₦airaland Forum

Image123:
Do you have a credible percentage or data for this? There are scientists, doctors, engineers, professionals, professors, astronauts, and other powerful and intelligent all over the world who are religious or you are not aware?

While it was long ago, I hear that only something like 1/7 top scientists today are Christians. Given the Bias of Top scientists coming from the just of recent very Christian West, it is alarming somewhat.

FatherOfJesus:
Most religions of the world see science as a threat to their faith. Science depends on observation, data, asking questions, not assuming the answers in advance. So we test, we test again. Hypotheses that fail the tests wind up discarded. If we disprove an idea, we leave it behind. But this cannot be said about religion.

Science does not have an anti-God bias. Remember, science depends on observation. Can one observe God? No. Furthermore, the Scriptures themselves demonstrate that God works in arbitrary and sometimes contrary ways, almost as if to frustrate the attempt to find him and understand him, this is one of the measures religion take to manipulate narratives to justify their conclusion. Since science can’t find any evidence of God to study, and everything we do study appears (evidence!) to have natural causes and to be natural phenomenon, God simply cannot be a part of any hypothesis or any conclusion.

Nor is science “pro-evolution.” Evolution is “change over time.” Populations change. Science studies those changes. It can’t deny that change has happened, because that is what the evidence clearly says. It isn’t a “bias” to accept that things change, including populations of organisms. We see it in the laboratory. We see it in the fossil record. We see it in farming techniques. We see it in the genetic records. It would be a “bias” to deny it.

What your religious teachers are trying to do to you is to make you come to your conclusions first, then try to find evidence that supports it later. If you can’t find evidence that supports your conclusions, then you make stuff up, or lie about the evidence, lie about the science, lie about the scientists, lie about your own credentials. Creationists — especially the ones writing the books, collecting your money — lie. It is their livelihood. They literally make a good living by lying.

I’m someone who likes to see evidence in all ramifications without special pleading for the existence of a god. If god has to exist then there must be a testable way to measure that and that’s why I would always tilt toward atheism and believe science most of the times. If a structure that follows evidence like science makes you uncomfortable, it means there’s something wrong with your belief system and you are trying very hard to cling to it.

I mean, I mostly agree with you OP but I don't get how that necessary ends in Atheism.

Paul praised the Christians who instead of believing blindly returned to the scriptures to cross reference his claims before they believed. My parents taught me to do this at an early age so for me it mostly ended with me looking up some Theology in form of videos, articles and books and most of the issues have been resolved.

Side effect of this is I don't take our loud mouth pastors seriously anymore, they say whatever they will say to get more bench warmers.

I don't really see evidence that the scriptures are anti-science or that a God that is a personality can be detected with science. So in my case at least, science isn't a threat to my religion, if anything the science of today is in more inline to my religion than the science of the 1900s.

In the 1900s, they taught that the earth was never changing, the Hittites never existed as that the universe was eternal.

Today we know that the Earth chances in glacial and sea level events and continental drift, that the Hittites were both a powerful Anatolian civilization and North levantine people and that the universe has a beginning.

As long as people read the Bible in the context of its genres and period, few things we know now really contradict it and the more we will know about the world the less so.

Did early Christians drive cars? Should you drive a car?

Find out now how early Pagan celtic people thought that Blacksmithing and Iron making was Magic.

You know since they were kinda close to early Christians, that means early Christians got the idea of using iron from them.

Thus no Christian should touch Iron because Iron is witchcraft

Lol, no.

Logic007:
as usual, you are opposite me and wrong.

Have you actually read the book, that was just a quote from a biased International left article.

Tolkien's books were never explicit about sex like GRRM books were.

Logic007:
Explain why scientists today are atheists.

Back in the day, Christianity and the church were powerful.

Because secularism got popular in the Protestant revolution as a solution to Europe's wars of religion and the West still remains the bastion of scientific progress today.

Move outside the Western and Secularized world an the to scientists there aren't Atheist.

People really, underestimate the global cultural influnece of the West sometimes.

Logic007:
All im seeing from you is Christian bias.

There is an implicit bias towards Abrahamic religions in general and Protestant Christianity in specifics in the word religion, as it's modern meaning had its origins parallel to that of secularism in the Protestant revolution.

3 places this implicit bias clearly raises their heads is in the mutual exclusivity of religion, the assumption that religion is a separate category from other social categories and the assumption that religion is primarily belief.

When you see and come into contact with these 3 assumptions as well as other assumptions around the usage of the word religion, you will see that most things that we call religions don't fit well into them, only Protestant Christianity fits well into it and Abrahamic religions roughly into it.

All you are seeing the the implicit Protestant Bias in the word, Religion.

Thelucifer666:
Only in the bible

I was literally paraphrasing a refutation to an enlightenment era idea.

So not from the Bible

donnie:
We are not middle Eastern. We do not decend from them. They together with Britain and the league of nations are responsible for the mass deception. They have used the media, western education and religion to brainwash our people. They are the synagogue of Satan (Revelation 2:9,3:9).

And the real Semetic people are in Africa. Yes, the decendants of SHEM are on the continent. Bantu languages are 100% Semetic.

Wash Africa given to Ham?

Even Canaan a Ham descendant that was in Asia was called in intruder

Also given just how influneced the dutch who conquered South Africa were by Christianity, bet is that they named that Jericho after the one in the middle east and not the other way around

donnie:
Yea right, it's pseudo because it's not slavemaster's teaching

Most of your premises are impossible and make no sense.

Why don't Sub-Saharan Africans genetically group with middle easterners if we dwcend from middle eastern tribes?

Why don't we speak Semitic languages (in the same family as Hebrew, Aramaic, most Mesopotamian languages) if we descend from people who according to your evidence should have been speaking Semitic languages at the time?

Why did most of Sub-Saharan Africa not write Mesopotamian sourced scripts, if they came from Mesopotamians, who are literate in the time period you are referencing.

Logic007:


So you think that the old religions of Buddhism and Hinduism did not exist in the past or what?

Buddhism is a religion that isn't necessarily as religious as Christianity. It is much more of a philosophy in my opinion while Christianity is more of a Theology.

Like you can literally be an Atheist and Buddhist or not believe in like 99.9% of the supernatural (including the soul) mad be buddhist.

As for Hinduism it is more the exception to the rule in my opinion but even then it is still much less rigid than Christianity, again, Hindu thinkers that can be considered Atheists have existed since ancient times and there isn't nearly as much of a bother about Orthodoxy as among the Abrahamic religions.

1Sharon:
What?? ?!!

The track record of the number of not evil people that die or have tragedy in the story of the Bible or just recent history indicates that you shouldn't be waiting for supernatural help.

Thelucifer666:
So snakes can talk?
Nor be story book be that
Abi donkeys and people waking up from dead

Na small pikin day believe these things

Something won't be considered a miracle if it was something that happens naturally, that's why the incident with Balam is considered a mircaculous.

Logic007:
FALSE.

Most scientists today are atheists.

Only today but not for most of the history of the profession

Logic007:
I'm very sorry for the late reply. I am also sorry to tell you that what you wrote is verbose bias from christian indoctrination

The simple fact is that Galileo was persecuted by the church

Copernicus's died before his book was publish and so, he faced no persecution from the church. His book was banned though.

Christianity and science/technology have never been friends

"Christian indoctrination" Nigerian churches don't teach the above and I learnt most of the above from secular sources, reading and listening to stuff like Byzantine History, not Christian preachers.

Copernicus book was banned much later after Galileo's affair soured the playing field. The book wasn't even that popular before then and was even taught in a few Catholic schools.

Also, Copernicus died the same year it was published, it was actually published before his death but he died soon after. According to the legend he died soon after he was presented with the printed copy of the work.

Lol. The religion of the part of the world most responsible for our recent era's technological progress somehow was against that technological progress. This is stuff I would expect out of a white supremacists' mouth before a Nigerian, that Whites are so awesome that even with a remarkably anti-science book they still brought about so much scientific progress.

Thelucifer666:
Well I guess so since the book is nothing but a story book.

Lol, ar Atheists still using this argument?

The "just a story book" that has correlation from archeology, Roman sources, Assyrian sources, Egyptian sources etc.

NairalandSARS:
If they exist simultaneously, then would we say He created the universe?
Maybe He didn't create the universe but affects it. May be the reason He has so little effect in the universe.

The nature of a timeless existance would be indistinguishable for everything happening simultaneously even if it isn't actually happening simultaneously.

It is a way of existing that we has humans cannot comprehend but there is some hope that we can at least calculate it.

Also, I timeless existance would also be indistinguishable from things having no beginning as everything would be happening at the same time coordinate.

So everything would be like happening simultaneously and unendingly, even tho that isn't the best description, it is the closest description we can comprehend.

BassReeves:
Luke 12:4
'I tell you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more.'

Matthew 10:28
'And you should not be afraid of those killing the body but not being able to kill the soul.
Indeed rather you should fear the One being able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna'

God, is not answerable to us or anyone for that matter. We control the controllable, and what we cant, we hands off and leave in God's Hands

Preach.

This.

God has given us Brain, Hand, Leg, Muscle for much more than Night Vigils and people that treat it like that is the only reason are decieving themselves.

BassReeves:
Word.

If God didnt allow this to happen to her, God didn't this to her or that she is in it because of God, who then allowed it, who then allowed this to her, who if not because of God, is why she's holding on to her faith huh?

I would say that this is the side effect of God letting the free will of humans manifest.

God allows people to do stuff and mostly (tho no always) doesn't interfer.

So God allows people to Blaspheme and Sin, so he allows human being to act to the fullness of their hearts in this life.

No

He is annoying and reads like a Propaganda

No though, no attempt to understand context, just trying to insert his thoughts into people's minds

I'm not sure but I fell like I had a trippy angel experience once.

Like something like looked like an Opahim or any of the Biblical angel descriptions

People should know that the Dead sea scrolls, for the books that are there are mostly later recordings than the source of what we have now and by a sectarian book.

Or in other words, they are less reliable than our Bible

Kobojunkie:
it takes more remorse for some sins..so God does not forgive your sins if you do not harboured enough remorse in your heart... where do you get such crapola from?

I am not explaining it well, maybe ask a priest for a better explanation.

But Catholic tradition is that Sins aren't equal, the worst of them are moral sins (murder is in this group) and I think those will get you into hell for sure while lesser sins depending on the amount can get you into purgatory. (Assuming you are not forgiven of them before death).

Kobojunkie:
Come on .... this is wrong!

Nobody knows exactly what the heart of this woman was as far as God is concerned to pretend that God did this to her or that she is in it because of God. That is rude and unfair a thing to claim.

I am not blaming God. I am just saying people shouldn't expect God to save them like it is his job.

God has let better people die, God letting you or me die isn't something so special that it deserves an explanation.

NairalandSARS:
Me self I wonder.
God supposedly existed (alone) for eternity past and had no need for anything and then suddenly decided to create the universe? For what? For his glory? Why did He suddenly need the glory?
Methinks it is most likely He has created countless universes before this one and destroyed them too.
He is just fucking with us.

Or given the way time would work outside a universe, it would be more that they all exist simultaneously.

I don't think this world is messed up and maybe it is a perspective thing, the world is wonderful in its own way for most.

Like see the Ecclesiastes quote on life without God.

Ecclesiastes 4 1
And I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living, who are still alive. But better than both is he who has not yet been, who has not seen the evil that is done under the sun.

So I would say for most, life without God will be meaningless and suffering through hardship for nothing is something that is hard for people, but if you believe in God and the inherit meaning and usefulness of life, you get a new energy to be able to suffer gracefully through hardship and enjoy the wonders of life more fully.

Tho, I can't just throw the unbelievers under the bus. There is this idea of "Optimistic Nihilism" which books down to, if life is meaningless, pain is meaningless and should be Ignored and joy and happiness should be indulged. It basically sounds like another way of justifying Stoicism, a similar but older idea.

And for those not too neurotic, this way of Ignoring and enduring hardship and focusing on the good is a good way to pass thru life.

Thelucifer666:
Exactly
The intelligent ones quickly accepted islam and were released back to the public
The girl decided to hold on to her religion thinking god will save her when he only performs in the bible

Stephen was stoned in Acts 7

In 1 Kings 18 and 19, Elijah had to save himself from Jezebel.

And according to tradition all the Apostles died to infidels.

James the Less was beheaded in Acts 12.

According to Tradition Paul was beheaded, Peter was Crucified upside down and John died in exile.

I think anyone that actually reads the Bible well will see most "good people" even there have more chances of coming to ruin, like all men do.

This pseudo-scientific bullshit doesn't even need debunking

In Catholic Tradition they are not all equal but are all still sin.

This means that they can all take you to hell yes, but it takes more remorse for some sins to be forgiven over some.

Christian Theology and Enlightenment philosophy as God as these.

The unmoving mover, the uncaused cause, the point of origin of all things. As all things have a cause, you can in theory go back infinitely to find the cause of every effect, but sooner or later you will reach the beginning of all things and the first cause. Unlike all other causes, that first cause must no reason and is just the first cause, that is what God is.

Or that God well, created himself. In this idea, the first cause as caused by the first cause, an effect that was its own cause. This is God.