Twitching & Birdwatching0 min ago
Is God An All-Powerful Creator, Alien, Spirit And/or Ghost Or Figment Of One's Imagination Invented By Ancient People Seeking Explanation To Natural Phenomena?
31 Answers
Unlike existence of God which cannot be exhaustively proved to exist, scientific knowledge demands concrete proof & evidence & is open to exhaustive peer reviews in scientific journals, conferences, etc. For example, in the Dark & Middle Ages, the earth was believed to be flat & centre of the Universe. The Pope was the ‘voice of higher authority’ of middle ages interfering with politics, science, laws, life, universe & everything - claiming to be the foundation of all knowledge & authority of morality.
Very often, religion inevitably prescribe/allow misguided practices & ideologies based on flawed, illogical, unfounded interpretation of reality & perceived situations, as well as forcing & coercing others to follow such misguided ideological interpretation. The efficacy of such misguided practice based on flawed, illogical, unfounded interpretation of reality can be dubious.
Phenomena can be scientifically explained, proved & verified, without having to invoke explanations that involve the spiritual world. Invoking the name of God on complex issues (as in the dark ages) can hinder the seeking of explanations & solutions from a scientific & logical standpoint to pressing problems.
Religion should be practised as a matter of private individual faiths & preferences. We are not in the middle ages. Religion does not have to be the ultimate prescription in laws, life, the universe& everything for society.
Britain is a secular society and religion should be practised as a matter of private individual faiths & preferences, not to be regarded as the ultimate prescription in laws, life, the universe & everything for society.
In my opinion, Strict literal interpretation (sanctioning stoning for blasphemy & adultery) of the Old Testament (or Sharia Law, etc), reflects the homophobic, racist, chauvinists’ attitudes of around 3,000 BD to 700 AD. This is counterproductive in the 21st century.
Very often, religion inevitably prescribe/allow misguided practices & ideologies based on flawed, illogical, unfounded interpretation of reality & perceived situations, as well as forcing & coercing others to follow such misguided ideological interpretation. The efficacy of such misguided practice based on flawed, illogical, unfounded interpretation of reality can be dubious.
Phenomena can be scientifically explained, proved & verified, without having to invoke explanations that involve the spiritual world. Invoking the name of God on complex issues (as in the dark ages) can hinder the seeking of explanations & solutions from a scientific & logical standpoint to pressing problems.
Religion should be practised as a matter of private individual faiths & preferences. We are not in the middle ages. Religion does not have to be the ultimate prescription in laws, life, the universe& everything for society.
Britain is a secular society and religion should be practised as a matter of private individual faiths & preferences, not to be regarded as the ultimate prescription in laws, life, the universe & everything for society.
In my opinion, Strict literal interpretation (sanctioning stoning for blasphemy & adultery) of the Old Testament (or Sharia Law, etc), reflects the homophobic, racist, chauvinists’ attitudes of around 3,000 BD to 700 AD. This is counterproductive in the 21st century.
Answers
It's an invention by the wide boys at the top to terrify the masses into submission. In the most primitive societies the religious agent is always THE top dog but over time power has to be shared with others, mainly due to the rise of martial matters and then royalty etc. But, as with our own "advanced" society, they always remain near the top of the pile.....
19:31 Sun 30th Jul 2017
Where is heaven - earth, somewhere in the Universe., somewhere outside the universe, on another pane/wavelength bandwidth of universes.
https:/
https:/
"For example, in the Dark & Middle Ages, the earth was believed to be flat..."
I don't think anyone from around 1100 onwards believed the world was flat until some sort of counter-science movement in the early 19th Century (that also brought us homeopathy, among other such delights). The modern belief that Medieval people thought the Earth was flat is essentially a myth; there was some debate over the *size* of the Earth, but none over its shape.
I don't think anyone from around 1100 onwards believed the world was flat until some sort of counter-science movement in the early 19th Century (that also brought us homeopathy, among other such delights). The modern belief that Medieval people thought the Earth was flat is essentially a myth; there was some debate over the *size* of the Earth, but none over its shape.
It's an invention by the wide boys at the top to terrify the masses into submission. In the most primitive societies the religious agent is always THE top dog but over time power has to be shared with others, mainly due to the rise of martial matters and then royalty etc. But, as with our own "advanced" society, they always remain near the top of the pile.....
Long-winded & self-plagiaristic (which might even be a sin) -
http://
Paras 1-3 there are 3,5 & 6 here - differently ordered, to be fair.
Also yours from another thread - "Unlike you, I can write properly without cutting & pasting. I am capable of writing articles, as well as dissertation."
Hmmm. Is that right? I'm not convinced. You do appear to be running out of ideas, though.
Oh, so that I'm not accused of not answering the OP - yes, probably/possibly one of them.
Off to watch the 2nd half.
http://
Paras 1-3 there are 3,5 & 6 here - differently ordered, to be fair.
Also yours from another thread - "Unlike you, I can write properly without cutting & pasting. I am capable of writing articles, as well as dissertation."
Hmmm. Is that right? I'm not convinced. You do appear to be running out of ideas, though.
Oh, so that I'm not accused of not answering the OP - yes, probably/possibly one of them.
Off to watch the 2nd half.
Not that it matters, as you've already indicated what you were looking for in an answer, but it's worth pointing out that for a long time and even until the early 19th Century, religious motives were often the principal driving force behind Scientific progress. It was only really the advent of Evolution that shook this up. Physics and chemistry, after all, are about understanding how the Universe works and how materials within it interact, but neither really gives a hoot about how these things came to be, and you can just as well pretend that it was deliberate as it was an accident of nature. It's only when you come to questioning biological history, and humanity's emergence from it, that religion and science truly come into conflict, for what better rebuttal is there to the statement that "God created man in His own image" than to say that actually we were just as much an accident of evolution?
Before then, in the Christian World at least, Scientific and Religious authorities were occasionally the same, and the greatest centres of learning were monasteries, or churches, or otherwise strongly religious in nature; charges of Heresy generally related to *other* aspects of scientific works. Galileo would probably not have got into as much trouble as he did had he not presented his works with deliberate and transparent insults at leading religious figures, for example.
In the Muslim world, too, Science and religion got on incredibly well, until maybe the 15th century or so. Again, it was a fundamentalist reactionary group that ruined the relationship. It's true that a fanatical devotion to a God destroys any meaningful effort to understand the world, but it's equally true that all of the World's major religions have managed at one time or another to *not* get in the way of progress and even drive it forward faster.
In the end, it's when religion gets mixed up with politics and power that it starts screwing the world over, rather than religion in and of itself.
Before then, in the Christian World at least, Scientific and Religious authorities were occasionally the same, and the greatest centres of learning were monasteries, or churches, or otherwise strongly religious in nature; charges of Heresy generally related to *other* aspects of scientific works. Galileo would probably not have got into as much trouble as he did had he not presented his works with deliberate and transparent insults at leading religious figures, for example.
In the Muslim world, too, Science and religion got on incredibly well, until maybe the 15th century or so. Again, it was a fundamentalist reactionary group that ruined the relationship. It's true that a fanatical devotion to a God destroys any meaningful effort to understand the world, but it's equally true that all of the World's major religions have managed at one time or another to *not* get in the way of progress and even drive it forward faster.
In the end, it's when religion gets mixed up with politics and power that it starts screwing the world over, rather than religion in and of itself.
Nice spot, lie-in king!
Also, willbewhatiwill, is there any particular reason you insist on asking controversial and occasionally inflammatory questions only to instantly answer them "no"? I'm thinking of the "Is LGBT a sin" thread in particular, that was rather a stark way of putting a view that you then professed to disagree with.
Also, willbewhatiwill, is there any particular reason you insist on asking controversial and occasionally inflammatory questions only to instantly answer them "no"? I'm thinking of the "Is LGBT a sin" thread in particular, that was rather a stark way of putting a view that you then professed to disagree with.
Well, sure, there is that aspect of it too. But then that's a wider problem with society at the time -- and perhaps even today, to an extent, although it's much less acute for sure -- rather than something specifically related to religion.
Organised religions have the habit of ending up very quickly as just naked grabs for power and a clear attempt to massage some people's massive egos. I guess all I'm saying is that you don't need religion to be a power-hungry Trustan 40 determined to stop anyone from challenging you.
Organised religions have the habit of ending up very quickly as just naked grabs for power and a clear attempt to massage some people's massive egos. I guess all I'm saying is that you don't need religion to be a power-hungry Trustan 40 determined to stop anyone from challenging you.
Latest Posts
News9 mins ago
Home & Garden12 mins ago
Will Blasphemy Laws Be Reintroduced?
News12 mins ago
News17 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.