|
|
Post by Tyrantor on Jan 21, 2011 1:21:24 GMT
I've always wondered what it would be like to be religious, not in a patronising way. I've always wondered what it would be like to believe in something based on faith.
I can't with my mindset, I need some kind of empirical proof. Which is annoying because I think it requires a resolute mind to see faith where others see ignorance.
This isn't intended to be in any way offensive. Also, don't take this as me being close minded. Truth be told, I am open to any and all possibilities that answer the questions we ask, but it's the proof supporting them that I need.
|
|
|
|
Post by hiveelysium on Jan 21, 2011 5:42:09 GMT
I've always wondered what it would be like to be religious, not in a patronising way. I've always wondered what it would be like to believe in something based on faith. I can't with my mindset, I need some kind of empirical proof. Which is annoying because I think it requires a resolute mind to see faith where others see ignorance. This isn't intended to be in any way offensive. Also, don't take this as me being close minded. Truth be told, I am open to any and all possibilities that answer the questions we ask, but it's the proof supporting them that I need. not to get into a super deep theological discussion unless you want to..... Since it sounds like you at least think about what you believe or don't believe i will ask you a question which you may answer in message if that is more comfortable for you or if thats more appropriate. How do you answer the question where did everything come from? because every answer i have ever heard from a non religious perspective is it came from nothing. (just curious if this is the belief you hold to as well) |
|
|
|
Post by andy089 on Jan 21, 2011 5:46:30 GMT
Well its the same question as "do christians play Space Marines?" (since their god is the emperor and this contradicts their beliefs in more or less the same way). I think it really comes down to "HOW [religious] are you?"
As for me I should be asking myself "Do i want to play something that defies science as we know it today?" (yes, in my opinion science is some kind of religion. and id love to have a 'scientific inquisition' "...whats that? evolution isnt true? burn him.")
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrantor on Jan 21, 2011 13:01:59 GMT
I've always wondered what it would be like to be religious, not in a patronising way. I've always wondered what it would be like to believe in something based on faith. I can't with my mindset, I need some kind of empirical proof. Which is annoying because I think it requires a resolute mind to see faith where others see ignorance. This isn't intended to be in any way offensive. Also, don't take this as me being close minded. Truth be told, I am open to any and all possibilities that answer the questions we ask, but it's the proof supporting them that I need. not to get into a super deep theological discussion unless you want to..... Since it sounds like you at least think about what you believe or don't believe i will ask you a question which you may answer in message if that is more comfortable for you or if thats more appropriate. How do you answer the question where did everything come from? because every answer i have ever heard from a non religious perspective is it came from nothing. (just curious if this is the belief you hold to as well) I would simply answer that question with "I don't know". Bland as the answer may be, no one really does know. There are theorys, stories, hypothesis' etc etc, but there is no absolute definitive proof. I question the beginning of our existance, but questioning something and coming up with a potential answer does not make it the right answer. Now I am not saying that any of the aforementioned answers are wrong, but rather that I do not believe in them as of yet due to a lack of empirical evidence. There are questions that, however, cannot be answered because the nature of the question depends on the context of it and thus it does not rely on empirical evidence. Questions that ask "Why" and not "How". Why we are here has many answers depending on the views that you believe in, thus we cannot answer it until we have the answer to the first question. But, to give you an answer not involving nothing as the answer to your question. At the centre of black holes, the matter in the black hole is so dense that there could be a galaxy's worth of matter all condensed into the space the size of several atoms worth. Theoretically, there could have been a "previous" universe in which one supermassive black hole (which is proven to exist at the centre of every galaxy, giving it it's shape) simply kept going and going and going, until it had condensed the entire mass of the universe into it's core. With nothing left to feed on, the black hole would collapse in on itself creating a massive explosion where every piece of matter would be flung out to space and thus a kind of "big bang" is created. Of course, this theory is unlikely, and is mostly bollocks. Since there is no proof to disprove it however, it remains a possibility, albeit an unlikely one. Though it is an example of something where there is an initial mass that explains the creation of the universe, as you asked for. What caused this hypothetical bang? Was it some kind of creator? We do not know. We are shooting in the dark right now, and we are unable to construct a sound empirical theory due to lack of proof. With this lack of proof, we cannot fit the theory to suit the proof - which is the opposite of what we're doing now, which is fitting the proof to suit the theory. Which is logically unsound. |
|
|
|
Post by andy089 on Jan 21, 2011 13:41:55 GMT
Even though I believe in science (and yes-it IS a religion. deal with it -.-), I think there MIGHT be some form of life that we can not detect. This might be entities made purely of energy-you couldn't say "this is impossible" because well...it isn't really. And it would probably fit very well in the whole god-scheme, because if you look at it almost everything involves some kind of energy (the DNA suddenly doesn't look so much "made by chance" anymore).
But following science you don't assume things and wait for them to be disproved, you have to prove your theory, which is impossible in this case-thus no life consisting almost purely of energy.
Same applies to any other religion, except the ones that are willing to be proven wrong (like science).
I suppose most people are more agnostic than anything else nowadays, saying "I don't know-it could be, but who could know?".
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrantor on Jan 21, 2011 14:39:31 GMT
Even though I believe in science (and yes-it IS a religion. deal with it -.-), I think there MIGHT be some form of life that we can not detect. This might be entities made purely of energy-you couldn't say "this is impossible" because well...it isn't really. And it would probably fit very well in the whole god-scheme, because if you look at it almost everything involves some kind of energy (the DNA suddenly doesn't look so much "made by chance" anymore). But following science you don't assume things and wait for them to be disproved, you have to prove your theory, which is impossible in this case-thus no life consisting almost purely of energy. Same applies to any other religion, except the ones that are willing to be proven wrong (like science). I suppose most people are more agnostic than anything else nowadays, saying "I don't know-it could be, but who could know?". Science is not a religion. |
|
|
|
Post by hiveelysium on Jan 21, 2011 17:13:33 GMT
TyrantorAs a christian i am sad because of your lack of faith but as a logical being i am glad that you at least are willing to say you dont know, generally when i ask that question they say (as before mentioned) mass was just there and it created itself. And they expect me to feel foolish when i believe the same about God. makes me chuckle at their double standard
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrantor on Jan 21, 2011 19:45:20 GMT
TyrantorAs a christian i am sad because of your lack of faith but as a logical being i am glad that you at least are willing to say you dont know, generally when i ask that question they say (as before mentioned) mass was just there and it created itself. And they expect me to feel foolish when i believe the same about God. makes me chuckle at their double standard See, the people that wll say that the Big Bang Theory is a definitive thing are not Scientists, they are just people who accept something as truth without being given proof. Ignore these idiots. I see the views on scientific theories and religious theories as pretty much equal to be honest. I do not believe in God, but that does not mean that it does not exist. I do not believe in God because of proof. I do not believe in the Big Bang, but that does not mean it did not happen. I do not believe in the Big Bang because of the lack of proof fully supporting it. Though, there is alot of proof for something of it's nature. At the end of the day, a scientist will only say something is definitive if it has been absolutely proven and can have empirical proof. These people that go bashing religion are ignorant and constitute the 90% of people that believe in science. The other 10% are the quiet ones who have to endure these morons. Obviously, it is bad on both sides. My mind doesn't see anything as definitive unless it has been proven, that isn't putting your faith in science however, it is having knowledge of yourself. I am not saying that because you believe in something that you are weak, I am saying that if you are going to believe in something then you need to put your all into it. There are the people who say they believe in God, but only when they need the deity - which is bull. Again, it's people ruining it, and it's a shame because people with belief, like you, have to endure these other morons. Having a theory, religious or scientific, is like having a Gentleman Parts: It's fine to have one, just don't go waving it about in public. And please don't try to cram it down my throat. |
|
|
|
Post by biomega on Jan 21, 2011 20:05:44 GMT
not to get into a super deep theological discussion unless you want to..... Since it sounds like you at least think about what you believe or don't believe i will ask you a question which you may answer in message if that is more comfortable for you or if thats more appropriate. How do you answer the question where did everything come from? because every answer i have ever heard from a non religious perspective is it came from nothing. (just curious if this is the belief you hold to as well) I would simply answer that question with "I don't know". Bland as the answer may be, no one really does know. There are theorys, stories, hypothesis' etc etc, but there is no absolute definitive proof. I question the beginning of our existance, but questioning something and coming up with a potential answer does not make it the right answer. Now I am not saying that any of the aforementioned answers are wrong, but rather that I do not believe in them as of yet due to a lack of empirical evidence. There are questions that, however, cannot be answered because the nature of the question depends on the context of it and thus it does not rely on empirical evidence. Questions that ask "Why" and not "How". Why we are here has many answers depending on the views that you believe in, thus we cannot answer it until we have the answer to the first question. But, to give you an answer not involving nothing as the answer to your question. At the centre of black holes, the matter in the black hole is so dense that there could be a galaxy's worth of matter all condensed into the space the size of several atoms worth. Theoretically, there could have been a "previous" universe in which one supermassive black hole (which is proven to exist at the centre of every galaxy, giving it it's shape) simply kept going and going and going, until it had condensed the entire mass of the universe into it's core. With nothing left to feed on, the black hole would collapse in on itself creating a massive explosion where every piece of matter would be flung out to space and thus a kind of "big bang" is created. Of course, this theory is unlikely, and is mostly bollocks. Since there is no proof to disprove it however, it remains a possibility, albeit an unlikely one. Though it is an example of something where there is an initial mass that explains the creation of the universe, as you asked for. What caused this hypothetical bang? Was it some kind of creator? We do not know. We are shooting in the dark right now, and we are unable to construct a sound empirical theory due to lack of proof. With this lack of proof, we cannot fit the theory to suit the proof - which is the opposite of what we're doing now, which is fitting the proof to suit the theory. Which is logically unsound. Tyrantor, you are so smart. High-five. Andy-- ask any scientist if science is a religion. If they say that it is, they are not a scientist. Science is a process by which people figure out how things work. We don't have our answers handed down to us, we can derive them from what we can observe and calculate in nature itself. Also, as Tyrantor said, science is meant to answer questions of "how," not "why." That is left up to whichever religion you decide to follow--if you do decide to follow any at all. I have found it increasingly more difficult to subscribe to any religious belief in the past few years. As someone who is particularly interested in science (specifically biology), I have found it less and less necessary to ask "why" questions about life and the universe. Being able to understand that life and the organization of matter is on a continuum gives me enough peace of mind that I seldom worry about the kind of questions that religions try to answer. For instance, if there is some plane of existence after death, there is no way for me to know what it is like, or what I must do in life to get there. Hence there is no reason for me to choose a religion (and how could I possibly know if any are right?). There are still reasons for me to try to be a "good" person, even if I am not religious. All you have to do is read John Locke in order to understand the motives of a socially conscientious person. I behave in an acceptable manner in society because I in good faith believe that members of a society should expect this from one another. It's that whole golden rule thing-- Jesus himself was a big proponent of this, but you don't have to be religious to employ it in your daily life. It's just basic humanity. So you see, science and philosophy give me plenty of good reasons to be kind to others, and I don't need religion to be a good person. On the other hand, religion gives plenty of people reasons to kill each other. I think this is a shame, and it's the main problem that I have with organized religion as a whole. That said, I still respect your right to practice your religion. However I do believe that the ideas behind most religions are essentially flawed, not only because most religions are hundreds or thousands of years old and are not always still applicable in modern times, but especially because they are in general not founded on logic. Logic is very important in the process of making good decisions, so this is a major deficiency in my book. The whole idea of "faith," which is essentially making decisions or holding beliefs about things without thinking about them, is a problem as well. Anyway, I'm sorry for ranting, but I feel that athiesm is often misunderstood, so I thought I might try to clear things up a bit. I'm sure nobody actually read the whole post, though. >_< Oh, and as far as life based on energy goes, energy without matter does not fit the scientific definition of life--which is based at the cellular level (it is debatable whether or not viruses fit this definition). However, I'm sure that if humans ever encountered an animated being that was composed completely of energy, we (the scientific community) would have to admit that we missed something, and might even expand the definition of life (but i doubt it). |
|
|
|
Post by biomega on Jan 21, 2011 21:50:12 GMT
At the end of the day, a scientist will only say something is definitive if it has been absolutely proven and can have empirical proof. These people that go bashing religion are ignorant and constitute the 90% of people that believe in science. The other 10% are the quiet ones who have to endure these morons While I agree with most of what you say, this I disagree with. Just because I sometimes "bash" (really just complain about) religion doesn't mean that I am ignorant. I know quite a bit about religion. I once held religious beliefs. I have studied many religions from around the world. I don't claim to understand everything about religion, but I also don't claim to understand everything about science. The fact that I don't know everything does not make me ignorant. Ignorance is a choice. My opinions on religion are similar to my opinions on Ke$ha and Lady Gaga. It's fine if you like to listen to them, but just don't try to make me like them; don't tell me that I don't "get" them, and one more thing-- it will probably be difficult for us to get along, because music is one way that I connect on a deeper level with people. Well, philosophy/world-views is another way I connect. Therefore I am unlikely to make a lasting friendship with someone who is deeply religious. |
|
|
|
Post by General Chips on Jan 21, 2011 21:51:52 GMT
Even though I believe in science (and yes-it IS a religion. deal with it -.-), I think there MIGHT be some form of life that we can not detect. This might be entities made purely of energy-you couldn't say "this is impossible" because well...it isn't really. And it would probably fit very well in the whole god-scheme, because if you look at it almost everything involves some kind of energy (the DNA suddenly doesn't look so much "made by chance" anymore). But following science you don't assume things and wait for them to be disproved, you have to prove your theory, which is impossible in this case-thus no life consisting almost purely of energy. Same applies to any other religion, except the ones that are willing to be proven wrong (like science). I suppose most people are more agnostic than anything else nowadays, saying "I don't know-it could be, but who could know?".  Nuff' said Back to the topic: I wonder what religious people would think of Dark Eldar? Space Elves who do sick thing to the bodies of those they kill then deficate on the bodies? I know a family that'd flip if they knew that. Its like Ork players yelling WAAAGH!, IG/Marines yelling for the emperor. or Nid players chanting nom nom nom.... Silly and fun, nothing more |
|
|
|
Post by hive fleet pandora on Jan 21, 2011 22:16:30 GMT
i know people that wont play that plastic baneblade because they say the adeptus shrine at the back in some sort of voodoo
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyrantor on Jan 21, 2011 23:05:55 GMT
pandora - your sig REALLY annoys me. I can't explain in enough detail how much it annoys me. @crmini - I'm not talking about the people in the religion or how that religion is practiced, I'm talking about the theories of creation and how things are what they are within that religion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trygon on Jan 21, 2011 23:46:05 GMT
Science is not a religion. +1 People that treat Science like a religion are fools. Science is a tool made of theories. The moment it is treated as an absolute is the moment you stop wanting to change what it has at the moment. And a tool you stop maintaining is a useless, rusty tool. For Science to work, it must always be flawed so that we can build and improve upon it. And something that is flawed cannot be a god, or anything like the sort. It is a shame that with all this 'New Age'/Dawkinistic "Atheism" being slung around these days amongst the youth, the line between Science and Religion is becoming too blurred. I've seen these people throwing around Science as some kind of deity and ranting on about converting unbelievers like some zealot of old (or a backwards country, like America  ). People need to be educated on the various aspects of Theism, Atheism, Agnosticism and their relationship with Science far more then they are these days. |
|
|
|
Post by Inquisitor Stingray on Jan 22, 2011 0:20:51 GMT
Blergh, TL;DR.
I'm christian by all means, and it does in no way disallow me to play Chaos, Tyranids or anything else. I'd love to elaborate through a loooong post, but let me just quote this guy called Paul. He says:
"Anything is allowed, but not everything will benefit you". It speaks perfectly for it self. And anyone, christian or not, should be able to agree with him: We do stuff. Some is good, some is bad. We believe in stuff. Some is true, some is false.
|
|
