Catholics that number almost a billion, have had discussion. Other denominations also believe god will not of only made one planet, they believe god has made many and we are just one of his creation.
Does finding life on another planet disprove religion?
- Thread starter Valentino
- Start date
Catholics that number almost a billion, have had discussion. Other denominations also believe god will not of only made one planet, they believe god has made many and we are just one of his creation.
Associate
- Joined
- 31 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 1,015
- Location
- Surrey, UK
So it's OK that religion has the answer, even if the answer is wrong?
If I ask someone what's 36 divided by 1.77, and they say "I can't be sure as I simply don't know, but the answer is definitely 'banana'", that's OK?
You can't just put a random answer simply because an answer is needed. That's what children do.
Science is trying to discover how the universe was created. Religion is not. Religion throws up its arms, says 'magic' and gets annoyed when people come along with facts and say they're wrong.
No, you are wrong.
You have tried to pick up on something in those two posts that doesnt exist.and are now trying vigorously trying to defend yourself and your mistake, its bordering on trolling now.
Really am I the one saying you must have oxygen starvation, or heat strock. It is in your posts and I can't understand how you can't see it. amelto agrees they have different meanings as well.
It quite clearly says in one post unless they believe in god and look the same, then it disproved religion. The other says if they do look the same and believe in God then that proves religion. They are clearly different and on top of that they are wrong.
some people get annoyed, not religion.
Not that I'm dipping my toe in this particularly foetid pool, but AH2 is right - the posts don't say the same thing. One says that finding life that's identical to us and believes in the same God would prove religion to be true (assuming we're narrowing the scope to Abrahimic religion here). The other says that finding ET life would disprove religion unless it looked like us and believed in the same God, but doesn't contain a counter to clarify that this would in fact prove religion. AcidHell2's posting style can be a little hard to read sometimes, but if you get over the affront of him calling you on a mistake you definitely made, you can see that his point's quite valid. Regardless, you've both put your point across, so please stop repeating the same thing over and over again.
Out of the pool...
Er no.
the thread title says.
Does finding life on another planet disprove religion?
1st post says, it does unless they look like us, believe in god and think they were made in his image.
2nd post says the same thing.
they both reach the same conclusion.
Your right about the first one, the second doesn't say anything about disproving, it talks about proving. Difference a pretty big one.
Anyway both are wrong.
If they look like us with a belief it does not prove god, as there are other possibilities, like being seeded by an alien. Or a process of evolution
If they don't look like us and have no belief that does not disprove religion. Scripture only talks about us being made in his image, not all creations.
Anyway both are wrong.
If they look like us with a belief it does not prove god, as there are other possibilities, like being seeded by an alien. Or a process of evolution
If they don't look like us and have no belief that does not disprove religion. Scripture only talks about us being made in his image, not all creations.
That's the point that I made earlier in the thread. Religion tends not to rely on evidence, but relies on faith. In fact, in certain cases, religion can answer questions that science can't
i cant think of a single thing that religion can answer truthfully and with hard evidence
No. I am right in what both posts say, both contain three statements.
1) the aliens look or the same as us.
2) they believe in GOD.
3) And they think they were made in GODs image.
that is whats contained in both posts.
I have highlighted the three parts in the same colour to make it easier for you to understand that the two posts contain the same thing and reach the same conclusion.
1) the aliens look or the same as us.
2) they believe in GOD.
3) And they think they were made in GODs image.
that is whats contained in both posts.
I have highlighted the three parts in the same colour to make it easier for you to understand that the two posts contain the same thing and reach the same conclusion.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
That was sort of the point, it could only disprove a religion that made that specific claim about Earth being the only planet with life. I wouldn't be surprised if such a religion exists but I don't know of one off the top of my head.
Congratulations, your colouring is very neat and tidy - all in the lines and everything. Still, it's completely ignored the discrepancy; being that one post deals with disproving religion and the other deals with proving it. You're arguing the same point couched in different prose, and it's really not doing the trick. Just take it on the chin and move on.
Damn, how'd I end up in this pool again?
I was just wondering, as I haven't heard any that specifically denounce aliens, I'm sure you're right though, there's always exceptions.
It would not change my opinion as i allready think religion is a load of poppycock,however if people want to waste their lives to believe that there is a god and his mates doing windmills
let them waste the short time we are here.
let them waste the short time we are here.That's why they're irrelevant tbh...
Anyone can create a religion as many humans have done over the years. I can create one now - I could make up a god(s) and a set of rules and go tell people about it... No one can prove my god that I just invented is any more or less real than any other god(s) that humans have worshiped over the years.
Unfortunately some ultra religious types take it all a bit too far - regardless of the fact most of them only believe in that particular faith because they happened to be raised by parents who believe in that faith they're adamant that out of the many religions that exist in the world that they could have been raised under their particular one is real - even though there isn't any more real evidence for or against it than any other religion.
Even then it wouldn't have much affect - science and modern secular values contradict the bible (particularly the old testament) in places - the solution by most Christians is to not take the bible too literally or to work around it in some way.
(Obv there are a few on the fringe in the US who literally do believe the Earth has only been around for a few thousand years.)
How was the Universe created?
Science
Christianity - God created the Universe
I know that Christianity isn't representative of all religions, but it's one example where a religion can answer a question that science cannot.
For religion (well at least for Christianity) , God is a necessary being. For science, the universe is the necessary being.
So you're saying that by claiming God made everything, religion irrefutably answers all the questions that science presently can not?
Based on that premise, from Biopoesis study, it is theoretically possible, under the right conditions to chemically create primtive or basic life forms ( amino acids > proteins ) which are the first building blocks of life forms without the need organic intervention.
If man can actually create these building blocks chemically, does this not render religion irrelevent?
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,807
- Location
- State of Volatile Apathy
If something is not black, that does not automatically mean it is white.
What you wrote doesn't mean the same thing.
That might depend on whether man can actually create those building blocks spontaneously, rather than utilising what has already been created.
I would definitely be ****ed off if some aliens came over and they started telling me I was created by a god I'd never heard of before.
I think its a compunction of intelligent life to try and understand. One of the logics easiest to cling to in infant civilisations is creationism. It satiates the mind with immediate answers. Its not a coincidence that largely segregated populations have developed similar faith systems.
I don't think you would ever get rid of religion though. While the logical aspect of it would be constantly damaged by the progress of science I still believe we desire faith. This is where I think we're headed, a new faith system. One where people are open minded to the scientific theories and patient in their desire for understanding, but retain the comfort of hope and faith, not in a god, but that our understanding continues to grow.
I think its a compunction of intelligent life to try and understand. One of the logics easiest to cling to in infant civilisations is creationism. It satiates the mind with immediate answers. Its not a coincidence that largely segregated populations have developed similar faith systems.
I don't think you would ever get rid of religion though. While the logical aspect of it would be constantly damaged by the progress of science I still believe we desire faith. This is where I think we're headed, a new faith system. One where people are open minded to the scientific theories and patient in their desire for understanding, but retain the comfort of hope and faith, not in a god, but that our understanding continues to grow.