What will happen when you die?

[daddy1gringo]

Christianity is not the only thing that requires blind faith. One who believes in evolution requires blind faith. and one who is an atheist also has blind faith, they just don't realize it.

Now, if you're determined to try this debating thing, go back to your quoted statement and try justifying it with some kind of rational argument. Blithe statments unsupported by fact or logic just make you sound like an idiot.

Well, be fair, DM. Now bear with me, because this is definitely outside of my area of expertise, but it has been expounded in other threads (by people much more qualified to do so than I, who I hope will come to my rescue) pretty much undisputed, even by those on your side of the fence. Here's my best attempt.

Whether your cosmology is "big bang" or "steady state" or some hybrid, in order to explain the beginning, or lack of one, of the universe as we know it, you have to postulate some thing that is un-provable, outside of our experience, independent of the laws of nature as we know them, and therefore mind-boggling and weird-sounding. For example, a breakthrough from a parallel universe.

Note that I am not saying, simplistically, "therefore, everything in the Bible must be true" as we Jesus freaks are constantly accused of. I am just saying that if you choose to believe one of the options other than an intelligent creator, it requires an equal amount of believing the unbelievable.

[suggs]

When i die, the PIE industry will collapse, and grieve mightily.

[comic boy]

Christianity is not the only thing that requires blind faith. One who believes in evolution requires blind faith. and one who is an atheist also has blind faith, they just don't realize it.

Dont be absurd, atheism is based on a LACK of religious faith and evolution is a theory based on sound evidence. It is so tiresome that some people,when faced with awkward questions, resort to nonsense like this.

[comic boy]

Christianity is not the only thing that requires blind faith. One who believes in evolution requires blind faith. and one who is an atheist also has blind faith, they just don't realize it.

Now, if you're determined to try this debating thing, go back to your quoted statement and try justifying it with some kind of rational argument. Blithe statments unsupported by fact or logic just make you sound like an idiot.

Well, be fair, DM. Now bear with me, because this is definitely outside of my area of expertise, but it has been expounded in other threads (by people much more qualified to do so than I, who I hope will come to my rescue) pretty much undisputed, even by those on your side of the fence. Here's my best attempt.

Whether your cosmology is "big bang" or "steady state" or some hybrid, in order to explain the beginning, or lack of one, of the universe as we know it, you have to postulate some thing that is un-provable, outside of our experience, independent of the laws of nature as we know them, and therefore mind-boggling and weird-sounding. For example, a breakthrough from a parallel universe.

Note that I am not saying, simplistically, "therefore, everything in the Bible must be true" as we Jesus freaks are constantly accused of. I am just saying that if you choose to believe one of the options other than an intelligent creator, it requires an equal amount of believing the unbelievable.

I can see the point that you are trying to make but you have to concede that its really a question of degree,there clearly needs to be more faith involved if something cannot be supported by ANY tangible evidence. I would not bank my life on evolution being 100 % accurate but there is enough in its favour to support that theory, inteligent design ONLY has blind faith to recommend it. That in itself does not prove anything but its false to sugest that both propositions hold an equal position, the onus is to find proof for ID as scientists have for evolution, if no proof is possible then the reliance is on blind faith alone.

[Dancing Mustard]

Thank you Daddy1Gringo, that is precisely the kind of post I was trying to encourage people to make.

[daddy1gringo]

I can see the point that you are trying to make but you have to concede that its really a question of degree,there clearly needs to be more faith involved if something cannot be supported by ANY tangible evidence. I would not bank my life on evolution being 100 % accurate but there is enough in its favour to support that theory, inteligent design ONLY has blind faith to recommend it. That in itself does not prove anything but its false to sugest that both propositions hold an equal position, the onus is to find proof for ID as scientists have for evolution, if no proof is possible then the reliance is on blind faith alone.

I appreciate your civilized response, but I have to disagree with you. I don’t agree that it’s a case of evidence vs. blind faith. I wasn’t actually talking about the evolution/intelligent design controversy, but I’ll get to that in a minute. The alternatives to the idea of God creating the universe, i.e. a breakthrough from an alternate universe, or matter existing since eternity without a beginning, etc., are, as I said, at least equally unproven, and actually contrary to the laws of science as we know them.

As for ID having only blind faith to support it, aren’t you aware that many of the leading scientists of the ID movement are not Christians or “religious” at all. They came to believe ID because of the evidence. Some “converted” as a result, but many still are not religious.

Even though I am obviously a Christian, my belief in creationism is not because of my faith, and I can say that for an interesting reason. I used to believe in “theistic evolution” as many other Christians do: that God created by means of setting evolution in motion, perhaps “tweaking” it here and there. I also came to believe in creation because of the scientific evidence. If evolution were proved true, it would not trouble my faith at all; I’d just go back to my former opinion. There is more evidence for creation, and less for evolution, than they tell you in school. But that is the subject of another post.

[Snorri1234]

I appreciate your civilized response, but I have to disagree with you. I don’t agree that it’s a case of evidence vs. blind faith. I wasn’t actually talking about the evolution/intelligent design controversy, but I’ll get to that in a minute. The alternatives to the idea of God creating the universe, i.e. a breakthrough from an alternate universe, or matter existing since eternity without a beginning, etc., are, as I said, at least equally unproven, and actually contrary to the laws of science as we know them.

The alternatives however are merely unproven at the moment. And what's more important, it doesn't matter what caused the big bang.

The main beef I have with believers saying atheism requires as much faith as theism (read: christianity as ofcourse all other religions are wrong), is that it just plain doesn't. Theism introduces something that is not needed. The big bang doesn't require an intelligent creator, it doesn't even require a creator. God is invoked as an answer when it isn't.

I hear people asking: "well what caused the big bang then?" after which they say it was obviously god because he could do it. When asked what caused god they reply god doesn't need a cause. But that same argument can be used for atheism, in that the big bang doesn't need a cause.

Basically, theism requires more faith because they simply introduce another factor.
But I'm sure someone else can explain that way better than me, since I reckon we already had this conversation.

As for ID having only blind faith to support it, aren’t you aware that many of the leading scientists of the ID movement are not Christians or “religious” at all. They came to believe ID because of the evidence. Some “converted” as a result, but many still are not religious.

Basically ID assumes there was a creator. This fucking means that when you believe it is true, you automatically are religious. The only being that can intervene in the way the "designer" intervened is a god.

ID is a religious theory, there's no two ways about it.

[MeDeFe]

ID fails to explain quite a lot of bad design, look at the giraffe, it can walk or sprint, but any speed in between is more or less impossible, or so I read in a recent issue of Die Zeit (or was it Welt am Sonntag? Either one). I also recall reading that some sharks need to keep swimming in order to breathe (yes, under water), if they stop they'll suffocate. Or take the appendix, it fulfills no function and is prone to become infected, yep, really good design. Or the eye, why don't we have eyes like squids, their eyes are so much better, our eyes are crude and clumsy by comparison.

ID is a nice try, but not more than that, the conclusion that living beings have been designed because they appear to be perfectly adapted to their environment falls flat as soon as you take even a cursory look at many of the problems that arise from this very "design".

[nmhunate]

It has been reveled through a profit that when we die, we transcend to a sort of heaven... Heaven consists of a beer volcano and a stripper factory.

All praise to him; the Flying Spaghetti Monster, RAmen

[Frigidus]

I knew we'd get to evolution eventually. Alright, blunt objects are fine, but no guns or knives. Let's keep this clean.

[Neoteny]

I knew we'd get to evolution eventually. Alright, blunt objects are fine, but no guns or knives. Let's keep this clean.

It's always a convenient discussion topic.

[daddy1gringo]

I knew we'd get to evolution eventually. Alright, blunt objects are fine, but no guns or knives. Let's keep this clean.

I think DM, CB, Snorri, MDF & I are doing ok at keeping it clean. I for one am tired of the other kind of "discussion" that gets nowhere. But, yeah, let's see if we can keep it up on the high road, guys. I'll be back w/ my response soon.

[116Soldier]

Christianity is not the only thing that requires blind faith. One who believes in evolution requires blind faith. and one who is an atheist also has blind faith, they just don't realize it.

While atheism might arguably require some sort of faith, depending on how you define 'atheism' and 'faith', I really do not see how you can possibly arrive at the conclusion that the opinion that the theory of evolution is in essence correct requires faith, whether blind or seeing. Darwin proposed his theory after examining a load of evidence, it has since been refined, expanded and revised time and time again, always as a result of new empirical evidence and new scientific methods. How does the opinion that evolution is an existing natural process require faith?

For someone to believe that Darwin is right requires faith. I have not seen any evidence =]











I have an interesting arguement but first I must ask one question...Do you evolutionists agree that life is by chance, a completely random occuring that happened by chance? (the big bang and such)

[Skittles!]

Look in a science book, it might just help you find evidence there.

[pimphawks70]

Look in a science book, it might just help you find evidence there.

[116Soldier]

Look in a science book, it might just help you find evidence there.

A science book? what one? all the ones i've looked at in school look pretty false to me.

[Skittles!]

How can science look "false"?

[OnlyAmbrose]

Yeah, that's something I like about Mormon theology. There's no hell in it, and I find hell is a particularly repugnant belief.

There certainly is. It's called "The Outer Darkness." Pretty sweet name.

[Skittles!]

Judaism doesn't have a hell either :/

[OnlyAmbrose]

Christianity is not the only thing that requires blind faith. One who believes in evolution requires blind faith. and one who is an atheist also has blind faith, they just don't realize it.

While atheism might arguably require some sort of faith, depending on how you define 'atheism' and 'faith', I really do not see how you can possibly arrive at the conclusion that the opinion that the theory of evolution is in essence correct requires faith, whether blind or seeing. Darwin proposed his theory after examining a load of evidence, it has since been refined, expanded and revised time and time again, always as a result of new empirical evidence and new scientific methods. How does the opinion that evolution is an existing natural process require faith?

For someone to believe that Darwin is right requires faith. I have not seen any evidence =]

I have an interesting arguement but first I must ask one question...Do you evolutionists agree that life is by chance, a completely random occuring that happened by chance? (the big bang and such)

A science book? what one? all the ones i've looked at in school look pretty false to me.

GAHHH!!! It's this kind of hostility to science which frustrates the heck out of me!

What do we have to fear from science? Nothing! If you are a Christian, then science is the study of God's creation! The Big Bang is pretty much beyond theory at this point. There's so much evidence out there, how can you POSSIBLY say that you don't see any? On what grounds are you calling your textbooks false? The evidence is in there!

And the Big Bang theory is one of the strongest arguments for a creator, imo, yet so many Christians are automatically repulsed by it because it is associated with "science" which is "evil".

Read your textbooks! Study science! You have NOTHING to fear! Don't just dogmatically reject it because your pastor is telling you about the "EVILutionists" who want to destroy your faith!

Look at the facts, and in doing so I think you'll come to realize as I have that they support your faith, of all things!

[strike wolf]

I'll stay here as a ghost for a while then either go to heaven or hell. I just can't see myself going directly to anything after I die though.

[muy_thaiguy]

I'm with Ambrose on this one, granted Science has never been my best subject, I have learned in my physics class (10 th grade that was) that physics, or even science in general (also took a space science course and chemistry course) doesn't refute God in any way, it does make more of a leap towards agnosticism, but, looking at the Big Bang Theory, and others even, I certainly see Ambrose's point in it. Just that science itself is not my best subject, history is.

[Neoteny]

I'm glad other people get as worked up about shunning education as I do.

[Neutrino]

For someone to believe that Darwin is right requires faith. I have not seen any evidence =]

Not very much faith. Everything requires some degree of faith. It takes a small amount of faith on my part to believe that you actually exist. I believe that you exist, because I have no reason to believe that you don't exist, and it really does appear as though you exist.
God, however, is a whole different kettle of fish (possibly the worst expression ever). There is no evidence for God's existence, therefore faith makes up the entirety of your belief, as opposed to a tiny percentage for your existence.

I have an interesting arguement but first I must ask one question...Do you evolutionists agree that life is by chance, a completely random occuring that happened by chance? (the big bang and such)

Quantum Mechanics dictates the universe is inherently probabilistic, so yes.

[Jenos Ridan]

I am doing a survey and I was just wondering what you people think. I love having conversations on this topic!

As do I. When we die we cease to be. End of story.

To a point, that is true. Our bodies have the word die in them for a reason . But I have this to say:

If the reality of existence is material and not spiritual, then life means nil and is pointless. Forget about consciousness; you don’t exist. Seeing as how you, deep down in what remains of your heart (seeing as your never had a soul, this mere organ will have to suffice), know that, you’ll then, in fear of the inevitable, proceed to cravenly fulfill your basest and most carnal desires, devoid of any real sensitivity, having, as Scripture points out, giving it all over to sensuality with an undying lust and hunger for more until you die. As the song goes, it turns to ashes in your mouth. If you accept all this as the truth, then prepare for the taste of ash while you lay on your deathbed and to become merely dust in the wind (or worm food, whichever seems more poetic. oops, yeah, poetry is a pointless venture too, since life itself is an exercise in futillity).

Nihilism is the product of Atheism. I should know, I lived it. And in truth, living that way is no better than the life of an animal. Not exactlly the find of dignity that most Atheists invision but it is the truth.

But isn’t it great ? There are a number of very good reasons I don’t think that way anymore.