn't yet been proven by science."

    I'm just trying to get a feel for what you're after here.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala;[url="tel:62731233")
    62731233[/url]]science can explain a lot of it, religion can explain non of it
    somewhat irrelevant if the ultimate mystery remains unsolved
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    I don't think there is any convincing scientific evidence for God's existence, otherwise it would be all over the news.
    Ha really? I'm sure that there are many 'events' that are not 'all over the news'.

    Also, surely 'convincing' is subjective and thus in theory, there could never be any 'amount' of evidence/reasons that could 'convince' yourself or anyone else
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ebxnyxo)
    Like I said, I don't think I believe in the same God as most Christian do because I don't believe God who's love is supposedly selective.

    But these religious people you speak of often take quotes from holy texts and interpret them in a way that satisfies their own selfish desires and use their deity's name as a reason for their crimes. This doesn't mean all the religions preach that this is the right thing to do. Most if not all religions preach about peace, yet when someone commits a crime from a certain religion their religion is radicalised rather than the person themselves e.g Islam

    And exactly, you don't need a book to tell you how to live good, which is why I emphasised that science (man's understanding of things) is not always necessary in moral situations.
    i think if you look at the holy books as a whole they give off negative morals. if you take the book literally, then you should act how these religious extremists act. if you take it in a good way, then i believe you are the one doing the cherry picking - not the extremists
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatOldGuy)
    So if you don't mean, "Hasn't yet been proven by science", then what do you mean? You have a circular argument - What is an example of something that can only be explained by God and can't be adjusted by the argument, "Hasn't yet been proven by science."

    I'm just trying to get a feel for what you're after here.
    many religious use examples of things that haven't yet been proven by science, like the complete origin of the universe, as proof of god. the point i'm trying to make is that just because something can't yet be scientifically explained, doesn't automatically mean that god did it. you have to find proof that god did it.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Racoon)
    I don't know where you live but I'm in a major city and I never see people with leaflets, apart from the JWs who might be outside the tube but that's because they have to earn their way into heaven so you can't really blame them.

    I think a baby is born with inbuilt questioning including to find out the meaning of life, which develops as they mature. A person grows and starts to explore the options.

    Also, there is a subtle undercurrent to completely remove the notion of God within schools, especially promoting science and evolution as being the total answer to life, the universe and everything and this subtle erosion of God is akin to the leaflet being placed in the passer's by hand but by the atheist saying 'there's no God'.

    Sorry you were affronted by my use of a triangle. If there are around 7.3 billion people in the world

    2.3 billion are estimated to be Christian,
    1.1 billion Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist
    3 billion other world faiths

    I thought that was quite a good and generous visual aid.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ons#Christians
    Well I live in London, and I think that's a pretty major city. Regardless, religious people proselytise. Not atheists.

    Baby's are born irreligious.

    If teaching people evidence based facts 'erodes God' then that, quite frankly, is a problem for God. Unless you're suggesting we should hold back on what we teach kids so that they still think there are things that can only be explained by religion?

    Your numbers don't add up to 7.3...

    According to your link there are 7.1 billion people: 2.2 billion Christians, 1.1 billion non-religious and the rest belong to the other religions - the rest being around 3.8. And my issue wasn't with the numbers that belong to each religion - this being subject to change with time. I don't think its at all appropriate to suggest there are three sides in the issue of God's existence: Christians, Atheists and Non-Christian religious people.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    i think if you look at the holy books as a whole they give off negative morals. if you take the book literally, then you should act how these religious extremists act. if you take it in a good way, then i believe you are the one doing the cherry picking - not the extremists
    I think if you look at the life of Jesus you can only view it in a good way.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zarek)
    somewhat irrelevant if the ultimate mystery remains unsolved
    how? would you rather know some of the answer or none of it?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Racoon)
    I think if you look at the life of Jesus you can only view it in a good way.
    http://godisimaginary.com/i39.htm
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    many religious use examples of things that haven't yet been proven by science, like the complete origin of the universe, as proof of god. the point i'm trying to make is that just because something can't yet be scientifically explained, doesn't automatically mean that god did it. you have to find proof that god did it.
    I feel like we're going around in a circle here. You still haven't told me what proof you'd accept.

    I've tried to get you to clarify and eventually we came back circularly to, "You have to find proof God did it."


    So... To get back to my original post... What - specifically- would you accept as proof?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala;[url="tel:62732787")
    62732787[/url]]how? would you rather know some of the answer or none of it?
    Clearly some knowledge is good. But partial knowledge does not allow anyone to speak authoritatively about the origins of matter and life, no matter how opinionated they are.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    i think if you look at the holy books as a whole they give off negative morals. if you take the book literally, then you should act how these religious extremists act. if you take it in a good way, then i believe you are the one doing the cherry picking - not the extremists
    Well, really, both ends of the spectrum do the 'cherry picking' as you call it but the bible for instance, there is no way you take the whole entire book literally. if you did you would be fighting two opposite battles as the bible constantly contradicts itself. why? again because of the many people who had written it.

    The bible, in the old testament, talks of crusades against 'pagans' ad non jewish people and how they killed whole villages for not being believers yet in the new testament it say 'do not kill'. But the whole aim of the Christian or jewish belief is how to life morally. therefore if an extremist looks at a holy book and interprets text without looking at the whole message of the religion aren't the extemist really the cherry pickers?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by popo111)
    Ha really? I'm sure that there are many 'events' that are not 'all over the news'.

    Also, surely 'convincing' is subjective and thus in theory, there could never be any 'amount' of evidence/reasons that could 'convince' yourself or anyone else
    Any time a major discovery is made it is all over the news, and I can't think of a subject that would receive more airtime than evidence for God's existence.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatOldGuy)
    I feel like we're going around in a circle here. You still haven't told me what proof you'd accept.

    I've tried to get you to clarify and eventually we came back circularly to, "You have to find proof God did it."


    So... To get back to my original post... What - specifically- would you accept as proof?
    you seem to be avoiding the question. give me an example of what you would class as proof, and we'll go from there
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ebxnyxo)
    Well, really, both ends of the spectrum do the 'cherry picking' as you call it but the bible for instance, there is no way you take the whole entire book literally. if you did you would be fighting two opposite battles as the bible constantly contradicts itself. why? again because of the many people who had written it.

    The bible, in the old testament, talks of crusades against 'pagans' ad non jewish people and how they killed whole villages for not being believers yet in the new testament it say 'do not kill'. But the whole aim of the Christian or jewish belief is how to life morally. therefore if an extremist looks at a holy book and interprets text without looking at the whole message of the religion aren't the extemist really the cherry pickers?
    I'm saying that overall there are much more negative messages than good messages, and therefore to interpret the book overall and live your life from it you would be like a religious extremist
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    you seem to be avoiding the question. give me an example of what you would class as proof, and we'll go from there
    Well, I would go with what the world classes as proof - First person testimonies. I assume that isn't what you meant by proof, so I assume you have some sort of specific criteria for what counts as 'Proof'.

    Far more than one or two people have claimed to have seen God. To avoid this being a frustrating experience where you aren't being given what you want, I want to know what proof you would accept since you obviously don't accept what the majority of the world, including courts of law, class as proof - First person testimonies from many, many, witnesses.

    You can take a moment to ridicule those testimonies, of course. Irrelevant to answering my question which is, "What would you classify as proof?"
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mangala)
    wasn't the big crunch disprove a while ago? the expansion of the universe is speeding up, not slowing down
    Couldn't say for sure, I just assume that was the theory he was talking about.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatOldGuy)
    Well, I would go with what the world classes as proof - First person testimonies. I assume that isn't what you meant by proof, so I assume you have some sort of specific criteria for what counts as 'Proof'.

    Far more than one or two people have claimed to have seen God. To avoid this being a frustrating experience where you aren't being given what you want, I want to know what proof you would accept since you obviously don't accept what the majority of the world, including courts of law, class as proof - First person testimonies from many, many, witnesses.

    You can take a moment to ridicule those testimonies, of course. Irrelevant to answering my question which is, "What would you classify as proof?"
    thousands of UFO sightings are reported every year, so claiming you saw something does not count as proof to me or to science.

    even in a court, first hand accounts alone do not count as evidence. those accounts are used in conjunction with, for example, finger prints or DNA samples.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 13, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.