How many people here believe in God, Heaven and angels, Hell and Satan and his demons

[photon]

Science itself isn't faith, but it also hasn't proven anything either. (In regards to the origins of life.)

Again I don't like the word proof. There's been some evidence with respect to different hypothesis of abiogenesis, some of which has already been provided here. So it's not like there's nothing.

But there is no good single theory (theory in the scientific sense of the word) of abiogenesis yet. That's why I won't make any specific claims about abiogenesis yet.

I would lean more towards a natural explanation of abiogenesis, but that's just based on the history of what's observed.

If you find a hoof print in your yard, it could be a horse, a zebra, or a unicorn. Would you agree that while you cannot be SURE of what created it, you can probably assign some probabilities based on previous knowledge.


Don't you think that science will one day figure out how earth developed life?I think we'll figure out how it might have happened; come up with one or more methods that demonstrate it could have happened naturally resulting in life with our chemistry. I don't know if we'll be able to be very sure though, molecules don't make fossils, and oxygen may have long removed any chemical signatures. Plus if the process is very low probability, it may not be reproducible in practice in a lab.

Given long enough and gathering info from other planets with life will add information to the question (or lack of life on other planets).

So I asked you before, what are you are saying what exactly? That God started life and then all the forms of life we see evolved from there? What happens if in 10 years they completely reproduce a natural process which leads to life that looks just like ours?

[Finny61]

Faith is belief without evidence, so no, it's not faith in science. Unless you are using a different definition of faith.

Faith to me isn't belief without evidence, something you can't prove certainly.. but in theory. If you were driving to Edmonton for some reason, I would have faith that you could get there safely if I felt you were a capable driver, something could feasibly happen it's not certain but based on what little I know I take faith that you would arrive safely. There is evidence, just very little. With say God, there is a great deal of historical ties to us as people that seems to show there very well could be something outside of our logical realms because it's so entrenched in humans for so long.

In religion faith is certainly without proof but through human history (cultural) you can likely put that fraction of what we know happened and say yes there is some possibility but very difficult to just outright assume as 100% truth. Obviously some religious tellings will seem extremely false due to advances in science and I agree with a lot of those but the human aspect of religion is something science can't touch, whether someone really existed or whether there is something over and above us all.

[photon]

Faith to me isn't belief without evidence, something you can't prove certainly.. but in theory. If you were driving to Edmonton for some reason, I would have faith that you could get there safely if I felt you were a capable driver, something could feasibly happen it's not certain but based on what little I know I take faith that you would arrive safely. There is evidence, just very little.

I see what you mean, and that's a valid definition of faith, I just find it problematic to use it that way in a religious context, since in the driving example faith is synonymous with trust or confidence, but in a religious context I think faith means something different than just trust.

"Take something on faith." is a good example of what I mean.

In the example of having faith in science vs faith in God however they are not synonymous, since the "faith" I place in science is confidence based on a long detailed demonstrable history, while faith in God is different.

(I'm not denying that the strength of that faith or trust or confidence is weaker, it's just derived from very different sources)

With say God, there is a great deal of historical ties to us as people that seems to show there very well could be something outside of our logical realms.

That's the sentiment, I agree. Personally though I found that once I started to really examine that critically and objectively, that much of it wasn't based on anything substantive.


In religion faith is certainly without proof but through human history (cultural) you can likely put that fraction of what we know happened and say yes there is some possibility but very difficult to just outright assume as 100% truth. Obviously some religious tellings will seem extremely false due to advances in science and I agree with a lot of those but the human aspect of religion is something science can't touch, whether someone really existed or whether there is something over and above us all.

I agree, without omniscience it's impossible to say 100% anything. But anything that impacts the natural world is something science can touch (in principle anyway) and speak to.

For example the claim that Jesus physically existed and is a descendant of David is something that science could at least potentially address. Without access to DNA or something like that though there's no way to tell.. but not because science can't touch it, just because there's no evidence.

Same thing with God.. while science can't detect God, science can't actually detect anything directly! Science can only detect the effects something makes on something else. So science can't detect God directly, but there are specific claims made about specific gods that are testable. Studies about healing, or studies about the quality of life of believers, that sort of thing. That all depends on the definition of god(s) being used.

[Finny61]

I agree go figure you and I always seem to butt heads, must be something in the water. But yeah faith on the religion side is a bit different because with say you driving somewhere I can use some various statistics to determine some chances but with believe in God there isn't statistics just cultural history to go from.

[evilcougar]

Okay, I'm going to jump all over you for this statement, evilcougar.

I don't think you've thought about this very long or hard, or if you have, you haven't come to reasonable conclusions. Your two statements are mutually exclusive and cannot both be true at the same time.

If 'everything happens for a reason' then it absolutely cannot follow that 'you are what you make of yourself' because you have no control over the events that you experience or even create for yourself. Since all (or almost all) of your actions are going to impact others - and yourself - and 'everything happens for a reason' then you don't have any control whatsoever over yourself, because all of your actions are part of this 'higher-purpose', this reason driven existence.

I think what's going on here is that, like a lot of people - particularly those raised by the faithful - you have a difficult time accepting the idea that there might not be a reason for events. If bad things happen, or even good things, it can be difficult not to ascribe special importance to them. If someone survives a damaging experience (and we all have) they are likely to try to find a way to explain why that happened to them, in order to be able to deal with whatever it was that occurred.

Like many people, you want to believe that we (and by extension yourself) are "special", that there is a grand scheme of things and that you are an essential cog in it, however minute. The fact of the matter is, however, that if there IS a grand scheme of things and that you are a cog in it, it strips your life of meaning instead of imbuing it.

If everything does, in fact, happen for a reason - then there is no reason for you to make any choice over any other choice - because whatever you choose was intended to happen. There's no reason to get up in the morning, or even to behave in a moral sense (other than the direct and personal reasons that you will get bed-sores, or will go to jail), if everything happens for a reason, there is no "higher" reason for you NOT to kill your whole family the next time you see them, because if you do, there is obviously a higher reason for you to do so (since everything happens for a reason, and you killing them would then become "something that happened" it must have happened for a reason).

To sum up, the phrase "everything happens for a reason" is a philosophically vapid statement and an intellectually dishonest way to think, unless you honestly believe you're nothing more than a helplessly operating cog in a vast machine OR you believe in an omniscient creator-god who directly involved themselves with their creation, and somehow managed to imbue it with free-will.

Fair enough. And you're right. I guess i just think that because everything happens for a reason, when things happen to you, which you can't control, only you can control how you deal with it and how you handle it, which is why i say you are what you make of yourself.
I don't know if that makes anymore sense. It does in my head, however, i AM a woman. So...

[Thor]

Fair enough. And you're right. I guess i just think that because everything happens for a reason, when things happen to you, which you can't control, only you can control how you deal with it and how you handle it, which is why i say you are what you make of yourself.
I don't know if that makes anymore sense. It does in my head, however, i AM a woman. So...

I honestly can sympathize, my sister, a long time Atheist says the same thigns all the time, destiny, 'meant to be' stuff.... She even believes in ghosts.

I'm at a early point in my learning of neuroscience, but already I've seen that there may eventually be something to explain why women are way more likely to believe in these things, besides the obvious, religion, spirituality, alternative medicine, psychics, mediums, etc...

Sam Harris is currently doing lots of great fMRI research on belief/non belief and is part of the many researching why we believe what we believe.

Either way, what you believe, its really no big deal. I know during these debates we sometimes get a bit 'mean' but really its nothing personal, everything I've debated here on a website I've said to friends and family. Its just that online words seem more mean than they are intended to be.

I bet this reply was 'meant to be' :D:D

[RT14]

Not having read any of this thread yet and spending 5 minutes perusing the poll options, I found myself unable to choose anything.

I don't understand how in this day and age one can "believe", which by my definition means believe to be true, as in, anything opposed would be untrue. There is just so much that is being discovered in the science community that disproves so many religious beliefs it's pretty much impossible to take the bible or any religious writings as factual. At the same time, there are so many things that had to go absolutely perfect for the human species to come out on top on our little speck of dust called Earth that it's hard to think there isn't some guidance or higher power looking out for us humans. However, I said hard to believe, not impossible. It's entirely possible it's all coincidence. With the billions if not trillions number of stars and incalculable number of planets out there, it's bound to happen here and there, but that's another topic all together.

Looking at my own life experiences though, there are a lot of incidences where a split second or inch of difference could have resulted in me not being here today and looking back at everything, again, it's hard not to think that maybe, just maybe, there is some higher power that has a slight influence on the time/space continuum, or something like that. But again, it could all be coincidence.

The thing is, anything is possible. The only things we know for certainty is what science has proven and is proving today. If there is a god, science will one day prove it and at that time he/she/it will have my full belief. Right now, I don't believe or disbelieve in "god" per se, but I'm open minded enough to think it's possible while waiting for science to enlighten me on what can honestly be believed in.

[evilcougar]

I honestly can sympathize, my sister, a long time Atheist says the same thigns all the time, destiny, 'meant to be' stuff.... She even believes in ghosts.

I'm at a early point in my learning of neuroscience, but already I've seen that there may eventually be something to explain why women are way more likely to believe in these things, besides the obvious, religion, spirituality, alternative medicine, psychics, mediums, etc...

Sam Harris is currently doing lots of great fMRI research on belief/non belief and is part of the many researching why we believe what we believe.

Either way, what you believe, its really no big deal. I know during these debates we sometimes get a bit 'mean' but really its nothing personal, everything I've debated here on a website I've said to friends and family. Its just that online words seem more mean than they are intended to be.

I bet this reply was 'meant to be' :D:D

Yes, i've noticed these debates can get a bit mean, however, i'm really impressed with this thread so far. No one has cut anyone down for anything. Everyone just has an interesting opinion, and it's cool to read them.
These just happen to be my beliefs....and i don't know about the whole "meant to be" thing, i just think everything has a purpose.
Anywho...heading to banff now. Have a good day all!

[photon]

However, I said hard to believe, not impossible. It's entirely possible it's all coincidence. With the billions if not trillions number of stars and incalculable number of planets out there, it's bound to happen here and there, but that's another topic all together.

I think it's relevant to what you are saying actually. You say coincidence, but really what's the coincidence? If life is at all possible, as you say given the # of stars and galaxies, it will happen. Once started, evolution shows that life will adapt and thrive in its environment. Given that it's possible, it's guaranteed to happen, basic probability.

Looking at my own life experiences though, there are a lot of incidences where a split second or inch of difference could have resulted in me not being here today and looking back at everything, again, it's hard not to think that maybe, just maybe, there is some higher power that has a slight influence on the time/space continuum, or something like that. But again, it could all be coincidence.

Looking back at all the possible places where things that have come out in just such way that you are still here is again an artifact of probability, not an indication of a higher power. Our brains want to see patterns, and our brains want to see reasons for things, but we don't intuitively understand probabilities or very large numbers, so we fill in other things.

If you had died in one of the close calls, then you wouldn't be able to look back say "wow, look at all the close calls, someone's looking out for me".

Look at it this way, lets say I take 20 of my son's transformers. For each one I flip a coin, heads it lives tails it dies. Do that once for each, I'll have 10 left (or so). Do it again, I'll have 5 left. Keep going until I have one left. The one that is left will marvel at its fortune, it survived so many close calls in its life where it could have easily died, some supernatural power must be looking out for it. But nothing is statistically wrong with what just happened, nothing supernatural.

The mistake is the surviving transformer is looking at it from their own point of view and the improbability, rather than the whole.

Plus, if there is a power with influence that is changing things to your benefit, the question then becomes why you? Why do you merit these small tweakings to save your life when others do not? Really how can I honestly think that a power helped me narrowly avoid a car accident when during the time it took you to read this post, two or thee children died of starvation somewhere in this world. Why am I so deserving?

since we are having this discussion, I'll post this link here that was just sent to me by a business colleague.
Interesting stats or fear mongering?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU

That video is just sad on so many levels.

[octothorp]

Not having read any of this thread yet and spending 5 minutes perusing the poll options, I found myself unable to choose anything.

I don't understand how in this day and age one can "believe", which by my definition means believe to be true, as in, anything opposed would be untrue. There is just so much that is being discovered in the science community that disproves so many religious beliefs it's pretty much impossible to take the bible or any religious writings as factual. At the same time, there are so many things that had to go absolutely perfect for the human species to come out on top on our little speck of dust called Earth that it's hard to think there isn't some guidance or higher power looking out for us humans. However, I said hard to believe, not impossible. It's entirely possible it's all coincidence. With the billions if not trillions number of stars and incalculable number of planets out there, it's bound to happen here and there, but that's another topic all together.

Looking at my own life experiences though, there are a lot of incidences where a split second or inch of difference could have resulted in me not being here today and looking back at everything, again, it's hard not to think that maybe, just maybe, there is some higher power that has a slight influence on the time/space continuum, or something like that. But again, it could all be coincidence.

The thing is, anything is possible. The only things we know for certainty is what science has proven and is proving today. If there is a god, science will one day prove it and at that time he/she/it will have my full belief. Right now, I don't believe or disbelieve in "god" per se, but I'm open minded enough to think it's possible while waiting for science to enlighten me on what can honestly be believed in.

So you're what's called a weak agnostic or empirical agnostic, which is a pretty interesting viewpoint. I think that a lot of people look at the same evidence that you cite and say, "I can't know anything for certain, but here's what I'm going to believe, even though it might be wrong." Whereas you chose, if I understand you correctly, not to believe or disbelieve out of concern that whatever you choose may someday be disproved.

I think that increasingly, more and more people are various forms of agnostic: agnostic theists who feel that they have no evidence for the existence of god, and yet choose to believe; agnostic atheists who have no evidence for or against the existence of god, but choose to disbelieve; apethetic atheists who feel that the lack of any evidence for god means that he has no empirical impact on us so the question is completely pointless; strong agnostics who believe that the existance of god can never be known or understood.

[onetwo_threefour]

There are many situations where it is getting more and more uncomfortable to see the reactions that happen when you mention what you believe, whether or not that was a topic you brought up or not. In some situations, people become actively hostile to anyone that reveals their beliefs (at least the ones that they disagree with). While I understand that many Atheists and members of other religions have felt that same feeling, this is a situation that Christians are feeling more and more on an ongoing basis. Remember, those that are Religious believe they are in the minority, and those that are Atheists also believe they are in the minority as well.


To give an example of your question, in particular this is the case in school - both grade school, and especially university.

This may have already been said, because I have not finished reading the thread yet, but wanted to respond to this post.

Welcome to being an atheist for the past couple thousand years or better brother. You feel slightly uncomfortable in sharing your beliefs in public? How about having to hide your atheism so you can hold public office. How about being belittled for disbelief. That is and has been atheism for an awful long time.

[MarchHare]

This may have already been said, because I have not finished reading the thread yet, but wanted to respond to this post.

Welcome to being an atheist for the past couple thousand years or better brother. You feel slightly uncomfortable in sharing your beliefs in public? How about having to hide your atheism so you can hold public office. How about being belittled for disbelief. That is and has been atheism for an awful long time.

I always chuckle whenever I hear a Christian living in the Western World claim that they feel like some kind of persecuted minority. There was a time when that was indeed the case...but that hasn't been true for, oh, 1700 years or so.

A question for the atheists here: since many of us come from religious families and were raised in the faith, how did you explain your atheism to your parents? I'm sure this analogy isn't entirely accurate, but for me it felt like what I imagine a homosexual goes through when he or she "comes out" when I told my parents that I no longer believed in God and would not be attending church services with them anymore. Needless to say, it took them awhile to get over it. My father is more understanding, but it's been over a decade and my mother still hasn't fully come to terms with it.

[photon]

Well I wouldn't say I'm an atheist, at least not a full time one. :)

But here's my experience.. my parents more recently have changed their views on things, less fully engaged in the Word Faith movement.

So one day they were over and my sister was too, and we were having a discussion about religion and doctrine and stuff, I have to really watch what I say, I don't want to lie about what I think, but I don't want to upset my parents either.

Anyway, my sister was actually leading the conversation criticizing lots of the practices of the modern church, how lots of things that are done are not biblical, etc.. the discussion got detailed and I floated a few trial balloons, pointing out that the particular scripture they were talking about had been changed over time and that the earlier versions meant something different.

Of course this instantly lead to biblical infallibility.. so rather than biting my tongue I pushed a little further and talked about the manuscript tradition of the NT and how changes have been observed, some authorship issues, nothing radical, stuff anyone who's gone to seminary will have been taught in a historical-critical class about the Bible. Every pastor knows this stuff.

Anyway by that point my mom was visibly upset, here both her kids were being far more liberal about religion than she had ever taught them. I let off at that point. Later she was fine and even said she enjoyed when we all had conversations like that, but I haven't been controversial since.

If I flat out told her that I was at best a deist and at worst a pantheist or even agnostic atheist, I'm really not sure what would happen. My dad would be ok with it I think, disappointed but he'd be ok.. but my Mom, I really don't know.

At this stage, I would much rather have my son know his Grandma and have access to her than have her disown me. I don't know what I'll do when he gets old enough for it to become a serious topic of discussion between them.

I have spoken with a number of people in the same boat, they can't be honest about their beliefs to their family. Or ones that have and have had significant changes in the relationships.

That's very sad. :(

[FireFly]

I have spoken with a number of people in the same boat, they can't be honest about their beliefs to their family. Or ones that have and have had significant changes in the relationships.

That's very sad. :(

It's quite sad, and not at all Christian, actually. The number one tenant of the faith is LOVE. Regardless of who it is, from a stranger begging change to your children, you're supposed to love everyone. Perhaps you should remind them of that. :)

[onetwo_threefour]

A question for the atheists here: since many of us come from religious families and were raised in the faith, how did you explain your atheism to your parents? I'm sure this analogy isn't entirely accurate, but for me it felt like what I imagine a homosexual goes through when he or she "comes out" when I told my parents that I no longer believed in God and would not be attending church services with them anymore. Needless to say, it took them awhile to get over it. My father is more understanding, but it's been over a decade and my mother still hasn't fully come to terms with it.


Interestingly, my mother probably figures it's her own fault. She grew up in a strongly religious family, but her mom died after a protracted illness when my mom was sixteen. That really shook my mother's own faith. My sister was born just before my mom turned eighteen and I was born just after she turned twenty, a year and sixteen days apart. For our sakes, my mother decided to try and raise us in the Catholic church, but my dad has always been pretty non-religious. They ended up splitting up by the time I was five and my mom seemed to kind of lapse again. At the same time, I was a pretty smart kid and avid reader and my mom encouraged me strongly to question everything, and she didn't chide me for asking hard questions about religion to her, our priest, or anyone else. By the time I was about eight or nine I had pretty much decided that the church didn't have any satisfying answers. After dabbling in high school with other philosophies and even another Christian sects I came away convinced that there is no good reason to believe in any supernatural agency in our lives. With a critical eye, I have observed the back and forth arguments over the years, which have literally exploded on the internet, and no religious argument has ever satisfied, while the secular/agnostic/atheist arguments have a fundamentally coherent sense about them.

My mom has gone back and forth on her own religion, but she has never bothered me about my atheism because she knows that it comes from a place of personal reflection and understanding of myself. I think my dad is probably agnostic/atheist anyway and certainly doesn't challenge me on it but our discussions in the area tend to be abstract rather than personal.


It goes back to some of photon's much earlier posts about not wanting to derail the thread by getting into a discussion of belief versus knowledge, but in many ways he is absolutely correct that the distinction is critical to what we are talking about.

In epistemological circles, the question is often discussed as being a distinction between coherentism and foundationalism. Foundationalism requires that you find some base piece of incontrovertible knowledge and develop a logical framework from there to justify making a claim that something is knowledge rather than belief. Its major weakness is that soemone can always challenge the truth claim for the original foundational knowledge leading to an unavoidable infinite regress. On the other hand coherentism says that if we have a bunch of different pieces of evidence, all of which hangs together in a consistent framework to support a truth claim, that should suffice to designate that claim as knowledge rather than just belief. However, the challenge to coherentists is the question, 'If something about how the evidence goes together makes the truth claim stronger, then shouldn't that be a foundational claim itself because it could be applied to different types of evidence or situations." That then leads to the infinite regress of asking what characteristics of a group of coherent evidence makes it worthy of converting a truth claim from belief to knowledge.

In an argument/discussion about religion, we all draw our own lines. I tend to lean towards a coherentist view, in that evidence from various sources that are reliable in other contexts such as physics, math, biology, geology, history, psychology and others paint a coherent picture in which the supernatural element of a god is not necessary. It doesn't mean everything is explained, but to maintain consistency and coherence of my knowledge claims, God is not a useful concept.

A foundationalist might think differently in some respects and focus on one specific idea, such as complexity and decide that that one issue, for which there is no satisfactory explanation in their mind, supports the belief in a supernatural agency.

Neither is necessarily wrong nor right, nor, despite appearances, are they necessarily mutually exclusive. Like atheism, one would be a strong foundationalist and weak coherentist at the same time to some degree for example.

It's a truly fascinating area of philospohy, but definitely steers away from the topic at hand if you get into it.

[photon]

It's quite sad, and not at all Christian, actually. The number one tenant of the faith is LOVE. Regardless of who it is, from a stranger begging change to your children, you're supposed to love everyone. Perhaps you should remind them of that. :)

It's not right, but it is understandable I think.. I mean if my son came up to me at 25 and said he'd discovered the powers of crystals and wanted me to meet the 10,000 year old being he was channeling, my unconditional love would still be there but it would be a lot harder to have a strong relationship.

From her point of view, it's like me rejecting my sister, saying she doesn't exist or that I hate her, only worse... Jesus even commands people to love him more than their families, and to leave their families. Jesus wasn't particularly pro-family, so the "that isn't Christian" line might not work with all believers, depending on how well they know scripture and how fervent they are. It would probably influence my parents though.

Maybe I'm being too cautions (something I am prone to do), but I know my mom's ability to hold grudges, and I don't want that directed at me lol.

[Antithesis]

A question for the atheists here: since many of us come from religious families and were raised in the faith, how did you explain your atheism to your parents?

In my specific case, I was brought up Roman Catholic where my Mom was the churchgoer and my Dad just never went. To be honest, I have no idea which side of the fence my Dad is on regarding religion and belief because we've actually never had the discussion which leads me to believe he's an apathetic agnostic :)

The closest my Mom and I have ever come to a discussion about belief is when, in the course of a normal conversation, we moved to a discussion of faith and religion and the hypocrisy we see in some specific so-called Christians in our lives. She explained she'd been moving away from church-based practice of faith (a bad experience with the church regarding her divorce) to a more personal practice, while I explained that I had moved in that direction too and no longer considered myself a Christian but rather 'spiritual' if that makes sense.

Very non-dramatic but I knew it would be, my parents are very accepting of things. Now I'm curious about my Dad's beliefs but of course I'm not going to ask!

[Hemi-Cuda]

both my parents were/are agnostic, they believed that there was some supernatural force in the universe that has a hand in how things play out, but they didn't believe in God as the bible put it and they wanted nothing to do with the church (despite my mom growing up catholic and my dad christian). religion simply wasn't talked about at all when my brother and i were kids, i believed in God the same way as Santa Clause or the easter bunny, a fairytale that kids were supposed to grow out of. it baffled me when i got older to see people who actually believed in God and who took the bible literally, in my mind they were the same as people who believed in UFO's and Bigfoot

probably explains why i'm not exactly good at dealing with religious people