10-12-06, 01:35 PM #401
I'll give you a counter example. South Korea's education system puts more importance on English and Chinese characters than Korean. But meet any Korean today, and they still know Korean perfectly fluently. I am one of those.
If every kid is taught about religions objectively, it can enhance their understanding of their own religion, how it has historically impacted other religions and other peoples.
REligion should only be taught in school as objective and only if it is inclusive all major world religions. Intelligent design is not science; it should not be taught in science class.
a "Higher power" is involved in intelligent design and that already makes it non-science.
10-12-06, 01:55 PM #402
10-12-06, 06:45 PM #403
Maybe, why so insecure about that? It's just as it was before you were born.
I'm just saying there is no afterlife. Every cell in your brain dissipates like a rain cloud.]
10-12-06, 07:02 PM #404
And this still is just your world view
10-12-06, 07:14 PM #405
On the subject of meaninglessness, I don't see where fantasy or delusion fills that void. As the man said whose name I have forgotten "I look forward to a good lunch this afternoon" - that's meaning. Meaning generated from every day activities which fulfill all of our passions and desires. As far as religion and god go, since there is no evidence to give it any credability at all, I think that is the true definition of meaninglessness. Worship of falsehoods is what is meaningless, not being without belief in them. What this has to do with your assumption as to why I post on these forums, I don't know.
By far the most likely one. Unless of course someone comes forward with any proof at all that the individual is immortal. I don't think anyone is going to come forward with proof of the celestial teapot either...
10-12-06, 07:18 PM #406
10-12-06, 07:38 PM #407
10-12-06, 07:48 PM #408
After an exaustive investigation and support for explanations with far more evidence and predictive power, we declare an absence of evidence sufficient for claiming the non-existence of the searched-for entity.
10-12-06, 07:49 PM #409
10-12-06, 07:53 PM #410
10-12-06, 07:59 PM #411
10-12-06, 10:26 PM #412
This is, of course, rediculous. A creator of the universe that had a real existence and had a real effect on the universe would be evident given the current level of detail in which we can examine the universe.
BG 10.42: But what need is there, Arjuna, for all this detailed knowledge? With a single fragment of Myself I pervade and support this entire universe.
..... seems to suggest otherwise
If you insist that you can perceive god but the best minds of science cannot, then you must be considered delusional.
Either your god is real, and has a real effect on the cosmos that can be measured, or you are claiming that you can percieve the invisible non-effect of a non-effective entity. This would be delusion, would it not?
10-13-06, 09:08 AM #413
10-13-06, 04:25 PM #414
All I will say is that it's a good thing that the presence or absence of a god is not the basis for any human endeavor of substance that requires an actual result.
I'm glad the truth of god is not required to:
-Save human lives
-Advance toward a more equitable and just society
-Develop the technology that makes your internet experience possible
What use is god anyway? What predictions can you make that either help or hinder humanity?
Can you use god to warn of a hurricanes approach?
Can reliably save lives by praying?
New thread time.
10-13-06, 05:28 PM #415
the confirmation of god's existence comes through participating in actual religion
BG 9.2: This knowledge is the king of education, the most secret of all secrets. It is the purest knowledge, and because it gives direct perception of the self by realization, it is the perfection of religion. It is everlasting, and it is joyfully performed.
Guessing god may exist by material observation is merely a means to enable one to take to the process of religion with confidence
10-13-06, 05:30 PM #416
Interesting circular argument. Don't you get dizzy doing that?
10-13-06, 07:22 PM #417
10-13-06, 07:25 PM #418
Only provided that they are actually operating out of a religion in the first place
On the contrary it helps for the scientific unless you want to propose that purpose and structure are not interelated
Last edited by falcon22; 10-13-06 at 07:48 PM.
10-13-06, 07:30 PM #419
10-13-06, 07:46 PM #420
Does emotion make a text any less credible? Emotion is not what diminishes the credibility of a text; lack of evidence and lack of logic is what makesit less credible.
Your logic that because my response is emotional, it is not to be taken seriously, is a falliable logic because everything has emotions and if we go according to your logic, then everything should not be taken seriously and you damn well know that that's not the case in reality.