Evidence and Religion

[betsy]

6 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

 

Why did the church believe the opposite until science proved the bible wrong?

 

I can't speak for the church.....but I can point to the Scriptures.    The Bible doesn't say.

 

Quote

Does the Bible teach geocentrism?

The short answer to this question is “no.”

For many centuries, however, people believed that Claudius Ptolemaeus and others were correct when they advocated an Earth-centered universe. They wanted to believe this theory because some thought, incorrectly, that this is what the Bible teaches.

Taken in order, Genesis 1:14-18, Psalm 104:5, Job 26:7 and Isaiah 40:22 were often cited to support the geocentric theory of Ptolemaeus. Yet none of these Scriptures, taken in any order whatsoever, state that God designed the universe with Earth at its center.

In fact, Earth isn’t even the center of its own small solar system; the sun is. We can understand why Copernicus and, later, Galileo, who posited the sun-centered (heliocentric) theory, caused such a controversy in the church. It was thought that heliocentricism contradicted the biblical teaching of geocentrism. But, again, the problem was that God’s Word doesn’t say that the Earth is at the center of anything.

https://www.gotquestions.org/geocentrism-Bible.html

Edited December 9, 2016 by betsy

[The_Squid]

12 minutes ago, betsy said:

 

I can't speak for the church.....but I can point to the Scriptures.    The Bible doesn't say.

 

https://www.gotquestions.org/geocentrism-Bible.html

The church now believes in the science...   they changed their minds about what the bible said because they couldn't stand against the truth of it.

[betsy]

7 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

The church now believes in the science...   they changed their minds about what the bible said because they couldn't stand against the truth of it.

I don't know what church you mean.

[The_Squid]

2 minutes ago, betsy said:

I don't know what church you mean.

I'm sure you won't bother to read it...  but here is some educational material for you:   https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair

[dre]

20 minutes ago, betsy said:

 

I can't speak for the church.....but I can point to the Scriptures.    The Bible doesn't say.

 

https://www.gotquestions.org/geocentrism-Bible.html

You are grasping at straws. The bible said the earth shall not be moved. Clearly if it travels around the sun it has to be moving. It also says that the sun hurries to come up at the same place. Clearly that implies the sun is rotating around the earth.

And lets not forget that the church labeled the opponents of geo-centrism as heretics and brought them to trial, and banned/burned books that posited other theories.

Galileo was ordered by the inquisition...

Quote

 to abstain completely from teaching or defending this doctrine and opinion or from discussing it... to abandon completely... the opinion that the sun stands still at the center of the world and the earth moves, and henceforth not to hold, teach, or defend it in any way whatever, either orally or in writing.

 

 

 

[dre]

7 minutes ago, betsy said:

I don't know what church you mean.

Hes talking about your fake skygod cult.

[betsy]

10 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

I'm sure you won't bother to read it...  but here is some educational material for you:   https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair

Of course I won't bother reading it....since you're the one who gave the source! Why will I waste my time? 

 

Anyway....you don't even realize that what you give is irrelevant! That's why I'm not going to bother.

 

 

Here, I'll shout it since you can't seem to hear well enough.

 

NOWHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE BIBLE THAT THE EARTH IS AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE!

 

 

Edited December 9, 2016 by betsy

[dre]

Just now, betsy said:

Of course I won't bother reading it....since you're the one who gave the source! Why will I waste my time? 

 

Anyway....you don't even realize that what you give is irrelevant!  

 

Here, I'll shout it since you can't seem to hear well enough.

 

NOWHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE BIBLE THAT THE EARTH IS AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE.

 

 

Sweet! Big stupid red fonts again! That will REALLY convince people LOL.

The bible says that the earth will not move. If its stationary then clearly that implies that everything else is moving. It also says the after the sun goes down, it just "giddies up" over to the other side of the world to come up in the same place again. Both of these are clear descriptions of geocentrism, but as I said... Whats even more telling is that if anyone dared disagree with geocentrism the church would label them heretics, burn or ban their books, or put them on trial and in Galileo's  sentence them to house arrest for life.

[The_Squid]

5 minutes ago, betsy said:

Of course I won't bother reading it..

Hahaha

Not surprised.   I gave you an answer to your question with that link, but you choose to remain ignorant.  That's OK...   

[betsy]

13 minutes ago, dre said:

You are grasping at straws. The bible said the earth shall not be moved. Clearly if it travels around the sun it has to be moving. It also says that the sun hurries to come up at the same place. Clearly that implies the sun is rotating around the earth.

 

 

 

He has established the world; it shall never be moved.

 

It means it will stay how He'd established it.  If He'd established it to revolve around the sun.....then that's how it will be.

Edited December 9, 2016 by betsy

[dre]

Just now, betsy said:

 

He has established the world; it shall never be moved.

 

It means it will stay how He'd established it.  If He'd established it to revolve around the sun.....that's how it will be.

Yeah you would think "it shall never be moved" means... "It shall never be moved". Clearly that's one of the reasons skygod cultists in the 1600's stuck to geocentrism and banned Copernican books and knowledge, and the inquisition put people who suggested the earth was moving on trial.

Uhhhh... anything else?

[The_Squid]

14 minutes ago, dre said:

Yeah you would think "it shall never be moved" means... "It shall never be moved". Clearly that's one of the reasons skygod cultists in the 1600's stuck to geocentrism and banned Copernican books and knowledge, and the inquisition put people who suggested the earth was moving on trial.

Uhhhh... anything else?

What are those???   FACTS????  

[Omni]

1 hour ago, betsy said:

 

FYI, it's not the sun that revolves around the earth.  It's earth that revolves around the sun.

 

 

http://time.com/7809/1-in-4-americans-thinks-sun-orbits-earth/

 

 

Umm, can you say gullible? 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, betsy said:

Who cares about opinion! 

 

Every belief in every God that has ever been believed in has been 100% opinion.  I would have thought you would care about it a great deal.

[betsy]

7 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Every belief in every God that has ever been believed in has been 100% opinion.

 

Only if  someone can't fathom the significance of, and  ignore the cumulative evidences that support the existence of God - and that the God of Creation is the Christian God.  

 

 

Quote

Is There A God?

 

This thread was created in response to Frank Apisa's request for me to provide evidences for the existence of God. I didn't get the chance to do a research actually.....and didn't gather all the evidences that can be presented. There will be numerous evidences given, and no doubt there will be attempts at rebuttals for each and every one at them. They're listed not in the order of any ranking.

But at the end of the day.....the main evidence that I'll give - there's no getting around it if we're going to use logic - is the fact that all the evidences for God that will be given, are "CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE."

Cumulative evidence(s) reinforces one another (evidences) thereby producing an effect stronger than any part by itself.
It's synonymous with, "corroborative evidence," which confirms, or adds to previous evidence.


So, after I'd given several evidences for the existence of God.....the last evidence I'd put on your doorstep will be the "package" that contains all the evidences as a whole.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/232358-there-god-w-262-890-a.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not all criminal cases are slam dunk! So many were convicted due to circumstantial evidences that when used as a whole, had become
THE evidence...... without reasonable doubt.

 

 

When you have evidence(s) to support your opinion (especially when what you have are cumulative evidence),

and there's no evidence at all to disprove it.....

.................................it becomes more than just an opinion.

 

 

 

 

Quote

I would have thought you would care about it a great deal.

 

I do.  That's why I say who cares about opinion?  Opinion, just by itself, is worth nothing in a discussion.  You can't use it as an argument.

 

Look at the poster who brought up Dawkins' opinion (neatly compiled in a book)  - which was laughed at and ridiculed by his peers. 

Dawkins couldn't even defend his own book when challenged by William Lane Craig.  Dawkins ducked and dodged, and ran away!  Even Christopher Hitchens mocked him.  Dawkins was called a coward, to say the least. 

If he wouldn't stand behind his own book, and instead of defending it he opted to leave it at the mercy of Craig to be shredded page by page........Dawkins knew he cannot defend it, even if he tried!  He knew he'd be humiliated on-stage!   Because he knew what he wrote was just full of bs, designed for the consumption of his gullible and ignorant, angry  anti-God followers.

 

 

Edited December 9, 2016 by betsy

[Guest]

3 hours ago, betsy said:

 

Only if  someone can't fathom the significance of, and  ignore the cumulative evidences that support the existence of God - and that the God of Creation is the Christian God. 

That's a lot of work, Betsy, so I'm reluctant to dismiss it, (But as a Christian defending her faith, it's better than being fed to the lions, right?) but if it wasn't all just opinion we'd all believe in God.  That the evidence points to a God, is just opinion.

Edited December 9, 2016 by bcsapper

[carepov]

16 hours ago, dre said:

Oh yeah ok thats better. I wouldn't use the word "god" though. Once you ditch all the human mythology garbage you are really just talking about a "higher power"... an extraterrestrial that is more powerful than us.

And yes... that is comparable to the belief in extraterrestrials, and I actually do believe there's a good chance there are extraterrestrials out there that humans would believe were a higher power. I don't "believe" in them, but I don't think its impossible. Based on the sheer number of solar systems, I think its quite plausible that there a thousands of life forms more powerful than us just in this one galaxy.

You are talking about something more like deism, as opposed to the made up fake personal gods believed in by Abrahamic skygod cults. I have always found deism to be a bit more reasonable. 

Correct me if I am wrong but we seem to at agree that:

-Faith and reason can co-exist
-Non-religious people can have faith (evidence-free beliefs)

I do take issue with terms such as "made up fake personal gods believed in by Abrahamic skygod cults" but perhaps it is related to some other inane exchange of posts.

Getting back to the ideas in the OP, do you agree that making a life-long commitment to stay with a partner can be an act of faith?  Think especially of people that say: "the first time that I laid eyes on Pat, I knew that we would be together for the rest of our lives."  If this is not faith I don't know what is. Besides why do we say that to not cheating on someone is to be faithful?

[The_Squid]

13 minutes ago, carepov said:

Correct me if I am wrong but we seem to at agree that:

-Faith and reason can co-exist
-Non-religious people can have faith (evidence-free beliefs)

Faith is not a reasonable position.  

 

Quote

Think especially of people that say: "the first time that I laid eyes on Pat, I knew that we would be together for the rest of our lives."  If this is not faith I don't know what is. Besides why do we say that to not cheating on someone is to be faithful?

I would say that's faith.  I never argued that no one has faith in anything.  I think I argued that I didn't, and that often wat people call faith isn't actually faith at all.

i would agree this example is faith.  I don't think it's a very intelligent t statement.  It's probably just a platitude.  Possibly some confirmation bias in there too....

[carepov]

12 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

Faith is not a reasonable position.  

I disagree.  A well balanced life is a mixture of faith and reason.  For reasons of efficiency some things are best left to faith.

15 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

I would say that's faith.  I never argued that no one has faith in anything.  I think I argued that I didn't, and that often wat people call faith isn't actually faith at all.

Perhaps, but I argue that what some people like the OP call "living a faithless life" is untrue and many things are faith even though we do not recognize it as such.  We could both be right.

19 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

i would agree this example is faith.  I don't think it's a very intelligent t statement.  It's probably just a platitude.  Possibly some confirmation bias in there too....

Perhaps, but surely for some people this has led to a very happy and successful life.  Surely for some people taking such a leap of faith was a reasonable course of action.

[The_Squid]

34 minutes ago, carepov said:

I disagree.  A well balanced life is a mixture of faith and reason.  For reasons of efficiency some things are best left to faith.

I don't take anything on faith....    are you one of those people who believe everyone has faith in something?

Quote

Perhaps, but I argue that what some people like the OP call "living a faithless life" is untrue and many things are faith even though we do not recognize it as such.  We could both be right.

Some people don't worry about evidence, or facts...  some people live by reason...  and some call things faith when they're actually not.

Quote

Perhaps, but surely for some people this has led to a very happy and successful life.  Surely for some people taking such a leap of faith was a reasonable course of action.

Sure...  and some people believe outrageous things that can be harmful when you take things on faith.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/stephan-lovett-couture-trial-necessaries-of-life-charge-1.3557437

Quote

A Calgary mother whose son died after she treated his meningitis and strep infection with dandelion tea and oil of oregano is just the latest case to surface in Alberta of parents charged with "failing to provide the necessaries of life."

 

Edited December 9, 2016 by The_Squid

[dre]

4 hours ago, carepov said:

Correct me if I am wrong but we seem to at agree that:-

It can but its hard, and reason crowds faith out. Western abrahamites for example are constantly having to give up more and more religion, and take their holy books less and less literally. Many of them now believe in evolution, but reconcile that with the idea that "god kicked off the process". This is totally at odds with whats in holy books. 

As soon as a country gets educated and industrialized religion starts to die. People will still answer on a survey that they are religious, but most of them dont attend church or prey, and they treat more and more of the bible as allegorical. Science has enlightened them, and many biblical beliefs sound do silly in today's world that they have to constantly retreat.

Quote

Getting back to the ideas in the OP, do you agree that making a life-long commitment to stay with a partner can be an act of faith?  Think especially of people that say: "the first time that I laid eyes on Pat, I knew that we would be together for the rest of our lives."  If this is not faith I don't know what is. Besides why do we say that to not cheating on someone is to be faithful?

I describe that more as hope. If they claim they "KNOW" then yes its faith and its misplaced. Most of those peoples marriages will fail. Its also "love" which is an emotion not faith. And love often DOES conflict with reason, and cause you to make bad choices. But as I said before that's hardwired into our brains. We aren't entirely rational creatures. 

Edited December 9, 2016 by dre

[betsy]

 

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

 but if it wasn't all just opinion we'd all believe in God. 

 

Not necessarily. 

 

How do you make an opinion worthy of consideration, or even  factual?

As science had humbly admitted, and  explained:

 

Quote

"Science is not the only way of acquiring knowledge about ourselves and the world around us. Humans gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection, and religious experience.

Scientific knowledge may enrich aesthetic and moral perceptions, but these subjects extend beyond science's realm, which is to obtain a better understanding of the natural world."

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/site/faq.html

 

It involves consideration of so many things (from different areas of science, philosophical viewpoint, etc. and all those given as evidence).........and mostly relies on critical thinking.

  One can also be obstinate, or in denial, or limited and  incapable of deeper reflections .....

 

 

.........so, it depends on the individual.   

Edited December 9, 2016 by betsy

[carepov]

1 hour ago, The_Squid said:

I don't take anything on faith....    are you one of those people who believe everyone has faith in something?

Some people don't worry about evidence, or facts...  some people live by reason...  and some call things faith when they're actually not.

Sure...  and some people believe outrageous things that can be harmful when you take things on faith.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/stephan-lovett-couture-trial-necessaries-of-life-charge-1.3557437

 

I strongly believe that everyone is different and I almost never say "everyone...."

Clearly I see "faith" differently than you.  Faith is a virtue like any other, if taken too far it can be disastrous like in your example.  However, IMO if one lacks faith then it similar to lacking confidence or trust or having excessive skepticism or doubt, one risks missing out on opportunities and perhaps can lead to excessive pondering and indecisiveness.

Do you believe in human rights?
Do you think that "all men are created equal"?
What is the purpose of (your) life?

I think that these are questions of faith.  A major influence of my thinking of this subject is from the book "Sapiens" by Yuval Harari here are some excerpts and key points:

http://www.ynharari.com/power-and-imagination/articles/the-most-important-things-in-the-world-exist-only-in-our-imagination/

http://hinessight.blogs.com/church_of_the_churchless/2015/07/imagined-orders-like-religions-depend-on-shaky-myths.html

 

[Benz]

I do not see this topics about a evidence/proof vs religion / faith thing.

I rather see this as the needed level of understing things in order to use them.

You do not need to understand how a motor works, if you want to drive a car. You do not need to understand how the aqueduc system works when you take water and use toilet. You do not need to know how to program a software if you play a game. But someday, for some reasons, you might need to know. Then the evidences and proofs are more useful than faith. Because you can do something out of it and pursuit or improve your understanding. While the faith is just another way to say "I do not know why, but this is how it works, don't ask!". Faith is not improving anything in science, technology or ingineering.

Sure one individual can function in society just with faith but, you cannot improve much or challenge anything. You are then just a plain user.

Edited December 9, 2016 by Benz

[carepov]

1 hour ago, dre said:

It can but its hard, and reason crowds faith out. Western abrahamites for example are constantly having to give up more and more religion, and take their holy books less and less literally. Many of them now believe in evolution, but reconcile that with the idea that "god kicked off the process". This is totally at odds with whats in holy books. 

As soon as a country gets educated and industrialized religion starts to die. People will still answer on a survey that they are religious, but most of them dont attend church or prey, and they treat more and more of the bible as allegorical. Science has enlightened them, and many biblical beliefs sound do silly in today's world that they have to constantly retreat.

I describe that more as hope. If they claim they "KNOW" then yes its faith and its misplaced. Most of those peoples marriages will fail. Its also "love" which is an emotion not faith. And love often DOES conflict with reason, and cause you to make bad choices. But as I said before that's hardwired into our brains. We aren't entirely rational creatures. 

We surely both agree that like ideological zealots, religious literalists are mentally retarded and that we should put aside.  There are are a significant number of successful, intelligent, progressive and rational religious people -some at the top of their scientific or other professional fields.  I am interested in these people and I take issue with the two groups being lumped together.

I disagree that reason is crowding out religious faith.  In the west religious faith is declining but it is not clear to me that reason is increasing.

IMO, faith got crowded out by shopping and football.  People no longer join religious groups because:
1. Individuals are way better off now and better able to comfortably survive without relying on community support
2. There are so many more options of things to do during leisure time (shopping and football)
3. The snowball effect of the above two reasons: working hours are 24/7 and there is less peer pressure to attend religious services