The religious of America

[chaard]

Not sure what you're getting at. You are very sure of yourself, considering none of us have seen the other side.

Let me try and break it down. You said

people of all faiths are living in denial of the fact that our existence is a random and insignificant occurrence that can't be explained yet....

People of faith are in denial of a FACT that our existence is random and insignificant.
Do you have evidence of this fact? No. Cause you end the statement with it can't be explained.
That would sound like another factual statement. Until the sentence ended with the word YET.
If it can't be explained then it cannot be proven insignificant or random.
So the first part is not a fact. People of faith are not necessarily in denial, the universe is not insignificant and random because you left it open for debate and further scientific research when you ended the whole statement with the word YET.

You then say believers are in denial and yet you are willing to believe, which would put you in denial.

[scrogdog]

Actually, logically speaking, God solves nothing. Nothing at all.

You see, if the argument is that something so wonderful and complex as this universe MUST have had a designer, then you've just botched logic from the word go. For that could only mean that God, probably the most complex "thing" there is, would have also needed to have been created.

Which leads to what we call "infinite regression". If the universe was created, who created the creator? And if we identify that entity, then who created it? On and on, it never ends.

Even scientifically speaking, infinite regression is a problem. It is for that very reason that theory of multiverses exists in the first place. Because, if one were to read an article geared towards layman about the Big Bang, it generally starts with a singularity but doesn't explain where it came from. It cannot have risen from non-existence, because its creation would be an "event" and events need a place to happen. Thus the multi-verse theory suggests that the singularity, or "reality" if you will, "leaked" here (for lack of a better term) from somewhere else. So then we'd need to explain where the somewhere else came from.

It's a difficult concept but the most logical way out of this mess is to simply say that reality didn't come from anywhere. Even philosophically speaking, when you think about it, existence must have always existed. In other words, the multiverses are some sort of perpetual model.

Even the God scenario suggests that existence always existed, though not necessarily THIS universe.

[Phrancis]

A Bible belt in Canada? I've heard people say that Canada is a very dark place spiritually. I know for sure that Vancouver, BC was the many times I visited there. You must be talking about a time when you lived in the U.S. I'll guess NC or WV.

There are a few pockets of religious people in Canada. Quebec has a lot of Catholics. Ontario seems mostly secular/multicultural especially the GTA. The center has a lot of protestants. But I don't think Vancouver is a good reference, that would be like saying all of use is like Portland, OR.

[Phrancis]

There's no evidence for god, but there's no evidence against, either. If you take a believer and an unbeliever and put them side by side, they are both the same in that they don't know. Where they differ is that only one of them is being true to himself. ...
So why do so many pretend they do?

I like the way you think a lot. Add to that the thought that pretty much every school of religious thought is the one true way, according to themselves. Hell, even Scientologists think they got it all figured out. The only logical conclusion that I see is the number of truly true religions has a minimum of (0) and a maximum of (1), which would in turn discredit all the other hundreds of religions.

Taking a step back, I would say most very religious people accept as fact the writings of the particular religion, while on the other side of their mouth telling their fellows that the other religions are so far-fetched. For instance, the Bible with its many physically unexplainable events and very cryptic prophecies, is no less far-fetched than Hinduism or Scientology, just a different set of beliefs.

As for alcohol; with Christianity in its various forms being the dominant religion in North America, it seems it would be easy to slip closer to theocratic thinking, which I thought was one of the chief reasons the founders fought and left the British Empire in the first place. I say it's more constructive to educate than to criminalize.

[hvacker]

Buddhism doesn't explain much. Has nothing comparable to the Bible. Just a history and a path that's considered intuitive. In Zen it's said without the experience, there is nothing to talk about.
Just the oposite of most religions where it's all talk and no experience. In fact some ask their followers to avoid experience as it leads to error.
When I mentioned "God Consciousness" before it was to illustrate the difference between that experience and religion. Many religions began when some person experienced God Consciousness. Their followers rarely did.
I once heard this example. There was a holy man who had a cat on a leash whenever he meditated. His followers all went out and got cats thinking it was part of the "Path". The facts were the holy man was disturbed during meditation by mice. The cat had nothing to do with the Path.
That is what religion does. Because most followers will never experience the consciousness they are told to live by faith, or works, or hope.
The question. If you had the chance to experience "God Consciousness" and the risk that goes with it. Would you?
If not, don't tell me you know about God or the absence of because, like my attorney says, "It's hearsay".

[tunnel_rat]

Why is it that when no logical argument can be made, someone has to fall back on..."it's the christians' fault"? I'm no christian, but I hate to see ignorant people always bashing religion because they have no intelligent arguments to make in defense of their stand.

[barbar]

Why is it that when no logical argument can be made, someone has to fall back on..."it's the christians' fault"? I'm no christian, but I hate to see ignorant people always bashing religion because they have no intelligent arguments to make in defense of their stand.

The "Truth" to all has not been proven (regardless of what it is), therefore, are we all not ignorant on this matter.
I see many intelligent arguments, but these can only be seen by those who are able to open their mind, to freedom of thought.
If you are a believer or a denyist, then any argument,that questions this belief, will seem to have no intelligence behind it.
Religion has a lot to answer for. (over time the finger can be pointed equally)

[geerair]

Why is it that when no logical argument can be made, someone has to fall back on..."it's the christians' fault"? I'm no christian, but I hate to see ignorant people always bashing religion because they have no intelligent arguments to make in defense of their stand.

If it males you feel any better I consider all religions and gods (not just Christianity and the J/C deity) as little more than primitive superstitions.

[chaard]

Actually, logically speaking, God solves nothing. Nothing at all.

You see, if the argument is that something so wonderful and complex as this universe MUST have had a designer, then you've just botched logic from the word go. For that could only mean that God, probably the most complex "thing" there is, would have also needed to have been created.

Which leads to what we call "infinite regression". If the universe was created, who created the creator? And if we identify that entity, then who created it? On and on, it never ends.

Even scientifically speaking, infinite regression is a problem. It is for that very reason that theory of multiverses exists in the first place. Because, if one were to read an article geared towards layman about the Big Bang, it generally starts with a singularity but doesn't explain where it came from. It cannot have risen from non-existence, because its creation would be an "event" and events need a place to happen. Thus the multi-verse theory suggests that the singularity, or "reality" if you will, "leaked" here (for lack of a better term) from somewhere else. So then we'd need to explain where the somewhere else came from.

It's a difficult concept but the most logical way out of this mess is to simply say that reality didn't come from anywhere. Even philosophically speaking, when you think about it, existence must have always existed. In other words, the multiverses are some sort of perpetual model.

Even the God scenario suggests that existence always existed, though not necessarily THIS universe.

Actually God solves a lot of things.

Let's suppose the Universe was started by the big bang or it leaked from somewhere else. Where did the intelligence come from that formed life.
And don't say it evolved over time. Time does not create anything.

[geerair]

That is not true. Science can not proof or disproof god.

Science is not in the business of determining the exsistence of the supernatural. That being said, through the vast body of scientific knowledge, it can be confidently stated that god/s is not necessary for the creation or explanations of Life, The Universe and Everything.

There is no scientific answer to what created the universe or possible infinite parallel universes.

Not as yet.

But the big question is: Does every question has to have an answer?

In a physical world the answer is yes.

[printer2]

Actually God solves a lot of things.

Let's suppose the Universe was started by the big bang or it leaked from somewhere else. Where did the intelligence come from that formed life.
And don't say it evolved over time. Time does not create anything.

Time heals all wounds.

[geerair]

Actually God solves a lot of things.

Let's suppose the Universe was started by the big bang or it leaked from somewhere else. Where did the intelligence come from that formed life.
And don't say it evolved over time. Time does not create anything.

You are correct, time did not create intelligence. Time only allowed an adequate span in which evolution developed intelligence.

[chaard]

Time heals all wounds.

Actually the body heals itself. And it takes several stages just for blood to clot. One would have bled to death before the body figured out how to stop the bleeding.

Second of all, that statement I believe refers to humans letting go of past hurts. Like 9/11. Everyone said "We will never forget."
But many people have forgotten or just don't care anymore.