Why I was so sensitif?

[Farabi]

I dont know but, when I was religous a few years ago, Im so iritated when my faith is questioned. Why do you think that was happen from science view, esp. psycology?
I was curious.

[oex]

Because that is what you were told.... How you were lied to.... Don't believe science either.... This is also a false religion....

Religion Fact:
Be good to your neighbour
Do not kill

Science Fact:
E=MC²
The moon falls into the earth which in turn falls into the sun which in turn falls into the center of our galaxy....

Both rulesets Religion and Science have a binding effect on your life, neither DEFINE your life....
You will not live forever if you follow either path, you will not have your own robot army or be reincarnated in heaven with 72 virgins.... Nor really if you have any iota of intelligence would you want this....

The mind of man is not designed to understand the universe.... Only small parts of it.... Go too far in any direction and you will get lost.... What makes sense to you will be based on many general falsehoods....

[dedndave]

we are all brainwashed, from the time we are born
our parents tell us what to believe
our schools and government tell us what to believe

that goes for religion, politics, and patriotism, as well as what is "socially acceptable"
some of the brainwashing is good - some isn't
for example, it's good to be brought up believing it is wrong to kill
it's bad to be brought up thinking republicans are good - lol
my dad is one of these "always vote republican" guys

whatever religion your parents are - you are likely to believe in strongly
if your parents are muslims and mine are christians, that means we disagree - and we don't even know why   :P

[TmX]

Im so iritated when my faith is questioned.

As the Joker said: "Why so serious?"  :P
I sometimes involved in discussions about faith with friends (some of them are agnostics/atheists).
We do it in a lighthearted way. In the end, we always agree to disagree, though.
That's it  :wink

[bozo]

i attended a catholic school and unfortunately was forced to learn about something that rarely made any sense to me, not just catholicism but religion in general made little sense.

at the time i was seeing a lot of hypocrisy by people who went there to pray every sunday, handing all their money over to a big corrupt institution.

i'm not against anyone who practices religion though, each to their own...and no, i'm not atheist either.

i agree with oex too about science being the new religion and how we're just simply not meant to understand everything about the universe.

some people just want a meaning to life and i suppose religion fulfills that need.

[baltoro]

I had a very similar experience as Kernel Gaddafi, above,...almost identical, in fact. If you examine religious dogma with a rigorous logic,...it is difficult to determine the truth with certainty.
Most of our major religions were created a thousand years ago, or more, when scientific thought was quite primitive,...and, religious beliefs were an attempt to explain what we as a people experience when we observe the natural world. A belief system is assembled and through the evangelist efforts of a hierarchy of initiates, those beliefs are conveyed to populations (of fools).

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

What really chenged my mind was Galileo. As you are probably aware, Galileo was a proponent of the Copernican heliocentric model. The response of the Catholic Church was to order Galileo to stand trial on suspicion of heresy in 1633. He was excommunicated from the Church (which means that he could no longer participate in Church rituals --  this implies eternal damnation), and was forced (under penalty of death) to retract his belief in his own scientific publications.

...If you want a somewhat unconventional perspective to the whole issue of religious belief, read, Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End"
(And, by the way, it's my ridiculous quasi-religious belief that Peter (aka, oex)), is, in reality, a fictional character that has somehow escaped from "Childhood's End".)

[hutch--]

Interestingly enough the Italian Catholic church did far less damage than the Spanish version. There was the less than edifying affair with Giordano Bruno being burnt in the square of the flowers but one would have to say he went out of his way to get there. I did a topic on Galileo at UNI many years ago and he did better than you may have thought, he was a buddy of one of the Popes when he was younger and received many favours but he was prone to make enemies with his mouth and it caught up with him as he got older. He was eventually sunk on an incorrect theory of the tides. The Catholic church was more inclined to believe Johanne Kepler. Galileo suffered so bady that his daughter did his penance for him but was prevented from publishing any works for the rest of his life.

His works were published after he died.

[vanjast]

The difference between science and religion, is that Science, from the start, has always been open to questioning? and changed to the more convincing/if not unproven theory.

Religion (from what I can see) is never been open to question (maybe within it's inner circles, but not by the public at large), and religious perpetrators still threaten unbelievers (those that question) with death.

This is where science is successfull as is appeals to (wo)man's curious nature. Religion is more about controlling your mind than what science is, and in both camps there are the liars and charletons trying to conn you out of your hard earned living (cash) - You must just learn to recognise them before they take your stash.
:bg

[anunitu]

Kind of a sticky subject religion..I follow no Abrahamic religion,those include Christian,Moslem,and Jewish. Those are the main monothiest  religions. I am a follower of a Pagan tridition. Best thing I find in my Pagan path,is it allows you to pick and choose your personal set of rules,don't like a certain Goddess,then pick another from the list...Religion is a binding dogma,spiritual understanding is not a dogmatic path,but an open concideration of what life and death may or may not mean. Each to their own. Religion is NOT really spiritual, it is a set of rules to follow blindly,in hopes of cheating death.

[oex]

I think the trick is to find something that doesnt fit nicely in neither category and then you know there is er.... more to life....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC73PHdQX04

[zemtex]

One problem with religion and science is that science criticize christians based on the bible. The bible is not written by God, it is just a collection of experiences from people who claimed to have a relationship with God. The bible simply had too much sales. The Bible has little to do with God.

2. Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousnes.

The bible is written by faulty men, it does not represent truth but it represents a cognitive model of God. It is very unfortunate that christians got into the position and need to protect God based on the old book.

[Astro]

4.6 Billion years ago. 13.6 Billion years from now.

'nuff said.

We came from nowhere, we shall return there, one way or the other.

If there is a creator, who created the creator? If God existed, we'd all worship it and would have proof of it/their existence. Why is God always a white male? If God is so powerful, why all the wars and suffering?

I could go on...  ::)

[zemtex]

4.6 Billion years ago. 13.6 Billion years from now.

'nuff said.

We came from nowhere, we shall return there, one way or the other.

If there is a creator, who created the creator? If God existed, we'd all worship it and would have proof of it/their existence. Why is God always a white male? If God is so powerful, why all the wars and suffering?

I could go on...  ::)

I understand that the billions of years can confuse people but it is in no way evidence against a higher entity, it really is not. It may LOOK like it is, but if you want to be an ice cold analytic, the damn number has absolutely nothing to do and is in no way evidence against any gods.

A God could have made all of this seem this way and that way, so despite how convincing science may be, we can never use it against a God. It is impossible. When you use that number as "evidence" against gods, you are comparing God to human-like beings who is seeking to design something with efficiency, who said this world had to be designed with the same efficiency as our society is?  :bg

[hutch--]

I have always seen the humour in comparisons of the existence or non-existence of a supreme being, something like two religious practitioners advancing rival theories. I am a bit rusty here but from memory the Catholic saint Thomas Aquinas produced the "First Mover" argument about 800 years ago. It went something like this, if you regress back far enough with a backwards causal chain you will get to the first mover, that which he calls God. Now the retort is very simple, what happens if the regression is infinite ?

This is where the fun starts, by its simple semantics "infinite" can never be proven and needs to be assumed, by any other name an act of faith so the comparison here is between one act of faith and another, two rival theologians advancing rival theories.  :bg

[vanjast]

I understand that the billions of years can confuse people but it is in no way evidence against a higher entity, it really is not. It may LOOK like it is, but if you want to be an ice cold analytic, the damn number has absolutely nothing to do and is in no way evidence against any gods.

.. and no evidence for the existence of even one god.  :wink