Scence and Religon are not exclusive of one another. Both have the same basic objective, the persuit of truth. Its just that they go about it in diffrent ways.

LOL.....You're teasing us, right?

Not in the least sir.

---

/Central Florida Astronomical Society

Ok, Mr. Stull,

what 'truth' is religion after?

You asserted it so the ball is in your court. Of course, by 'truth' we must agree on a defintion. Mine is the correspondence theory....meaning that in order for something to be true it must correspond to reality.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Ok, Mr. Stull,

what 'truth' is religion after?

You asserted it so the ball is in your court. Of course, by 'truth' we must agree on a defintion. Mine is the correspondence theory....meaning that in order for something to be true it must correspond to reality.

The truth that religon is after is the same as the truth that science is seeking, the understanding of the world around us. It is simply another window to the world we inhabit. Neither one alone produces a complete picture, religon alone can not fill in all the boxes, nor can science. Its a complex world, and to only look at it through a single view limits what you can learn. To exculde religon from sciance is no better then what religon did to sciance during the dark ages.

---

/Central Florida Astronomical Society

Ok, Mr. Stull,

what 'truth' is religion after?

You asserted it so the ball is in your court. Of course, by 'truth' we must agree on a defintion. Mine is the correspondence theory....meaning that in order for something to be true it must correspond to reality.

The truth that religon is after is the same as the truth that science is seeking, the understanding of the world around us. It is simply another window to the world we inhabit. Neither one alone produces a complete picture, religon alone can not fill in all the boxes, nor can science. Its a complex world, and to only look at it through a single view limits what you can learn. To exculde religon from sciance is no better then what religon did to sciance during the dark ages.

by what method does this religion produce its 'truth' ?

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Ok, Mr. Stull,

what 'truth' is religion after?

You asserted it so the ball is in your court. Of course, by 'truth' we must agree on a defintion. Mine is the correspondence theory....meaning that in order for something to be true it must correspond to reality.

The truth that religon is after is the same as the truth that science is seeking, the understanding of the world around us. It is simply another window to the world we inhabit. Neither one alone produces a complete picture, religon alone can not fill in all the boxes, nor can science. Its a complex world, and to only look at it through a single view limits what you can learn. To exculde religon from sciance is no better then what religon did to sciance during the dark ages.

by what method does this religion produce its 'truth' ?

The same as in Science. Exploration of the physical world around us, i.e. if God created the universe and all the things in and about it then by understanding these we come to know God, by understanding who you as a person are through personal growth (both spiritual and physical and intellectual).

---

/Central Florida Astronomical Society

That sounds sweet and all, but that's not a method. That is a desire. I'm asking by what METHOD does religion uncover 'truth'.....

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

That sounds sweet and all, but that's not a method. That is a desire. I'm asking by what METHOD does religion uncover 'truth'.....

OK, the you can use the Scienceific method if so inclined. Through religon you can

Observation and description of a phenomenon, with the phenomenon being life the universe and everything...

Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. Why do we have life, what makes the universe run and why did God need the head ach of putting up with all this in the first place?

Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, I think God is real in large part, and among other things, becuse of how well engineered the universe is. ( I hate to use the term Anthropic Principal becuse I find this to be a compelling but weak explination)

Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments. This can range from looking at cosmic background radiation and throwing protons down partical accelerators to better understand the mechanical side of the universe to purely metaphysical and philosophical pursuits.

---

/Central Florida Astronomical Society

OK, the you can use the Scienceific method if so inclined. Through religon you can

Observation and description of a phenomenon, with the phenomenon being life the universe and everything...

I can use the scientific method? Again, what other method are you using? If you've got another that's better or can compete with it then please touch us on the head, annoint us, or whatever....let us in on the secret. If you've got senses other than the 5 the rest of us have then we're all chomping at the bit waiting to hear...

Why do we have life, what makes the universe run and why did God need the head ach of putting up with all this in the first place?

1. We have life because we evolved.

2. The laws of physics makes the Universe 'run'....

3. Why did 'God' need the headache? You're assuming to be true what it is you're supposedly trying to demonstrate. A common fallacy of logic.

I think God is real in large part, and among other things, becuse of how well engineered the universe is. ( I hate to use the term Anthropic Principal becuse I find this to be a compelling but weak explination)

'well engineered!!???' . Have you ever seen a 'disorderly universe' ?

The most ancient law of logic (or corollary if you prefer) states that the burden of proof is on the man doing the assertions. That means 'you'.....

If you somehow think that randomly throwing assertions around is going to get you far, think again. I want to discuss this with you, but rationality is a prerequisite for any discussion on any topic at any time, any place.

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

1. We have life because we evolved.

2. The laws of physics makes the Universe 'run'....

3. Why did 'God' need the headache? You're assuming to be true what it is you're supposedly trying to demonstrate. A common fallacy of logic.

I think God is real in large part, and among other things, becuse of how well engineered the universe is. ( I hate to use the term Anthropic Principal becuse I find this to be a compelling but weak explination)

'well engineered!!???' . Have you ever seen a 'disorderly universe' ?

The most ancient law of logic (or corollary if you prefer) states that the burden of proof is on the man doing the assertions. That means 'you'.....

If you somehow think that randomly throwing assertions around is going to get you far, think again. I want to discuss this with you, but rationality is a prerequisite for any discussion on any topic at any time, any place.

1. Evolution dosen't fill in all the blanks, and besides as I said I am not anti science who is to say that evolution isn't just a ball that was started rolling at the time of creation. As I said Science and religon are not exclusive, I belive the two work together.

2. Yes the Laws of physics make the universe run on a purely mechanical level however we happen to know for a fact that these laws are not the end all and that there are occasions where even the laws of physics break down, and this is something that even Sciance admits.

3. There is also no proof that God dosen't exsist. And even in Sciance there are assumptions made in the absense of facts, look at Hawkings 'Bubble Universe' theory. Logic is one tool that you can use to look at the world but you should not be a slave to it. Even Immanual Kant said that Logic alone can't awnser all questions. Its largley in western society that we slave ourselves to pure logic. I discoverd this when I lived in East Asia. Logic is a window to the world, but its not the only one.

I belive it was Carl Sagan who suggested the 'disorderly universe' theory, whis at its most basic level holds some truth however to suggest that our of sheer randomness, with enough rolls of the dice you could find order isn't completly true either. I think Einstein was right when he said God dosen't place dice with the universe, if God was going to create a universe he wasn't going to create one helter-skeltor. Its just like building an engine (going back to my other passon of Hot Rodding) you can build an engine that has cams too big for the carb, or a exhaust with a diamter that is too large and the engine will work but not all that well.

I don't see how this is all that irrational, all that I am saying is that I don't belive Logic is the only kind of rational out there. The human mind dosen't think in Logic alone, we have emotions and creativity its part of the human condition and to say that we can only use one part of our mental abilites to explore the world around us to me is just another way of closeing too many doors to finding the facts of the world around us. Though I do thank you for a stout debate, its nice to get the mind out for a strech from time to time.

---

/Central Florida Astronomical Society

Only a fool would pray to a false god.

Only a fool would pray to a false god.

I agree completly.

---

/Central Florida Astronomical Society

OK, let's wrap this up so I can spawn a new thread (this one's getting a little long).

Some people believe in God, and some don't. No one here is forcing anyone to believe what he/she doesn't want to believe, and no one here is willing to listen to the strongly held beliefs of others whith whom he/she disagrees. So since this thread isn't really about converting anyone, one way or another, I propose to start another (Rel. Thr. [8]), the purpose of which will be, as it always has been, to discuss religious ideas and issues.

Tom, I'm just gettin' warmed up.... :-)

---

Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data!
I did NOT authorize this belly writing!

Tom, I'm just gettin' warmed up.... :-)

Well, I'll wait until tonight (here) when most of the rest of you (there) are asleep.

Tom, I'm just gettin' warmed up.... :-)

Well, I'll wait until tonight (here) when most of the rest of you (there) are asleep.

Chicken!

---

Tom, I'm just gettin' warmed up.... :-)

Well, I'll wait until tonight (here) when most of the rest of you (there) are asleep.

Chicken!

Tim never sleeps. (except for the weekly seti outage).

---

me@rescam.org

Now closed, but you can continue here.