Religion vs. Science

[Red&Stiletto]

I know its long but its a very good discussion. Please read.

"Let me explain the problem science has with religion." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
"Yes sir," the student says.
"So you believe in God?"
"Absolutely."
"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good."
"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"
"Yes."
"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."
The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"
"Yes sir, I would."
"So you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."
"But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."
The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"
The student remains silent. "No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.
"Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"
"Er...yes," the student says.
"Is Satan good?" The student doesn't hesitate on this one.
"No."
"Then where does Satan come from?"
The student falters. "From God"
"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"
"Yes, sir."
"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"
"Yes."
"So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil."
Again, the student has no answer. "Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?"
The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."
"So who created them?" The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question.
"Who created them?" There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized.
"Tell me," he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor, I do."
The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"
"No sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir, I have not."
"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?"
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."
"Yet you still believe in him?"
"Yes."
"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?"
"Nothing," the student replies.
"I only have my faith."
"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith." The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own.
"Professor, is there such thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies.
"There's heat."
"And is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No sir, there isn't." The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain.
"You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees."
"Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer. "What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't darkness?"
"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word."
"In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?" The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him.
This will be a good semester. "So what point are you making, young man?"
"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed." The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time.
"Flawed? Can you explain how?"
"You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought."
"It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it."
"Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"
"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."
"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?" The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going.
A very good semester, indeed. "Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?" The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.
"To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean." The student looks around the room.
"Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter.
"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir."
"So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?" Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers.
"I guess you'll have to take them on faith."
"Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life," the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"
Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. This students statements are true, can you or can you not make night darker? Is it possible for it to get colder after absolute zero -458 degree's F? Can you feel, taste, see, hear or smell your brain?

Please leave your thoughts on the matter.




~*Lady

[Pix the Skull Kid]

My screen is currently too dark to really read the black text on black background (( Possibly some other color seeing as I'm colorblind, and ALL the backgrounds are nearly black on this stupid computer )) I'll just respond how I would normally to one of these topics..

I'm a STRONG believer in religion, as well as a strong believer in science, to a point. I believe in them both I guess you could say equally, but on some occasions when it comes to a lot of the spiritual stuff I believe in, and I mean a LOT of spiritual stuff, I swing in the direction of religion and personal beliefs. I don't try to compare the two.. Because science will try its hardest to disprove religion and religion will try its hardest to disprove science.. Though I'm pagan, and I may not be familiar to ALL the beliefs as I still havent completed my year and a day of study, I think it's a little more... Accepting to some forms of science where other religions call it blasphemy.


And I will say this now because every time I mension I'm pagan in a religious thread, I get flamed by christians.. WARNING: I will fight back, so save your breath. I hate christianity and I know not all the christians in the world are bad, but this warning is aimed at the 90% of the christian population who shove their beliefs and facts on converting down other peoples throat.

[Khanxay]

"Big block of text! Can't read!" are my thoughts right now. Please make the post into paragraphs.


Oh and for the title. I like science and math better than religion. Culture sure, but religion no.

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

In case anyone actually wants to read that gigantic blob of copy pasta, when I read it in Notepad++, I hit the enter key every so often. Copy it to a text editor. It should be somewhat more readable.

Let me explain the problem science has with religion." 
The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. 
"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
 "Yes sir," the student says. 
 "So you believe in God?" "Absolutely."
 "Is God good?"
 "Sure! God's good." 
 "Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?" 
 "Yes." 
 "Are you good or evil?"
 "The Bible says I'm evil." 
 The professor grins knowingly. 
 "Aha! The Bible!"
 He considers for a moment. 
 "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"
 "Yes sir, I would."
 "So you're good...!"
 "I wouldn't say that."
 "But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."
 The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 
 "He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?" 
 The student remains silent. 
 "No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. 
 "Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?" 
 "Er...yes," the student says. 
 "Is Satan good?" The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 
 "No." "Then where does Satan come from?" 
 The student falters. 
 "From God" 
 "That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?" 
 "Yes, sir." 
 "Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"
 "Yes." 
 "So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil."
 Again, the student has no answer. 
 "Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?" 
 The student squirms on his feet. 
 "Yes."
 "So who created them?" The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. 
 "Who created them?" 
 There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?" 
 The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 
 "Yes, professor, I do." The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?" 
 "No sir. I've never seen Him." 
 "Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
 "No, sir, I have not."
 "Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?" 
 "No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't." 
 "Yet you still believe in him?" 
 "Yes." 
 "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?" 
 "Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith." 
 "Yes, faith," the professor repeats. 
 "And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith." 
 The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. 
 "Professor, is there such thing as heat?" 
 "Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat." 
 "And is there such a thing as cold?" "Yes, son, there's cold too." 
 "No sir, there isn't." 
 The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. 
 "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees." 
 "Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. 
 We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it." 
 Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer. 
 "What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?" 
 "Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't darkness?" 
 "You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word." 
 "In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?" The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. 
 "So what point are you making, young man?" 
 "Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed." 
 The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed? Can you explain how?" 
 "You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought." 
 "It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it." 
 "Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?" 
 "If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do." 
 "Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?" The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed. 
 "Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?" 
 The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided. 
 "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean." The student looks around the room. 
 "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter. 
 "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir." 
 "So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?" Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 
 "I guess you'll have to take them on faith." 
 "Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life," the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"
 Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
 To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. 
 Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light." The professor sat down. This students statements are true, can you or can you not make night darker? 
 Is it possible for it to get colder after absolute zero -458 degree's F? Can you feel, taste, see, hear or smell your brain?

Anyway, that blob of copy pasta is a nice straw man, but it doesn't constitute an argument. Yes, everything is impossible to prove, but if you proceed from the assumption that you CAN effectively observe the outside world, you have a tool you can use to try to make sense of Reality (capital R). Through empirical evidence we can determine what seems true, and what seems false. If we can make no objective observations that directly support the existence of a Christian Deity, there is no reason to believe he exists. At best we can say that a deity, if he exists, does little that fits the depiction of any known religion, save maybe Buddhism. Deism seems a valid belief based on the (lack of) evidence, but it's still unfalsifiable.

Also, the Evolution bit in there was garbage. People have observed plenty of Speciation in both the wild and the laboratory.

[███]

Please... Paragraphs... Before... Oh... No... It's... Already... Happened... ME EYES! MY EYES!

[rEikAbLeU]

it really doesn't matter if you approve or disapprove with religion or science...

those things in life that can be explained is thanks to science...

but how about those things you can't explain?
when those things occur you have nothing to turn to but to believe that maybe, just maybe, there really is a higher being among us controlling everything that's happening in this world, and that's God.....

you may never be able to prove God's existence but merely the fact that alot of people believe that there is a higher being than all of us, may it be called, Allah, Buddah, or God, is an enough proof for me that there really is GOD...

[Dxon]

I have forbidden myself to post in these threads... But I'm doing it anyway! >

I'm atheïst. I do not let my life be controlled by some fairytales.
If there is no religion. That would reduce the violence in the world by 50%.
Since religion's are an excuse to go to war. (Crusade's, jihads whatever..)

Whatever the religious man will say. I will not believe in a fairytale. If they really want me to believe in their fairytale. Then out of resistance I will believe in snowwhite. Since that is the same.

[Drifter Uk]

im a science guy. i just cant believe in a god, especialy one that apparently has the power to stop suffering but chooses not to.
besides, i cant think anything at the moment science cant explain, i mean theresprobably something, but i just cant think of it of the top of my head right now

[Eris]

im a science guy. i just cant believe in a god, especialy one that apparently has the power to stop suffering but chooses not to.
besides, i cant think anything at the moment science cant explain, i mean theresprobably something, but i just cant think of it of the top of my head right now

You are a poor scientist guy. The reason why science clashes with religion is philosophical. The fundamental idea that makes science work is skepticism, which is a very tricky thing indeed. It's as hard to convince as it is to dissuade a skeptic. See, a scientist would never make blanket statements about the existence about god. A scientist would keep the possibility open, but until hard proof came either way, leave it at that.

However, the fundamental reason why many scientists are atheists is falsifiability (they are ignostics or theological noncognitivists): They find since there is no way to disprove the existence of god, it becomes a meaningless concept.

There's a lot of people who watch two episodes of myth busters, and then think they are scientists without really understanding what it entails to be a scientist. Poor, uneducated atheists are more damaging to atheism than any theists could ever hope to be.

[Azel]

There's a lot of people who watch two episodes of myth busters, and then think they are scientists without really understanding what it entails to be a scientist. Poor, uneducated atheists are more damaging to atheism than any theists could ever hope to be.

You completely devestated my scientific aspirations; I'm not even going to release my cosmological theoretical construct of a universe where we live in a multiverse of realities of cannibalistic hotdogs and falling upward apples. And hey, I watched three episodes of Myth Busters for your information! That should make my scientific approaches and philosophical arguments a bit more credible don't you think! (Cries in corner)

Anyway; I say science wins! Just personal opinion. Too much of the bible is "misconstrued". Go talk to some adamant christians and they'll all have many different interpretations. One will say you have to interpret one part of this bible this way but another part another way. Maybe this part of the bible is metaphorical and symbolic, maybe it's supposed to be literal. Maybe it's supposed to be both. It's gotten to the point where my brains hurts and I don't know what to believe anymore.

[Amray]

Yeah I met God. Him and I had a dazzling outdoor picnic together by the seaside.

[Red&Stiletto]

Also, the Evolution bit in there was garbage. People have observed plenty of Speciation in both the wild and the laboratory.

I think that bit was refering to humans since science says we evolved and christianity says we were put upon the earth.

i just cant believe in a god, especialy one that apparently has the power to stop suffering but chooses not to.

God lets us make our own decisions. We have chosen to make the world bad. He wants us to believe of our own free will because when people are forced into things, most of the time they rebel becauseof the fact that they were forced and just simply that fact.

[Faceless111]

I have forbidden myself to post in these threads... But I'm doing it anyway! >

I'm atheïst. I do not let my life be controlled by some fairytales.
If there is no religion. That would reduce the violence in the world by 50%.
Since religion's are an excuse to go to war. (Crusade's, jihads whatever..)

Whatever the religious man will say. I will not believe in a fairytale. If they really want me to believe in their fairytale. Then out of resistance I will believe in snowwhite. Since that is the same.

I really don't have a problem with atheism, but I do have a problem with people who think religion is evil. These people [you are included] demonstrate a disgusting ignorance. They completely ignore the fact that religions are composed of humans. And let me ask you this: if there is no god, what is the cause of war? If there was no such thing as religion, would there be no war?

In truth, we'd just kill each other for a different reason. As a species, we are fundamentally insane. Put more than two of us in a room and we'd pick sides and dream of reasons to kill the other one.

But onto the original topic: it was an interesting read, although I disagree with the part about evil being the result of the absence of God's love. That assumes there is a god and there's such a thing as good and evil. Of course, there is faith in gods but that should not suggest the existence of one. And to blame the problems of the world on the belief that everyone doesn't believe in god is ridiculous.

I believe in God, but I believe in humanity more. Humans are flawed and humans are the cause of perpetual injustices. I believe in God but I do not expect anything from this deity that in all probability exists only in my hopeful mind and if He does exist in reality then probably doesn't care. Therefore, I do not attribute the good or bad things in this world to Him.

[Dxon]

I really don't have a problem with atheism, but I do have a problem with people who think religion is evil. These people [you are included] demonstrate a disgusting ignorance. They completely ignore the fact that religions are composed of humans. And let me ask you this: if there is no god, what is the cause of war? If there was no such thing as religion, would there be no war?

In truth, we'd just kill each other for a different reason. As a species, we are fundamentally insane. Put more than two of us in a room and we'd pick sides and dream of reasons to kill the other one.

But onto the original topic: it was an interesting read, although I disagree with the part about evil being the result of the absence of God's love. That assumes there is a god and there's such a thing as good and evil. Of course, there is faith in gods but that should not suggest the existence of one. And to blame the problems of the world on the belief that everyone doesn't believe in god is ridiculous.

I believe in God, but I believe in humanity more. Humans are flawed and humans are the cause of perpetual injustices. I believe in God but I do not expect anything from this deity that in all probability exists only in my hopeful mind and if He does exist in reality then probably doesn't care. Therefore, I do not attribute the good or bad things in this world to Him.

I didn't say there would be no war. I just said there would be 50% less war.
Besides... God is an atheist. So you must become one too.
It's almost as if you hate humans. Then you must be hating yourself?

[Azel]

I don't think there would be 50% less war. We would still probably find a complete other matter to shed blood over. Looking from anywhere to ancient Mesopotamia to Roman Times up to present religion has been a quintessential representation of who we are as human beings. Religion is about love, hate, betrayal, sexuality, divinity, and evil (the fallen) in an overall conflict of good and evil that is tied in with our everyday reality. Religions are a tale that were composed by humans. We would find other reasons to war no doubt, for even the bible says war is human essence and war between mankind is our ultimate downfall. Religion was destined to be, however, because it is simply an anecdotal reflection of who we have been as a race throughout all of time and what various morals/lessons we have tried to instill in ourselves as a race.

[Drifter Uk]

i think i proved that i shouldnt post in these sort of threads

also, dont call me a poor science guy. im getting A's in A-level physics. explain to me how thats poor

[DOOM!]

It's times like these when even being an atheist doesn't pay off. So i'm Satanist, instead

[Sagat]

Good marks in physics in absolutely no way equate to you being a "poor science guy"

[Azel]

Listen man, it's great that you are doing so well in your physics class but that wasn't the point. The scientist mentality is to be an objective and skeptical observer, but only make statements with relevant and substantiated evidence to back up your claim. You weren't being skeptical, you just made an unjustified and impetuous statement.

The point of the scientific mindset is to bring corroborated evidence to the table to back up your argument/theory. As for science being able to prove everything, that’s not true at all. Physical theories and theories of how our universe works are revised for better accuracy all the time by people with better evidence. That’s the thing: science is very much theoretical. Things can be changed with enough sensible support and thoughts and ideas are always open to change. Nothing is set in stone. Furthermore, many physical and scientific concepts touch on philosophical views. Many physical principles that tie in with cosmological principles for example. The scientist doesn't immediately reject the idea, but doesn't believe the idea either until enough verification is present.

[Drifter Uk]

Good marks in physics in absolutely no way equate to you being a "poor science guy"

thankyou

[Eris]

also, dont call me a poor science guy. im getting A's in A-level physics. explain to me how thats poor

There is studying science, and being a scientist. An engineer is not a scientist. A researcher is not (necessarily) a scientist. Science is a mindset, an outlook of the world around you, more than it is an occupation or an academic title. There are so many quacks (in lack of a better word) who call themselves scientists and what they do science, that most people wouldn't know what the word meant if it was tattooed in their face.

[Kawairashii hikari]

I said i wouldn't read these types of threads but i couldn't help myself... ^^'
((Is this real?? Just wanted to know, that'd be interesting....))

My first point.
The student said the wrong thing when he said 'the Bible says he's evil' Sure everyone enters the world evil but once you've accpeted Jesus Christ into your life, he's apart of you, and no part of him is evil.

Second point.
God didn't create evil like the student said, he gave us a free choice to do 'what is right' and 'what is wrong.' And from people doing what they want to do and not having God in their life is where the evil comes from.

Third point.
When the professor asks, "Have you ever seen Jesus?"
I love to respond by saying the quote off of the movie 'The Santa Clause' with Tim Allen. His little son Charlie is having a conversation with Neil, his stepfather.
Neil says something like, 'have you ever seen Santa Clause?' And Charlie responds, "Have you ever seen a thousand dollar bill?"
"No."
"Well, just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist."


I just wanted to add my input just to add it the student my a good comeback anyhow, which was good, so I'm not complaining.

[Faceless111]

I didn't say there would be no war. I just said there would be 50% less war.
Besides... God is an atheist. So you must become one too.
It's almost as if you hate humans. Then you must be hating yourself?

Way to miss the point. If there was no religion, there would still be no decrease in violence. Without religion, there'd still be 100% war. Got it? Can you understand that you're made-up statistic is dramatically off?

And please, please, please try to make sense in your posts. I hate humans because I am human? What? More accurately, I hate know-it-all high school kids. Especially ones that base an argumentative point off a silly comic stripe.

Basically, you're an atheist because you can't question your own belief. You can't ponder "what if I'm wrong?" and then you assume you're absolutely right, even though those that are more sensible (Christians included) can see that your belief is flawed. It isn't the religion that determines the level of intelligence of an individual, so even though atheism is based on logic, you are illogical. Maybe there isn't a god and you're right about that. But you're believing in atheism for the wrong reasons. And you hate religion for the wrong reasons.

I can't help but get an I-hate-President-Bush-because-it's-the-latest-trend vibe from you.

[Manhattan_Project_2000]

My first point.
The student said the wrong thing when he said 'the Bible says he's evil' Sure everyone enters the world evil but once you've accpeted Jesus Christ into your life, he's apart of you, and no part of him is evil.

Second point.
God didn't create evil like the student said, he gave us a free choice to do 'what is right' and 'what is wrong.' And from people doing what they want to do and not having God in their life is where the evil comes from.

If you accept the notion that Yahweh is omniscient (all seeing/knowing), that he has true free will (he could choose to do anything, instead of being a puppet of causality), and you accept the notion that he created mankind and/or the universe, then he was obviously aware of and responsible for the fact that he'd be creating evil. If he is all knowing, he couldn't have not known that, say, the Holocaust would happen. If you accept the notion that he actively controls everything, you get into even deeper territory, because he would have caused such atrocities as the Spanish Inquisition, or the Cultural Revolution.

Third point.
When the professor asks, "Have you ever seen Jesus?"
I love to respond by saying the quote off of the movie 'The Santa Clause' with Tim Allen. His little son Charlie is having a conversation with Neil, his stepfather.
Neil says something like, 'have you ever seen Santa Clause?' And Charlie responds, "Have you ever seen a thousand dollar bill?"
"No."
"Well, just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist."

While I'm sure it's fun and easy to quote-mine Disney movies, wrap your head around this question.

From the position that you don't need proof of something's existence to believe in something, why should you believe in Yahweh, but not Zeus, Thor, Ra, Buddha, Allah, Legba, Grandfather Raven, Big Boss, Vecna, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, Eris (the deity), the Almighty Bob, The Invisible Pink Unicorn, or Bizarro Jesus?

I just wanted to add my input just to add it the student my a good comeback anyhow, which was good, so I'm not complaining.

Plz speek englis kthxby.

[Azel]

Fallicious conclusions derived from OP

Argument #1.
A. Heat is real.
B. Cold is only the absence of heat.
C. Therefore cold does not exist.

Argument #2.
A. Light is real.
B. Darkness is only the absence of light.
C. Therefore darkness does not exist.

Argument #3.
A. Good and evil fit the same category as heat and cold.
B. Therefore evil is only the absence of good.
C. Therefore evil does not really exist on its own.

Argument #4.
A. God is the source of all good.
B. Evil is only the absence of good.
C. Therefore, evil is really the absence of God.

The problem with arguments 1 and 2 is the logical fallacy called equivocation. It is using a word that has multiple meanings, such as hot or cold, in an ambiguous way.

For example, it is correct technically in that heat and light are simply the effects of vibration of sub-atomic particles inside a substance. If you stop the particles from vibrating by cooling them down, then you stop the heat and light. Heat and light are a measure of the quantity and quality of that vibration. We do not typically measure the coldness or darkness of an object.

But then they try to contrast heat and cold. A correct contrast would be between hot and cold, since those terms are used for relative measurements, just like fast and slow.

Here is the equivocation; the word heat can be used both as measurement of the quantity of thermal energy, as well as for a relative measurement between two or more objects. For example, you can say that one object is colder than another, or that one room is darker than another. Their argument concerning heat and cold, as well as light and dark confuse the two meanings; one being an absolute measurement, the other being relative.

So the conclusion of argument 1 is correct in that cold does not exist as physical property, but it is wrong in that the concept of cold does in fact exist when two objects of dissimilar temperatures are compared.

Argument 3 is a false analogy combined with said equivocation; trying to use an analogy to equate a physical concept with a metaphysical one.

The terms good and evil are never used in scientific ways such as heat or light. You can't measure the absolute goodness of an act by a human, nor can you find the absolute bottom of evil (unless you consider the concept of hell). You can't say there were 253 units of goodness in an act, nor can you say that no act can score below -322 units of goodness.

The analogy of argument 3 falls apart because they use the absolute nature of heat and light in arguments 1 and 2, but they do an under-handed switch to the relative meaning of heat and light when they try to equate those concepts with goodness. They want you to think that goodness is absolute and exists on its own, rather than in its relation to evil.

So the final conclusion is evil is only lack of god's presence or goodness, and does not exist on its own. Therefore you can't accuse god of creating the non-existent thing called evil. But all they do is use equivocation, followed by a false analogy. Good and Evil only exist in relative terms and therefore only in direct relation to each other. They try to argue against this but evil does exist on it's own relative to good. This gives no underlying conclusion of God's existence either.