Religion, what's the point?

[Giggs86]

Is there a proven scientific evidence that there is no God or some sort of higher power? No.

Same as there is no proven scientific evidence regarding the existence (or non-existence) of alien life.

In both cases it's natural that people will hold different beliefs and opinions regarding their existences.

 

[Buster15]

It doesn't fail, and I made no mention of the book of Genesis.

In respect of the origins of the universe I'm referring to the simple idea that the universe is the result of a purposeless accident, and the denial of that notion.

The only thing that describes the creation of the Universe is in Genesis is in not. So you were referring to it.

 

[Buster15]

I have no problem people in believing in a religion if it gives them comfort as long as it doesn't affect other people, that they don't try to force their beliefs on other people, or use it to think they are nicer or better than other people or worse, use it as a weapon to hurt other people or use it as something to hide behind to justify their actions.

Exactly my view as well.

 

[Kinsella]

The only thing that describes the creation of the Universe is in Genesis is in not. So you were referring to it.

I wasn't. I've never read it so I wouldn't refer to it any case. I'm only familiar with the first verse.

 

[Buster15]

Is there a proven scientific evidence that there is no God or some sort of higher power? No.

Same as there is no proven scientific evidence regarding the existence (or non-existence) of alien life.

In both cases it's natural that people will hold different beliefs and opinions regarding their existences.

There you go. You talk about God as if it was singular. Your God.
But what about the countless other so called God's.
They can not all be God.
It is just what people created as a belief and that has been handed down by word and mouth.

 

[Grylte]

And that is your evidence is it.
The same so called evidence that says that the Universe is a few tens of thousands of years old....
I suggest that you understand the definition of evidence.

you had this answer prepared, hadn't you?

Think Grylte was being sarcastic there

I know it sometimes can be hard to see in written form, so i added the "d'uh" - aparantly not enough :P

 

[Raoul]

Is there a proven scientific evidence that there is no God or some sort of higher power? No.

Same as there is no proven scientific evidence regarding the existence (or non-existence) of alien life.

In both cases it's natural that people will hold different beliefs and opinions regarding their existences.

The only problem with this is that we all live in a shared objective reality, which means agreeing on a common set of facts which collectively influence each of our lives.

 

[Grylte]

Is there a proven scientific evidence that there is no God or some sort of higher power? No.

Same as there is no proven scientific evidence regarding the existence (or non-existence) of alien life.

In both cases it's natural that people will hold different beliefs and opinions regarding their existences.

Considering the size of the universe, i'd say it's probable that there are so called aliens.
Living organisms, i'd say a very high possibility, maybe not with 2 legs, 2 arms and a head, like us, like in the movies :P

That's not really a belief, more probability.

It's not really science's job to disprove god, rather the other way around.

 

[Gehrman]

I've had quite a few strong spiritual experiences in my life that's made me incline towards believing in rebirth/reincarnation through having spent time with or receiving teachings from Tulku's(supposed consciously reincarnated buddhist masters). It's not something that i'm going to state as a fact, just that simply it's made me more inclined to believe in it. Considering this is the religion bashing thread there probably isn't much point in describing any of them.

 

[Giggs86]

There you go. You talk about God as if it was singular. Your God.
But what about the countless other so called God's.
They can not all be God.
It is just what people created as a belief and that has been handed down by word and mouth.

No I'm not, I specifically mentioned God or some sort of higher power. There must be thousands of Gods and deities people believed in since the beginning of human history.
It is in the human nature to believe in stories and myths to create explanations to things they don't have answers to.

 

[Kinsella]

I've had quite a few strong spiritual experiences in my life that's made me incline towards believing in rebirth/reincarnation through having spent time with or receiving teachings from Tulku's(supposed consciously reincarnated buddhist masters). It's not something that i'm going to state as a fact, just that simply it's made me more inclined to believe in it. Considering this is the religion bashing thread there probably isn't much point in describing any of them.

More evidence.

 

[Gehrman]

More evidence.

Well I could share one story that I find interesting because the experience was shared by at least one other person. A nun and female Lama called Khandro Rinpoche came and gave teachings at our buddhist center. She is fat and bald. I didn't know anything about her at the time. However once she sat down on her seat, it was like her body became transparent like a hologram and she transformed into a beautiful slim woman with long black hair, fair skin and silver earrings.

I thought that was excatly like how I imagined Yeshe Tsogyal would look like who is the most famous female budhist master of all time. During this time I wondered whether I was going crazy or trying to force some experience. It continued during the 2 hours she was teaching. I decided to keep the experience to myself. When I was dining with some ladies from the center, one of the women said "I must have been really tired in there, because it was like she transformed into an indian princess. So I thought this was interesting, it seemed another had a somewhat similar experience, so I went over and asked one of the senior buddhists at the center "Is this nun supposed to be a reincarnation of someone important" and she said "Yes, she is supposed to be a reincarnation of Yeshe Tsogyal, why?".

So at least this was a inner experience that seemed to be shared by at least one other person and made sense in the context. And no I wasn't on drugs.

 

[Salt Bailly]

A nun and female Lama called Khandro Rinpoche came and gave teachings at our buddhist center.

Such smart animals.

 

[Gehrman]

Such smart animals.

We actually have a lama farm right next to one of our housing buildings. I've never asked why.

 

[fergieisold]

Religion on the whole is difficult for me to understand - I have my own personal feelings about spiritual things but I don’t see how I could ever go from that to adhering to a set of beliefs.

 

[Grinner]

I think you'll believe in something if you need it.

 

[MrMarcello]

No I'm not, I specifically mentioned God or some sort of higher power. There must be thousands of Gods and deities people believed in since the beginning of human history.
It is in the human nature to believe in stories and myths to create explanations to things they don't have answers to.

https://www.godchecker.com/

 

[Kinsella]

Well I could share one story that I find interesting because the experience was shared by at least one other person.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[The Corinthian]

Considering the size of the universe, i'd say it's probable that there are so called aliens.
Living organisms, i'd say a very high possibility, maybe not with 2 legs, 2 arms and a head, like us, like in the movies :P

That's not really a belief, more probability.

It's not really science's job to disprove god, rather the other way around.

Sorry to break it to you, but belief in alien life forms with 0 evidence is 100% a belief and has nothing to do with probability.

 

[Sparky_Hughes]

As long as it’s not imposed on others, or used to try and tell non believers how they should live, each to their own.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

Sorry to break it to you, but belief in alien life forms with 0 evidence is 100% a belief and has nothing to do with probability.

There's a far higher probability that aliens exist across a nearly unlimited amount of planets, then a man in the sky created everything.

 

[The Corinthian]

There's a far higher probability that aliens exist across a nearly unlimited amount of planets, then a man in the sky created everything.

You can only have a 'far higher probability' based on some evidence of it occurring in the first place. As things stand, there is no actual evidence of alien life forms existing.

If you take the number of planets / solar systems discovered as your denominator, and your numerator is 'alien life forms discovered' the probability is 0.

Right now, you (and Grylte) believe in alien life forms existing based on the vastness of space and the fact there's still a lot we don't know about it. But it's a belief, not 'probability'. That might change years from now, but that's the case as things stand.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I am the one who would rather choose death over leaving my religion (as in Spanish Inquisition), or reject 1M dollars in exchange me leaving my religion.

Do you ever wonder why (other than I am being stupid or brainwashed)?

In a way I massively envy you. Believing in something so abstract, so strongly in this day and age is really impressive. I would love to think there's an afterlife, unfortunately, all the evidence says otherwise.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

You can only have a 'far higher probability' based on some evidence of it occurring in the first place. As things stand, there is no actual evidence of alien life forms existing.

If you take the number of planets / solar systems discovered as your denominator, and your numerator is 'alien life forms discovered' the probability is 0.

Right now, you (and Grylte) believe in alien life forms existing based on the vastness of space and the fact there's still a lot we don't know about it. But it's a belief, not 'probability'. That might change years from now, but that's the case as things stand.

I get what you mean, lets spin the question though. Do you believe that there is no alien life out there? The fact you say that could change years from now makes me think you certainly believe in the possibility.

 

[The Corinthian]

I get what you mean, lets spin the question though. Do you believe that there is no alien life out there?

From very high level reading, there's 'Earth' like planets out there which (with some caveats) have habitable conditions for life. Some scientists say that these conditions could turn chemistry into life in the 35-45 million years range.

The fact you say that could change years from now makes me think you certainly believe in the possibility.

I said that could change more in not knowing what the future holds but no one really knows. Right now I don't think there is, and I doubt there will be (certainly not in my lifetime).

But if I'm around in 35-45 million years, I might have to revise my opinion.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

From very high level reading, there's 'Earth' like planets out there which (with some caveats) have habitable conditions for life. Some scientists say that these conditions could turn chemistry into life in the 35-45 million years range.



I said that could change more in not knowing what the future holds but no one really knows. Right now I don't think there is, and I doubt there will be (certainly not in my lifetime).

But if I'm around in 35-45 million years, I might have to revise my opinion.

Yeh fair enough, I am not really expecting us to find anything in my lifetime either, I just struggle to believe that means it isn't out there in some form. Just too add to the discussion, what do you think the impact would be if we were to discover life in the next 20-30 years? Does that effectively put the final nail in religion once and for all, or will people just brush it off?

 

[The Corinthian]

Yeh fair enough, I am not really expecting us to find anything in my lifetime either, I just struggle to believe that means it isn't out there in some form. Just too add to the discussion, what do you think the impact would be if we were to discover life in the next 20-30 years? Does that effectively put the final nail in religion once and for all, or will people just brush it off?

I'm not sure. I don't really see it affecting any religion if other life forms are found.

I think in most Abrahamic faiths, there's a distinct notion of more than one 'world'. Whether that means planets (and subsequently what inhabits them), or something else entirely, I don't know.

Hinduism and Sikhism, I can't really comment on, but at my limited understanding, I doubt it would affect their day to day practice of the religion.

Similarly, with Buddhism, I can't see it affecting their religion either.

 

[Gehrman]

Considering how vast simply the known universe is, I would be surprised if there weren't other lifeforms in the universe, but I'm skeptical whether we will ever have the capacity to find out.

 

[Eugenius]

Yeh fair enough, I am not really expecting us to find anything in my lifetime either, I just struggle to believe that means it isn't out there in some form. Just too add to the discussion, what do you think the impact would be if we were to discover life in the next 20-30 years? Does that effectively put the final nail in religion once and for all, or will people just brush it off?

I really don't think (and from personal experience) think that religious people are simple science-denying folk unable to contemplate dinosaurs and some single cell organisms existing on some far off planet.

 

[TrustInJanuzaj]

I really don't think (and from personal experience) think that religious people are simple science-denying folk unable to contemplate dinosaurs and some single cell organisms existing on some far off planet.

Sure, but for many, it's yet more bending of truths that were established a long time ago in each relgion. If you can keep pointing at new evidence and somehow still rationalising that into some kind of higher power, then you'll never be able to move on from religion. Surely it gets to a point where the original religion and beliefs have changed so much that it's not even recognisable and questions the very fundamentals of that original belief system.

 

[Eugenius]

Sure, but for many, it's yet more bending of truths that were established a long time ago in each relgion. If you can keep pointing at new evidence and somehow still rationalising that into some kind of higher power, then you'll never be able to move on from religion. Surely it gets to a point where the original religion and beliefs have changed so much that it's not even recognisable and questions the very fundamentals of that original belief system.

Perhaps. But I would say the main truths that most religions purport (eg existence of creator, afterlife and how to live life) care very little for the plumbings of everyday life and science. And in general say very little about this.

Whatever explains the beginnings of the universe (how time and matter came to be infinitely condensed etc) is going to be as paradoxical and arbitrary (eg the universe has always just existed, just because) as the concept of a 'higher power'.

 

[e.cantona]

We have evidence of life in the universe. On earth. Not unthinkable there could be others out there. Comparing that to religious belief is, I'm really sorry, a little bit silly.

 

[RexHamilton]

If you take the number of planets / solar systems discovered as your denominator, and your numerator is 'alien life forms discovered' the probability is 0.

Surely the numerator is planets where we know life has occurred and would be 1. Because the argument is that life has occurred on Earth, so if you take all of the other planets in all of the other solar systems, in all of the other galaxies, it's not only probable, but actually almost certain that life in some form or another has occurred on other planets.

 

[The Corinthian]

Surely the numerator is planets where we know life has occurred and would be 1. Because the argument is that life has occurred on Earth, so if you take all of the other planets in all of the other solar systems, in all of the other galaxies, it's not only probable, but actually almost certain that life in some form or another has occurred on other planets.

I take your point, but the hypothesis originally positioned by Grylte specifically was about alien life forms, and in that instance the numerator is 0.

If you include us, then yes, the probability is >0, but still infinitesimally small. According to work done by a Swedish scientist, there are 70 quintillion planets out there, of which we've found evidence of life on 1 (our own), so your equation would be 1 divided by 70 quintillion.

Generally, the notion that there must be 'some life out there' despite the lack of evidence is known as Fermi's paradox. It's an interesting read.

Fermi basically said that as our galaxy / Earth is relatively nascent, if there was intelligent life out there (in the Universe where its age surpasses our 'part' of the Universe), why haven't they discovered us?

The other side of the argument about why Earth has life is called the Rare Earth theory (again, a really interesting read), where there have been a set of unique conditions across a variety of factors that have allowed life to exist.

My overall point is (coming from a science background) is that we can't say something has a high probability, probable, what-have-you, without any evidence (because that is a belief).

 

[Roane]

Sure, but for many, it's yet more bending of truths that were established a long time ago in each relgion. If you can keep pointing at new evidence and somehow still rationalising that into some kind of higher power, then you'll never be able to move on from religion. Surely it gets to a point where the original religion and beliefs have changed so much that it's not even recognisable and questions the very fundamentals of that original belief system.

I find religion/s fascinating. I myself went from years of being not religious, maybe a bit cultural to a degree in done aspects to someone who is a practicing muslim.

It was about 20 years ago that my fascination with religion/s started after I went to an event to refute a speaker and found him to be quite "different". Can't think of a better word here, can't say inspirational (although maybe was later as I spoke to him more).

Now this guy wasn't simply a religious guy who came to tell everyone how great his religion was, and the largely religious audience, would shout hallelujah or Allah ho Akbar etc, albeit that is what I was expecting.

He literally spent an hour telling folk that what they followed "religiously" was nonsense and in fact what they worshipped wasn't what their religion was and gave examples from the religious books and texts.

It was an eye opener and lead me to look into some of that he said and I couldn't believe how much religion being followed wasn't "authentic".

So for example I am from south Asia and the muslims there pretty much follow versions of Islam (barelwis, deobandi etc) that are from a book called baheshti zewar than Quran and Sunnah (which they all claim to be following). So much so that the arguments their speakers have on various aspects have, what I call, a false basis. And this is what often, not exclusively, causes the problem in discussions with non religious, science folk etc.

Similarly in many aspects of the other, and here for me it is mainly abrahamic, religions.

 

[Zlatattack]

I find religion/s fascinating. I myself went from years of being not religious, maybe a bit cultural to a degree in done aspects to someone who is a practicing muslim.

It was about 20 years ago that my fascination with religion/s started after I went to an event to refute a speaker and found him to be quite "different". Can't think of a better word here, can't say inspirational (although maybe was later as I spoke to him more).

Now this guy wasn't simply a religious guy who came to tell everyone how great his religion was, and the largely religious audience, would shout hallelujah or Allah ho Akbar etc, albeit that is what I was expecting.

He literally spent an hour telling folk that what they followed "religiously" was nonsense and in fact what they worshipped wasn't what their religion was and gave examples from the religious books and texts.

It was an eye opener and lead me to look into some of that he said and I couldn't believe how much religion being followed wasn't "authentic".

So for example I am from south Asia and the muslims there pretty much follow versions of Islam (barelwis, deobandi etc) that are from a book called baheshti zewar than Quran and Sunnah (which they all claim to be following). So much so that the arguments their speakers have on various aspects have, what I call, a false basis. And this is what often, not exclusively, causes the problem in discussions with non religious, science folk etc.

Similarly in many aspects of the other, and here for me it is mainly abrahamic, religions.

We're your family religious?

Also if you don't mind who inspired you?

 

[Roane]

We're your family religious?

Also if you don't mind who inspired you?

Family wise only so much as many people from that neck of the woods were. As in religious in name but not in practise. And even the practices were cultural.

I think I read your family had links to Mirpur (could be wrong so sorry if I am) but that's where my family are from. And if you know mirpuri families generally they claim Islam but are not always practising. So may fast in Ramadan but don't pray 5 times etc

I won't name the person if that's ok. Mainly because it maybe someone who was/became controversial. And as I said the word was "different". And tbf I had gone to refute said guy.

 

[RexHamilton]

I take your point, but the hypothesis originally positioned by Grylte specifically was about alien life forms, and in that instance the numerator is 0.

If you include us, then yes, the probability is >0, but still infinitesimally small. According to work done by a Swedish scientist, there are 70 quintillion planets out there, of which we've found evidence of life on 1 (our own), so your equation would be 1 divided by 70 quintillion.

It's about finding life. Alien life, just means life on another planet. We're alien to any other possible forms of life out there. There is life on one planet, so the probability of life on another is never zero. Also, just because we've identified 70 quintillion planets doesn't make any difference. We haven't gone to them or studied them to find life. So the odds of finding life absolutely aren't 1 in 70 quintillion.

 

[Salt Bailly]

We have evidence of life in the universe. On earth. Not unthinkable there could be others out there. Comparing that to religious belief is, I'm really sorry, a little bit silly.

I can't believe this needed to be said. "No proof" of life in the universe.

Jesus fecking Christ.

 

[Fingeredmouse]

You can only have a 'far higher probability' based on some evidence of it occurring in the first place. As things stand, there is no actual evidence of alien life forms existing.

If you take the number of planets / solar systems discovered as your denominator, and your numerator is 'alien life forms discovered' the probability is 0.

Right now, you (and Grylte) believe in alien life forms existing based on the vastness of space and the fact there's still a lot we don't know about it. But it's a belief, not 'probability'. That might change years from now, but that's the case as things stand.

In fairness, the numerator for planets with life is 1. The numerator for proven gods is 0. I'm not sure the stances are fully equatable.