Poll: How do we get them to see the truth?
This poll is closed.
Peacefull reasoning 69.23% 9 69.23%
Full attack of facts 30.77% 4 30.77%
Total 13 votes 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-06-2016, 09:15 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 06:24 AM)Dom Wrote:  
(04-06-2016 07:27 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  But to let my family members (not only my folks) live forever without the chance to know the universe as I see it is to do them a great disservice, I think.

Hmmmm. Christians say: "But to let my family members (not only my folks) live forever without the chance to know god as I see him is to do them a great disservice, I think. "

Indeed so. And they do try, at every opportunity, to show me that view of God. Yet I refrain from trying to convert them from atheism. I simply don't think that learning about the universe as it actually is (which is magnificent) detracts from the concept of God, while their view requires that I ignore what I've learned about the universe.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2016, 09:20 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 07:02 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(04-06-2016 10:40 AM)Aliza Wrote:  Judaism teaches that G-d offered the Torah to every group of people prior to offering it to the Jews. So if, according to Jewish teaching, all other people were offered the same stories and ideas prior to the writing of the Torah (according to Judaism, some 3,500 years ago), then why should a Jewish audience be surprised when the Epic of Gilgamesh pops up?

Atheists who present this argument to Jewish people seem to expect that we’re going to be stunned into silence and have the fabric of our culture and region somehow cast into doubt because of this. In reality, Jewish people view this information as validation of our religious beliefs.

That is a mindset that I could never understand. It makes complete sense that various peoples told similar stories and that they sometimes borrowed and reworked details to embellish and personalize their own tales. The presupposition that a god has to exist and that something is needed to provide support for that when much simpler explanations are quite sufficient is just baffling to me. The convolutions that theists go through to preserve a space for a god to fit in are just amazing sometimes.

I think I can understand your position on this. It's just that Jews who hold these traditions as valuable aren't going to just let them go because someone presents a case to them that doesn't even resonate with them at all.

I think it comes down to this: Whether an atheist presenting facts to a religious Jew agrees with the Jews position or not is not relevant. To effectively make their case, the Jewish position must be taken into consideration otherwise it will just fall on deaf ears.

(05-06-2016 07:02 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(04-06-2016 10:40 AM)Aliza Wrote:  I strongly support science and actual evidence (archaeological, historical, etc) being introduced to religious people, because at least for Judaism, if something is a fact (as opposed to interpretation), the vast majority of Jewish movements absolutely will reinterpret texts in light of the new information.

The question is why re-interpret the texts to force them to incorporate new facts. They would retain their cultural and historical value and they would still impart the same lessons even if everybody admitted that they were just the mythology of the early Hebrews. Why is the security blanket so tightly grasped?

Judaism is willing to re-interpret biblical stories in light of new data because that’s what Judaism does. Judaism not only supports redefining things, it’s actually a foundation of our religion. –And that statement opens up a huge rabbit hole that I’m not prepared to jump into on this forum, but the long and the short of it is that Judaism does support (and as far as I know, has always supported) that reinterpretation is totally kosher.

Judaism is, first and foremost, a way of living. Our Torah is not a book about creation, and it’s not a book about the first humans, and it’s not a book about floods. These subjects are barely touched on, and there is no religious requirement that they be taken literally. Some Jews do take the statements literally, but most do not.

I pulled some quotes from Wikipedia page that I hope will illustrate my point about the relationship of Torah and science.

"Today, many Jews accept the theory of evolution and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, reflecting the emphasis of prominent rabbis such as the Vilna Gaon and Maimonides on the ethical rather than factual significance of scripture."

"Some medieval philosophical rationalists, such as Maimonides and Gersonides held that not every statement in Genesis is meant literally. In this view, one was obligated to understand Torah in a way that was compatible with the findings of science. Indeed, Maimonides, one of the great Rabbis of the Middle Ages, wrote that if science and Torah were misaligned, it was either because science was not understood or the Torah was misinterpreted."

We hold onto our security blanket because it’s our way of life that we’re protecting, and not our fear that maybe the universe wasn’t literally created in six days.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aliza's post
05-06-2016, 09:27 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 07:59 AM)dimmu.borgir Wrote:  You can't accuse one by the action of others
I don't claim all athiests are like the ones who had the biggest portion in rape of Berlin , which is the world record in mass rape

Newton is totally wrong according to Einstein not just not accurate , but his laws can do well in our scales but they still wrong

I didn't say I should stop learning at some point, science will be forever endless cause if I'm a creation I will never reach my creator wisdom,I'll keep trying but I will never reach,... This is valid till now, we didnt know everything around us, actually we don't even know a thing yet , what we know is so little ,

Till now creator fringerptints is everywhere around ,

Non-matter stuff , the most simple example is the mathematical zero , the nothing , no time no place , zero dimension, we can use it to solve problem but I can't have a physical representation for it, some people accepted it and called it eternity way before Einstein makes it mathematically acceptable

For me that's weak approach , I like to separate both things ,I love science its amazing but its so poor cause it made by us, we can't explain daily routine processes using science , how can I use it to solve problems like after eternity and after death

What was before big bang if its true can't be solved by analytic science
And I believed in multi universes and that universe gonna collapse before I learnt it from another human -who can be mistakable in his theory and probably will when his theory expires
And it's always amazing learning that science and my beliefs don't contride, it just make my beliefs get stronger

Just as we don't blame you for the mass rapes of the women of Bangladesh by Pakistani Muslims (on the same exact scale as that committed by the Soviet communists against the Germans). Yet by mentioning it, you implied that there was a connection to their atheism, rather than being the result of systematic propaganda against and dehumanization of an enemy in wartime.

And none of this changes the fact that the "revelations" of your holy book were known by other peoples (with whom the Muslims had contact) before the Qur'an was written/assembled. It doesn't change the vague nature of the alleged claims, which can be read many different ways in the light of hindsight.

Of course humans can be mistaken. That's why the scientific method is about constantly checking and refining ideas until they're as close to perfect as humans can make them (and as our technologies are capable of gathering the information upon which to base our theoretical models... as was the case with Newton, who simply did not have the equipment to gather data about relativity).

It may well be that in the next 50-100 years, we may have better technology that allows us to gather the data necessary to determine what happened outside of the Singularity from which our universe expanded... and I don't doubt for a second that AFTER this discovery is made, Muslims and Christians alike will point to some obscure verse in their holy texts which they claim "predicted" it. And it will still be a load of bullshit.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
05-06-2016, 11:02 AM (This post was last modified: 05-06-2016 11:15 AM by unfogged.)
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 07:59 AM)dimmu.borgir Wrote:  You can't accuse one by the action of others
I don't claim all athiests are like the ones who had the biggest portion in rape of Berlin , which is the world record in mass rape

Sorry, but you were the one that said that anti-Newtonian views could have gotten somebody burned in an atheist temple. You don't get to dodge the fact that you painted atheists as likely to do something for which we have many examples from the theist side. You are being completely dishonest.

Quote:Newton is totally wrong according to Einstein not just not accurate , but his laws can do well in our scales but they still wrong

That is not how it is generally viewed. Newton is still correct within the framework and scale on which his work applies and the differences are totally irrelevant for practical purposes. To say that Einstein proved him totally wrong is to misrepresent what science does and what science claims. Newton advanced our understanding of how things operate. Einstein deepened that understanding. Neither is claimed to be the final "truth".

Quote:Till now creator fringerptints is everywhere around ,

Yes, until we started learning more about how things work and realized that the "fingerprints" were just illusions. The "creator" is just an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Quote:Non-matter stuff , the most simple example is the mathematical zero , the nothing , no time no place , zero dimension, we can use it to solve problem but I can't have a physical representation for it, some people accepted it and called it eternity way before Einstein makes it mathematically acceptable

I'm still not sure what you mean. Numbers are conceptual and not physical but I have no idea what you are trying to say about that.

Quote:For me that's weak approach , I like to separate both things ,I love science its amazing but its so poor cause it made by us, we can't explain daily routine processes using science , how can I use it to solve problems like after eternity and after death

Science has not found out the answers to all questions but it is the only practice we have with a proven track record of finding any actual answers at all. If a better, more reliable method of finding answers is found then I will switch to that. Reading old books written by people who didn't have any real understanding of much of anything offers nothing except the chance to wallow in wishful thinking.

Quote:What was before big bang if its true can't be solved by analytic science

Science has not determined what happened before the big bang or even of there was a "before" for things to have happened in. That does not prove that it will never find out more about it. By what evidence do you claim that it can't?

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
05-06-2016, 01:36 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 05:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-06-2016 09:25 PM)Aliza Wrote:  Where am I making shit up? I'll try to source my shit for you.

"Judaism teaches that G-d offered the Torah to every group of people prior to offering it to the Jews."

Made up from whole cloth, a fabrication.

When the books don't have the answers, make shit up.

I used the example about G-d giving the Torah to the other nations first because I believed it would illustrate my point about a Jewish belief being mostly unknown to non-Jews. This understanding could very well color a Jew’s interpretation of what it means to have found the Epic of Gilgamesh.

No, this story is not a part of the Torah, nor did I say it was. There are many other books that compose Jewish theology and the Midrash, where this story comes from, is one of them. The Midrash is roughly 2,000 years old, and like the Talmud, it is said to be based on earlier teachings.

Even if the story was written 15 years ago and became accepted by the majority of the Jewish movements, this wouldn’t negate the fact that it’s now a part of Judaism. The point I was trying to make was that whatever the theist believes (logical or illogical) should be taken into account when an atheist is presenting evidence. Failure to understand what the theists believes could present a huge barrier in effectively communicating one’s argument.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2016, 02:58 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 09:27 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(05-06-2016 07:59 AM)dimmu.borgir Wrote:  You can't accuse one by the action of others
I don't claim all athiests are like the ones who had the biggest portion in rape of Berlin , which is the world record in mass rape

Newton is totally wrong according to Einstein not just not accurate , but his laws can do well in our scales but they still wrong

I didn't say I should stop learning at some point, science will be forever endless cause if I'm a creation I will never reach my creator wisdom,I'll keep trying but I will never reach,... This is valid till now, we didnt know everything around us, actually we don't even know a thing yet , what we know is so little ,

Till now creator fringerptints is everywhere around ,

Non-matter stuff , the most simple example is the mathematical zero , the nothing , no time no place , zero dimension, we can use it to solve problem but I can't have a physical representation for it, some people accepted it and called it eternity way before Einstein makes it mathematically acceptable

For me that's weak approach , I like to separate both things ,I love science its amazing but its so poor cause it made by us, we can't explain daily routine processes using science , how can I use it to solve problems like after eternity and after death

What was before big bang if its true can't be solved by analytic science
And I believed in multi universes and that universe gonna collapse before I learnt it from another human -who can be mistakable in his theory and probably will when his theory expires
And it's always amazing learning that science and my beliefs don't contride, it just make my beliefs get stronger

Just as we don't blame you for the mass rapes of the women of Bangladesh by Pakistani Muslims (on the same exact scale as that committed by the Soviet communists against the Germans). Yet by mentioning it, you implied that there was a connection to their atheism, rather than being the result of systematic propaganda against and dehumanization of an enemy in wartime.

And none of this changes the fact that the "revelations" of your holy book were known by other peoples (with whom the Muslims had contact) before the Qur'an was written/assembled. It doesn't change the vague nature of the alleged claims, which can be read many different ways in the light of hindsight.

Of course humans can be mistaken. That's why the scientific method is about constantly checking and refining ideas until they're as close to perfect as humans can make them (and as our technologies are capable of gathering the information upon which to base our theoretical models... as was the case with Newton, who simply did not have the equipment to gather data about relativity).

It may well be that in the next 50-100 years, we may have better technology that allows us to gather the data necessary to determine what happened outside of the Singularity from which our universe expanded... and I don't doubt for a second that AFTER this discovery is made, Muslims and Christians alike will point to some obscure verse in their holy texts which they claim "predicted" it. And it will still be a load of bullshit.

And it will still be a load of bullshit. that is the type of conversations i try to avoid
i understand that ignorant ,filth is a human nature, has nothing to do with religion
,i am not with any kind of rape even if it happened by my own side, i am against it
actually it wont be side anymore, but you are trying to fake statistical facts by saying propaganda and so, well at least atheists still have the record, and u just trying to defend it, i understand some people cant control their defending mechanism its ok man

as i know atheism based on respecting minds ,,, can you just do this , and respect others
mind is the reference, and u cant even respect it
you just do like the stupid religion man who acts like he owns it , i am the only right,that behavior has nothing to do with religion its a pathetic human nature
you can believe at what you wana but have some respect

and the predicting thing of quran dont get me, i know that science after all is a poor calculator , it didn't solve any daily routine process problems, or even explain it
any scientist knows that all science is too lil

but that predicting thing get some other people, respect the diversity


i am sure there is people here can establish a good argument without insults
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-06-2016, 07:03 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 02:58 PM)dimmu.borgir Wrote:  And it will still be a load of bullshit. that is the type of conversations i try to avoid
i understand that ignorant ,filth is a human nature, has nothing to do with religion
,i am not with any kind of rape even if it happened by my own side, i am against it
actually it wont be side anymore, but you are trying to fake statistical facts by saying propaganda and so, well at least atheists still have the record, and u just trying to defend it, i understand some people cant control their defending mechanism its ok man

How DARE you say I was trying to defend it!?

No one is suggesting that you're on the side of rape, either. That was my whole point. Why, then, did you mention the wartime privations of the Soviet Communists, as if they had something to do with atheism?

On the other hand, no I'm not trying to "fake statistical facts by saying propaganda". The estimated totals for rape in the Rape of Berlin is around 100,000, though "rape-related deaths" places the total at 240,000. If you count the overall campaign of rape committed by the entire Red Army, the number rises to roughly 1.4 million women "in East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia alone". (Source.) At the same time, during the invasion of Bangladesh in 1971, the Muslims targeted Hindu women for a campaign of (quote) "genocidal rape", with estimates totaling between 200,000 and 400,000 women. Thus, it is certainly on the same scale as the Soviets.

The difference here is that the Soviets did what they did out of a feeling of anger and retaliation for the invasion of the Motherland, finding that the Germans lived even at the end of the war in better conditions than theirs under Communism, and because they had been systematically propagandized to think of the Germans as evil, sub-human, and "deserving" of whatever happened to them. (This is not to justify their actions, only to understand it.) It is a tribute to the power of teaching that some humans are less valuable than others, especially when backed by messages from your government that tell you they're some despicable Other. It had nothing to do with being a culture that encouraged atheism, and everything to do with the depravity of organized warfare. The Soviet leadership claims that they tried to stop the rapes and punish the wrongdoers, though there's little evidence that it was much more than talk.

All those same factors apply to the Pakistani military's actions, as well... except that, quote:

During the war, a fatwa in Pakistan declared that the Bengali 'freedom fighters' were Hindus and that their women could be taken as the 'booty of war'. Imams and Muslim religious leaders publicly declared that the Bengali women were 'gonimoter maal' (war booty) and thus they openly supported the rape of Bengali women by the Pakistani Army. The activists and leaders of Islamic parties were also involved in the rapes and abduction of women. Source.

That is why I got angry when you suggested "atheists" had done something, when there was no link between the atheism (especially the odd version practiced under the Leninist Communists in the Soviet Union, which I consider a religion in and of itself) and the act... while there is a DIRECT link between Muslim leaders in Pakistan and the assaults on Bengali women.


(05-06-2016 02:58 PM)dimmu.borgir Wrote:  as i know atheism based on respecting minds ,,, can you just do this , and respect others
mind is the reference, and u cant even respect it
you just do like the stupid religion man who acts like he owns it , i am the only right,that behavior has nothing to do with religion its a pathetic human nature
you can believe at what you wana but have some respect

I do respect people. I do not respect ideas. Nothing is off-limits for discussion and analysis, and anyone who suggests that an idea may not be criticized and examined is an enemy to the human intellect. If you hold an idea that is based on non-demonstrable assertions and that is counter to demonstrable fact, I will call you (and anyone else) on it, every time.

Likewise, if something I say can be shown to be counter to demonstrable fact, I will expect the others here to point it out to me, and I will thank them for doing it.

I cannot "believe what I want". That is lunacy and ignorance. I will believe what I feel to be the best-supported, from as broad a perspective as I can manage, and I will change my mind when presented with better evidence.


(05-06-2016 02:58 PM)dimmu.borgir Wrote:  and the predicting thing of quran dont get me, i know that science after all is a poor calculator , it didn't solve any daily routine process problems, or even explain it
any scientist knows that all science is too lil

but that predicting thing get some other people, respect the diversity

i am sure there is people here can establish a good argument without insults

I don't even know what you're trying to say, above. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you're still working on your skill at English (respect for that!), and offer you another try to make yourself clear before I comment on it.

I will, however, close by saying that the reason I used the word "bullshit", or specifically the phrase "it will still be bullshit", is because I referred to something that has not yet happened. I said WHEN they make a discovery, THEN people will search through holy texts to see how it was "predicted", which is bullshit. It's not a prediction unless it's made in advance (I suppose it would be a postdiction?), yet people will often claim otherwise. And that is bullshit, pure and simple.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
05-06-2016, 07:20 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(05-06-2016 01:36 PM)Aliza Wrote:  
(05-06-2016 05:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  "Judaism teaches that G-d offered the Torah to every group of people prior to offering it to the Jews."

Made up from whole cloth, a fabrication.

When the books don't have the answers, make shit up.

I used the example about G-d giving the Torah to the other nations first because I believed it would illustrate my point about a Jewish belief being mostly unknown to non-Jews. This understanding could very well color a Jew’s interpretation of what it means to have found the Epic of Gilgamesh.

You mean the convoluted ignoring of facts?

Quote:No, this story is not a part of the Torah, nor did I say it was.

Nor did I. I simply point out that it is made up shit.

Quote:There are many other books that compose Jewish theology and the Midrash, where this story comes from, is one of them. The Midrash is roughly 2,000 years old, and like the Talmud, it is said to be based on earlier teachings.

Made-up shit is still made-up shit regardless of age or popularity.

Quote:Even if the story was written 15 years ago and became accepted by the majority of the Jewish movements, this wouldn’t negate the fact that it’s now a part of Judaism. The point I was trying to make was that whatever the theist believes (logical or illogical) should be taken into account when an atheist is presenting evidence. Failure to understand what the theists believes could present a huge barrier in effectively communicating one’s argument.

That is the very definition of closed-mindedness.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
08-06-2016, 06:46 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
Let us reason together
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-06-2016, 07:04 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
Does this sound random or designed?

Extremely specified and complex 4-digit DNA code is copied and transported to an assembly line. The DNA instructions are read and individual amino acids are transported and placed on the assembly line in specific order as specified by the DNA code to form a chain of amino acids (some being around 200 characters long). The order of the different type of specified amino acids determine the type of protein, or in human design lingo, what type of component part, will be assembled on the assembly line. After the assembly is complete, another transport device (in human design lingo, a transport is like a bus or airplane), picks up the newly formed protein component part and delivers it precisely into a barrel part shaping machine to form the part so it may serve it's later intended function. After the part forming is complete, the barrel machine receives a stop command and opens the door. A transport device picks up the shaped protein part and then delivers it to the precise location instructed from the code to serve as part of a larger machine system in the cell. The protein component part fits exactly into place with other parts and the overall machine assembly process continues until the last part is installed. After all the different parts are installed into the machine, a start machine operation command is given as the machine then serves it's intended purpose for the cell.

It is actually more specified and complex than this but these are some of the basic details. Again, random or designed?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: