How can rational people believe in any religion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is there perfect physics down to the stone and then subatomic particles? Why are their physical universes that follow patterns? Why are there tiny cells with amazing functions? Believing all this happened at random takes faith. Believing all this is knitted together by God takes faith. At least the later has the Bible as evidence and the places and events of the Bible are traced.

^atom, not stone

My favorite book takes place in South Carolina...which is a real place. Does that mean the book is true, and not fiction?

Have you studied science?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is there perfect physics down to the stone and then subatomic particles? Why are their physical universes that follow patterns? Why are there tiny cells with amazing functions? Believing all this happened at random takes faith. Believing all this is knitted together by God takes faith. At least the later has the Bible as evidence and the places and events of the Bible are traced.

It does not take any faith whatsoever.

All of the physics things are explained by the big bang. If evidence is found of a better explanation, we'll switch to that one.

All of those biological things are explained by evolution, with the exception of abiogenesis, and there is mountains of evidence explaining how that might have happened.

Asking how it "happened" implies there was a before it happened. There is no evidence of that, and no reason to think there was. It's quite likely time began with the big bang so there was nothing for it to come from.

None of this is simple, but it is all easy to believe once you understand.

You know what is hard to believe? A magic man in the sky who existed forever outside of time but then decided to create time and everything in it on a nearly infinite scale but place his personal fishtank on the third stone from a sun in the corner of one of billions of galaxies. And he stays hidden except for a short while to a bunch of illiterate shepherds 2 millennia before mass media. And he allowed thousands of similar stories of gods to exist but those are all false and just his is true.

That is the definition of preposterous.

Oh, nonsense. We have good Physics explanations from a very very short time after the big bang until now. We have no widely accepted Physics explanation for the big bang itself or its creation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is there perfect physics down to the stone and then subatomic particles? Why are their physical universes that follow patterns? Why are there tiny cells with amazing functions? Believing all this happened at random takes faith. Believing all this is knitted together by God takes faith. At least the later has the Bible as evidence and the places and events of the Bible are traced.

It does not take any faith whatsoever.

All of the physics things are explained by the big bang. If evidence is found of a better explanation, we'll switch to that one.

All of those biological things are explained by evolution, with the exception of abiogenesis, and there is mountains of evidence explaining how that might have happened.

Asking how it "happened" implies there was a before it happened. There is no evidence of that, and no reason to think there was. It's quite likely time began with the big bang so there was nothing for it to come from.

None of this is simple, but it is all easy to believe once you understand.

You know what is hard to believe? A magic man in the sky who existed forever outside of time but then decided to create time and everything in it on a nearly infinite scale but place his personal fishtank on the third stone from a sun in the corner of one of billions of galaxies. And he stays hidden except for a short while to a bunch of illiterate shepherds 2 millennia before mass media. And he allowed thousands of similar stories of gods to exist but those are all false and just his is true.

That is the definition of preposterous.

Oh, nonsense. We have good Physics explanations from a very very short time after the big bang until now. We have no widely accepted Physics explanation for the big bang itself or its creation.

Let me repeat since you fail to understand. There is no evidence that the big bang was “created”, or hasn’t always existed, or that there was anything before it. There is no evidence there was time before it.

That is the “nonsense”, and it is your nonsense.

[Anonymous]

It's all theory. An attempt to explain our world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's all theory. An attempt to explain our world.

Not sure what ideas you are referring to with this brief statement, so for general edification I will copy and paste the following:

In science, a theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that is supported by a vast body of evidence, facts, and repeatedly confirmed observations. Unlike the colloquial use of the word to mean a guess or hunch, a scientific theory is a comprehensive framework that explains why phenomena occur and is capable of making falsifiable predictions about future outcomes.

Key characteristics of a scientific theory include:

- It is built upon empirical laws and integrates many facts, hypotheses, and observations into a coherent, systematic structure.
- It must be testable and falsifiable, meaning it can be proven wrong if new evidence contradicts it.
- It does not "graduate" into a law or a fact; rather, laws describe what happens (often mathematically), while theories explain why it happens.

Examples of well-established scientific theories include the theory of evolution, the germ theory of disease, the heliocentric theory, and the theory of plate tectonics. These theories remain "theories" even when widely accepted because they provide the explanatory models for facts, rather than becoming the facts themselves.

[Anonymous]

Even just using Christianity, it doesn't make sense that God first appeared to the Jews many thousands of years after people existed and only to this one tribe of people, but then he brought a son down to earth but somehow didn't convince the jews despite this fulfilling his original plan they should have been on board with. And then somehow also influenced the Muslim world and the Muslims and Christians for most of the time after Jesus hated jews. And then his new religion splintered into hundreds of churches.. Its all so ridiculous. These religions are just myths from the time period and culture they came from. They have no flow from century to century.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even just using Christianity, it doesn't make sense that God first appeared to the Jews many thousands of years after people existed and only to this one tribe of people, but then he brought a son down to earth but somehow didn't convince the jews despite this fulfilling his original plan they should have been on board with. And then somehow also influenced the Muslim world and the Muslims and Christians for most of the time after Jesus hated jews. And then his new religion splintered into hundreds of churches.. It's all so ridiculous. These religions are just myths from the time period and culture they came from. They have no flow from century to century.

No, it makes sense. God appeared to Jews because he wanted them to be the light of the world and lead everyone else out of darkness. Unfortunately they messed up and so he had to appear again to Mohammad to reiterate what he wanted done. The idea that he had a son and there is a holy trinity, etc., is nonsense. Neither Jews nor Muslims believe that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even just using Christianity, it doesn't make sense that God first appeared to the Jews many thousands of years after people existed and only to this one tribe of people, but then he brought a son down to earth but somehow didn't convince the jews despite this fulfilling his original plan they should have been on board with. And then somehow also influenced the Muslim world and the Muslims and Christians for most of the time after Jesus hated jews. And then his new religion splintered into hundreds of churches.. Its all so ridiculous. These religions are just myths from the time period and culture they came from. They have no flow from one century to the next.

At least get your facts straight before you call anything ridiculous. Jesus didn't hate Jews--he was a Jew and always saw himself as a Jew. Islam sees Jesus as a prophet and views itself as representing his true message (Christians disagree). So a fair amount of continuity. And Judaism and Islam have also split into many sects each.

Whatever your background, we get that you hate Christianity specifically, lol. You look sort of ridiculous yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even just using Christianity, it doesn't make sense that God first appeared to the Jews many thousands of years after people existed and only to this one tribe of people, but then he brought a son down to earth but somehow didn't convince the jews despite this fulfilling his original plan they should have been on board with. And then somehow also influenced the Muslim world and the Muslims and Christians for most of the time after Jesus hated jews. And then his new religion splintered into hundreds of churches.. Its all so ridiculous. These religions are just myths from the time period and culture they came from. They have no flow from one century to the next.

At least get your facts straight before you call anything ridiculous. Jesus didn't hate Jews--he was a Jew and always saw himself as a Jew. Islam sees Jesus as a prophet and views itself as representing his true message (Christians disagree). So a fair amount of continuity. And Judaism and Islam have also split into many sects each.

Whatever your background, we get that you hate Christianity specifically, lol. You look sort of ridiculous yourself.

DP: You miss PP's point, intentionally, I assume.

All these beliefs are bronze age myths, including yours. Sorry. There is no evidence otherwise. Since you appear to be an intelligent person, let me point out you are free to drop then and join the modern world. The world will be a MUCH better place when all mythology is dropped, and while I can't be certain I think your individual life will be better also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Religion is like love. The heart wants what the heart wants, it's not rational.

A lot of religions are the opposite of love. They are hateful and violent and love controlling the masses. To follow hate is irrational to most.

[Anonymous]

It’s “rationale” and enjoy hell

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One person chooses to believe there is a God. You choose to believe there isn't one. You can't prove either stance, theirs or yours.

Religion is not merely “choosing to believe in God.” I believe in a higher power or energy of some kind. But religion is gobbledygook.

Religion is a belief in things like someone living inside a whale for 3 days, a great flood that wiped out much of early humanity, a crucified man being resurrected after 3 days, earth being created in six days, martyrs getting 72 virgins, a hidden army licking a wall, etc.

It’s so fantastical that people just make up rationalizations for how it’s just an interpretation or whatever and then religious councils will come together and create their own new interpretations over time. It’s like a little kid who keeps making up new rules to a nonsensical board game.

You should really look into the beliefs of religions other than your own (presumably you believe those religions are wrong if yours is the true one). That is how your religious beliefs sound to many others.

You don't seem to know what religion is. It's intelectually lazy to base your argument about religion on the story of Jonah and the Whale. It's like saying you don't believe in literature because fairy tales can't be true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People with weak minds believe in that BS.

Which BS specifically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is there perfect physics down to the stone and then subatomic particles? Why are their physical universes that follow patterns? Why are there tiny cells with amazing functions? Believing all this happened at random takes faith. Believing all this is knitted together by God takes faith. At least the later has the Bible as evidence and the places and events of the Bible are traced.

It does not take any faith whatsoever.

All of the physics things are explained by the big bang. If evidence is found of a better explanation, we'll switch to that one.

All of those biological things are explained by evolution, with the exception of abiogenesis, and there is mountains of evidence explaining how that might have happened.

Asking how it "happened" implies there was a before it happened. There is no evidence of that, and no reason to think there was. It's quite likely time began with the big bang so there was nothing for it to come from.

None of this is simple, but it is all easy to believe once you understand.

You know what is hard to believe? A magic man in the sky who existed forever outside of time but then decided to create time and everything in it on a nearly infinite scale but place his personal fishtank on the third stone from a sun in the corner of one of billions of galaxies. And he stays hidden except for a short while to a bunch of illiterate shepherds 2 millennia before mass media. And he allowed thousands of similar stories of gods to exist but those are all false and just his is true.

That is the definition of preposterous.

DP: What religion believes in a "magic man in the sky"? It isn't useful to be lazy and rude with straw man arguments (unless you are actually ignorant of theology and think the greatest theologians of our time really believe the space shuttle might pass by a man with a white beard sitting on a cloud, in which case maybe learn what something is before arguing about what it isn't.)

All of these discussions can be fast forwarded to the point where science, math, philosphy and theology stop having answers and start have theories. The big bang theory is generally agreed to be that point, a theory first articulated by a Jesuit priest, so it is not anti-theological. The discussions that start there are fascinating and worthy; none will claim to know the answers. Some will theorize that everthing came from nothing, others will theorize that based on everything we know, that is impossible, so there had to be something. Some will call that something God, others will reject a God theory and call it "Something-but-not-God." Another worthy question is even though we can't know, how should we live? And how should what we do know inform our living?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is there perfect physics down to the stone and then subatomic particles? Why are their physical universes that follow patterns? Why are there tiny cells with amazing functions? Believing all this happened at random takes faith. Believing all this is knitted together by God takes faith. At least the later has the Bible as evidence and the places and events of the Bible are traced.

It does not take any faith whatsoever.

All of the physics things are explained by the big bang. If evidence is found of a better explanation, we'll switch to that one.

All of those biological things are explained by evolution, with the exception of abiogenesis, and there is mountains of evidence explaining how that might have happened.

Asking how it "happened" implies there was a before it happened. There is no evidence of that, and no reason to think there was. It's quite likely time began with the big bang so there was nothing for it to come from.

None of this is simple, but it is all easy to believe once you understand.

You know what is hard to believe? A magic man in the sky who existed forever outside of time but then decided to create time and everything in it on a nearly infinite scale but place his personal fishtank on the third stone from a sun in the corner of one of billions of galaxies. And he stays hidden except for a short while to a bunch of illiterate shepherds 2 millennia before mass media. And he allowed thousands of similar stories of gods to exist but those are all false and just his is true.

That is the definition of preposterous.

DP: What religion believes in a "magic man in the sky"?

Yours.

Yes, it is intended as a pejorative.

It isn't useful to be lazy and rude with straw man arguments (unless you are actually ignorant of theology and think the greatest theologians of our time really believe the space shuttle might pass by a man with a white beard sitting on a cloud, in which case maybe learn what something is before arguing about what it isn't.)

How, specifically, does your god differ from a magic man in the sky? If your explanation is apt I promise I will never use that phrase again.

All of these discussions can be fast forwarded to the point where science, math, philosphy and theology stop having answers and start have theories.

No, that is incorrect. When science stops having answers is where "we don't have the answer yet" begins. Not some stuff bronze age shepherds told each other. Not some stuff a 19th century con-man creates. Not some stuff a sci-fi writer makes up. None of that is necessary, warranted, or helpful. In fact it is all harmful.

The big bang theory is generally agreed to be that point, a theory first articulated by a Jesuit priest, so it is not anti-theological.

Dude, YOUR side is the one comparing the two. YOUR side is the one saying "There must have been something before the big bang so god". Science says nothing about any of it, and doesn't care to.

The discussions that start there are fascinating and worthy; none will claim to know the answers.

AYFKM?: Every preacher on the planet claims to know the answers.

Some will theorize that everthing came from nothing, others will theorize that based on everything we know, that is impossible, so there had to be something. Some will call that something God, others will reject a God theory and call it "Something-but-not-God."

Yeah say whatever you want, "theorize" whatever you want, but without evidence, it has zero value.

Another worthy question is even though we can't know, how should we live? And how should what we do know inform our living?

And for this you need a book that endorses slavery, genocide, mass murder, incest, and more?