"The fact is, there is a STRONG correlation between NON-belief and your level scientific education." So science teaches non-belief, and those who are bent that way accept non-belief as the right way to view the world. There is a strong corelation between communism and NON-belief too.
Don't poison the well surf. I do NOT have a profound hatred for all things spiritual. I know spirituality helps a lot of people, I simply don't need such a crutch. What gets my goat is when people make extraordinary claims about their spirituality and know they are absolutely right, then SCOFF when you ask them to prove their position and they fail to deliver. The other part of religion that gets my goat is the HIGHER THAN THOU mentality. Many religions ASSERT a higher moral ground, ESPECIALLY over us HEATHEN atheists They claim some kind of MORAL MONOPOLY. They claim atheists CANT be moral without a god. And yet at the same time, have the BLOODIEST histories on this earth. The hypocrisy is mindboggeling. Child molesting priests anyone? Higher ground my a**! I am FAR FAR FAR more moral than the vast majority of christians and theologians I have met in my life, and yet ***I*** am the sinner?!?!??! The nerve of these people!!!! It's sickening really. peace axeman
I never said they "were into God". As you and I both know, the great majorty of my quotes are NOT from evangelical Christians. The fact that these guys are non-theistic does not mean they are not deistic! The point is this: a big block of them is non-materialistic and willing to admit that the universe looks designed! This is what you won't admit. The universe up through the time of the Origin of Life looks designed. The scientific evidence up through the Origin of Life looks exactly as you would expect it if there was a God!
You don't need religion as a crutch, you have logic and reason to hold you up. A small finite mind looks to the universe and shouts, I AM ALL THAT I AM! Your comments that religion is a "crutch" tells the entire story of your sense of self superiority.
Science teacher non-belief??? Bzzzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong. Science teaches a method of finding the truth. If this leads to the non-belief of something, its for a good reason. Does science teach the non-belief of unicorns? Does science teach the non-belief of Santa clause? Does science teach the non-belief of the tooth fairy? Does science teach the non-belief of god? No No No and No. Science provides a method of discovering wether or not such things truly exist. Non-belief IS THE DEFAULT POSITION OF SCIENCE and any rational person. Evidence is required FOR belief. If a scientist does not believe in god or santa clause, its because THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PROVEN, *not* because it teaches non-belief of such things. peace axeman
Wow! What a powerful arguement. NOT! FALLACY: Ad hominem. FALLACY: Poisoning the well. Learn to debate, and then come back to the table. peace axeman
Prove that science is necessarily the correct and rational point of view when addressing the issues of God, and of course, if you use science itself to prove your point, the argument is useless. You are a true believer in science, no different than a true believer in God. The belief mechanism is exactly the same, exactly.
Here we go again. "I never said they "were into God". As you and I both know, the great majorty of my quotes are NOT from evangelical Christians. The fact that these guys are non-theistic does not mean they are not deistic! " Ummm YES IT DOES. Deism *IS* a kind of THEISM. If you believe in the existence of any god or gods, you ARE IN FACT a theist. It doesn't matter if you think god "went away" or doesn't mess around with us. Your still a theist. Also...the great majority of the quotes may not be from evangelical christians but THEY ARE from the MINORITY of our best scientists. The best scientists are, in general, non-theistic. "The point is this: a big block of them is non-materialistic and willing to admit that the universe looks designed! This is what you won't admit. The universe up through the time of the Origin of Life looks designed." LOOKS designed and *IS* designed are two very different things. I can admit the universe LOOKS designed, I think even Dawkins has said something similar. But "looks designed" is no where near any kind of proof and does not constitute any kind of evidence. Lots of things LOOK one way, and are another. "The scientific evidence up through the Origin of Life looks exactly as you would expect it if there was a God! " Ummm no. Huge assertion you cannot prove. There is also counter evidence. The discussion about an all knowing intelligent designer who creates so many FLAWED designs, actually contradicts this quite well. If there was an omniscient, omnipotent god who really designed the universe, then I would EXPECT giraffe babies to NOT fall on their heads from 6 feet and be occasioanally killed. I would EXPECT innocent babies to NOT be over run by lava flows, etc. Unfortunately, all of these things DO happen, and contradict what I would EXPECT, if this super creator existed. peace axeman
This is the really the crux of the issue for most failed believers. They simply could not trust that God would behave in a manner that was against their own limited, finite sense of what is fair, right, logical, etc. They came to their own sense of what was ultimate reality, and judge God according to their own limited concepts. Your expectations are your own creation. As simply as I can say this, you have issues with God.
I hope you realize the significance of this: the core of your arguments are NOT based on the science or mathematics of this, but the issues that you have with Pain and Suffering. That's fine. I don't dispute that Pain and Suffering is a difficult topic and I respect your opinion. I just get angry because you have been implying that your position is based on modern scientific findings which cannot be valid. Also, the argument against bad design has little to do with what we're talking about, as you know, since it is post-Cambrian-explosion.