Belief in a god does not make for stupid, uneducated - #79918895 added by cobaltlumi at Divine Theory

Reply+35

(01/07/2013)[-]

Anyone who thinks religion and science don't mix is a ******* retard. I'm not saying atheists are idiots, just people who think that religion and science cannot be related, and that if you believe in god, you can't believe science are idiots. around Jesus' time the Bible was the extent of the science at the time. (the word science comes from the latin 'Scire'- to know) And their knowledge comprised of religion and the bible, that was how they explained how the world works. I'm a Christian, and for me, science and evolutuion is an explanation of how god has formed the world (Big bang-Let there be light, Evolution-man being created from dust) I'm studying Chemical engineering, and I'm sick of people coming up to me and saying "but you're a christian, why do you believe science hurr durr?" As Albert Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, Religion without science is blind."

TL;DR Bible is outdated, Religion and science CAN mix. Albert Einstein knows his ****.

#110 to #39 - thebigcountry

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

You my friend earn a thumb and my respect.

This makes me very happy

#91 to #39 - cobaltlumi

Reply+3

(01/08/2013)[-]

You sir are so very true.
pic unrelated.

#90 to #39 - chillinwithbears

Reply+1

(01/08/2013)[-]

can you prove that god exists is the real question. see you can take god out of science and it will still make sense which means that there probably isn't one. i am not against religion but i think that if you think that there is a correlation between religion and science then why don't you just believe in science and throw out the stuff that you cant prove. what would happen if everyone stopped believing in god and just science i honestly think it would be better for mankind because science has no arguing factions like religion does

#127 to #90 - toadsquad

Reply+1

(01/08/2013)[-]

i disagree on not being able to prove God exist because you can through reasoning. (5 proofs of St. Aquinas). there are things science can't answer. and the 2 go together. Its not fair to say the world is better without religion because people might fight over religion but its not like the world would even change because people always try to kill and a counterpoint is science creates things like nukes that can destroy millions and people use science just as much as religion if not more to fight. people will fight over anything.

#134 to #127 - chillinwithbears

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

i am 100% sure that that the pros and cons in science are far better then the pros and cons in religion. and the only way to have a good debate on god is by having a third party but that would require aliens because every human intelligent human being has already taken sides in this debate. but i would wonder if aliens came to earth and they saw religion going on they might think we are insane

#147 to #134 - toadsquad

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

well you can be a 100% sure because u don't believe but if u did you would say religion because eternal life. its not insane at all to have religion. People are actually religious by nature. Thats why all throughout history you see people worshiping and trying to praise to a superior being because we can know that their is something that is greater, that created everything.
P.S. thanks for not being a douche for disagreeing. and actually giving back good arguments points instead of being a asshole

#121 to #90 - anon id: 57ebbd58

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

Yes but then you have to ask , if religion is true and after death their is eternal punishment and life, and then if everybody stopped believing in religion (false or no), then we would all be damned to eternal pain and suffering.

#136 to #121 - chillinwithbears

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

if their was a god don't you think he would accept people into to heaven if they lived good lives but didn't believe in him. i though god was merciful?

#137 to #136 - chillinwithbears

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

is* instead of was lol

#102 to #90 - kafudamapla

Reply+1

(01/08/2013)[-]

The amount of logic in your answer makes me happy

#97 to #90 - anon id: a83271e9

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

You can't prove that he doesn't exist either. All we have are theories.

#95 to #90 - cobaltlumi

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

Belief in a god does not make for stupid, uneducated people. I'm not saying there aren't whack-o Christians out there, but you can't say there aren't whack-o atheists out there either. You can believe in god AND science. Just let people believe, I mean, who suffers from someone else finding happiness in god? So many people get through depression and trauma through religion, using it as a way to cope.
Science tells people who've lost someone that they will never see them again. Religion gives people hope.

TL;DR I'm not so sure that if everyone suddenly stopped believing in God that the world would Improve.

#99 to #95 - chillinwithbears

Reply-3

(01/08/2013)[-]

yeah im cool with people finding happiness in god. but when we start wars over religion its stupid which is why i think that we would be better off without religion

#101 to #99 - cobaltlumi

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

The Crusades?
More about money, To be honest. Yes, religion, but also not.
Though you do have a point.

#86 to #39 - supermegasherman

Reply+3

(01/08/2013)[-]

thank ******* god somebody else sees that there is not just black and white

#106 to #86 - heartlessrobot#129 on commentsRank#129

Reply+2

(01/08/2013)[-]

Yeah, there's asian and hispanic too.

#113 to #106 - supermegasherman

Reply+1

(01/08/2013)[-]

#60 to #39 - arnoldnorris

Reply+2

(01/07/2013)[-]

#55 to #39 - trollmobile#223 on commentsRank#223

Reply-9

(01/07/2013)[-]

science and religion don't mix.

#50 to #39 - dcmp

Reply+11

(01/07/2013)[-]

There is a definite schism between religion and science. I'm not saying that you cannot believe in god and understand science as well. All I am saying is that it is illogical to implement god into already substantiated scientific theories. You cannot mix an untestable hypothesis into an already stable theory. Sure you can say that god spurred evolution, but there is no way to scientifically test or prove that hypothesis, and it is already in bad standing since evolution and natural selection are already pretty well understood and there is no logical place for a deity to be in that theory. I don't care if you are a christian and believe in science, but there is a definite barrier between religion and science. Also I am pretty sure that the romans had a leg up on the whole extent of science at around jesus' time. Seeing as the bible is mostly stories and the romans were had a good grasp on science from what they stole from the greeks.

#178 to #50 - Cambro

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

You are using Ockham's razor (that which does not need to be included in a theory is extraneous and therefore should not be included) to argue that God has no place in science. This is only partially true. You are correct that God, the deity himself, cannot be examined by science, but that does not exclude his existence as a possibility all together. Just as saying God spurred evolution does not make a good argument for the existence of God, saying evolution was naturally spurred down does not disprove God. The key issue here is absolute creation. Science does not know how nothing could come to be from nothing, and it is logical that contingent things could not have existed in an infinite chain. In contrary to Ockham's argument, God is not an extraneous addition to a scientific theory, but rather an alternative in itself. As long as scientists have no explanation for what could have caused the Big Bang, your argument can never apply to God. I know about quantum mechanics and physics, but these are just theories right now and shaky at that. Furthermore, if God is this supernatural thing then it makes sense that we cannot measure him by natural means. It is illogical to expect that God could be explained by science.
Also, it is a popular belief that God has guided evolution not with natural selection but instead of natural selection. The argument is this: by natural selection, it only makes sense that a species would acquire abilities relevant to their survival. For instance, by natural selection you would not expect a frog to develop eyes that can focus strong enough to see the surface of the moon. Following this logic how, then, could natural selection account for higher intellectual properties to the brain such as the ability to do calculus? While many say the brain has advanced thro years of evolution, it seems it has actually expounded outside of natural selection's bounds. If natural selection was not guiding evolution in the human brain's case, then what was?

#198 to #178 - dcmp

Reply0

(01/08/2013)[-]

I am an anthropologist and have studied in great depth human evolution. While the brain size of humans has increased exponentially since Homo erectus, this does not warrant a divine hand to make. The brain size of homonids is one of the last things to develop, we get animals anatomically identical, save for the head, with the dawn of Homo erectus. There are many theories as to why brain size increased, but it is most likely the product of many factors. Probably the most important one is the advent of active hunting and consuming meat, which would allow for larger brain sizes to develop. Also the climate at around this time in africa was very unstable, changing drastically over relatively short periods of time. A creature that could adapt to different climates without much effort would be most likely to survive. This is where brain size comes in. Being able to solve problems and form social groups was essential to early hominin survival. Over the course of millions of years brain size grew larger as species became more adaptable and more social, eventually leading to us. The advent of a deity, once again, is not neccessary to explain humans, and the fact that there are several different species of humans, even ones that had culture and probably a belief system other than Homo sapiens existed, kind of throws a wrench in the whole creation thing. But the fact of the matter is, natural selection has shaped the human brain, not god's hand.

#45 to #39 - sirbustyabals

Reply+2

(01/07/2013)[-]

That's exactly how I think

#42 to #39 - sploilerman

Reply0

(01/07/2013)[-]