The likelyness of God.

I don't subscribe to that one. I think we use all of what we have. Our brains haven't changed that much in millions of years but what has changed is the amount we collectively know. Because we've had writing for thousands of years we've been able to collect and store the info and so we haven't - as individuals - had to re-learn it (Newton said it well in his remarks about standing on the shoulders of giants).

I highly recommend the Holographic Universe, by Mchael Talbot.

it is about how the brain works and gives documented cases in humans exercising extraordinary abilities throughout history.

http://quanta-gaia.org/reviews/books/holoUniverse.html
http://www.crystalinks.com/holographic.html
 
I don't subscribe to that one. I think we use all of what we have. Our brains haven't changed that much in millions of years but what has changed is the amount we collectively know. Because we've had writing for thousands of years we've been able to collect and store the info and so we haven't - as individuals - had to re-learn it (Newton said it well in his remarks about standing on the shoulders of giants).


Your right that we use all of what we have the ability to use, but science has made several discoverys about the brain and that only certain regions of our brain respond to all activitys on earth, thinking, acting, doing, dreaming. Basically there are regions of our brain that are not used and are believed to have the capability of storing information. Imagine every brain had hundreds of gigabytes of information to be able to remember at any point.

Aristotle and Plato got alot of credit for writing down what they believe to be true, but Socrates was the first to actually believe that thinking will not prove much anything without experimentation. Plato and Aristotle believed that If you can think it, then it must be true, or if you just sit down and think deeply, then you can prove anything in the universe.

Which I like, but I believe socrates was right about testing predictions.


The difference with now and back then is, religion. They were forced to believe in certain scriptures and were persecuted if they did not. That is why religion plays so much of a part into old philosophy. Even gallileo was put in jail for predicting that the earth actually revolved around the sun and so did all the other planets.

In a way, religion has slowed down science, and has definitely slowed down society. If more people where interested in testing the bible, then more people would read instead of watching American Idol. The bible tells you what to believe and dont try to read otherwise or its a sin, science questions everything. In my opinion, its a sin not to question everything. Its a sin to force anyone away from knowledge.
 
Science is about facts and logic, and religion or spirituality is about belief. We shouldnt judge, those who choose to belief in god, or dont believe in god.

Period.
 
My question is to everyone who believes in God and uses God as the answer for the creation of mankind.

'who or what created God?'

Why do you assume God was created at all?

I know it's difficult for humans in our mortal existance to comprehend eternal matters sometimes, we tend to like things broken down into clear concrete pieces for us to understand.

We may not learn all things in this life, but that doesn't mean we can't learn anything. We may receive glimpses of the Eternal nature of God and even of our Eternal nature.
 
I concur,
There is no telling what lies in the 85-90% of our brains we don't use, we could have unimaginable "powers" we have yet to tap, unfortunatly with our consumerist and religious society, learning and intelligence isnt really an important goal.

True learning and intelligence is a goal of all those who know God, and is a goal impossible to those who spurn Him. Intelligence is light and truth and by refusing to listen to the truth will severely limit any persons abilities to progress.
 
Unfortunatly religion perpetuates intself.

It would be nice to see it have less and less of a hold on society, as far as fanatics go.

reason and intelligence are far greater tools and influences and should more readily be exercised.

Yes, of course because reason and intelligence have never brought genocide and oppression upon society.
 
Science is about facts and logic, and religion or spirituality is about belief. We shouldnt judge, those who choose to belief in god, or dont believe in god.

Period.

True religion and spirituality is just as fact oriented as science. And both are learned through experimentation. The only problem is most people dont want to experiment on the word.
 
True religion and spirituality is just as fact oriented as science. And both are learned through experimentation. The only problem is most people dont want to experiment on the word.

No, I have to disagree. Religion is usually learned through indoctrination. Religion requires convergent thinking. Science is its total opposite, it eschews indoctrination and convergent thinking for open-mindedness and the pursuit of knowledge through the scientific method.

Religion is not fact-oriented.
 
True learning and intelligence is a goal of all those who know God, and is a goal impossible to those who spurn Him. Intelligence is light and truth and by refusing to listen to the truth will severely limit any persons abilities to progress.

I respecfully disagree with the first, and feel 'science and darwinism' could be placed within the sentance for a large majority of the populous. and thus re-enforce the second sentance.
 
True religion and spirituality is just as fact oriented as science. And both are learned through experimentation. The only problem is most people dont want to experiment on the word.

Everyone knows that religion is based on Faith not knowledge.

The notion that religion is a proper field, in which one might claim expertise, is one that should not go unquestioned.

I find it hard to fathom that all the answers to the universe are found in one single book, full of answers that end in Faith.

What experiments are currently being conducted on behalf of religion, or have they all been done and recorded in the bible?

The Idea that The Word is fact based, and should be saught after as a reference is likened to having an artist presumably defer to the expertise of a claimed 'fairyologist' on the exact shape and color of fairy wings.

There is as much proven factual evidence toward religion as fairytale.
 

Forum List

Back
Top