Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 30

Thread: God science

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,761
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    9
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    9
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    26771

    Default God science

    Let me explain the problem science has with religion." The atheist professor
    of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students
    to stand.

    "You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"

    "Yes sir," the student says.

    "So you believe in God?"

    "Absolutely."

    "Is God good?"

    "Sure! God's good."

    "Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"

    "Yes."

    "Are you good or evil?"

    "The Bible says I'm evil."

    The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a moment.
    "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can
    cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"

    "Yes sir, I would."

    "So you're good...!"

    "I wouldn't say that."

    "But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could.
    Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."

    The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't, does
    he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to
    Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"

    The student remains silent.

    "No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a
    glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

    "Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"

    "Er...yes," the student says.

    "Is Satan good?"

    The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."

    "Then where does Satan come from?"

    The student falters. "From God"

    "That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in
    this world?"

    "Yes, sir."

    "Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"

    "Yes."

    "So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created everything,
    then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle
    that our works define who we are, then God is evil."

    Again, the student has no answer. "Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred?
    Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?"

    The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

    "So who created them?"

    The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question.
    "Who created them?" There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks
    away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me,"
    he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"

    The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor, I do."

    The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to
    identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"

    "No sir. I've never seen Him."

    "Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"

    "No, sir, I have not."

    "Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have
    you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that
    matter?"

    "No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

    "Yet you still believe in him?"

    "Yes."

    "According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol,
    science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?"

    "Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith."

    "Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has
    with God. There is no evidence, only faith."

    The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His
    own. "Professor, is there such thing as heat?"

    "Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

    "And is there such a thing as cold?"

    "Yes, son, there's cold too."

    "No sir, there isn't."

    The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room
    suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. "You can have
    lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white
    heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We
    can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any
    further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be
    able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees."

    "Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits
    energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy.
    Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is
    only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold.
    Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the
    opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

    Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding
    like a hammer.

    "What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"

    "Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't
    darkness?"

    "You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of
    something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing
    light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called
    darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word."

    "In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness
    darker, wouldn't you?"

    The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a
    good semester. "So what point are you making, young man?"

    "Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start
    with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed."

    The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed? Can you
    explain how?"

    "You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You
    argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God.
    You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can
    measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought."

    "It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully
    understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be
    ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death
    is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it."

    "Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a
    monkey?"

    "If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes,
    of course I do."

    "Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

    The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where
    the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

    "Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot
    even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching
    your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"

    The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has
    subsided.

    "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me
    give you an example of what I mean."

    The student looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has
    ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter.

    "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the
    professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to
    have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable,
    demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due
    respect, sir."

    "So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"

    Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face
    unreadable.

    Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. "I guess you'll
    have to take them on faith."

    "Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,"
    the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"

    Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it
    everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in
    the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These
    manifestations are nothing else but evil."

    To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does
    not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like
    darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of
    God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man
    does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes
    when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

    The professor sat down.

    This student's statements are true, can you or can you not make night
    darker?

    Is it possible for it to get colder after absolute zero -458 degree's F.

    Can you feel, taste, see, hear, or smell your brain?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    Inference
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Way ahead of you
    Posts
    2,274
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    639

    Default

    My major interest in "God science" is that I'd like a chance to dissect God.
    If you're worth less than $5 million and you vote for McCain, you're a loser.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    12,504
    Thanks (Given)
    6
    Thanks (Received)
    210
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    2
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    565784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by typomaniac View Post
    My major interest in "God science" is that I'd like a chance to dissect God.
    and how exactly will that teach us anything new?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    That was a fun little story but Plato it ain't. Still it's not mean to be I suppose. The author wrote it for the converted, not to convert.
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,002
    Thanks (Given)
    36
    Thanks (Received)
    209
    Likes (Given)
    20
    Likes (Received)
    101
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1187318

    Default

    .....can you refute the student's logical analysis?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Way ahead of you
    Posts
    2,274
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by avatar4321 View Post
    and how exactly will that teach us anything new?
    We could see what God's brains are made of.
    If you're worth less than $5 million and you vote for McCain, you're a loser.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California
    Posts
    9,768
    Thanks (Given)
    1
    Thanks (Received)
    28
    Likes (Given)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    16
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    515526

    Default

    I hate teachers with agenda's, shut up and teach.

    Also, teach kids HOW to think, NOT what to think.


    when you teach a child critical thinking skills, you just gave him a skill he can use for his whole life.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    .....can you refute the student's logical analysis?
    There is no logical analysis in it. It's just a contrived piece of propaganda, it's not an argument.

    You see the way I see it is this. If you - and I do mean you - believe in God then I am happy for you. I don't. But I'm not going to tell you (a) you're wrong or (b) you're stupid or (c) there is no God. What the hell do I know?

    If I'm asked about my religious beliefs I simply state I haven't got any.
    If I'm asked if I believe in God I have to say, no I don't.
    I don't retort with a "there is no God you idiot". How would I know?

    If you have faith, if you believe, then you - and I do mean you - don't need any affirmation from anyone else and the ignorant who would decry your faith will have no effect on you. And that's how it should be.

    So when I read something contrived like this piece, it irks me. It's contrived because it's written by someone who feels they have to take on an atheist and to make their opponent look foolish. The author can present the atheist professor as an arrogant smart-arse, trying to make the poor believer student look like a fool. But the author will write the piece and put words in the mouth of each actor to suit the aims of the author. In this instance the arrogant atheist in the position of power over the believer student is shown to be a fool by the student's responses. Unfortunately for the author though, the logic fails and the misrepresentation of the atheist position doesn't help either.

    Instead of this type of writing it would be preferable for us to try to understand and accept each other's points of view and not to combat one another because ultimately it's pointless. Common decency tells me not to seek to offend someone by ridiculing their religious beliefs (whatever they are). Common sense tells me not to let myself be put upon by anyone's beliefs - religious or otherwise.
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    The Deep,Deep South
    Posts
    4,006
    Thanks (Given)
    2
    Thanks (Received)
    4
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    44440

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by diuretic View Post
    There is no logical analysis in it. It's just a contrived piece of propaganda, it's not an argument.

    You see the way I see it is this. If you - and I do mean you - believe in God then I am happy for you. I don't. But I'm not going to tell you (a) you're wrong or (b) you're stupid or (c) there is no God. What the hell do I know?

    If I'm asked about my religious beliefs I simply state I haven't got any.
    If I'm asked if I believe in God I have to say, no I don't.
    I don't retort with a "there is no God you idiot". How would I know?

    If you have faith, if you believe, then you - and I do mean you - don't need any affirmation from anyone else and the ignorant who would decry your faith will have no effect on you. And that's how it should be.

    So when I read something contrived like this piece, it irks me. It's contrived because it's written by someone who feels they have to take on an atheist and to make their opponent look foolish. The author can present the atheist professor as an arrogant smart-arse, trying to make the poor believer student look like a fool. But the author will write the piece and put words in the mouth of each actor to suit the aims of the author. In this instance the arrogant atheist in the position of power over the believer student is shown to be a fool by the student's responses. Unfortunately for the author though, the logic fails and the misrepresentation of the atheist position doesn't help either.

    Instead of this type of writing it would be preferable for us to try to understand and accept each other's points of view and not to combat one another because ultimately it's pointless. Common decency tells me not to seek to offend someone by ridiculing their religious beliefs (whatever they are). Common sense tells me not to let myself be put upon by anyone's beliefs - religious or otherwise.
    Great post diuretic, I tried to give you meaningless reputation points but it seems I am nolonger able to do that since I was banned, I have tried to rep three others and I am not allowed......*shrug*
    No matter where I've traveled or how great the trip was, it's always wonderful to return to my country, The United States of America......... me

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    That's much appreciated Sitarro and thank you to Jon as well.
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,002
    Thanks (Given)
    36
    Thanks (Received)
    209
    Likes (Given)
    20
    Likes (Received)
    101
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1187318

    Default

    There is no logical analysis in it.
    sure there is....

    "Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

    "Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something."

    "Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

    seems like a legitimate logical argument to me......

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,597
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet View Post
    sure there is....

    "Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

    "Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something."

    "Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

    seems like a legitimate logical argument to me......
    Semantical points I'm afraid. Everything turns on the shared meanings of the words used.

    If someone is going to mount an argument from analogy then the analogy has to be very close to the situation being argued or it loses its potency.

    Darkness isn't the absence of something because there's no such thing as darkness. It's a word that we use to describe what we perceive as a lessening of light.

    Moving from there to "Evil is simply the absence of God" is also a semantical word game. I can argue that "evil" is a human social construct but that's only my opinion, what do I know about it? I'm no expert.


    "Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

    I understand the emotion behind the words and I appreciate it. But - and again I'm no logics master - take the emotional meaning from the words and you're not left with much.

    If God is responsible for everything then He created evil. If God is omnipotent then by definition He can't be "absent". He can be rejected, but He can't be absent.

    By all means admire the piece as an appeal to emotion but don't assert its logic when it's really sophistry.
    "Unbloodybreakable" DCI Gene Hunt, 2008

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,002
    Thanks (Given)
    36
    Thanks (Received)
    209
    Likes (Given)
    20
    Likes (Received)
    101
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1187318

    Default

    Everything turns on the shared meanings of the words used
    show me a logical argument which doesn't......that shouldn't keep us from discussing the validity of the logical argument.....

    it appears there is agreement that there is no substance or force known as "dark", it is simply the lack of that which we know as "light"....

    now I know that one of the favorite arguments of those critical of a belief in God is the argument that if there was a God, he would be responsible for "evil" and therefore, not worthy of praise.....

    is it not logically consistent to posit that "evil" is not a thing created, but simply action devoid of any "good"....thus, rather than being brought about by God, it exists as a result of man's action, freely willed?.....

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    College Park, GA
    Posts
    4,749
    Thanks (Given)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    1681

    Default

    Wow. I'll go ahead and forward this to seven people as fast as I can so that I'll have good luck all day...
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaffer
    Science wants to explain things and understand why they happen. Creationists want to use science to justify their own causes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums