Religion Poll

[lynn_402]

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

The whole universe is a proof that order comes from chaos. At first there was the highly chaotic Big Bang, then chaotic galaxies formed, which gave birth to stars, which organized more complex matter, which made unchaotic planets, and so on

What can we observe scientifically that shows order from chaos?  A big bang could not have left the universe in an orderly state based on observable science.  Nothing we observe exploding leads to order and creation of anything new does it?  A "big bang" could not have led to human intelligence and the amazing design of our bodies.  There are just too many variables at play for everything to have happened by random chance.   The position of the earth in relation to the sun, water on the earth, the way our bodies work, etc.  There are just too many things that for them to have happened by chance it is mathematically impossible even adding the "millions and billions of years" to the problem.

Not only billions of years, but billions of planets too! Matter has a tendency to organize itself when the energy that is in it gets redistributed, that's one of the rules of the universe. An explosion is high-energy and chaotic at first, but it ends up creating very finite things.

 Really, by random chances, there's as many possibility of worlds that there are possibilities of bitcoin adresses. Don't get me wrong though, this kind of thinking is not minimizing how wonderful life is; on the contrary. We're incredibly lucky to have the life we have and, imho, the feeling it gives me to think about this is a religious experience.

[lynn_402]

Also, intelligence's uniqueness is overated; it's simply another way to survive, not objectively superior to, say, being a big and verocious dinosaur. The fact of intelligence does not prove the existence of god in any way, since many mammals have a nervous system similar to ours, the only difference being that ours is just a little bit more complex and thus is able to be conscious of itself.

[beetcoin]

yeah the more i think about consciousness, the more i get confused.

[lynn_402]

yeah the more i think about consciousness, the more i get confused.

Yeah, it's amazing how matter managed to organize itself in such a way, to make it able to contemplate itself.

[cooldgamer]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence and planning in how everything operates and works together.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

What would have created the creator?  If intelligence doesn't come from nothing, then he couldn't exist without something creating him, and creating that.  Circular logic

Where does intelligence come from then?  Could it come from nothing?  Is that something we observe?  Hence my argument about the computer.  We can have a hunk of metal but with someone intelligent designing the software to make it run, it would do absolutely nothing.  Our bodies are far more complex than a computer.  Our brains more complex than any software design. But I am called illogical for saying that it took an intelligent designer to create us?  It is more logical from observation that there was someone intelligent that designed us.  That is all I am saying.

At first, the only intelligence we had was primitive instincts: survive and reproduce.  As evolution advanced us, our brains became more and more complex, allowing us to gain more knowledge.

How is saying that there a omnipotent being that got bored and created a universe any more logical than the big bang?  One has all of science to back it up, one has... *cricket chirping*

[u9y42]

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

The whole universe is a proof that order comes from chaos. At first there was the highly chaotic Big Bang, then chaotic galaxies formed, which gave birth to stars, which organized more complex matter, which made unchaotic planets, and so on

What can we observe scientifically that shows order from chaos?  A big bang could not have left the universe in an orderly state based on observable science.  Nothing we observe exploding leads to order and creation of anything new does it?  A "big bang" could not have led to human intelligence and the amazing design of our bodies.  There are just too many variables at play for everything to have happened by random chance.   The position of the earth in relation to the sun, water on the earth, the way our bodies work, etc.  There are just too many things that for them to have happened by chance it is mathematically impossible even adding the "millions and billions of years" to the problem.

The big bang wasn't an "explosion" as such, and based on "observable science" it very likely did leave the universe in the "orderly state" it now exists. Sorry, but you need to read up on it.

And you're looking at the creation of life the wrong way around... the conditions you go on to mention gave rise to life as you know it. It's not that life can't possibly exist in other forms, having started from different initial conditions: it's just that it's the only life we've seen so far, nothing more.

[beetcoin]

The fact that we have DNA shows that there was some planning or "information" that took place to begin with.  In a way, information in our world and in our structure proves intelligence and a "designer."  So it is logical to think that there was a plan.  Without that the world might exist but we would not have intelligence at all.  

Don't you agree that, in the 4.5 billions of years that the Earth has existed, molecules could have had the time to assemble themselves on their own, through fortunate collisions of atoms? I mean, in that much time, all the possibilities can happen, and as soon as the first cell is formed in a random process and the most basic strand of RNA (precursor of DNA) is formed, replication and evolution would then kick in and make life as we know it appear and change really fast.

i think bitchick doesn't quite understand evolution very well.

I think evolutionists do not understand the intelligent design of the world very well.

My point is that we do not see order come from chaos. That is not something that is observed in our world.  But we do see great signs of intelligence and planning in how everything operates and works together.  The fact that we are intelligent as humans proves we had to have had someone or "something" more intelligent program us to work the way we do.  It is just logical.  To have intelligence come from nothing is not observable in our world.  

What would have created the creator?  If intelligence doesn't come from nothing, then he couldn't exist without something creating him, and creating that.  Circular logic

Where does intelligence come from then?  Could it come from nothing?  Is that something we observe?  Hence my argument about the computer.  We can have a hunk of metal but with someone intelligent designing the software to make it run, it would do absolutely nothing.  Our bodies are far more complex than a computer.  Our brains more complex than any software design. But I am called illogical for saying that it took an intelligent designer to create us?  It is more logical from observation that there was someone intelligent that designed us.  That is all I am saying.

At first, the only intelligence we had was primitive instincts: survive and reproduce.  As evolution advanced us, our brains became more and more complex, allowing us to gain more knowledge.

How is saying that there a omnipotent being that got bored and created a universe any more logical than the big bang?  One has all of science to back it up, one has... *cricket chirping*

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

[u9y42]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

[Vod]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

Many decades after his death, in fact.  Several generations forgot about jesus, then suddenly people were able to remember ever detail about him.  Again -  

[LostDutchman]

I do not care if it rains or freezes...............................................

https://myspace.com/thefishheads/music/song/plastic-jesus-22696809-22497994

My $.02.

[beetcoin]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

i didn't imply that jesus wrote the new testament. im saying human beings did, with their own "interpretation" of it.

[u9y42]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

i didn't imply that jesus wrote the new testament. im saying human beings did, with their own "interpretation" of it.

Sorry, didn't mean to put words in your mouth, but that's what I understood you said from "it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god".

[beetcoin]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

i didn't imply that jesus wrote the new testament. im saying human beings did, with their own "interpretation" of it.

Sorry, didn't mean to put words in your mouth, but that's what I understood you said from "it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god".

i can see how you came to that conclusion.. i wasn't clear. what i meant is that people wrote the pretty much all of the bible.. in god's name, so that it could suit whatever the fuck they want. the bible is just a clusterfuck.. if you are a christian and want to justify your actions, just look to the bible.. and interpret it according to your needs.

[u9y42]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

Many decades after his death, in fact.  Several generations forgot about jesus, then suddenly people were able to remember ever detail about him.  Again -  

Yep, pretty much... maybe 40 to 120 years later apparently. This interview with Reza Aslan in The Young Turks goes into some detail about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL6E4eMX-4k.


EDIT:

i can see how you came to that conclusion.. i wasn't clear. what i meant is that people wrote the pretty much all of the bible.. in god's name, so that it could suit whatever the fuck they want. the bible is just a clusterfuck.. if you are a christian and want to justify your actions, just look to the bible.. and interpret it according to your needs.

Yeah, couldn't agree more. And if you are the church and you can define what the "correct" texts that make up the bible are, you can easily define the world view that is convenient for you.

[beetcoin]

and let's not forget that the new testament, at the very least, was re-written to suit or "convert" romans.. and it wasn't written by "god" but only man who claimed himself to be god.

No, the bible wasn't written by Jesus; the several books that make up the "bible" were written through time, after his death. Then the books that were convenient to the church were chosen and put together, forming the bible we now know.

Many decades after his death, in fact.  Several generations forgot about jesus, then suddenly people were able to remember ever detail about him.  Again -  

Yep, pretty much... maybe 40 to 120 years later apparently. This interview with Reza Aslan in The Young Turks goes into some detail about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HL6E4eMX-4k.

i read reza's book on the jesus.. it was a decent read, since it was, you know, objective. basically their priests = our politicians today.

[bryant.coleman]

OK... total votes: 112. Total religious: 52 (46%). Total non-religious: 60 (54%).

The ratio is maintained even after close to 20 new votes. Good.

[Vod]

OK... total votes: 112. Total religious: 52 (46%). Total non-religious: 60 (54%).

The ratio is maintained even after close to 20 new votes. Good.

The thing is, religious people are always pushed to recruit others... they will make up fake accounts just to show they are winning.

Non-religious people, meh, we don't care - we know the truth.

[beetcoin]

still shocking that 46% of the people here have a religion.. and fyi, buddhism is not a religion.. since there is no god. i don't consider myself a buddhist, but more like a student of buddhist philosophy. a lot of their beliefs complement physics and the known world too.

OK... total votes: 112. Total religious: 52 (46%). Total non-religious: 60 (54%).

The ratio is maintained even after close to 20 new votes. Good.

The thing is, religious people are always pushed to recruit others... they will make up fake accounts just to show they are winning.

Non-religious people, meh, we don't care - we know the truth.

disagree. there are many atheists who work in the same manner.

[Lauda]

still shocking that 46% of the people here have a religion.. and fyi, buddhism is not a religion.. since there is no god. i don't consider myself a buddhist, but more like a student of buddhist philosophy. a lot of their beliefs complement physics and the known world too.

OK... total votes: 112. Total religious: 52 (46%). Total non-religious: 60 (54%).

The ratio is maintained even after close to 20 new votes. Good.

The thing is, religious people are always pushed to recruit others... they will make up fake accounts just to show they are winning.

Non-religious people, meh, we don't care - we know the truth.

disagree. there are many atheists who work in the same manner.

Not really, maybe a few. I don't care about the results here either.

[Bitcoin Magazine]

yeah the more i think about consciousness, the more i get confused.

Yeah, it's amazing how matter managed to organize itself in such a way, to make it able to contemplate itself.

it's deception.  aka teh debil.

remember the devil is responsible for all your BAD actions.