/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 123 KB, 1024x768, annoyingjesus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:09:57 2010 No.1074932 [Reply] [Original]

So /sci/, I've been meaning to ask this for a long time. Where do you stand? Are you an atheist or a Christian? Does religion and science mix? Why are you a an atheist or a christian? Which is better? Pratically, Logically, Spiritually etc.
This is a serious post. I am in a confused state. Dilemma. After this I will choose my path.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:10:57 2010 No.1074940 bump for Scientific discussion

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:10:57 2010 No.1074953 guise I need help on this one. Is god really unprovable? Does god exist or not? What stand is better?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:11:57 2010 No.1074956 I think I am agnostic, although lately I am unsure.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:11:57 2010 No.1074960 bump

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:11:57 2010 No.1074962 Fuckin' 7

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:11:57 2010 No.1074965 >>1074956 how does being agnostic work

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:13:57 2010 No.1074985 >>1074962 7, i don't get it?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:14:57 2010 No.1075004 So how does your religious stand affect your academic life

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:14:57 2010 No.1075007

as someone who went from committed christian to atheist, i can let you know that atheism won't make you a happier person, but you can't really accept the scientific explanation for the state of the universe and still believe in supernatural intervention.
Atheism is really just getting rid of cognitive dissonance after you learn science

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:14:57 2010 No.1075009 bump for help

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:15:57 2010 No.1075014 File: 76 KB, 500x688, charliebrown.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] GOD DOEESNT EXIST IF YUO DONT AGREE WITH ME YUO ARE GAY

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:15:57 2010 No.1075016 >>1075007 elaborate please

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:15:57 2010 No.1075017

>>1074932
>Are you an atheist or a Christian?
These are not the only choices, first of all.
God is neither provable nor unprovable, so there's no way to tell if He exists.
There is no stand that is "better."
If you believe in God, you believe in God.
If not, then you don't.
There's nothing we can tell you that will decide for you. Just look inside yourself, and see what you truly believe. There's no wrong answer.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:15:57 2010 No.1075018 >1074962 fucking 7's, how do they work

>>	sage sage Tue Jun 1 00:15:57 2010 No.1075020 sage.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:15:57 2010 No.1075021 fucking magnets

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:16:57 2010 No.1075030 >>1074965 It is possible that God exists, although you do not believe in him. I think.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:17:57 2010 No.1075033 >>1075017 >>1075017 So for science what matters?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:17:57 2010 No.1075043 gods obviously real, there would be no point in going to heaven if he were not there

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:17:57 2010 No.1075047
File: 34 KB, 500x429, theism.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1074965
Agnosticism is just the position that you don't know whether God exists or not.
Atheism is the position that you do not believe in God.
Gnosticism is the position that you do know that God exists.
Theism is the position that you do believe in God.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:19:57 2010 No.1075057

>>1075016
Science depends on figuring things out based on the evidence that you are presented with, whereas faith depends on belief in things with no evidence at all. I couldn't keep pretending that these opposing systems of understanding could be reconciled, and I came down on the side of science.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:19:57 2010 No.1075059 >>1075033 Since there's no scientific proof of God existing, many scientists are atheists. But it is still possible that there is a God, even if He is not the God of the Bible or Qu'ran or what have you.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:19:57 2010 No.1075066 >>1075014 don't be trolling here

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:21:57 2010 No.1075077 We put A.D. after our dates, therefore even scientists agree God exists. Religion - 1 Science - 0 DISCUSS

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:21:57 2010 No.1075078 File: 4 KB, 126x81, 1274152516967.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Are you an atheist or a Christian? >implying either Atheists or Christians are correct and there are no other options

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:21:57 2010 No.1075081 >>1075059 >>1075059 Oh so God doesn't exist then, I mean by science, err logically, Im confuse

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:21:57 2010 No.1075087 File: 3 KB, 126x125, jesussays.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Everyone who isn't a christian will burn in hell, there is no argument you stupid trolls. gtfo

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:22:57 2010 No.1075095 >>1075081 No, there's just no proof one way or the other. There is proof that most of the events of the Bible could not have happened, but you can't disprove God.

>>	Different Poster !tFj8DP0Frs Tue Jun 1 00:22:57 2010 No.1075096 File: 40 KB, 524x527, Anon.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] TROLL ATTEMPT 9/10 good job /b/ro

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:23:57 2010 No.1075099 File: 70 KB, 894x700, scientificmethodvsfaith.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1075077

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:23:57 2010 No.1075107 >>1075078 >>1075078 please don't sage, this is a serious discussion >>1075077 >>1075077 >>1075077 What we don't believe in that, scientists long ago believe in God, or afraid in God. Dates were started in Rome when God was popular

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:23:57 2010 No.1075109 >>1075081 Scientific reasoning cannot accept the existence of a god until evidence for a god is presented. Science cannot disprove the existence of a god in the same way that it cannot disprove the existence of pixies, unicorns, and fairies.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:24:57 2010 No.1075110 >>1075078 Or maybe it was just an open question for people to introduce their religions/beliefs. Butthead.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:25:57 2010 No.1075118 >>1075087 0.10

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:25:57 2010 No.1075120 File: 24 KB, 429x410, look.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1075096 >>1075096 ... .. . >we're not /b/ros... what board did you come from /v/?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:27:57 2010 No.1075141 >>1075109 >>1075109 So if I cannot accept antimatter exists because there is no proof... gravitons have no proof but we use them in our equations... please fix your arguments... we don't need your kind here...

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:29:57 2010 No.1075151
File: 596 KB, 240x160, 1274556924960.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>1074932
>Are you an atheist or a Christian?
Neither
>Does religion and science mix?
No
>Why are you a an atheist or a christian?
I'm not
>Which is better?
If they don't interfere with any aspect of life, it makes no difference
>Pratically
Not believing that there's another life means you'll do more in this, so probably Atheism
>Logically
Observation would suggest Atheism is more logical (as long as by Atheism you mean Agnostic Atheism and not Gnostic Atheism)
>Spiritually
What does that even mean?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:29:57 2010 No.1075153 bump for discussion

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:30:57 2010 No.1075169 >>1075151 >>1075151 How you feel? I mean we're humans right. Some things, even superficial ones makes us feel happy or what not.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:31:57 2010 No.1075173

>>1075141
So you're saying that scientists believe in the existence of antimatter and gravitons on faith? Of course not. If that were true, we wouldn't need to build the LHC because people would simply accept the existence of the Higgs particle. Belief in supernatural phenomena has never contributed to science.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:31:57 2010 No.1075178 >>1075141 Antimatter has been seen experimentally plenty of times.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:32:57 2010 No.1075182 File: 44 KB, 479x317, 1275073971108.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1075096 >>1074890

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:32:57 2010 No.1075186 >>1075151 agnosticism is just for pussies who aren't willing to admit you can know that there aren't fairies

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:33:57 2010 No.1075190

Well, science is basically just a process of understanding information through rational inquiry, supposition, and testing. Those who enjoy these kinds of activities tend to like being scientists. If you do any of these badly, it becomes obvious that you are a bad scientist.

Christianity, at least the kinds I was exposed to and taught as a child, discourages inquiry and testing, but allows for endless supposition. Also, if you practice inquiry or testing, you are usually threatened with death and misfortune. Also, you are told that a part of you is unkillable, and will be forced to boil in a furnace that hates you for time beyond conception.

Based on these facts, I think it's obvious that science and Christianity are incompatible.

Based on the logic used, I think it soon becomes obvious that science and religion are incompatible.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:34:57 2010 No.1075193 >>1075182 >>1075182 hey this is not a troll thread

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:34:57 2010 No.1075197 File: 478 KB, 1000x1160, 1269554220671.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1075186 >doesn't know the difference between agnosticism and agnostic atheism

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:35:57 2010 No.1075203

>>1075186
The proposition that you *can* know that there aren't fairies is not scientific. Science relies on evidence, and there is no evidence that fairies don't exist, just as there is no evidence that they do exist. So we can never really know certainly that there is no god, but practically we say that there isn't one.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:37:57 2010 No.1075212 Is OP still even here?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:37:57 2010 No.1075214 >>1075190 >>1075190 So by your logic... I suck at being a scientist... Thanks a lot... Feels bad man...

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:37:57 2010 No.1075216 >>1075197 >implying the original post didn't contain the key word "know" Fail

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:37:57 2010 No.1075217 File: 2 KB, 210x168, Trollface.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1074932

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:39:57 2010 No.1075224 File: 33 KB, 281x238, 1275276408317.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >this topic

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:40:57 2010 No.1075230

>>1075197

I've said this before, but I think the term "Non-Believer" really does our group better justice than "Atheist" or "Agnostic."

Generally, we don't believe anything, because you don't have to believe facts. Also, it means something more amorphous to "Believers," so it usually doesn't cause them to avoid you.

Maybe exciting believers is your goal, but I posit that these people are our friends, and helping them to see reason in discovering the world is a much nobler goal than simply proving them incorrect.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:40:57 2010 No.1075231 >>1075212 >>1075212 Still here... I'm really getting confused... May I request a bruteforce thread... I'm not very smart so I need it to be straight forward... Atheism vs. Christianity(includes others: Judaism, Islam etc.)

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:40:57 2010 No.1075233

What the fuck is it with people going herp derp there is no way of proving or disproving God's existence.

If you're referring to the fact that variants on "god moves in mysterious ways" can counter any argument possible, then shut the fuck up. You don't say "monsters move in mysterious ways" when the cyclopse you thought lived in your closet fails to appear when you open the closet door.

So long as you don't retreat into such preposterously philosophical definitions of "proof", God can and has been disproven. 99% of the universe has been observed to operate according to physical laws, so either God doesn't exist, God obeys all of those physical laws when he influences the universe, in which case, for all intents and purposes, God doesn't exist.

Now yes, there is an argument for a God that set the laws of physics in motion and then just sat back and watched (Deism). But if that's the case, then again, for all intents and purposes, God does not exist.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:42:57 2010 No.1075249

>>1075203
given a particular definition of a meaningful entity, it will have testable consequences.
All major religions have some testable consequences.
These testable consequences fail to occur.
Therefore, there is evidence against the existence of defined conceptions of god.
It's the same way I can know that there isn't an elephant in this room. Its presence would have observable consequences
If it doesn't have observable consequences, then why even think that the proposition that it exists has any substantial meaning?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:42:57 2010 No.1075250 >>1075233 >>1075233 This is not a God Exist or not thread. This is about Atheism and Theism... More on the whole encompassing concept...

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:43:57 2010 No.1075260 >>1075233 I just try to be reasonable with this sort of thing. >for all intents and purposes, God doesn't exist. And if God does exist, even if He does follow all the rules and what not, he still exists.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:44:57 2010 No.1075272 >>1075250 > This is not about god existing or not existing > This is about theism or atheism > this isn't about plants, it's about botany

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:44:57 2010 No.1075275 >>1075249 >>1075249 >>1075233 >>1075233 The term God exists is even debatable

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:45:57 2010 No.1075282 >>1075272 >>1075272 Lifestyle, morals, blah, etc...

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:45:57 2010 No.1075284 >>1075233 Actually, Deism conflicts with what we seem to know about how complex systems have to originate from less complex systems

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:45:57 2010 No.1075288

>>1075231
Let me try to explain my perspective on the issue.
-There is no evidence that God exists.
-For Christians, this means that one believes in god without any evidence (this is the definition of faith)
-For atheists, this means that there is most likely no god (this is the definition of skepticism)

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:46:57 2010 No.1075290 >>1075260 Yes, but he exists in a way that has no relevance to anything at all. He also (in that particular case) exists in a way that is neither provable nor disprovable, so it's a pointless argument.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:46:57 2010 No.1075294 You all know this is a troll topic from /b/ right?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:46:57 2010 No.1075297 >>1075275 wtf does that mean?

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:46:57 2010 No.1075299

>>1075260

But he doesn't exist in the ways he is defined by the books that invented him. The logic of keeping him around for your own amusement is questionable.

This is a Scientific and Religious compatibility thread. I see them as incompatible for reasons such as these.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:47:57 2010 No.1075303 >>1075288 >>1075288 Is it possible to be a skeptic Christian and Faithful Atheist

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:47:57 2010 No.1075306 >>1075290 I agree that it is a pointless argument in the most general terms, plain theism vs. atheism. But OP was curious.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:47:57 2010 No.1075309 >>1075282 All irrelevant. You should believe in something because there's evidence for it, not because it has practical benefits.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:49:57 2010 No.1075316 >>1075303 Yeah. You'd just be a bad Christian for the first, and possibly part of some kind of nontheistic religion, like Scientology or Buddhism for the second.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:49:57 2010 No.1075321

>>1075297
>>1075297
>>1075297
"existence" of God is very vague. How does he exist? In our reality, why does he operate outside the concepts of logic? Outside of our reality, then does he really exist? There are many more examples but Idk how to write them in a clear way

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:50:57 2010 No.1075325

>>1075303
> Skeptic Christian
No. There is no evidence for the Christian god, thus if you were skeptic you would not be Christian.

> Faithful Atheist.
> Yes. There is evidence for atheism, but if you were atheist without being aware of that evidence then you would be faithful.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:50:57 2010 No.1075329 >>1075288 in other words, Christian irrationally make an except for one belief that they would never make for anything else and then use it to run their whole lives. It sounds like a form of insanity

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:50:57 2010 No.1075333

Santa and God are very similar figures. The idea of a benevolent figure who rewards kindness and punishes badness applies to both.
If there is really no god, then that means that Hitler is not burning in hell (doesn't get coal) and Gandhi is not rejoicing in heaven (doesn't get presents). Religion is just a misguided way for people to deal with the injustice in the world.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:51:57 2010 No.1075336 >>1075309 >>1075309 I didn't mean to say it that way... I meant the characteristics... Just how it is, so I can prepare myself when the time comes.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:51:57 2010 No.1075339 >>1075321 God is a consciousness, a mind. "Does god exist" is basically like asking "are other people conscious". It's not a philosophically difficult question at all, unless you get really deep in.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:52:57 2010 No.1075345 bump for great justice

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:52:57 2010 No.1075348 >>1075321 outside the concepts of logic, so he is a contradictory entity and therefore impossible, outside reality so he isn't real. Those both just sound like atheism. I fail to see the point

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:52:57 2010 No.1075352

>I've been meaning to ask this for a long time. Where do you stand? Are you an atheist or a Christian? Does religion and science mix? Why are you a an atheist or a christian? Which is better? Pratically, Logically, Spiritually etc.
seriously? you've been meaning to ask the same thing every troll on /sci/ does every day... for a long time now?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:53:57 2010 No.1075356 So does God exist or not... Just asking...

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:53:57 2010 No.1075357

>>1075333

My father once asked me (colloquially, he didn't expect an answer) while he was grieving why the good and the young die why terrible people still live.

I told him that it's most probably because there's nobody making those kinds of decisions for us, and it's very likely that it's only up to us to do something about it.

He nearly disowned me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:54:57 2010 No.1075362 >>1075339 >god is a consciousness I challenge anyone to explain what this statement actually means.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:54:57 2010 No.1075366 I am a Christian. Live a life worthy to see miracles and you will see miracles. That is why I'm Christian. Yes science and religion mix, they're both working on finding truth.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:54:57 2010 No.1075367 >>1075339 wtf are you talking about. All our evidence suggests you need a body to be conscious. So the question still seems to hinge on whether there is a thing out there that realizes a god-like consciousness. Don't give us Cartesian bullshit

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:55:57 2010 No.1075369 >>1075352 >>1075352 well to be honest yeah... I don't go to /sci/ everyday... mostly I hang around at /v/ or /a/...

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:56:57 2010 No.1075384

>>1075357
>He nearly disowned me.
That's so sad. It just goes to show how difficult it is for people to deal with that kind of injustice. When you're grieving or in hard times, you're generally not in the mood for logic. People delude themselves because it's comforting.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:56:57 2010 No.1075386 >>1075366 perhaps if one of the "truths" is put in quotes and said sarcastically

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:57:57 2010 No.1075391 >>1075366 What steps is Christianity taking towards finding truth? I thought they claimed that only one dude knows the truth, and he's not sharing it until you've choked to death on the Bishop's cock.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:58:57 2010 No.1075397
File: 32 KB, 717x248, Capture.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Read up on Pascal's Wager, then read why it is flawed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

another thing to note that I don't think was included in the article is the possibility that of the infinite, unpracticed religions that exist and could be considered for the wager, both disbelief in God could be rewarded as well as belief in God being punished. There is no reason Christianity deserves any higher 'chance' than any other religion.

You can now live your life.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:58:57 2010 No.1075400 >>1075366 >>1075366 If god exists, then why can I raep children... Atheists: 1 Xtians : 0

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 00:59:57 2010 No.1075408 >>1075397 "Flawed" is the wrong word to use. There are objections, but the idea isn't really flawed.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:00:57 2010 No.1075416 >>1075077 Anno Domini?

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:01:57 2010 No.1075421

I honestly don't think /sci/ is being completely helpful here. I advise OP to do his own research on the subject. See the following wiki articles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_inconsistent_revelations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_nonbelief
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_wager
And this Richard Dawkins talk, which 'converted' me from being an on-the-fence christian to an atheist:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9112899495889928903#

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:01:57 2010 No.1075423

>>1075362
Consciousness really isn't that hard a concept to understand, bro. It basically boils down to being something capable of perception.

>>1075367
You need a working definition of God in order to talk about it. One of the criteria of that definition is necessarily going to be that God has to conscious, since otherwise he'd just be an unthinking physical force, and nobody would call something like that a God. That's just the definition. If you want to claim that the definition implies a God must have a physical brain then that's a separate issue.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:03:57 2010 No.1075436

>>1075408
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P7uSsZ1xAQ

You'd be hard pressed to call any of those objections something other than flaws. TheraminTrees also has a rebuttal video (to supporters of Pascal's wager) uploaded on his account, which I've not watched but which I suspect will have the same quality.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:03:57 2010 No.1075440

>>1075408

"Flawed" is a perfect word for Pascal's Wager. Its logic is easily dismantled to show how the philosophy can only work if you pretend that there has only ever been one religion instead of unknown thousands.

It isn't an objection to the argument Pascal is making or why, it's a simple dismissal as a harmful meme.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:04:57 2010 No.1075446 >>1075423 You still have no evidence that God exists or is a conscious being. I could just as well say that my peanut butter and jelly sandwich is a conscious being.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:04:57 2010 No.1075449 If God doesn't exist, then why do I eat good food on Xmas Eve X'tians : 1 Atheists : 0

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:04:57 2010 No.1075451 File: 23 KB, 800x600, Agnostocism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1075047 No it's not. Goddammit why do people always get this shit wrong. Pic related. Gnostos has NOTHING to do with Theos. At all. Stop conflating terminology.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:05:57 2010 No.1075454 bump for great justice

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:05:57 2010 No.1075459 So do are Jews really evil?

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:05:57 2010 No.1075461

Religon is only something made up by early man with vast empires such as the romans to keep them in fear of doubting the current caesar with ties to the church. In time so and so didnt like what was being preached changed some aspects of the written book and started another religon..Christianity,Catholism, Judaism,Islam. If only one can be right and the rest are wrong, wouldnt it seem that all are wrong?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:07:57 2010 No.1075475 bump

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:08:57 2010 No.1075484

>>1075436
A clear response to pascal's wager: there could be an all powerful god who will punish you for for believing things on insufficient evidence. If this God exists believing based on pascal's wage will fuck you over. There is no reason to think the christian god is more likely. So any bet is irrational

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:09:57 2010 No.1075490 bamp, nobody answered OP's question yet

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:11:57 2010 No.1075504

I'm an agnostic atheist. I believe that there is no god, much like I believe there is no Santa or unicorns, because there is no evidence at all.

Theism is totally fine, but Christianity is completely illogical. The Bible is filled with contradictions, and Christians today are even more hypocritical.

Practically: There's no real difference, other than having your Sundays free.

Logically: Atheism/Deism/Pantheism is most logical, Christianity is more illogical than Greek/Pagan gods.

Spiritually: You must first define spiritual. Buddhism is an atheistic religion in many aspects and they are very spiritual.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:12:57 2010 No.1075508

>>1075190
There are a lot of posts, but this one is pretty clear.
>>1075490

Whether or not which one is "better," is relative to what you value as being "good." I submit that science is "better" simply due to the observed failings of religion, but it is not an alternative to religion, just as buildings are not alternatives to clouds.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:12:57 2010 No.1075513 >>1075446 I have evidence that God is a conscious being because that's part of the definition of God. As for God existing... ...I'm atheist. I don't know where you got the impression I was trying to argue for the existence of God.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:13:57 2010 No.1075530 >I am in a confused state. Dilemma. After this I will choose my path. Did you really think coming to /sci/ would help you decide on something as complicated as your spirituality? This is a much more complicated decision than that.

Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:15:57 2010 No.1075541

>>1075513
>God is a consciousness, a mind.
>...I'm atheist. I don't know where you got the impression I was trying to argue for the existence of God.
???
Also:
>I have evidence that God is a conscious being because that's part of the definition of God.
>I have evidence that Santa has a beard because that's part of the definition of Santa.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:15:57 2010 No.1075542 >>1075490 see >>1075233 and then >>1075309

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:16:57 2010 No.1075546 >>1075541 Ok fine you fucking pedant > I have evidence that IF SANTA EXISTS he must have a beard because that's part of the definition of Santa. happy?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jun 1 01:19:57 2010 No.1075567 >>1075530 no but it helps clear the minde

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]