Religion

[excal]

Well if you think socialist is a personal attack, then that's your perogative, not mine

I just think it's a little too general to discount all his non-physics opinions/contributions prima facie simply because he's described as a socialist.

[Collin Li]

I just think it's a little too general to discount all his non-physics opinions/contributions prima facie simply because he's described as a socialist.

All I'm saying is that it discredits him from being always correct. I don't mean to say he is always incorrect. All I mean to say is that he is neither. It is a bit like saying there is a God, there is no God, and then taking the agnostic path (can't prove either way).

It is relevant because we shouldn't take his quotes on religion or society with much more than a grain of salt (at least compared to other people anyway).

[amyminchin]

"While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was discovered gathering wood on the Sabbath day.  Those who caught him at it brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly.  But they kept him in custody, for there was no clear decision as to what should be done with him.  Then the Lord said to Moses, "This man shall be put to death; let the whole community stone him outside the camp." So the whole community led him outside the camp and stoned him to death as the Lord had commanded Moses."   Numbers 15:32-36 NAB

Old Testament, FYI. Part of the old covenant meaning that these punishments and most of the laws set out in numbers/leviticus/deut ETC (ie every verse you posted) are now invalid to modern day christians.

The Bible states that sin will cause everyone to die, as seen in Genesis when Eve eats that damn fruit  (grumble grumble), she does not die straight away- but she does die eventually and she is seperated from God- spiritual death.

However, when Jesus died on the cross he created the new covenant, meaning that sacrifices no longer needed to be made and he revoked many of the jewish laws including those about food, stoning and ostracising certain people.

Basically, I'm a christian not because of an infantile need to believe in something but because I have overwhelming faith that the Bible is truth. I don't go in for organised religion- yes I go to my church and our youth but all the doctrine that has been man made (spesh in the Anglican and Catholic church) is crap. My morality is not directly from the Bible but there is so much in that book that everyone could learn from. It's not just the big stuff like "Do not murder" but also one of the most important commandments- "Love your neighbour as yourself-" and Jesus' direct teachings to accept all people no matter their job, social status or nationality. How can believing in this be shameful?

I respect your opinions but I think that Atyler needs to respect the religous beliefs of others instead of making personal attacks- you're not exactly a wonderful spokesman for atheism and the innate morality when you say "o sorry i didn't realise you had a learning disability." Morality is not just about not going out and raping someone, it's also about basic human respect.

Just needed to clarify. Continue!

[bturville]

It is relevant because we shouldn't take his quotes on religion or society with much more than a grain of salt (at least compared to other people anyway).

I quoted him not because I think this was some brilliant new insight. It wasn't even a main part of my point. It doesn't take Albert Einstein to suggest  that humans morals aren't completely tied to punishment and reward. It was just my opinion and I found it repeated (albeit not surprisingly) from an interesting source.

[sxcalexc]

To answer your question. "IS THERE ANY GOOD REASON TO BELIEVE IN A GOD OR LIVE ONES LIFE AS IF ONE DOES?" I say yes. What do you place your morals and values on without a higher being? Why should you not murder your neighbour i mean there is no such thing as sin afterall? why not rebel against society and go on a murder spree since the worst that can happen is rotting in the ground which you are going to anyway? God serves an important service within society and i don't think you can see that.

I think you'll find that atheists tend to (in general) have a higher moral scope than most other people I know. This is just from my personal experience, and of course is not a complete fact. What is a fact is that the jail-rate of non-religious is far far lower compared to their percentage of presence in society. Where as other groups ie. Christians tend to have a roughly equal percentage of imprisonment to their percentage of presence.

Cite your source.

Roger that.
1st link in Google will do for now. http://www.skepticfiles.org/american/prison.htm
This is only in America, but if you bother to search you will find other statistics from reliable sources.

Religion being a personal belief it really depends how you feel. If you feel it's 'unlikely' and should be considered non-existent for all intents and purposes then you are clearly an atheist. If however you say that it is 'unlikely' but still feel that it could exist then you are an agnostic and not an atheist.

I agree with you on that, mostly.

[sxcalexc]

I just think it's a little too general to discount all his non-physics opinions/contributions prima facie simply because he's described as a socialist.

All I'm saying is that it discredits him from being always correct. I don't mean to say he is always incorrect. All I mean to say is that he is neither. It is a bit like saying there is a God, there is no God, and then taking the agnostic path (can't prove either way).

It is relevant because we shouldn't take his quotes on religion or society with much more than a grain of salt (at least compared to other people anyway).

I see what point you're trying to make, that Einstein should not be guaranteed immediate truth status. However, whilst he may be economically weak-minded, he really did have some great insights into humanity as well as science. Another one of my favourite Einstein quotes (COD4 players might remember this ):

I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.

And I also used this one in an essay once,

Any power must be an enemy of mankind which enslaves the individual by terror and force, whether it arises under the Fascist or the Communist flag. All that is valuable in human society depends upon the opportunity for development accorded to the individual.

Ironically - this last quote can actually be applied to the religion/god(s) debate 

[Glockmeister]

I just think it's a little too general to discount all his non-physics opinions/contributions prima facie simply because he's described as a socialist.

All I'm saying is that it discredits him from being always correct. I don't mean to say he is always incorrect. All I mean to say is that he is neither. It is a bit like saying there is a God, there is no God, and then taking the agnostic path (can't prove either way).

It is relevant because we shouldn't take his quotes on religion or society with much more than a grain of salt (at least compared to other people anyway).

Of course that is correct. As I said to sxcalexc, relying only on the words of a man is logically fallacious.

[sxcalexc]

I just think it's a little too general to discount all his non-physics opinions/contributions prima facie simply because he's described as a socialist.

All I'm saying is that it discredits him from being always correct. I don't mean to say he is always incorrect. All I mean to say is that he is neither. It is a bit like saying there is a God, there is no God, and then taking the agnostic path (can't prove either way).

It is relevant because we shouldn't take his quotes on religion or society with much more than a grain of salt (at least compared to other people anyway).

Of course that is correct. As I said to sxcalexc, relying only on the words of a man is logically fallacious.

I think you misunderstand the intentions of such a quote. It's purpose was not as a form of evidence but as an insight, or a prompt into deeper discussion.

[excal]

I just think it's a little too general to discount all his non-physics opinions/contributions prima facie simply because he's described as a socialist.

All I'm saying is that it discredits him from being always correct. I don't mean to say he is always incorrect. All I mean to say is that he is neither. It is a bit like saying there is a God, there is no God, and then taking the agnostic path (can't prove either way).

It is relevant because we shouldn't take his quotes on religion or society with much more than a grain of salt (at least compared to other people anyway).

Oh certainly - I absolutely agree with you on the last point.

It's just that the way you worded your statement discrediting him (or his opinions) because he's a socialist - could have easily been read the way I read it (or your way).

[sxcalexc]

Again, his quotes are not infallible truths but insights and prompts that allow for elaboration on ideas. And it does add some credit to an argument as he's possibly, historically, the world's greatest mind.

[ATyler]

Glockmeister you, like the others, miss my point entirely or either can simply not comprehend it, even if i repeatedly type it out in captitals, you say:

I would argue that "invisible fairies exist in my backyard" could exist. There maybe such "invisible fairies exist in my backyard" that you can't see. It is impossible to prove definitively that "invisible fairies" don't exist using the scientific method.
 

There are billions of propositions that one could believe, invisible purple faires called steve or jeff, and of course no one can unequivocally prove or disprove these by scientific means, however the judgment is whether there is any good reason to hold a view that these things are real. Of course there is no good reason, and no one is yet to state one good reason. other than 'its personal, its a matter of faith (blind superstition) or I believe the bible (which i have already refuted). One cannot argue for, nor believe in, god from a scientific and rational stance because it was not reached though scientific and rational endevour, rather reached through religious indoctrination and a deeply natural desire to believe 'in something bigger'.

amyminchin i could find many quotes from the New testament that are just as shocking. You say:


Basically, I'm a christian not because of an infantile need to believe in something but because I have overwhelming faith that the Bible is truth.

You are a Christian because whoever raised who was a christian, and hence raised you to be a christian., you have not come to your end  belief becuase of your own thinking, but rather have been told what to think by others, and your attempts to rationalize your beliefs fail (see above). 'Faith' is not a reason to believe in something, it is A LACK of reasons to believe in something. You also directly support the point I made before:

My morality is not directly from the Bible but there is so much in that book that everyone could learn from

You 'cherry pick' parts of the bible that accord with your underlying system of morality; on what criteria do you judge the 'good parts from the bad parts' its all 'god's word' is it not?? This supports a criteria that has been ingrained in our species through the process of evolution, and through secular means in our society.

You say i need to 'respect' your opinions, that is meaningless phrase...you do not respect my opinion, you simply tolerate them due to your ignorance and then patronizingly say 'i respect your opinion', (as if to say oh yes I am right, but in my holiness I allow you to be wrong), you don't even understand my opinion. I am not a 'spokesperson for atheism' i am just an individual who derives his views from reasoned and scientific thinking, rather than being told what to think, like your self.

And for people still confused about what Atheism means, it literally means A Thiest: NOT A THEIST, THAT AND NOTHING ELSE.

[amyminchin]

Oh please, don't patronise me. I do understand what you are saying and while I have been raised a christian do you really think that I've just followed it blindly my entire life? I have questioned everything in the Bible, looked for my own faith, investigated other faiths, looked into atheism, read The God Delusion, studied other peoples opinions. You know absolutely NOTHING about me so don't you dare make assumptions about a) my feelings regarding your opinions b) my upbringing c) my personal faith and d) my intellect.

How are you not cherry picking the bad parts of the Bible? You are repeatedly taking the verses entirely out of context and out of an entirely different culture!

I have never, ever been told what to think. My parents have always encourage me to go to church but never, ever forced me to go to church. They have never made me believe or Bible bashed me. My church has always encouraged me to believe but never stopped me from asking questions and have always answered them truthfully and honestly. They never pretended to know everything, and never lied to me in their answers.

I do have respect your opinions, but it is obvious you dont respect others.   

[excal]

Oh please, don't patronise me. I do understand what you are saying and while I have been raised a christian do you really think that I've just followed it blindly my entire life? I have questioned everything in the Bible, looked for my own faith, investigated other faiths, looked into atheism, read The God Delusion, studied other peoples opinions. You know absolutely NOTHING about me so don't you dare make assumptions about a) my feelings regarding your opinions b) my upbringing c) my personal faith and d) my intellect.

How are you not cherry picking the bad parts of the Bible? You are repeatedly taking the verses entirely out of context and out of an entirely different culture!

I have never, ever been told what to think. My parents have always encourage me to go to church but never, ever forced me to go to church. They have never made me believe or Bible bashed me. My church has always encouraged me to believe but never stopped me from asking questions and have always answered them truthfully and honestly. They never pretended to know everything, and never lied to me in their answers.

I do have respect your opinions, but it is obvious you dont respect others.  

Don't fret too much, s/he's already making a habit of it.

[Collin Li]

So, ATyler, why do you feel the need to create a 2nd account support your main account?

Can confirm the validity of this claim.

Last thing I will add to this thread (my opinion): I don't go into the efforts and pains that you guys do about religion because I don't see it as having much relevance to day-to-day life. It's still interesting to talk about, but if you are so stubborn and charged in your beliefs, I would rather let you have them than try to impart my view (which doesn't exist). I would much prefer to have a debate about issues that affect us.

Of course, the rest of you are free to continue debating about this.

[sxcalexc]

So, ATyler, why do you feel the need to create a 2nd account support your main account?

Can confirm the validity of this claim.

Last thing I will add to this thread (my opinion): I don't go into the efforts and pains that you guys do about religion because I don't see it as having much relevance to day-to-day life. It's still interesting to talk about, but if you are so stubborn and charged in your beliefs, I would rather let you have them than try to impart my view (which doesn't exist). I would much prefer to have a debate about issues that affect us.

Of course, the rest of you are free to continue debating about this.

That's fair enough. I suppose you are more economically minded. I myself, don't think one can gain much (superficially anyway) by philosophical discussion but I find great joy in asking and answering such profound questions. I suppose you could call it a hobby. I wish I lived in the time of the Ancient Greek philosophers and scientists  :buck2: