I think MightyMoe touches on the significant thing.
Some beliefs make more sense than others.

When science discovers inconsistencies and unreasonableness it says "Wait a Minute, something isn't right?" then we take another look.

When religion has inconsistencies and unreasonableness it says "That's God's will, never question God's will!" and we are expected to never look again.

Its the dismissal of curiosity and reason that defeats the viability of religious doctrine. Faith doesn't build churches, brick and mortar builds churches. Religion is a consensus of belief of individuals that attempts to build unity. However, the unity is not truly obtained because people have individual beliefs. Religion attempts to control those individual beliefs with rewards and punishments for belief and non-belief in alignment with the established doctrine. A 'manipulation' of belief on multiple agendas.

Religion attempts to 'define' God according to its requirements.
Assuming it 'knows' God. Yet it conflicts with this assumption in its practice.

that's kind of a weak argument... There's way more ideas showing that it doesn't exist than that it does...just because we can't figure out how life started doesn't mean a magical being snapped its fingers and poof, were all here...the theories on life and panspernia make much more sense than any magical being we should devote our lives too...


Actually, the Scriptures frown on magic, or a belief thereof.

Just because you cannot see Him is no indication that He is magical or does not exist. We can't see black holes except with x-rays. But we can see the effects of back holes.

Perhaps one day someone will invent a filter we can see through and see God.

I see God every moment, everywhere I look.
My God is nothing like anyone else's God...Because its My God.
My Belief.
Personally, I don't need to prove anything to anyone.
But I do understand other's need.

that's kind of a weak argument... There's way more ideas showing that it doesn't exist than that it does...just because we can't figure out how life started doesn't mean a magical being snapped its fingers and poof, were all here...the theories on life and panspernia make much more sense than any magical being we should devote our lives too...


Actually, the Scriptures frown on magic, or a belief thereof.

Just because you cannot see Him is no indication that He is magical or does not exist. We can't see black holes except with x-rays. But we can see the effects of back holes.

Perhaps one day someone will invent a filter we can see through and see God.


that would solve a lot of confusions in the world today... I hope for religious peoples sake it does happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it tho...in the mean time, I'll enjoy all the sciences I can understand...

Actually, I am not really very religious. I am more Spiritual.

Do you understand Quantum Physics? You have two things in your home that are a result of that science.

CLV Jn 10:34 Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, that `I say you are gods'?
35 If He said those were gods, to whom the word of God came (and the scripture can not be annulled),

Can you see how this relates?

God and science do not clash.

what does that have to do with quantum physics? For hundreds of years the sciences were outlawed by the church...if it didn't glorify God, it was herecy...back then, they knew it would prove what the priests were saying was wrong, but what they didn't understand that God couldn't be proven either way...so it was all for nothing...one of the many reasons I feel organised religion is just for control, not much else...

My father always said religion thrives on poverty and ignorance
De LA soul say 3 is a magik number

I'm going to take a moment and explore some concepts and observations that might shed some insight on the whole religion proof thing. Bear with me...

Right now, In all the Universe we only know of one planet in one star system that has life. On that planet we know of only one species that has what we consider intelligent life...US.

Religion makes this out to be something very special. That in all creation mankind is the only intelligent life created. It portends to describe that mankind is made in the image of its creator.

Lets say that only one lifeform exists per star system. That the life form in each star system is man, everytime.
In the Milky Way galaxy alone (we know the Milky Way galaxy exists), around 100 thousand light years across, there are around 200 million stars. That means, there are 200 million created mankinds.
But wait.
We have detected the observable Universe at 14 Billion light years across.
That is observable from our current vantage point. It is a sphere of detection that extends out 14 billion light years no matter which way you look. There is no detected edge which means that if you change the vantage point and look again, you may see an additional 14 billion light years because we are limited to detecting light thru time.
At 14 billion light years we estimate there are 30 billion trillion stars in the Universe that we can detect. That's (3x10²²) a lot of mankind made in the image of God. How can we be anything special.
Now take the possibility that life exists on more than one planet in a star system and the number grows exponentially.
We are looking for any life on any other body in the solar system. If we find it, that fact will change the special purpose of mankind in the Universe forever. The vast expanse of the Universe is significant to reason in this train of thought.

Look at life on this one little planet. There are billions of lifeforms here. Plus there is the fact that we can't communicate with any other lifeforms on this one planet except ourselves in any meaningful way. How do we know what the intelligence level of any other species is except by measuring it against our own ideas of intelligence.

Not only is our religion biased to ourselves, our science and understanding of the Universe is biased to ourselves. We have no standard on which to gauge our accuracy, except the standards we create.

What is that about? Me not know.

Your post below is quite good and actually, parallels The Urantia Book.

FWIW:

Note: The Urantia Book uses the term "universe" somewhat differently than we use it today.

12:1.7 The Grand Universe is the present organized and inhabited creation. It consists of the seven superuniverses, with an aggregate evolutionary potential of around seven trillion inhabited planets, not to mention the eternal spheres of the central creation. But this tentative estimate takes no account of architectural administrative spheres, neither does it include the outlying groups of unorganized universes. The present ragged edge of the grand universe, its uneven and unfinished periphery, together with the tremendously unsettled condition of the whole astronomical plot, suggests to our star students that even the seven superuniverses are, as yet, uncompleted. As we move from within, from the divine center outward in any one direction, we do, eventually, come to the outer limits of the organized and inhabited creation; we come to the outer limits of the grand universe. And it is near this outer border, in a far-off corner of such a magnificent creation, that your local universe has its eventful existence.

2nd Note:

The Urantia Book describes a species of "non-breathers," mortals. In other words, within parameters, life is designed to fit a habitat. No air? They can get their sustenance from sunlight. And The Urantia Book says this below about a race of non-breathers "in close proximity" to our world. I take that to mean the Greys, and I take it to mean they live right here in our solar system with us. They don't come from another star to visit us. They're probably native to the Moon, Mercury, Ganymede, Callisto, Europa, or perhaps even Pluto. There are a lot of non-breather candidate worlds in our solar system.

49:3.6 You would be more than interested in the planetary conduct of this type of mortal because such a race of beings inhabits a sphere in close proximity to Urantia.

A very good example. The word "heresy" is not in the Scriptures. It has been interpreted there.

I have found that science does glorify God.

You said you will enjoy the sciences that you understand. I asked if you understood Quantum Physics.

there is no need to rub salt into the wounds by confusing him with semantics.

after all, the cornerstone to scientific method [using mathematics to prove a scientific theory], began with men who are considered giants of science and the pillars like Galileo were known to be devout believers of God!!

in fact, Galileo quoted, "mathematics is the language by which God created the universe." and he also made the statement, "In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual."

but let us not forget the man who used Werner Heisenberg, Max Born, and Pascual Jordan matrix mechanics [quantum mechanics] to formulate one of the biggest break throughs in the study of relativity with his E=MC2 [quantum theory] Albert Einstein.

and Albert is on record with his belief in God via Spinoza.

in fact, one of Albert's most famous quotes was, "The more I study science, the more I believe in God." another of his famous quotes concerning his beliefs, "“I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world." and my all time favorite, “That deep emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.”

another pillar and great mathematician known for the law of gravity, Isaac Newton stated, "I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."


quite amazing that 3 major pillars of science actually believed in God or a higher power.

it's why it's as easy to disprove modern science. especially when they have changed the BBT, haven't witnessed single cell splitting naturally in over 150+ years under the microscope, dating methods are skewed, DNA, and now astrophysicists are discussing simulated universe with an alien creator of higher knowledge.

I find your replies interesting.
Let me continue a bit on a tangent.

Reality is just reality. It requires no justification and no proofs. It just is.
There is no emotional connection in reality.
There is no higher reason for reality. It just is.

The human mind has innate fear of the unknown.
Reality even in its simplicity is unknown.
We wrap delusion around reality so it is easier to deal with.
That delusion is belief.

Human beings tend to complicate everything.
Our delusions of reality become complicated to give us harmony that exists in our own perception of the realities we choose to embrace.
Religions play on those delusions to give us a sense of comfort in a world of stark cold reality.
It is our delusions that allow us to cope with it.

No matter what delusions we tell ourselves, reality always exists, even when we refuse to embrace it. This results in a feeling of need or inadequacy.
Its those feelings of need or inadequacy that religion tries to fulfill.
The problem is that those delusions do not fill the needs without absolution. Meaning believing without question.

During our existence in reality we encounter times when the delusion of belief is inadequate to aleve the trepidation of what reality is and we become discontented.
Some people seek guidance (contentment) in religion, others find their contentment in their own delusional perception. A small percentage embrace reality and deal with it as is.

This is why you can quote me saying that "if you find contentment in your belief what more do you need?".

Understand that reality is not as per human understanding. Reality has no dividing hierarchy, it just is. Religion assumes a hierarchy of purpose.

To realize that everything we know, everything we understand about reality is merely our interpretation of it is comforting. Religion attempts to define purpose where no purpose exists. People pick up on that even when they don't realize it.

As mankind embraces more and more of reality we require less and less belief in religious mandates. This is why religions are waning in favor of reality based science.

not really..just some basic crud I can't really agree with yet..

Consider this for a minute;

When is the last time you had an intelligent conversation with something that was not human?
Did you sit down with you cat and discuss God?
How about your dog?
Did you overhear the birds on the fence discussing God?
What about the worms in the dirt?

This planet is full of lifeforms that coexist in reality with you yet none of them display any type of religious fervor?
Is it a conspiracy?
Is it preordained?
Could it be that reality doesn't conform to expectations?

The proof in the pudding is the absence of proof.
The proof may exist but we can't decipher it.
If mankind is elevated over nature, you would think that we would be able to detect religion in lower species on the same planet?

I recall some stuff about how mankind once had dominion over the animals.
Wouldn't you think if that were true there would be at least some residue remaining? I mean c'mon, we have residual animalistic imperatives after 50,000 years of civilization. Civilization that tries to eliminate our animal nature.

Religion attempts to separate our animal from our civilization but, its not working. We still have animal drives. You can delude yourself but actions speak for the reality. We are animals, we always have been and always will be.

Since we are animalistic in our nature, and..., religion insists that man is made in the form of God. God must therefore be an animal and that makes your God, not a God.

It doesn't matter what you assign on your impression of what God is. The moment you believe that we are created in God's image, God becomes an animal.

My belief of God is much different than that. I believe God is an unknown force that caused the initial change that created the eruption of the Universe.
Everything that has happened since is just a manifestation of God resultant of that initial change. This means that any science or reality that occurs is of God, including me.

I know you are a mathematician by your own admittance.
I understand your reasoning based on that enlightenment.
However, math can't explain the Universe.
Lemme splain...
The Universe existed before math.
Math is currently how we make sense of the Universe we can test.
But, the Universe exists in ways that math can't explain.
What is the mathematical equation of happiness, dreams, hopes, desires or imagination? Those are all part of the Universe too.
On the subject of math and the importance of numbers, the only number that has any significance is ONE. All other values are derived from one.
However, ONE is subjective. It is relative to the observer. It is relative to the understanding of the observer. At one time, the atom was thought to be a value of one but as we unlock our understanding of particle physics we know that an atom is composed of multiple parts and certainly is not a baseline ONE.
If you consider the Universe as a whole, it becomes one but we all know that it consists of multiples of one, divisions of one. Therefore, mathematics, while accurate at our present understanding, may not be how the Universe is defined.

Maybe ants Tom... They have borg type mindset filled with delusions of self importance where anything and everything is theirs, just like humans...only difference is they have no fear of death protecting or taking what they think is thiers, which is everything..

you do understand the concept that God is not a religion?

religion is built around the idea of God, but then is mucked by humanities will.

now let's look at scientific theory:
it's an opinion that is not based upon facts, but solely based upon acceptance within science itself.

example is the BBT. we once believed the laws of physics, singularity, energy grew, the universe shrunk, and when it froze it annihilated into the universe.

today however, astrophysicists like Arizona States Krause, propose after watching the evidence from the COBE telescope expedition the BANG took place and from that caused the laws of physics, singularity, energy.

of course, that now leads to the ultimate question, what caused the Bang if there literally was nothing, no space, no dark matter, plasma, energy, gravity, electromagnetics, no singularity.

science has come full circle, and we are literally back to square ONE!!

I give them effort for trying, but their failures ending them right back at the starting grid only gives credence for more evidence of God.

Once again I'm in over my head with you guys. But isn't the concept and number 0 pretty important too. And unless I'm mistaken I believe it was first used in India or it could have been Tibet. Perhaps some of these people are more enlightened than some people give them credit for