Simple reason science and religion are incompatible...

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: Dr1Akula

Here is the thing, there is no reason to hate people simply for believing something other than yourself. You claim a "known" God.. essentially, there is not a known God because we have yet to be able to weigh and measure one.

Yet somehow the religions know the character of this god and what he wants from us?
That's what I meant with ''known'' gods.

Yet, most of us are theists in one form or fashion. But hatred of people due to their belief in a personal deity verses the panentheist view verses the pantheist view verses the atheist view verses the agnostic view is ridiculous..

Why don't we decide all are free to believe as they will, and go about our own lives and learn stuff as we go. Threads like this to me, are absolutely ridiculous.

I've never heard of hate between atheists , pantheists and panentheists ... maybe because they are not religions?

On the other hand guess which was the most hateful, fascist, racist and violent religion in the history of mankind?

a reply to: SuperFrog

No problem.

However, those two links are from the horses mouth...

Again: Most people do not even understand what the true nature of religion means and that is why many see the two as separate...and confuse Einstein's meaning.

I too, do not believe in the God that Einstein was talking about...

You should really look into those links. It comes from Einstein's mouth and turns everything you posted in this thread on its head.

Click those links...don't be shy.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

It is more likely that you really did experience something and either it was something mundane that are you attributing more to it because of preconceived dogma or you are just misremembering it.

Be careful not to judge what you do not know.

I am agnostic, and I am the first to attribute mundane explanation to mysteries. But I have seen things that defies the mundane. I had a dozen premonition visions, I saw things walk around in my house and which were like nothing I have ever seen in any taxonomic textbooks, and I even had one case of telekinesis.

Nowadays I keep my mind open. Life is too short to forever keep thinking inside a box anyway.

a reply to: Dr1Akula

How hard is kindness, consideration, not hurting people... in the end, that is what most religious people tell you he wants...

you know, if we all followed religion in what is considered the greatest commandment, we would have no wars, no murder, none of it. We would never be worried about being ripped off or robbed, raped or harmed.

It would be a veritable utopia on earth... if we went about the business of following what religion tells us God actually wants from us...

everyone wants detail detail detail, or to force their views down others throats, which all religions decidedly teach against.. then the atheists spring up out of disgust for those who don't follow their religion yet only pretend to and say hate hate hate it all..

its core is beautiful.. it is us who are decidedly not... and at its core, even an atheist will say that it is not wrong for people to follow.

Its when you get outside of that core people have issues... yet even Jesus said, the core is what matters.. if you do that, everything else just falls into place.

Did you know the bible says that I am not the judge of you? most people either don't, or wholly ignore it. and therein, lies the problem. It lies in us.. not religion.

But again, that is only my opinion.

a reply to: OpinionatedB

How hard is kindness, consideration, not hurting people... in the end, that is what most religious people tell you he wants...

what does an ant want from you?

a reply to: swanne

At no point did I suggest that there aren't things out there that we aren't aware of. All I am saying is that when you experience the unknown, unless you can test it right there on the spot with valid tests, saying it is anything but the unknown is intellectually dishonest and a guess.

I make similar arguments in the UFO forums. Yes UFO's exist, but only because they are unidentified flying objects. Once you start labeling them as alien or government or whatever is when you leave the realm of intellectual honesty.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

what does an ant want from you?

Kindness, consideration, not getting hurt by us.

They certainly do not want destruction, negligence or pain from us, this is for sure.

a reply to: TzarChasm

what does it want from you?

Nothing I would imagine, unless it lives in your yard.. then it might want peace - no lawnmowers, and perhaps an area where they can obtain food, and of course housing..

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
All I am saying is that when you experience the unknown, unless you can test it right there on the spot with valid tests, saying it is anything but the unknown is intellectually dishonest and a guess.

A statement I most certainly agree with.

originally posted by: swanne

originally posted by: TzarChasm

what does an ant want from you?

Kindness, consideration, not getting hurt by us.

They certainly do not want destruction, negligence or pain from us, this is for sure.

and it told you as much, did it?

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: TzarChasm

what does it want from you?

Nothing I would imagine, unless it lives in your yard.. then it might want peace - no lawnmowers, and perhaps an area where they can obtain food, and of course housing..

i have difficulty imagining an ant to experience desire at all. more like a gear in a clock, operating autonomously until its body breaks.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
People love to be on teams, to practice the comfort of groupthink, and to have an enemy to rally against.

Meanwhile, science has become something that is used like a club by atheists to beat the religious up with, choosing to make fun of them and belittle their beliefs.

Obviously, the result of this will be religious people withdrawing into groupthink and rallying against their attackers.

Uh....no. As the education system succeeds in indoctrinating the youth against any and all faith systems, and as the boomer generation fades into the ashbin of history, the religious people will be driven entirely out of and away from the public square to live their lives out in the shadows. Then the state will confiscate the church properties, confiscate what few remaining children they have and let the elders die off.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

and it told you as much, did it?

It certainly ran away as soon as I tried to harm it.

i have difficulty imagining an ant to experience desire at all.

No desire? Not even the desire for a sugary piece of food, or the desire for survival?

a reply to: SuperFrog

How is Science incompatible with Religion? The statements you provide do not answer that question.

What your statements regard is the difference between a scientist and a fundamentally religious person.

However, the actual story told in the three core books - the Bible/Quran/Tanakh - is not incompatible with our modern understanding of science.

Let me put it differently;

These aforementioned books all derive from one core story, which is the Eridu Genesis. You can attempt to attack the books INDIVIDUALLY (which is actually good as all of them should be studied collectively) but if you really want to eliminate the idea of religion, at least personally, then you will have to tackle the actual core message first and foremost.

What's the core story of the Eridu Genesis then? When read in conjunction with the SKL (Sumerian Kings List) and the Enuma Elish, the story goes something like this:

150,000 to 200,000 years ago (derived from SKL reigns) the 'Gods' descend from Heaven onto Earth.

The 'sons of Gods', the Iggigi (or later called the Anunnaki/Nephilm) toiled the Earth for many generations for the 'Greater Gods'.

After 'many generations', the Iggigi complained about their position to the 'Greater Gods', and the the God Enki proposed the solution of a worker race.

You get a few different explanations here regarding what happened:

'The Gods created the black-headed people' - Eridu Genesis (note the conscious separation here).
'Man was created from the blood of Kingu and Tiamat' - Enuma Elish
'Man was created from the divine and of Earth' - Surrounding Myths

At this point, the Iggigi are given the task of over-seeing these workers. The Iggigi misbehave and instead teach us the 'ways of the Gods', giving us knowledge that was not apparently wished for us.

The Iggigi also began having sexual relations with the workers, resulting in the countless references to 'Demi-Gods', 'sons of Gods' and so forth.

This is actually one of the most interesting parts of any of the religious texts or stories as it actually DIRECTLY refers to these 'Gods' as posessing HUMANOID qualities rather than that of a spiritual, astronomical or symbolical nature.

That section is mostly composed from surrounding fragments and myths, Babylonian stories and finally what would become the Book of Enoch. The Eridu Genesis doesn't directly mention this but it is missing a massive amount of text inbetween the creation of man and the flood, due to physical damage to the tablet.

Anyway, the story then goes on to say that this really pissed off the 'Greater Gods', of which the council (led by the God's Anu and Enlil) had decided to (as worded in the Eridu Genesis) agree on the destruction of the created worker race - or apparently us.

Interestingly, depending on the official translation taken - this would be achieved by either a naturally occurring flood that the Greater Gods were aware of, or a flood directly caused by the Gods.

The God Enki goes against this decision and warns a man of the impending danger. He is told to build a boat and take 2 of each domestic animal at his disposal (Eridu Genesis - written approx. 2500 BC).

The other Gods are furious that humanity survived (the Human-Iggigi offspring apparently didn't) but after hearing Enki out, the Greater Gods decide to allow us to remain and establish 'kingship'.

At this point separate tablets show the God Enlil (depicted as a humanoid) gifting us the plow and we are also told that four legged animals to provide our vital needs are given in abundance. Please see the British Museum for this tablet and the accompanying 'official' description (I'm usin my mobile and getting references is a pain - sorry).

It is important to note that the SKL has the reigns of the 'Kings' up to this point as extremely long (1000s and 10,0000s) and after the flood as becoming more human. It is also important to note that the first 7 reigns seem to be precessionary numbers.

At this point some surrounding myths talk of a new race being created, of which were to become the 7 sages, and the first of these - Adapa - was personally of Enki's blood and a human's. These sages were to be advisors to the first human kings in the absence of the God's kingship and this is also reflected in the SKL.

The story after this pretty much goes stale until the Tower of Babel (which arguably could have occurred before the 'flood') and then the coming of JHWH (who is incredibly symbolic of Enlil), and later on Jesus Christ.

THERE'S YOUR STORY. Read it ALL together and that's the story you get - as simple as that. It's completely up for interpretation and people can think what they want.

An important thing to consider here is that this was an evidently complex story being told by relatively primitive people. However, it is indeed a fairly consistent story that stretches back to our very first cradle of true civilisation.

It is also important to note that untouched Amazonian tribes on the Earth TODAY may be explaining our aeroplanes in the most ridiculous of manners, but this does not mean they are not actually seeing those aeroplanes.

Now - the key point here isn't me trying to convince you of a truth or a particular belief, but to simply say that a person could interpret that story in a particular way which would make it scientifically plausible using MODERN KNOWLEDGE.

If you want to literally take an angel to mean an etheric being that does magic stuff with no apparent reasoning - then o.k, you can use modern science to discredit this. If you look at the original definitions of these 'entities', then they could arguably just be an advanced humanoid species separate to us.

It is not incompatible with evolution neither, and we know now enough about genetic engineering and DNA to have a much better idea of what is actually possible.

My point is, yes, you can destroy the Bible and it's individual sentences easily. When you put it in the larger context, and try to figure out the story actually being told rather than the semantics of each word, it becomes much harder to derationalise via science - since our scientific knowledge itself allows us to comprehend the story in a potentially logical way.

That is the key point. I am neither religious nor do I truly believe that the story I have said above is 'true'. We should NOT be quick to dismiss this story either.

We know now there was an abrupt ice age shift around 12,000-10,000 BC which would have caused global issues for everyone inhabiting it. We know several humanoid races (who were physically larger with bigger brains as well) died out but we survived. We also now know we originated from Africa and can be traced back to one modern descendant.

All those aspects of our history were spoken about in the ancient stories. Likewise, the stories of Atlantis/Lumeria and so forth in the Early Greek period were also corresponding to a civilisation thousands and thousands of years ago that was devastated in a dramatic catastrophe.

Who knows?

I don't agree with your point that these things are incompatible though. That would require science to demonstrate a principle that is DIRECTLY contradicted by attempting to rationalise the story - this is not the case - but rather one can actually rationalise the story more so than ever using modern understanding of the universe and it's extrapolations.

originally posted by: swanne
No desire? Not even the desire for a sugary piece of food, or the desire for survival?

That's not desire. That is instinct.

a reply to: DazDaKing

That's all well and good, but archeology and geology don't agree with your account of things. So I'm going to have to say you are most likely wrong.

Just because it is mentioned in a book, doesn't inherently make it true or valid. The account should also align with archeology, geology, and historic research as well.

Nvm

originally posted by: SuperFrog
Only reason it makes sense to you is ...

Nope. Sorry, but don't try to analyze me. You'll fail.

Here is how Einstein closed his address:

Again .. I do not care what he supposedly intended for the quote.
Taken at FACE VALUE it makes perfect sense.

Religion and science can be very compatible. They can teach each other. It's indoctrinated people ON BOTH SIDES with closed minds who continually cheer only 'their side' that are the problem.

a reply to: swanne

That is a question for a biologist. I'm not much of a biologist. I know that ants are pretty much driven by instinct and that two examples of animals that can show desire are humans and dolphins, so I'd wager that the ability to express desire has to do with higher levels of intelligent thinking in the animal. But other than that, I'd suggest consulting a biology textbook or something. Sorry.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm curious and perplexed. You've been on this thread since 7:30 a.m. shooting down the weak minded and advocating scientific methodology and logic. That's near 7 hours.

Are you paid to do this?

And then I note that you intervene in practically every thread about science and religion. Why are these threads allowed to continue on? I'd have thought by now every one of them could have been axed as a duplicate thread or a topic that's been hashed to death. Why the endless repetition?