1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Truth : Science Vs. Religion

Discussion in 'Science & Technology' started by Wrigleyvillain, Jul 18, 2011.

  1. Mr McC

    Mr McC

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,248 (0.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    323
  2. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,163 (2.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    925
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2011
  3. Robert-The-Rambler

    Robert-The-Rambler

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    646 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    Location:
    Bay Shore NY
    Wait a minute

    You can't prove something doesn't exist if it never existed in the first place. The reason you can't prove it doesn't exist is because nobody ever proved it ever existed. The burden of proof is on the believers when it comes to religion not the other way around when it comes to God. :slap:
     
  4. f22a4bandit

    f22a4bandit

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2010
    Messages:
    574 (0.37/day)
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    SATX
    Philosophy is fun: is there an absolute truth?
     
  5. Velvet Wafer

    Velvet Wafer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,123 (2.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    990
    Location:
    North of Germany
    there is one, but its not understandable for a species, which already has a hard time, in scientifically understanding, what negative energy is.
    Our Resources are simply too limited, to be sure of anything...only thing, that we truly know is... that we know nothing, really.;)
     
    f22a4bandit says thanks.
  6. Mr McC

    Mr McC

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,248 (0.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    323
    Is there an absolute?
     
    f22a4bandit says thanks.
  7. f22a4bandit

    f22a4bandit

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2010
    Messages:
    574 (0.37/day)
    Thanks Received:
    196
    Location:
    SATX
    To quote the awesome MLB 11 The Show commericials:

    "Well played, Mauer."
     
  8. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,179 (3.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,277
    Location:
    Virginia
    I'm currently reading the Bible with an open mind, but so far it's nonsense. He's consistently creating situations where he knows the outcome will possibly be negative and then when it happens he punishes people for it. But if you created temptation within man then why are you temping them and getting frustrated when it doesn't go your way? Since you already know what will happen, then why must you punish those who follow through on your will?

    Then God saw the violence of the earth and in man, so he flooded the Earth in order to kill every living thing he created(besides the animals in Noahs ark), but he created that situation himself, i don't understand a God that creates man in knowing violence will exist and then murdering all living creatures because he screwed up.

    Then in Genesis 2:22 is states that God put Adam to sleep and pulled out his one of this ribs to create Woman, some people are saying not to take anything literal, but how can you not?, it states it clearly.

    I'll probably come back with my overall analysis of the book in the end, but so far it really takes a stretch of imagination.
     
  9. Velvet Wafer

    Velvet Wafer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Messages:
    5,123 (2.57/day)
    Thanks Received:
    990
    Location:
    North of Germany
    The Bible is a prime example, of how Information can be accidently and knowlingly distorted,maybe out of dumbness, and thru errors, or just to be able, to manipulate People, that believe in it.
    So, that in the end, there are only small bits left, that resemble the original...
    The Story of Jesus is a nice example for that: Imagine, 300 Years in the Future, someone writes a Book about you... how much would it resemble that,what really was?;)
     
    CDdude55 says thanks.
  10. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    Please don't just read the KJV, read other versions as well. It's like only referencing one dictionary; different ones have better definitions for certain words. (I'm fond of the NEB.)

    Also: http://www.npr.org/2011/07/17/138281522/how-bible-stories-evolved-over-the-centuries

    EDIT: I use this site a lot when I'm reading the bible because it gives me several different translations: http://www.biblegateway.com/
    As long as you ignore the parts about goat sacrifice, killing non-virgins, and people inviting gangs to rape their children . . . :laugh:
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2011
    CDdude55 says thanks.
  11. lilhasselhoffer

    lilhasselhoffer

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,672 (1.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,036
    Location:
    East Coast, USA
    I never quite got that myself.

    If you read the bible literally there are conflicts within stories, openly racist and hateful messages, and a surprisingly calous and amoral god. These things are inherently different than the kind and loving absolute truth that religious zealots would have you believe.

    I prefer to think of the bible, and most holy texts, as something akin to Aesop's Fables. The tales are fantastic, so they retain their readers interest. The core message, once you strip away the fantasy, is a reasonable moral compass and treating your fellow people with dignity and respect. That message I can stand behind.

    Seriously though, does god ever sound kind and loving in the old testament? God tempts people to see if they are worthy, is openly hateful of creation, and destroys on a whim. That sounds more like sociopathic tendencies than a benevolent creator.
     
    CDdude55 says thanks.
  12. twilyth Guest

    It is virtually pointless to read the bible or any other text regarded as "sacred" if you don't understand the context. There are some exceptions, but this is absolutely true of both the old and new testaments.

    Think of it this way. When you read Shakespeare in high school, did that shit make any sense until your teacher explained it to you? OK, you could probably follow the broad outline of the plot, but did you really understand what was going on? Of course you didn't. It was written more than 400 fuckin' years ago. If they caught you with an ipod back then you would have been burned as a witch. While that may still be the appropriate punishment for owning one, the motivation is completely different.

    So explain to me how you expect to read something written more than 2000-2500 years ago in the case of the old testament and more than 1600 years ago in the case of the new testament and expect to have the foggiest fucking idea of what it's about? Really. Please explain that to me.
     
  13. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    C'mon dude. How did people translate hieroglyphics? Some of the context is undoubtedly lost to time but the majority of it is retrievable with historical data and study.

    The KJV is the real joke, because people consider it the final word of god, because god apparently wrote in English in the early 1600s . . . Some years ago I was discussing the bible with a neighbor, and she was very nice and conversed politely and intelligently on many bible taboos (homosexuality, murder, etc.). I mentioned that I thought it was important to read several versions of the bible when she suddenly became very insulted and asked to end the discussion. I later found out from a friend that the real religious taboo is mentioning that there is more than one translation of the bible. Damned odd if you ask me.
     
  14. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,179 (3.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,277
    Location:
    Virginia
    It's not to hard, the Bible has been edited, reedited and redone thousands of times from various languages so the original text from when the bible was first conceived 2000 years ago has consistently been modified to fit with the language of the period. And granted that alone actually makes me question the authenticity of what's in the book.

    But everybody has their own context of how the bible reads, you just have to read it see what makes sense. And personally, i understand the jist of most of the passages, but a lot of the actual content is requiring a strong imagination.
     
  15. twilyth Guest

    Not to be rude, but do either of you understand what I mean by the word "context"?

    edit: Also, maybe my analogy wasn't any good. Have either of you studied Shakespeare? If not, I'll try to come up with something more appropriate.
     
  16. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    I'm fairly certain I know the meaning of the word "context" as you use it.

    Yes I've studied Shakespeare, enough to know that the quacky Christians going after Harry Potter have missed the ball by several million miles. :roll:

    It does seem a poor analogy. The context of Shakespeare's writing may still conjure debate but the vast majority is well known to many scholars.

    Brevity is the soul of wit. :D
     
  17. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,554 (2.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    857
    Shakespeare is obvious as soon as you STOP looking into it. Most of his work was written for theatre, to entertain, and once you begin to think about how what he wrote was acted out then it's pretty easy.

    To me, Shakespeare is a bad example.

    The only holy book that has not changed much is the Koran. To read it correctly you have to learn Syrian Arabic, then you get to read how it was written. English translations are simply wrong.
     
  18. twilyth Guest

    Exactly. So how did you manage to interpret it to mean merely how the text was translated?

    And note the "to many scholars" part. Are you a scholar on biblical exegisis? No? How about biblical archaeology? No again? Let's try something more general like ancient near eastern history? Still a 'no' huh? Bummer.

    So basically what you're telling me is that you have no understanding whatsoever of the history, customs, ideas, beliefs or mindsets prevalent during the time periods when the books of the bible were written but yet you think that by reading these books they will somehow reveal their secrets? Have I more or less summed up your position?
     
  19. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    I didn't. I mentioned the translation as being a [large] part of the confusion, but not the only (or central) aspect. For instance the NEB tries to translate the bible and fill in contextual gaps; it's an attempt to make a bible that can be understood today. I also like reading bibles that include theological discussion and interpretation (usually in a two column per page format).
    Yes, as it turns out I am. I am a student of many disciplines. Doesn't mean I know a lot though. :roll:

    It's spelled "exegesis". :D
    Don't take that tone with me mister. ;) :D

    Unfortunately I won't live long enough to know everything, but to say I have "no understanding whatsoever of the history, customs, ideas, beliefs or mindsets prevalent during the time periods when the books of the bible were written" would be wildly inaccurate. I've spent a lot of time learning about it, but alas, I'm not an expert.

    Must I be an expert to have an informed opinion?
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2011
    CDdude55 says thanks.
  20. twilyth Guest

    Wonderful. So if I don't put you at the "completely ignorant" end of the spectrum, that must mean I'm talking about the diametric opposite and that I think you need multiple PhD's to understand anything, right? Do you have a thing for stark dichotomies or are you intentionally trying to obfuscate the issue?

    The point is that trying to understand the bible based on the words alone is like trying to understand comedy or sarcasm based on the words alone. If you don't understand the cultural background, then you understand precisely squat. I really don't see how that could not be any more obvious.

    Maybe I don't expect you to understand that on a visceral level but I do expect you to understand it on a conceptual level.

    I don't know what areas relevant to biblical history, archaeology, anthropology, etc you've studied, but it turns out that I too have some relevant training since I actually studied ancient near eastern history and culture as well as the old and new testaments as part of my Bachelor's degree in religion. What areas have you studied exactly? I'm curious now.

    It doesn't really matter though since the point is only that picking up any ancient work of literature and reading it cold is probably the stupidest thing anyone can do. Once I picked up the ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead (which isn't really a book at all as it turns out) and it made no sense at all. The problem with the bible and similar books is that when you read it, whether in the original or translation, it SEEMS to make sense. So from the very beginning you are deceived. At least with most ancient writings it's clear from the beginning that you have absolutely no clue.
     
  21. qamulek2

    qamulek2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    8 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    I know of only two absolute truths:

    1) Mathematics.

    2) There is something rather than nothing.

    #1 should be obvious since Mathematics is built up using axioms that are assumed to be true. Any species living in any weird universe can start with the same axioms and build the same Mathematics.

    #2 comes about by thinking about the "true" reality. When you build up your reality, how do you know it represents the true reality? I've read an example where the author asks how do we know we aren't just a dream of some super advanced butterfly living in some higher dimension? The simple answer is we don't know what the true reality is, and we wouldn't know it even if we were living in it. Since we don't know the true reality, all we can say for certain is that something exists; the proof being that if something didn't exist we wouldn't be able to ask the question in the first place, so clearly something must exist(look up: "I think therefore I am")


    In regards to the science vs religion, one problem I have with both is that neither can explain why there is something rather than nothing. Science sidesteps the question entirely, while religion usually has a divine creator. The problem is who created the divine creator? Who created the creator of the divine creator? The question boils down to why is there something rather than nothing? The fact there is something rather than nothing is a miracle, and my body feels like it's crushed every time I try to think about why something exists at all(it's like peering into infinity trying to visualize the first moment when there is no first moment). Science and religion will never be adequate since they can never answer why anything exists in the first place, but at the end of the day they are both still useful.


    PS: Don't try and mention how the big bang was the first moment. The megaVerse was here much longer than the start of our pitiful universe. The Copernican principle says we hold no special place in the universe; that really should be applied to our own universe within the megaVerse, so the big bang that started our universe, which is special to us, isn't at all special to the megaVerse.
     
  22. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    It certainly wasn't my intention to offend you (at any time), so if I have I apologize. I think my last comment included a bit of sarcasm in response to what I perceived to be a snide comment. It was intended to be light-hearted.
    I don't know if I entirely agree with this, though it is true on many levels. Just like the, increasingly inaccurate, Shakespeare analogy, when you really look at it you realize 90% is just fart and shit jokes ;). You only need to have some of the words translated (like "protest" = "vow") and a few tidbits of history to see it. :laugh:
    I suppose the relevant areas I've studied about include history, culture and evolution of Mesopotamia, though I can't say I have much formal training. I've studied anthropology, sociology and psychology in HS and college, though not even a minor equivalent. In my leisure time I've read about those disciplines with respect to the development of religion. I've read parts of the Bible, Talmud, Koran, as well as books discussing the aforementioned. Religion is very important to some of my family, but equally important are rationality and facts. I've learned a lot from them despite our differences. The extent of my archaeological knowledge is mostly what I've seen on NOVA specials, or implied in other texts :laugh:. Just to add a bit of proportion to this, if you think you guessed my religion you're most likely wrong. ;)
     
  23. twilyth Guest

    You seem to have left off the last part of my quote which was the most important point and what the other issues were cited in support of. I'm surprised since you're normally pretty thorough.
     
  24. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    I couldn't argue with it, I completely agree :laugh: -- And thanks for the compliment.

    Except maybe the phrasing, "SEEMS to make sense", because most people don't understand enough of it [the KJV] to form an uninformed opinion :roll:
     
  25. digibucc

    digibucc

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Messages:
    4,937 (2.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,503
    that sounds great twilyth - but what is this context knowledge that is so necessary? it can't be that hard or we wouldn't be trying to teach it to children so young.

    you make it sound like that understanding is hard to come by. but i have never gotten that impression.

    i know what the world was like when it was written. I know how the people who wrote it lived. i know it was multiple authors in different times. many saying different things. i know it was edited and combined by a council 300 years after every apostle who wrote anything died. i know they picked and chose out of 100s of accounts for the 13 they wanted to be "the bible". that's a decent amount of contextual information off the top of my head, without even trying.

    what exactly is the context we are missing? and what great understanding of the contradictions inside does it lend?
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page