Added: 2 years ago
From: LordCalculus
Views: 2,202
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (47)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • maybe science could have some type of religion i know it sounds bad but think about humans need something like relgion but not like relgion

  • Steve Weinberg is a national treasure. I wish more americans were aware of him and his work.

  • @sieracki001 i disagree with him

  • @FIGHTFANNERD3

    You keep saying that, but you don't say what it is you disagree with. smh

  • Because my faith is strong thanks to the FACT that I know what is my religion ALL ABOUT... both historically and theologically. Thus my faith is beyond any justification of whether the gospels, or any book in the Bible, is true or not. I do not need any proof whatsoever. That you can reach when you have gone through long periods of meditation and study. It is not the product of infertile fundamentalisms or dogmatisms.

  • You are escaping the argument. You have not been able to prove in any way that your faith is more true than any other, nor have you been able to demonstrate how your personal experiences in any way testifies the truth of your religion.

  • My faith better that any other?? That is not the point!! I do not need to prove that!! My faith is good for me as the fsaith of a muslim is good for him or her. Same goes with all other religions. Once a teacher told me all religions are true and false because what is true for a catholic is not true for a budhist. But faith is above dogma and rite... because, as said before, faith is trascendent of human reason...

  • If Islam is right then you are wrong, and vice versa.

    And please answer, if I said that I was a racist beacuse of my inner faith, would you respect me?

  • I will respectyour faith, not yr fanatism. See, I have said more than enough times that the demons of our modern world are fundamentalisms, dogmatisms and fanatisms. If your faith makes you a racist... then your faith is not based on love.. and obviously I would not respect you for that!!!

  • Then if because of your faith you are a racist then you are not intellectaully honest... touché!!!

  • You are not being logical at all, also, your grammar is horrible.

    I am not a racist.

    You have not proven anything.

  • My apologies for my spelling... not for my grammar. I am a 53 years old person who never learnt how to type. I use just two fingers so it is very easy to make mistakes. Of course, that does not mean that I do not know what I am talking about. And by the way your grammar is nothing extraordinary either... but you make yourself understood and that is what matters.

  • And no... because if you read my posts you will see that my faith is not based on dogmas and rites. My faith is above those limitations. Am I catholic? Yes I am because I have found in Catholisism enough freedom to expand my other needs of knowledge in science and math . Obviously, that was not the case 50 or 100 or 1000 years ago. I would have been burnt by the inquisition... but catholicism has evolved whereas the other religions have NOT... that is why I am a catholic...

  • When you read the gospels you wil note that the four of them have significant differences between them when the divinity of Jesus is referred. As per John, Jesus was divine before time. As per Mathew and Luke Jesus was divine as from his conception. There are also severe contradictions in this issue when you read Paul's letters, especially Romans. Paul consider Jesus a normal human being who became God because of his resurrection.

    Why am I telling you all of this??

  • Let me explain something: the first gospel that was written was the gospel of Mark arround the year 70 AD, the first letter of Paul was written 20 year before. The gospels and all other books of the New Testament are basically a theology though which the divinity of Jesus is established. The order and validity of the books was decided in the IV century AD (almost 400 years after Jesus death). So, the divinity fo Jesus was stablished after his death by his followers.

  • You have not proved anything. You have simply explained when the gospels were written and that they have an important role in your faith.

    Again, what makes Christianity more true that Islam?

  • Life without religion is difficult... and life without science is not easy either. Life without faith is difficult... and life without knowledge is difficult as well. We have come a long way to where we are now (for good or bad) and both religion and science have a great deal of merit for it... for good or bad. Tks for uploading these videos dspite the fact that I found their proposals a bit simplistic. Tks!!!

  • Life without religion does not have to be difficult. I have manged to live my entire life free from religion, and I`m perfectly happy.

  • Good for you!!! I have done it the other way arround and... I am perfectly happy as well!!! That is the whole point, don´t you think so??

  • @mfrances0503

    Well, it certainly is one of the ponits. But, when it comes to philosophy and intellectual honesty, we should not let religion pass.

  • It should be the free choice of each one of us... but for certain I do not think religiosity can be erradicated from human nature.

  • @mfrances0503

    Religiosity can certainly be erradicated, just look att Sweden. ( My home country )

    What we should and must preserve, is spirituality. Religion is irreconcilable with intellectual hoesty.

  • Religiosity is above religion. Is the capacity of we humans to create religions and to cultivate and preserve the greatness of the spirit. We are both reason and spirit, not just one alone. I do not agree with the idea of erradicating religion. This basically responds to a rejection to our christian inheritance. There are many other religions which are even older than ours (budhism and taoism for example) and are as well very conciliable with entellectual honesty.

  • Even among christianity there are as well very honest intellectuals and scientists who are as well believers. I recommend father Georfe Coyne so you can have a good look at a religious person as well as an honest world class scientist. I as well do not see contradictions between science and religion. I see them complementary... as reason and spirit. On the other hand, I am completely against fanatisms of either side: theists and atheists. There is where the contradiction is born: in fanatism...

  • @mfrances0503

    The belief that Jesus is the son of God is never compatible with intellectual honesty. Intellectual honesty has to do with beliefs scaling with your evidence. We do not need religion and dogmatism in order to be spiritual.

  • With all due respect, I see no contradiction in been a believer and intellectual honesty. And history, as well as present day world, is full of examples. So, the word "never" seems to be out of place in your comment. And I do not see any intellectual dishonesty in father Coyne's position as a believer and as scientist. The issue here is to be honest with yourself: if atheism fits you better, so be it. Both atheism and fanatism do not work for me. And I am an honestly happy person...

  • @mfrances0503

    I am sorry, but you are not at all adressing the point.

    Intellectual honesty is about believing things for which you have good evidence.

    Christians believe that Jesus is the son of god, and that he was a miracle worker.

    That notion is not supported with reliable evidence, therefore, it is not compatible with intellectual honesty.

  • @mfrances0503

    Atheism does not have to fit me, that is not the point. The thing is, that I`m simply being led to it by the evidence.

  • That is exactly my point!! In religion faith, not fact, is the driving process. In science is proven fact not faith the driving force. And that is exactly why I keep telling you I see no contradiction in being a believer (faith) and being an honestly intellectual scholar or scientist. I believe because I have faith and I also love science because my need for knowledge is insaciable.

    And as originally said, you specifically address your rejection to the christian religion, whereas I said

  • there are other religions older than christianism and wherein intellectaul honesty is far beyond question. I am a christian and I believe in the theory of the big bang and evolution. I believe in the miracle of creation. God ask us to believe... He has never asked us to be ignorants, therefore I believe that in christianism you can as well believe (faith) and be intellectually honest... there is no contradiction at all...

  • Of course there is a contradiction.

    Let me make it clear and easy for you.

    Can you present any reliable evidence, that have made you believe that the gospels are true?

  • Again and again: faith does not need proof or evidence. It is in you. It is your free choice. It is your free will. I do not need to produce any evidence of nothing. Religion IS NOT science. Religion is a matter of faith and in such is trascendent of human reason.

    Moreover, neither theism or atheism are subjects of science. Science does NOT need to proof whether God exists or not. And yes again... both science and faith have peacefully lived in me without any contradictions between them!!

  • I wish everyone on this planet could say that. Maybe we would not be facing fanatisms and dogmatic fundamentalisms that are the demons of our present day world. There is no need for a controversy between science and religion: there are already many areas where humans can make a dollar out of ignorancy and naiveness. I am happy for you because you have managed your life without faith and you are happy. Have u see me trying to convince you otherwise?? That is usually called respect...

  • It seems to me, that you simply ignore the grave dangers connected to your position.

    And why do you believe in christianity rather that Islam? is Islam less true?

    And, if we should not require evidence for religious beliefs, why then should we oppose the fundamentalists? How could ever say that they are wrong if dont care about evidence?

  • Also, to talk about respect is irrelevant in this debate. I do not respect your position for one simple reason, beacuse you have not given any reasons for me to believe that you are right.

  • Didn´t I said there are other religions older than christianism?? Didn´t I say that those religions are profoundly honest both intellectaully and theological?? All have great spiritual acomplishments and some are more dogmatic that others. I am catholic by choice and, again, I do not need any proof whether God exist or not. It is a matter of faith. Can you prove beyond any doubt that God does not exist??

  • If your religion is true, then basiclly no other religions can be true, that is why evidence matters.

    And no, of course I can not prove the non-existence of god, that is rather pointless, it is like proving the non-existence of trolls, it can not be done.

    What is important is holding beliefs which scale with your evidence.

  • Exactly. You can not prove it. I can not prove it either. I can not prove the existence of God through evidence or fact. I can only believe through faith. See what I have been telling you all this time??

  • Can you disprove me if I say that golden dragons live and prosper in northern Norway?

  • No I won´t!! But I will ask you for proof because that particular sentence is a scientific enunciate. If you produce the evidence and the scientif community accepts it then I will believe you. By the way, science has been proving that dragons in fact existed... just chek your scientific sources.

  • You are failing again. There is no evidence for the golden dragons in Norway, just as there is no evidence for the monotheistic god. Both claims are claims about truth.

    So you are not a catholic beacuse you think that that is the true religion?

  • Really?? Am I failing?? Read what you wrote and you will see that what you are saying is an affirmation. I you have said: I do believe that golden dragons live and prosper in Norway, tehn the semanthics would have been completely different. Don´t you agree??

  • I will make it easier for you: science is neutral. It does not care whether you believe or not. Science can not prove beyond any doubt whether God exist or not. It is not its field of study. Science, to that matter, is agnostic. But if you do not believe because of your own concious and free decission, then you need not to prove anything to me. I will respect that. And that is what I mean by respect!!

  • You are still not adressing the point.

    Science has nothing to do with faith or fidelity.

    Science is about the things we can prove. If you disprove something in science, it is no longer true.

    If I said that I am a racist beacuse of my inner feelings and my inner faith, would you respect that?

  • Thanks a lot for the upload of this.

  • You're welcome! : )

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more