PROOF that GOD Exists......

Originally Posted by HeartlandHank

You cannot compare science and religion like that.
Science is about accepting nothing as fact. Building on understandings. A living neverending review of data. Reasoning.
Religion is about faith. Believing despite anything you might hear or see.

In my opinion, Science has no conflict with religion. Religion however, has quite the conflict with science.
Any belief that discourages from using reasoning... I don't know.
Maybe my simple, Taught beliefs - Reasoning = Faith , equation is over simplified, but...

I would to hear more about science being a spoiled kid. I wonder if you mean that in the way I am understanding you.

"

...that's the outer shell of religion, my friend What I am comparing is a term known as religare, 'union'. It is the basis of religions, or, the root understanding of religious attributes in man's condition. Religion is not all churches, ties, and knee length skirts. So, yes, I can compare them like that It is a provable truth that religion has been on man's mind longer than scientific study has. Doesn't make one better than the other, it just 'is'.

I was a kid once, you were, we all were, etc... There was a point in our childhoods that we started to 'know stuff'. This usually results in the kid thinking they are more than a kid, 'smart'. Our parents would normally have something to say about their new little 'smart ass'. I'm finding more and more that young aspiring scientists are a bit like that. They gain a bit of knowledge and puff up with pride. Me, I puff up with good ganja - hehe!

*also, real religion is about a never ending review of data that pours from one's own mouth, so yet again comparable

I think there are two main reasons why people believe in things that are not real (religion/theology/spirituality).

1. It makes you feel special.
(you really aren't special in the eyes of the universe, you're are merely a by-product)

2. It makes you feel like you will still exist after you die.
(you as in who you are, when you realize what makes you who you are, you begin to understand that you barrow, take or leave pieces of yourself from others. We are nothing but our ability to make choices, everything else was learned and taken from others)

You are not special, no one is... and most likely when you die you cease to exist. It may not really be this way, but this is where all evidence points to.

You can be a courageous and suck it up, accept it... or be a coward and pretend to know things that you really don't know to make yourself feel better, or feel special, or feel like you are going to continue to exist when you die.

The choice is yours.

Originally Posted by Zaehet Strife

You can be a man and suck it up [...] The choice is yours.

...Gobstoppers, I choose Gobstoppers

Originally Posted by eye exaggerate

...Gobstoppers, I choose Gobstoppers

^Defined: Fantasy, i choose fantasy.

I am completely ok with this, even if i may not agree.

Originally Posted by HeartlandHank

You really cannot even talk about religion in a way of evaluating it against science. What is there to measure the value, accuracy, or whatever of religion? Try putting faith, prayers and miracles on a scale. These things could be 13.9 billion years old and it's going to read 0.0.

I guess my point is, Science and Religion are different games. It's like the Yankees playing the Celtics. Either the Celtics have to show up and play baseball, or the Yankees have to trade in their cleats for high tops. Whoever the away team is will lose. If Kevin Garnett goes up to the pitchers mound and throws a basketball to home plate, (both sides trying to play their own sport) you are just going to have a fucking mess, and get nowhere.

While I tend to agree with much of this, and I do dig the sports analogy, I would like to point out that scales and evaluations are, at some point, invented by man. I bet if we all sat down and tried hard enough we could come up with a scale of evaluation to rate religion, religious practice, etc. But, we would have to all agree that this defined scale is based upon a set of group deliberations in order to erect a hierarchy of values. We could use very rational measures like surveys of practitioners self-reported happiness levels, etc.; and, these would be collected and balanced against more objective, standard measures of the individual like health, and observations of how often the engage in logically deduced moral behavior.; we could then also define religious practice according to how well one follows a given religious doctrine--as compared to both the writings and contemporary teachings of that religious institution--thereby erecting several spectra (a la the Levi-Strauss personality assessments). In short, we could collect a shit-ton of data ABOUT religion and its followers and then place our findings on numerical scales but, as you sort of point out, to what avail? you couldn't collect this data and directly compare it to science or philosophy or anything without reducing disparate disciplines to their lowest common denominators. And once something has been diminished so greatly it always opens the door for the absented information to be used as argument for why the comparison is wrong.

anyhow, just a long response to the notion that you can't put religion on a scale. sorry bout that...too much coffee and herb
be easy

Originally Posted by Zaehet Strife

I think there are two main reasons why people believe in things that are not real (religion/theology/spirituality).

1. It makes you feel special.
(you really aren't special in the eyes of the universe, you're are merely a by-product)

2. It makes you feel like you will still exist after you die.
(you as in who you are, when you realize what makes you who you are, you begin to understand that you barrow, take or leave pieces of yourself from others. We are nothing but our ability to make choices, everything else was learned and taken from others)
You are not special, no one is... and most likely when you die you cease to exist. It may not really be this way, but this is where all evidence points to.

I think humans have huge egos. And therin lies our fallibility. But there can be no proof of God's existance. It has to be that way. It is a matter of faith.
I also think we were made in His image and God himself has a huge ego. Who else would undertake the creation of the universe?

Originally Posted by Dr.J20

how, exactly?

By raising a population to value reason above all else. The problem is, this population could not be controlled by another group. They would soon have a monopoly on technologies and science. Look at human history. As science and education increase, Mankind excels. Add religion, and we kill each other. Pretty basic.

I could site countries that have secular societies, but this is not an Atheist society. Just secular. Science has trumped religion from day one. You can argue this point. On your computer or iphone. Over electrical cables and air waves. Through a monitor. In your house. Which is heated. And air conditioned. With science. Not religion.

Technology = Brought to you by science, not religion.

The evidence is clear.