Why is the UK not religious anymore?
- Thread starter kwerk
- Start date
Isn't that a bit like missing the wood for the trees? Surely the fact that you are aware of that, questioning it and posting it on an online forum in the first place is pretty intelligent?!
Are human beings designed? I see nothing that supports that notion. I see a lot of evidence that we evolved.
Why not design through evolution? The Christian definition of God is omniscient and outside of space and time. A bit like letting off a firework - it's been "designed", you know roughly what's going to happen, but until it does, it doesn't... if you see what I mean...
Sorry, will be offline for a good while now.. maybe catch up later!
If you look at your lovely car sitting in the drive would you ever think it just came about by chance or some natural processes? No, obviously an intelligent mind or team of minds designed it.
I have no doubt that evolution occurs but it offers absolutely nothing in terms of where the first cell came from.
Look at DNA and the huge complex 'software' like code inside each one of us. I work as a software developer. If a customer wants their software to do something extra it takes intelligence to extend the function.
There is absolutely no scientific explanation that can explain this information injection from nothing.
Increased intelligence I would hazard a guess. There is a shift from "working down t' mines" to "working in the IT department"
Nowt wrong with faith but by definition it is voluntary stupidity. Ignoring everything we know to believe in something on the basis there is a chance it would exist.
Don't even get me started on religious people who discredit other religions, if you believe in a deity, you believe in a deity, it doesn't matter what branch so can we not all get along man?
Mind you I follow buddhism, not to the letter of any specific branch but I study it and use it in my daily life.
Nowt wrong with faith but by definition it is voluntary stupidity. Ignoring everything we know to believe in something on the basis there is a chance it would exist.
Don't even get me started on religious people who discredit other religions, if you believe in a deity, you believe in a deity, it doesn't matter what branch so can we not all get along man?
Mind you I follow buddhism, not to the letter of any specific branch but I study it and use it in my daily life.
Last edited:
Why not design through evolution? The Christian definition of God is omniscient and outside of space and time. A bit like letting off a firework - it's been "designed", you know roughly what's going to happen, but until it does, it doesn't... if you see what I mean...
Sorry, will be offline for a good while now.. maybe catch up later!
Not really how evolution works. You aren't really designing anything just letting things develop.
All the religious answer does though is move the question one step back. If the answer to "Whence came the universe?" is "God" then all that does is open up the question "Whence came God?".
You say 'hazard a guess' - is this any worse than 'voluntary stupidity'?
I am in the fortunate position of being able to accept everything I know. I don't have to ignore anything in order to exercise faith in Jesus.
What is different from religious people discrediting other religions than atheists discrediting religion as a whole? I obviously won't agree with every other faith. I will respect every single human being in this planet.
Develop from what though? There was nothing originally, yeah? If you can create one cell as a starting point from nothing you still have bigger issues. What about the fine tuning of the universe... the cosmological constants for example. I suppose they 'just happened' to have the exact values necessary to support human life?
What about the planets and their positioning - if the positioning wasn't right then we wouldn't have a life sustaining planet.
Aside from the reservations of Darwins theories themselves, evolution offers nothing in terms of the origin of life.
If God is the designer and creator of the universe then he must be an eternal being that transcends the boundaries of time and space. The Christian God of the Bible matches this description.
Only things that have had a beginning are bound by the requirement of design.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,321
- Location
- Woking
Ringo, you are simply wrong. There is no compelling evidence for intelligent design, except for the sort of viewpoint of "how could something so well made just come into existence." I understand that you're trying to show us that you think there is an alternative to evolution, but evolution is a fact and it is undeniable whether you observe it over millions of years or a few generations of pigeons.
We also view things as being designed because, as humans, our minds have developed to look at things in a manner which interprets and analyses how well things in our environment work, for example, our own hands. If we had no concept of design (say you were a non-human species) then we would never have come up with the concept that perhaps something could be designed. It's all human, God is a human creation by its very nature.
With regards to this *** about cosmological constants, they work so perfectly because they always existed in that manner, and everything else around them had to adapt (I'm talking in terms of the motion of planets, for example) to those constants, not the other way around.
Furthermore, I have a very pertinent question. What makes your God the one true God; virtue of your birth country, your parents, and the culture you live in. As much as I despise religion, at least some religious people have the guts to say that they don't believe in a specific form of God such as the Christian form, or the Hindu form, and just believe in a higher power, because they KNOW that you cannot all be right, and likely none are, because religion was created entirely by humans.
We also view things as being designed because, as humans, our minds have developed to look at things in a manner which interprets and analyses how well things in our environment work, for example, our own hands. If we had no concept of design (say you were a non-human species) then we would never have come up with the concept that perhaps something could be designed. It's all human, God is a human creation by its very nature.
With regards to this *** about cosmological constants, they work so perfectly because they always existed in that manner, and everything else around them had to adapt (I'm talking in terms of the motion of planets, for example) to those constants, not the other way around.
Furthermore, I have a very pertinent question. What makes your God the one true God; virtue of your birth country, your parents, and the culture you live in. As much as I despise religion, at least some religious people have the guts to say that they don't believe in a specific form of God such as the Christian form, or the Hindu form, and just believe in a higher power, because they KNOW that you cannot all be right, and likely none are, because religion was created entirely by humans.
Evolution says nothing on the origins of life. It is about how life developed not how it came to be. As an aside what are the reservations on evolution? As far as I am aware it pretty much fits all the available evidence.
As to God being eternal, why is that acceptable yet the universe being eternal isn't? We also don't know enough about the universe to say "This is what is required for life". It may be that the universe is teeming with life, we just have no idea.
It seems to a remarkable feat of hubris to say "God made the entire universe just for us." it also seems to be a touch wasteful...
As to God being eternal, why is that acceptable yet the universe being eternal isn't? We also don't know enough about the universe to say "This is what is required for life". It may be that the universe is teeming with life, we just have no idea.
It seems to a remarkable feat of hubris to say "God made the entire universe just for us." it also seems to be a touch wasteful...
http://firstlifeseries.com/
Watch this if you can find it anywhere, it will answer a lot of your questions or at least provide suggestions for them. I do not argue that science currently answers everything, but just because we can't explain things yet doesn't mean they can't be explained.
That's a valid position. The Christian God has apparently interfered in ways which we can test for so I'll disregard him for the moment, but if you have a God who lights the firework and then does nothing else then he's obviously going to be difficult to prove or disprove. Either way, it doesn't really matter. But I'll reject any claim of definitive proof for our hypothetical God's existence.Why not design through evolution? The Christian definition of God is omniscient and outside of space and time. A bit like letting off a firework - it's been "designed", you know roughly what's going to happen, but until it does, it doesn't... if you see what I mean...
No, you're correct. Science can't explain abiogenesis but equally that doesn't mean that a religious explanation is the correct one. Science may be able to explain it in the future, so I'm happy to say "I don't know" until we do know where it came from.
I don't see what's so improbably about starting off with the simplest blocks of DNA and then evolving from there. You could start off with organisms that only have one base pair. Evolution takes care of the rest.
gtfo
Sure I'm religious. Here's my religion. I call it Problynotacult:
The main ideas are that:
- The universe is a software simulation (as there is evidence of optimisation for computation in that there is a minimum distance, a minimum temperature and a maximum speed. There are also bugs)
- There are many simulated universes
- When you 'die' in one universe, your apparent consciousness continues to live on in another universe. Therefore while others may perceive your death and you may perceive the death of others, you appear to continue to live on until the end of the simulation.
- Evolution is literally an evolutionary algorithm written such that it continues to evolve more intelligent life until it surpasses that of the programmers of the multiverse simulation
- The first self replicating molecules were not put here already self-replicating, they merely had the potential to and have done so.
- The programmers tend not to interfere with the simulation. Or if they do, it's probably not with the specific universe you're currently occupying.
- The big bang happened because positioning all those stars and planets manually is really, really time consuming.
- Above all else it should be a human's primary concern to reach their maximum potential in life while facilitating others to do the same - not for anybody else, but for their own gain and the benefit of their simulation society in the long run.
- Organisation of this religion into a group, holding meetings regarding the religion, attempting to convert others Problynotacult or using the anything regarding Problynotacult in an authoritative manner is strictly forbidden.
Like that? Well you can't join. Go away.
The main ideas are that:
- The universe is a software simulation (as there is evidence of optimisation for computation in that there is a minimum distance, a minimum temperature and a maximum speed. There are also bugs)
- There are many simulated universes
- When you 'die' in one universe, your apparent consciousness continues to live on in another universe. Therefore while others may perceive your death and you may perceive the death of others, you appear to continue to live on until the end of the simulation.
- Evolution is literally an evolutionary algorithm written such that it continues to evolve more intelligent life until it surpasses that of the programmers of the multiverse simulation
- The first self replicating molecules were not put here already self-replicating, they merely had the potential to and have done so.
- The programmers tend not to interfere with the simulation. Or if they do, it's probably not with the specific universe you're currently occupying.
- The big bang happened because positioning all those stars and planets manually is really, really time consuming.
- Above all else it should be a human's primary concern to reach their maximum potential in life while facilitating others to do the same - not for anybody else, but for their own gain and the benefit of their simulation society in the long run.
- Organisation of this religion into a group, holding meetings regarding the religion, attempting to convert others Problynotacult or using the anything regarding Problynotacult in an authoritative manner is strictly forbidden.
Like that? Well you can't join. Go away.
Last edited:
Great - I await to being enlightened!
I think I have just listed a number of options that when investigated give good reason to accept intelligent design as the best explanation. Essentially the other option is chance. The likelihood of all the fine tuning being as a result of chance are hugely improbably.
Take the DNA example again, there is no possible cause for information injection other than a mind.
I am not talking about an alternative to evolution - I am happy to accept that evolution occurs but it doesn't give any answers to the origin of life.
Sorry I don't accept that. The Christian God who transcends time and space is not a human creation. Some religions do create a god however. We call these idols.
So your definition of nothing actually is 'nothing other than a few constants'. Is that correct? Nothing to me means nothing, no matter, no constants, no nothing.
You say that they always existed... I am assuming therefore that you believe the universe didn't have a beginning?
I have no interest in what any other religions definition of God is. I am a Christian, I believe in the historicity of the Bible and of the resurrection which in itself is the singlemost important pillar of our faith. If Christ wasn't raised then our faith is unfounded.
Please just go away
The prime example of a sweeping generalisation of an OCUK anti-religious post.
Perhaps we do need to go back to the basics. Do you not realise that some of the finest scientists ever have been religious?
Mr Newton for example was claimed to have been religious. A monkey with a small mind? O really.
Before I go may I ask what your beliefs are? Am I touching a chord?
I'm terribly sorry that others on here have to witness your obvious bigotry and hatred.
Claimed, Not proven.
I am an atheist
because in my eyes, if such a being as your "god" was indeed not a figment of a drugged up chav's imagination thousands of years ago then why do we have such little proof of this being apart from a book that has been added to for along time.
