Question for all the God-bothering Christian types on here

[sasguru]

Astrophysicist says science points to God's existence

Here is Professor Brand's description of his topic: "Our scientific understanding of the physical Universe exposes us to great beauty and to mind-stretching ideas. In presenting the current picture I shall try to persuade you that this understanding, based on physical laws and careful observation, is secure. But we must recognize that this security is based on faith: faith that the laws of physics apply everywhere and always. This faith is tested continually and (so far) has always been justified. Its consequence is our modern technological society of planes and cars, bridges and wind turbines, TVs and the Internet. How does the idea of faith in God fit into this scheme? I explore, from my own perspective, how physical understanding moderates the possibilities. While it is of the essence that God cannot be known in the same sense as physical facts are, one can use science to suggest what God is not. This reduction technique is routine in science (and Sudoku) and is very productive. How far can it be taken in this case? I suggest that there is a position from which both faith systems seem simultaneously reasonable."

He probably has overactive temporal lobes.

[sasguru]

Is this sas complaining because people have too much imagination?

There is no pleasing some people

I am an imaginative atheist.

HTH

[Churchill]

I reckon it's about time some sockies got burnt for utter heresy!

Now, old woman -- you are accused of heresy on three counts -- heresy by thought, heresy by word, heresy by deed, and heresy by action -- *four* counts. Do you confess?

[BrilloPad]

Now, old woman -- you are accused of heresy on three counts -- heresy by thought, heresy by word, heresy by deed, and heresy by action -- *four* counts. Do you confess?

Can I extract a confession with thumb screws please?

[Le Rosbif]

The explanation why some people may be more atheist than others may be as simple as that they have more active temporal lobes.

BBC - Science & Nature - Horizon - Science on the Brain

Given what I know of human psychology (we can convince ourselves of whatever we want) and neuroscience (we can artificially cause "faith in science" feeling by stimulating temporal lobes, thus mimicing what may be abnormal brain chemistry), I am am inclined to discount people's accounts of religious feeling as having (abnormal?) biological causation.

ftfy

[Churchill]

ftfy

I did mention the "Higgs Boson" earlier. A lot of faith being relied upon there methinks... Oh, and a lot of money too. Not quite as much as is available to the Roman Catholic Church but hey ho!

[BrilloPad]

Astrophysicist says science points to God's existence

Here is Professor Brand's description of his topic: "Our scientific understanding of the physical Universe exposes us to great beauty and to mind-stretching ideas. In presenting the current picture I shall try to persuade you that this understanding, based on physical laws and careful observation, is secure. But we must recognize that this security is based on faith: faith that the laws of physics apply everywhere and always. This faith is tested continually and (so far) has always been justified. Its consequence is our modern technological society of planes and cars, bridges and wind turbines, TVs and the Internet. How does the idea of faith in God fit into this scheme? I explore, from my own perspective, how physical understanding moderates the possibilities. While it is of the essence that God cannot be known in the same sense as physical facts are, one can use science to suggest what God is not. This reduction technique is routine in science (and Sudoku) and is very productive. How far can it be taken in this case? I suggest that there is a position from which both faith systems seem simultaneously reasonable."

I disagree with that. He is talking faith out of religion.

[Le Rosbif]

I did mention the "Higgs Boson" earlier. A lot of faith being relied upon there methinks... Oh, and a lot of money too. Not quite as much as is available to the Roman Catholic Church but hey ho!

Good point. Just like "it's impossible to go faster than light".

Faster than light particles found, claim scientists

[Mich the Tester]

Good point. Just like "it's impossible to go faster than light".

Faster than light particles found, claim scientists

Shall we wait for the results to be confirmed by the other two laboratories in the US and Japan, and wait for the new distance measurements before drawing conclusions?

[NorthWestPerm2Contr]

Given that over the course of human history, different civilisations have developed widely differing religions/beliefs and that the majority of people in the world (Indians and Chinese) hold completely different views from you, why do you think your beliefs must be the correct ones?

How about the fact that many of the religions are adding to previous religions and all carry the same principles but through different means e.g. Noha, Moses, Jesus, Joseph, Jonah, Abraham, Jacob, Solomon etc etc.

Why would all these people come along with the same message claiming to be from the same source?

Why not ask if all religions are pointing towards the same truth rather than claim to be different truths?