Kate - I just read what you posted. If that wasn't what you meant then at least recognise why I would think you just said your motivation in studying science was based upon your faith in god. Faith is the exact opposite of what you described - faith does not fit into the cycle from a scientific POV. Faith posits some knowledge gained despite a lack of evidence and held in the face of conflicting information.
Posts by Qcmbr
-
85Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
If your faith is in something in contravention of a scientific fact it is in conflict 'truthfully'. Many of your faith based assertions are in conflict with scientific understanding. You are not in agreement with much of what science has discovered.
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
" I want to understand particle physics better, I feel it draws me closer to God as a creator and that is my motive to investigate science.""
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
tec - if your faith could solve world hunger, heal the sick, protect the vulnerable, provide energy to power our lives and so on it would be worth following but unfortunately your faith hasn't (goodness knows it's been given enough opportunity.) In the meantime I and others will rely on scientific findings to increase crop yields, improve healthcare and so on. That's why , when people of faith try to hold their magic worldview up as better than the scientific one, they are challenged to prove themselves (they fail) and their faith is rejected as of equal value to modern day knowledge. Trying to pull the 'then they pick on us' card is just an admission of failure.
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
So without faith you wouldn't have any interest in science? Wow. This is similar to the idea that morality only has meaning when its caused by a divine force. I suspect if you dropped God out of your equation you might surprise yourself and still have a great desire to see how the universe works (and by drop God I don't mean your belief in that being just as the motivation - trust yourself.)
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
You have to earn the right to critique science, anything else is preaching your prejudice.
-
167
this site sucks! its just a buncha athiest on soap boxes.
by crossquestions6995 inthis site is not a healthy forum for discussion or healing.
its an arena for jaded athiests to bash anything christian or god related.
yes, i know the jw's lied to us about god and the truth.
-
-
Qcmbr
Having transitioned from one side to the other on this site (and yes I posted several boo arrogant atheist messages) I understand the desire to explore ideas a stage at a time. Losing one's religion for many does not equate to losing one's faith and while most are united in their analysis of JWs (mostly well intentioned people living in a structure that promotes groupthink and downgrades individualism and sometimes makes asshats leaders and often has tragic stories) not everyone is yet ready or willing to discuss whether that has any wider application within the faith based world.
It is extremely frustrating to be challenged (ambushed ?) when you want to discuss some topic on whether Noah was a story with local application or global scope (i.e. you believe it happened) and some poster, usually one of the usual skeptics, starts quoting stats on water volumes and temperature gradients and shows how physics does not allow a global flood without suspending current models of knowledge. The challenge is what to do with that question. Its difficult to realise that the question originally posted may not be the question that people wish to respond to. That is the joy , price and opportunity that freedom permits. This is no JW meeting being led by an Elder. There are no set magazines to underline. There are no pat answers to recite. There is a higher standard of thinking required to avoid looking silly but that is all.
When I transitioned I realised those who ripped up my logic and disrespected my 'facts' where actually great people who cared enough about me to disagree (and spend a long time trying to explain it!)
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
Kate - please describe how faith / religion investigates truth? My opening statement should inform you that I accept that religion can co-exist with a scientific viewpoint.
Inspiration to perform scientific study is great. Scientific study is not religious - it is a methodology - though it can study the religious (and the atheist for that matter). It involves no prayer nor worship and invokes no deity.
Dawkins certainly seems driven to explain himself over and over again because so many ill informed and faith based thinkers continually try and denigrate the knowledge that is staring them in the face. Sometimes the religios need to shut up and admit they haven't done the research necessary to discuss the topics but at every debate you'll always have some zealot thinking or asking some astonishingly poor questions born of bible / dogma based information (written thousands of years ago by uneducated people!) rather than listening to an expert in the field.
I cannot think of one useful scientific discovery given by the gods of the believers (loads of rules for controlling sex,eating food and giving money to priests though).
-
85
Dawkins Chapter 2 - Dogs, Cows and Cabbages
by KateWild ini have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
-
-
Qcmbr
Science and religion need not be in conflict they just tend to be the moment a decision is made by an individual that religion/faith is a better way to achieve knowledge than the scientific method. There is a fundamental shift in the basis of what evidence is acceptable, what would invalidate that conclusions reached and what explanatory power those conclusions give. The moment you are convinced you are in contact with a supernatural being you have made a stance shift in reality, no matter what physical or material evidence or theories or conclusions are presented they will be rejected outright unless they support the supernatural demands.
As a believer I thought myself wonderfully open minded as I read the theories on evolution but all the while my reality filter was rejecting the information and re-explaning it in some form of christian timeframe / creation worldview. This is where the conflict exists -inside the head of the person who has chosen a sub-optimal path to truth.
Science will march on regardless of the debates and will continue to discover how this reality works. Faith and religion never will since they all lack a means to approach and evaluate knowledge but start from a given (deity / spirit / woo x exists) and then explains all competing information as part of that whole.
To really be open minded is hard because it normally means accepting that you do not know, that you were wrong and that cherished invisible friends are figments of your imagination. In 100 years the books written about evolution will be radically improved with massive strides made in understanding the implications and making use of them (we will be doing real genetic manipulation rather than praying for them which is the sum total of the faith based contribution.) Dawkins will be hailed as a great educator but many of his statements will have been improved and expanded. Science never stops doubting and never stops to say 'this is TRUTH' bow down and worship.
-
25
What have Jehovah's Witnesses copied from the Mormons
by konceptual99 inhave jws pinched anything other than family worship from the mormons?.
could we see jws implement a type of meeting structure similar to the mormons to try and engage different ages in different ways?.
could we ever see a jw feel free to do anything like...?.
-
-
Qcmbr
Tithing is used within the Mormon church to determine worthiness. If you want to take part in family religious events such as weddings you must pay the church for that privilege. Many heartbroken parents are denied access to their children's wedding based upon this cynical ploy. The church uses that money in a secret way which is a big indicator about what's really going on. A lie is allowed to persist within the organisation that no one gets paid ( a pass is given for secular roles such as lawyers where they are employed )but in reality the only people who don't get paid are the local workers, the bishops, sunday school teachers, youth leaders and leaders in the women's organisation and so on. Once you reach a sufficient level you hit the good time. For those at the top the rewards are ridiculous. Millions of dollars flow into the pockets of the top men and women both in direct payments but also in the form of fake jobs ( they sit on the boards of church owned businesses being paid handsomely for nothing ), they receive the best food, free travel, use of private jets, free accommodation in lavish style , free healthcare and so on. This privilege extends right down through their family with the children's scholarships being paid, family cruise style holidays and nepotism within well paid church jobs. Additional funds are extended to cover debts, pay for ghost writers to write the next cash making words of *cough* wisdom book and to make interest free loans.
The church as an organisation is moving heavily away from any pretence of being divine or a charity. Less than 1.5% of church income is expended on charitable work outside the church. A charity that makes billions a year it can afford to spend a few million here and there on obscure projects. The vast bulk of charitable payments in the church of course fall upon the already fleeced church members who having paid 10% then are asked for additional offerings. Back in the 70s you used to put a note on the tithing slip when the church was collecting for a special cause but now the instruction ( in the UK at least) is not to and of course this is because the church can siphon off the money as they desire without creating an accounting headache.
Why would the kingdom of heaven need hunting lodges, shopping malls, hotels, vast real estate holdings, a university , a communications company, life insurance holdings, book publishing firms and so on?
Will a man rob god? Presumably omniscient super beings are pretty hard to rob. The real question is will the church leaders rob the members? The answer is Of course obvious.