The Official Religion of Sciforums?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by kx000, Apr 30, 2012.

  1. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    To be fair no religion has made God pleased enough to reveal himself. So in terms of science how can we make God happy enough to reveal himself?

    I guess the first thing would be what is God like? How did his existence begin? Did it begin? How would he be if he were a human? Did we all come from him? If so, then we can take a global census on each persons morality to see if he is more hot, or more cold. If he is hot then we can assume to make him happy we would have to be kind and fair to one another.

    Can we here on Sciforums establish a scientific religion of God?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Please don't involve science in your deliberations, most concepts of God cannot be falsified. There is no evidence of a God, and plenty of evidence that certain Gods are very probably untrue. Since you don't know God's nature, you can't know what would please him. He could be a sociopath and enjoy it when you murder people. He could not care about people at all and favors deep sea diatoms. There is simply no way to tell.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Use common sense. What is the norm of mankind?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    That's just an appeal to common mythologies. I'm sure people like Deepak Chopra will indulge in such things, but I don't find any connection there to anything real. What's the norm for mankind may have nothing to do with God.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2012
  8. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Ok. Then theres two common ideas of God. A. all powerful creator, or B. a supreme being. If its A then he is most likely good being that he created us in his image. If its B then odds are he would be like us somehow.
     
  9. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    I don't see how those follow from your premises.
     
  10. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575

    brilliant!!
    spider, do try to keep up

    /snort
     
  11. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    God is myth. Religion is superstition. That's a scientific appraisal of religion. The rest of what you posted makes no sense.
     
  12. Xotica Everyday I’m Shufflin Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    456
  13. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    Cool tune, Xotica. Finally some centering to these manic threads.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Whats wrong with trying to come up with a religion that moves humans forward? If we can't come up with one, then we all tried...
     
  15. Buddha12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,862
    What's wrong with a government that is elected by everyone to move us forward? That way everyone votes on who we want to represent us and what we all would think is "forward" not just a few who want to tell us which way to go. By insuring that everyone can vote, we insure that not just one person or one ideology can lead us but a consensus is needed by everyone as to which direction is better for us.
     
  16. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    whats wrong with rethinking both religion AND government?

    they both have screwed everything up..
     
  17. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    A lot of people don't vote. A lot of people who do vote don't really know. That is corrupt. You should have to pass a test on morality, and mental apt to get a vote.
     
  18. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    So have many individuals.
     
  19. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    Most likely it's scientism.

    That assumes that there is something corresponding to the word 'God', that this hypothetical entity possesses psychological states like pleasure, and that its knowability by people like us is a function of whether it's pleased or not.

    We're already begging so many questions, we might as well add one more. I have no idea what might please this hypothetical God, assuming that it can be pleased at all.

    How could a human being possibly know?

    Supposedly there's only one God. Human beings develop their personalities and psychologies socially, by interacting with others of their kind. For God, there's no others of its kind. So God can't possibly be a "person" or have a psychology anything like our own.

    If God exists, then it would presumably be a super space-alien of some kind, utterly inhuman.

    I can't imagine any way for us to do that.
     
  20. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Yazata is out
     
  21. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    The Abrahamists (the only religionists about whose beliefs and customs most of us Westerners know very much) believe that God does not show himself because he wants us to believe in him on the basis of faith rather than evidence.
    Indeed. This is the fatal flaw in all belief systems predicated on divine creation of the universe. The universe, by definition includes "everything that exists." The god described by all religions that I have any understanding of at all is said to have created the universe. Yet this god clearly exists or he would not be able to perform these magnificent feats. And if he exists, also by definition he is part of the universe.

    So the creation myth fails to be believable (or even comprehensible) by one of the bonehead rules of Logic 101A: The Fallacy Of Recursion. Nothing can create itself, because before it comes into existence it's not there to do any creating. Duh!
    Very accurately and succinctly stated. Science is based on evidence. Religion is based on feelings, hunches, stories told by our parents which they got from their parents, and (according to Jung, with his language updated) instincts.
    People have been trying to do that since the Stone Age. Some faith-based belief systems appear to move the species forward, such as Hinduism (perhaps; they haven't always been peace-and-love hippies) and Rastfarianism (it's too new to judge). But the monotheistic religions of Abraham that now dominate the world do just the opposite. By condensing the rich pantheon of the traditional religions into a pathetic one-dimensional scale of good vs. evil, they lose sight of the fact that all religions are based on the same universal archetypes (Jung's term for an image, ritual, idea, legend, etc. that is found in all societies in all eras). So each increasingly large body of followers loses its bond to the followers of the other monotheistic religions, which is why we appear to be headed for a nuclear holy war among Christians, Muslims and Jews, all of whom claim to worship the same god and believe in most of the same prophets.

    If monotheism is the ultimate form of religion, then there's no possible way that it can ever move people forward. The next crusade, jihad, inquisition or world war is always just one or two generations ahead of us.

    The members of each sect think they're just a little bit better than all the other people, so it's their right and duty to show us where we went wrong and rebuild our societies more righteously, at the expense of the loss of our own laws and customs. Even during peacetime they look down on us. During turmoil they positively hate us. And what makes this system suck so bad is that we automatically feel the same way about them because of the way they treat us.
    Nope. The fundamental premise that underlies all science and which has been tested exhaustively for 500 years is that the natural universe is a closed system whose behavior can be predicted by theories derived logically from empirical observation of its present and past behavior.

    The fundamental premise of all religions is that an invisible, illogical supernatural universe exists, from which fantastic creatures and unbelievable forces perturb the behavior of the natural universe at irregular intervals, usually whimsically and often petulantly.

    There is no way that these two premises can be combined into a single belief system.

    Scientists who claim to believe in gods, angels and prophets who rise from the dead are simply practicing cognitive dissonance.
    Obviously you've spent your life in a modern Western or Middle Eastern country where almost the entire population are members of one of the monotheistic Abrahamic religions. In the not-so-distant past (classical Rome, Greece and Egypt, for example), polytheism was the standard belief system. The Jews were the first well-known group to embrace monotheism, and so far it hasn't worked to their advantage. Today there are still traditional religions in Africa. I don't know as much about the other parts of the world where people still live in the Paleolithic or Neolithic Era, but many of the Native Americans had multiple gods before the Christian occupation and slaughter. Perhaps one of our Australian or Kiwi members can tell us about the religions of their native peoples.
     
  22. Buddha12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,862
  23. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    do you count multiverses as 'the' universe?
    M theory and such...

    M theory states that in the other universes the laws of physics are different than our own, IOW everything we know may not apply to the other universes..

    the official religion of sciforums is:
    if i can see it, touch it,smell it,taste it,hear it...it exists..
    otherwise all bets are off..
     

Share This Page