Aethiesm is a religion

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheOriginalJames

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,395
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

JMilley said:
science and religion tell the same story in different languages.

Is that why fanatic Christians don't believe the dinosaurs roamed the earth? Or that humans and monkeys have similar traits and characteristics?
 
  • 82
    Replies
  • 4K
    Views
  • 0
    Participant count
    Participants list

Blackwater_GT

Active Member
Messages
592
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I think it's better to believe in something that has a tangible history to it.
I do believe in God. But what has been written and rewritten to fit in with the times and the ideaology of the Popes and kings of past generations has left me wondering about things in it. thats why I am reading it again.
I still have faith and believe in the basic teachings and the lessons to be learned from it. I think you have to go with your own feelings and rely on the goodness of your heart and treat others as you would like to be treated. Treat your body like a Temple and don't abuse it to the point it will revolt against you. Just go with the basics.
 

AtlanticBlue99

Active Member
Messages
3,075
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.06z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

JMilley said:
AtlanticBlue99 said:
i am agnostic because i have found an equal amount of defensive proof that religion (the old testament of the bible) did and does exist. now the corruption in religion is out of play here, i am just basing my belief on facts backed by science. the future is in science and the past is in faith. with knowledge, blind faith and trust is not needed, but religion is always a fall back crutch... until i observe more proof to sway my opinion, i rest as agnostic.

how can you not see God in todays world? this place was born out of nothing, and the scientists believe that a slightest miscalculation of what happened to create the universe would have made it a thin mist. so you would rather believe than the world was made as a one in a billion card...

science and religion tell the same story in different languages.

how much research have you done on string theory, evolution of time measurement itself and mass collapses inward into an infinitely small point, and the expansion rate of the universe? do you understand the calculus to the formulas derived in quantum mechanics and in the theory of relativity?

if so, apply these formulas to the the estimated universal mass (including dark matter) and see how these formulas break down just seconds in time at the creation of the universe (really measured as billions of years now) and you will see how the theory of relativity breaks down at such a small size point and the theory of quantum mechanics breaks down with such a large mass.

at this exact point (the 6 days fo creation of the universe) all science breaks down, but string theory may be a portal into unifying science to understand what happens to matter at this exact point in time dubbed the creation of the universe as the "big bang"

did god create the big bang? here is an explanation that i follow mathematically and believe to be the most accurate:

Israeli Physicist Gerald Schroeder said:
Each of the six days in Schroeder's Genesis actually takes a different length of earth time. The duration D, in earth days, of each cosmic day t is calculated from the formula D = (Ao/L)exp(-Lt), where Ao = 4x1012 (the ratio of the frequencies of the cosmic microwave background at quark confinement compared to now) and L = 0.693 (natural log of 2). More simply, cosmic day one is 8 billion earth years long and you divide by two to get the duration of each succeeding cosmic day.

Cosmic day one starts 15.75 billion earth years ago and covers the creation of the universe, the "breaking free" of light as electrons bind to atomic nuclei, and the beginning of galaxy formation. This is described in Gen. 1:1-5 as the creation followed by light separating from the darkness.

Cosmic day two starts 7.75 billion earth years ago and lasts four billion earth years. During this period the stars and galaxies are born. This corresponds to Gen. 1:6-8, the formation of the heavenly firmament.

Cosmic day three starts 3.75 billion earth years ago. During two billion earth years, the earth cools, water appears, and the first life forms appear. In Gen. 1:9-13, vegetation first appears during the third day.

Cosmic day four starts 1.75 billion earth years ago and lasts a billion earth years. The earth's atmosphere becomes transparent and photosynthesis produces an oxygen-rich atmosphere. Schroeder says that this corresponds to Gen. 1:14-19 when "the Sun, Moon, and stars become visible in the heavens" (67).

Cosmic day five starts 750 million earth years ago and lasts 500 million earth years. During this period, the first multicellular animals appear and the oceans swarm with life. Gen. 1:20-23 says the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures and "birds fly above the earth" (94).

Cosmic day six starts 250 million years ago and ends at the time of Adam. During this period we have a massive extinction in which 90 percent of life is destroyed and then repopulated with humanoids and humans. This, Schroeder says, corresponds to what is described in Gen. 1:24-31.

Technically, Schroeder's formula gives the present as the end of the sixth day. However, it could just as well have ended a few thousand years ago and not affect the rest of the calculation where things are rounded off at hundreds of millions of years. Schroeder argues that after the six cosmic days of creation, Genesis switches its focus over to humanity and starts measuring time in human terms. The rest of the Bible concerns itself with the 6,000 earth years since Adam and Eve, estimated from the Bible in Bishop Ussher fashion.

dispute this mathematical claim with other evidence and sway my view. i have donated years of study to the creation of the universe and have found an equal amount of support for and against religion- so i chose to wait for more evidence to sway my view. religion keeps the peace of the lower class (no offense to the lower class) and aristotle believed that religion would tame and control the non-intelligent and often belligerent lower class, while the educated upper class needed no religion because math and science could prove the workings of the viewable and conceivable universe. prove me wrong...
 

lemon

Member
Messages
7,916
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.01z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

AtlanticBlue99 said:
JMilley said:
AtlanticBlue99 said:
i am agnostic because i have found an equal amount of defensive proof that religion (the old testament of the bible) did and does exist. now the corruption in religion is out of play here, i am just basing my belief on facts backed by science. the future is in science and the past is in faith. with knowledge, blind faith and trust is not needed, but religion is always a fall back crutch... until i observe more proof to sway my opinion, i rest as agnostic.

how can you not see God in todays world? this place was born out of nothing, and the scientists believe that a slightest miscalculation of what happened to create the universe would have made it a thin mist. so you would rather believe than the world was made as a one in a billion card...

science and religion tell the same story in different languages.

how much research have you done on string theory, evolution of time measurement itself and mass collapses inward into an infinitely small point, and the expansion rate of the universe? do you understand the calculus to the formulas derived in quantum mechanics and in the theory of relativity?

if so, apply these formulas to the the estimated universal mass (including dark matter) and see how these formulas break down just seconds in time at the creation of the universe (really measured as billions of years now) and you will see how the theory of relativity breaks down at such a small size point and the theory of quantum mechanics breaks down with such a large mass.

at this exact point (the 6 days fo creation of the universe) all science breaks down, but string theory may be a portal into unifying science to understand what happens to matter at this exact point in time dubbed the creation of the universe as the "big bang"

did god create the big bang? here is an explanation that i follow mathematically and believe to be the most accurate:

Israeli Physicist Gerald Schroeder said:
Each of the six days in Schroeder's Genesis actually takes a different length of earth time. The duration D, in earth days, of each cosmic day t is calculated from the formula D = (Ao/L)exp(-Lt), where Ao = 4x1012 (the ratio of the frequencies of the cosmic microwave background at quark confinement compared to now) and L = 0.693 (natural log of 2). More simply, cosmic day one is 8 billion earth years long and you divide by two to get the duration of each succeeding cosmic day.

Cosmic day one starts 15.75 billion earth years ago and covers the creation of the universe, the "breaking free" of light as electrons bind to atomic nuclei, and the beginning of galaxy formation. This is described in Gen. 1:1-5 as the creation followed by light separating from the darkness.

Cosmic day two starts 7.75 billion earth years ago and lasts four billion earth years. During this period the stars and galaxies are born. This corresponds to Gen. 1:6-8, the formation of the heavenly firmament.

Cosmic day three starts 3.75 billion earth years ago. During two billion earth years, the earth cools, water appears, and the first life forms appear. In Gen. 1:9-13, vegetation first appears during the third day.

Cosmic day four starts 1.75 billion earth years ago and lasts a billion earth years. The earth's atmosphere becomes transparent and photosynthesis produces an oxygen-rich atmosphere. Schroeder says that this corresponds to Gen. 1:14-19 when "the Sun, Moon, and stars become visible in the heavens" (67).

Cosmic day five starts 750 million earth years ago and lasts 500 million earth years. During this period, the first multicellular animals appear and the oceans swarm with life. Gen. 1:20-23 says the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures and "birds fly above the earth" (94).

Cosmic day six starts 250 million years ago and ends at the time of Adam. During this period we have a massive extinction in which 90 percent of life is destroyed and then repopulated with humanoids and humans. This, Schroeder says, corresponds to what is described in Gen. 1:24-31.

Technically, Schroeder's formula gives the present as the end of the sixth day. However, it could just as well have ended a few thousand years ago and not affect the rest of the calculation where things are rounded off at hundreds of millions of years. Schroeder argues that after the six cosmic days of creation, Genesis switches its focus over to humanity and starts measuring time in human terms. The rest of the Bible concerns itself with the 6,000 earth years since Adam and Eve, estimated from the Bible in Bishop Ussher fashion.

dispute this mathematical claim with other evidence and sway my view. i have donated years of study to the creation of the universe and have found an equal amount of support for and against religion- so i chose to wait for more evidence to sway my view. religion keeps the peace of the lower class (no offense to the lower class) and aristotle believed that religion would tame and control the non-intelligent and often belligerent lower class, while the educated upper class needed no religion because math and science could prove the workings of the viewable and conceivable universe. prove me wrong...

study is different from research. i would suggest you approach your claims more carefully in the future.
 

OUZBnd

Active Member
Messages
2,807
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.06z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

AtlanticBlue99 said:
JMilley said:
AtlanticBlue99 said:
i am agnostic because i have found an equal amount of defensive proof that religion (the old testament of the bible) did and does exist. now the corruption in religion is out of play here, i am just basing my belief on facts backed by science. the future is in science and the past is in faith. with knowledge, blind faith and trust is not needed, but religion is always a fall back crutch... until i observe more proof to sway my opinion, i rest as agnostic.

how can you not see God in todays world? this place was born out of nothing, and the scientists believe that a slightest miscalculation of what happened to create the universe would have made it a thin mist. so you would rather believe than the world was made as a one in a billion card...

science and religion tell the same story in different languages.

how much research have you done on string theory, evolution of time measurement itself and mass collapses inward into an infinitely small point, and the expansion rate of the universe? do you understand the calculus to the formulas derived in quantum mechanics and in the theory of relativity?

if so, apply these formulas to the the estimated universal mass (including dark matter) and see how these formulas break down just seconds in time at the creation of the universe (really measured as billions of years now) and you will see how the theory of relativity breaks down at such a small size point and the theory of quantum mechanics breaks down with such a large mass.

at this exact point (the 6 days fo creation of the universe) all science breaks down, but string theory may be a portal into unifying science to understand what happens to matter at this exact point in time dubbed the creation of the universe as the "big bang"

did god create the big bang? here is an explanation that i follow mathematically and believe to be the most accurate:

Israeli Physicist Gerald Schroeder said:
Each of the six days in Schroeder's Genesis actually takes a different length of earth time. The duration D, in earth days, of each cosmic day t is calculated from the formula D = (Ao/L)exp(-Lt), where Ao = 4x1012 (the ratio of the frequencies of the cosmic microwave background at quark confinement compared to now) and L = 0.693 (natural log of 2). More simply, cosmic day one is 8 billion earth years long and you divide by two to get the duration of each succeeding cosmic day.

Cosmic day one starts 15.75 billion earth years ago and covers the creation of the universe, the "breaking free" of light as electrons bind to atomic nuclei, and the beginning of galaxy formation. This is described in Gen. 1:1-5 as the creation followed by light separating from the darkness.

Cosmic day two starts 7.75 billion earth years ago and lasts four billion earth years. During this period the stars and galaxies are born. This corresponds to Gen. 1:6-8, the formation of the heavenly firmament.

Cosmic day three starts 3.75 billion earth years ago. During two billion earth years, the earth cools, water appears, and the first life forms appear. In Gen. 1:9-13, vegetation first appears during the third day.

Cosmic day four starts 1.75 billion earth years ago and lasts a billion earth years. The earth's atmosphere becomes transparent and photosynthesis produces an oxygen-rich atmosphere. Schroeder says that this corresponds to Gen. 1:14-19 when "the Sun, Moon, and stars become visible in the heavens" (67).

Cosmic day five starts 750 million earth years ago and lasts 500 million earth years. During this period, the first multicellular animals appear and the oceans swarm with life. Gen. 1:20-23 says the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures and "birds fly above the earth" (94).

Cosmic day six starts 250 million years ago and ends at the time of Adam. During this period we have a massive extinction in which 90 percent of life is destroyed and then repopulated with humanoids and humans. This, Schroeder says, corresponds to what is described in Gen. 1:24-31.

Technically, Schroeder's formula gives the present as the end of the sixth day. However, it could just as well have ended a few thousand years ago and not affect the rest of the calculation where things are rounded off at hundreds of millions of years. Schroeder argues that after the six cosmic days of creation, Genesis switches its focus over to humanity and starts measuring time in human terms. The rest of the Bible concerns itself with the 6,000 earth years since Adam and Eve, estimated from the Bible in Bishop Ussher fashion.

dispute this mathematical claim with other evidence and sway my view. i have donated years of study to the creation of the universe and have found an equal amount of support for and against religion- so i chose to wait for more evidence to sway my view. religion keeps the peace of the lower class (no offense to the lower class) and aristotle believed that religion would tame and control the non-intelligent and often belligerent lower class, while the educated upper class needed no religion because math and science could prove the workings of the viewable and conceivable universe. prove me wrong...

Wow. I didn't read all of this because the first line said "THEORY" Which is exactly what both of you are disputing. Just a reminder, one could argue that a scientific theory is just as good of a guess as a religious theory.

And Lemon, researching and studying is essentially the same thing. Studying is the pursuit of knowledge through research, research is the act of studying something thuroughly. See the connection?
 

AtlanticBlue99

Active Member
Messages
3,075
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.06z
i hear you OUZ, but the mathematics is nothing but theory because of the infinity of numbers feasible. i like to group math and science together in relation to social, political, economic, and religious theory since math and science bear more truth in their theories...
 

lemon

Member
Messages
7,916
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.01z
when you put it that way ( your view on research and studying ) i would have to say ok.

but this is how i viewed it:

research - going through other's writings based on whatever they were studying

studying - writing down your observations of something

--------

but then your view kinds puts em together, because researching studies could be the studying, and during your studies, you may not want to start from the beginning, so you use other's work(s).

:dunno
 

insanityOfReality

New Member
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

lemon said:
when you put it that way ( your view on research and studying ) i would have to say ok.

but this is how i viewed it:

research - going through other's writings based on whatever they were studying

studying - writing down your observations of something

--------

but then your view kinds puts em together, because researching studies could be the studying, and during your studies, you may not want to start from the beginning, so you use other's work(s).

:dunno

i have to agree with those but i mean scientific research is the process of doing experiments to obtain data and draw conclusions and studying i think of examining material to withdraw the information from it (like school)

while there are two distinctly different defintions both words are interchangable to these different definitions

it seems to me scientific research is more of setting up an experiment and examining it while studying is just observing it more naturally but tahts just the way i veiw it
 

IntruderLS1

Active Member
Messages
2,489
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
How about this...

"If you choose to believe there is no God, you had BETTER BE RIGHT."

:D

You have nothing to lose by believing and being wrong, but everything to lose by not believing and being wrong.

How is that for simple math? :)
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

IntruderLS1 said:
How about this...

"If you choose to believe there is no God, you had BETTER BE RIGHT."

:D

You have nothing to lose by believing and being wrong, but everything to lose by not believing and being wrong.

How is that for simple math? :)

It's kinda like buying insurance.... right?
 

sharpies

Active Member
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Wrong, it's more like being brainwashed into believing in Santa Claus.

"If you don't believe in Santa then you won't get any presents."

This is what every parent tells their kid at some point & it usually keeps them saying they believe for a couple more years. Doesn't mean that they do believe but they are not really brave enough yet to admit that they don't.

Believing in God is very similar if you are forced to, because of what you think may happen to you, if you don't.

Allan
 

SilentEyz

Well-Known Member
Messages
5,305
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I am a little confused here,

I am of no religion, But Yes I believe in GOD, I do not buy into any set religions rules or beliefs, I go by what I have learned in my experiance, What I read I take to value only in the sense of what my Faith believes. I have studied the Bible, read it many times in fact, but tendency goes to the fact that it was written by man, exageration and embellishement are what writers do. all truths are are salted with perception.

Why does Belief in anything be it God or the lack of, Why do you have to be classed in a religion due to it ? I am not religious, Yet I have faith and believe
 

sharpies

Active Member
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I think the simple fact here is that if you believe in a God, then you are religious & if you do not believe in a God then you are not religious. The definition means to believe & worship.

This does not mean that you have to belong to any religious group it simply means that you fit into that definition.

Allan
 

Butterfly

Active Member
Messages
2,416
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

sharpies said:
I think the simple fact here is that if you believe in a God, then you are religious & if you do not believe in a God then you are not religious. The definition means to believe & worship.

Not believing in God does not automatically make you not religious... there are other religions and other gods/goddesses out there to believe in. It just makes you a non christian.
 

sharpies

Active Member
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Yeah fair call, but I will argue that most of them (other religions) worship a diety or a number of dieties & that when I am referring to God, I am generalising.

Allan
 

Tim

Having way too much fun
Valued Contributor
Messages
13,518
Reaction score
43
Tokenz
111.11z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

sharpies said:
I think the simple fact here is that if you believe in a God, then you are religious & if you do not believe in a God then you are not religious. The definition means to believe & worship.

This does not mean that you have to belong to any religious group it simply means that you fit into that definition.

Allan

Believing in God does not make you religious. Belonging to and participating in a religion makes you religious. As you have pointed out, the definition is to believe and worship. To believe in God and to worship him are two different things.
 

TheOriginalJames

Well-Known Member
Messages
23,395
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

RecklessTim said:
sharpies said:
I think the simple fact here is that if you believe in a God, then you are religious & if you do not believe in a God then you are not religious. The definition means to believe & worship.

This does not mean that you have to belong to any religious group it simply means that you fit into that definition.

Allan

Believing in God does not make you religious. Belonging to and participating in a religion makes you religious. As you have pointed out, the definition is to believe and worship. To believe in God and to worship him are two different things.

:agree
 

Haus

OTz Original
Messages
16,068
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.10z
Re: RE: Aethiesm is a religion

2000Si said:
RecklessTim said:
sharpies said:
I think the simple fact here is that if you believe in a God, then you are religious & if you do not believe in a God then you are not religious. The definition means to believe & worship.

This does not mean that you have to belong to any religious group it simply means that you fit into that definition.

Allan

Believing in God does not make you religious. Belonging to and participating in a religion makes you religious. As you have pointed out, the definition is to believe and worship. To believe in God and to worship him are two different things.

:agree
:agree i totally agree on that tim. im not religous in the least bit but i believe in god. i just choose to believe what i want to believe instead of someone shoving their beliefs down my throat.
 

sharpies

Active Member
Messages
1,385
Reaction score
0
Tokenz
0.00z
I'm willing to concede the point... but (being an arguementative person) what's the point of believing in a God if in some way you don't worship him?

Quick definitions (worship)


noun: the activity of worshipping
noun: a feeling of profound love and admiration

I suppose if the belief is used as an explanation for the beginning, maybe I can understand it, but I would then wonder what the point is?

Allan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members
Back
Top