Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

That’s false. No where on the Bible does it state God grants wishes.

I did not state it was in the Bible. I said many in the US believe God grants wishes and they do. They believe God will solve their infertility, help them afford a house, cure their cancer, elect the right president. You name it, they believe God is going to do it because they prayed for it. “The power of prayer.” They absolutely believe this.

Asking God in prayer is different than asking a genie to grant a wish.

People ask God for help in prayer for every human hope and fear imaginable.

People pray for help and healing for other people, even people they don’t personally know.

People use prayer as confession, meditation, worship, surrender, reflection, or to feel connected to something greater than oneself.

Even people who are unsure whether God exists sometimes pray during moments of fear, grief, love, or desperation.

You are offended that someone is praying privately and not harming, pressuring, or targeting anyone, it says more about you (and none of it flattering) than the person praying to God.

I did not say I was offended and am not offended. I was merely refuting the claim that people don’t think God grants wishes. There are DEFINITELY people who think that they wanted something, prayed to God about it, and then received it because they prayed. If that’s not believing in wish granting, I’m not sure what is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP I believe the Bible is an accurate historical record, has true geneologies, and explains the correct origin of the species: In the beginning God created...and both male and female God created on the same day.

God created plants and flowers and two days later created bees and other pollinating insects. The hypothesis (it is not a theory) of Evolution is presented as a plausible explanation but it is an explanation grasping at straws couched in science-y language and parroted by intellectuals to give a fetid pile of baloney called Evolution some semblance of credibility, hoping to persuade themselves and others that there is no God who created anything. Drugs, alcohol, and insistent denial assist in this self deception.

It is the atheist who thinks gaps in our knowledge will be solved by science. The origin of atomic particles and human beings will never be explained by science because it was an historical event that happened once in the far past (the Bible does not say how long ago).

These origins cannot be replicated or observed again, only a choice made between God, or a lucky sequence of random events that magically caused it all to happen, such as flowers to have evolved "just in time" for bees to make honey from nectar, a female to have evolved "just in time!" for the male to mate with and produce offspring. The atheist pounds his chest, dripping with snotty condescension and arrogance, "It just so happened just in time on our insignificant planet that life by lucky chance arose and reproduced, producing all that we see today. It is true because we are sure we know more than you and our science says so. Nanny-nanny boo-boo, stick your head in doo-doo, Creationists!"

The Bible speaks true. Jesus quoted the Bible, including the book of Genesis therefore validating the scriptures. Those who have rejected Jesus will refuse to believe that God created all things. The unbelievers call the Bible foolishness but will perish in their sins.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18)

"Well which god?" the atheist will whine and mewl. It is the God who said in the Bible, "I am". Jesus said in John 14:6

I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

Either Jesus spoke the truth that there is only one God and only one way to heaven, or Jesus did not speak the truth thus causing all religions to be a lie. All religions that say Jesus was not the messiah, not the son of God, are false:

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

Exactly. Jesus as the son of God is a lie and all organized religions that teach about some being that we cant explain having power over us and the world are also lies. That doesnt mean we cant wonder about things we don't know and that there isn't a positive life force that needs to be nurtured to continue to grow things in this world. We just clearly know that Jesus wasn't a God and that Mohammed didn't actually hear God and write down word for word what he said and that Moses didn't actually part the Red Sea and that there aren't many headed God's running around the world.

What is it with atheists thinking they know things for everyone else on earth?

The irony of this statement is unbelievable. It is the theist that says they have the answers, and the atheist says “we don’t know yet” all the time.

My personal relationship with God doesn’t involve you or anyone else on earth. I don’t tell atheists they have to believe in God or religion or be spiritual or whatever. I don’t unilaterally declare my own opinions are valid for everyone on earth, as pp atheist did.

No scholar, academic, historian, theologian, etc, has declared that everyone must accept that Jesus Christ is the Son Of God and everyone must believe. Nor has any scholar, academic, historian, or theologian declared Jesus Christ isn’t the Son of God.

Pp who claimed “we” know Jesus as the Son of God to be a “lie” is the person lying. They can’t know, and no one else does either. It’s odd I have to explain this.

DP - what they KNOW is that there is no evidence it is true and therefore no reason to believe it. The same reason you don't believe in everything else you don't believe in.

I might not have chosen PP's wording, but I certainly agree with their sentiment. And your statement about "atheists thinking they know things for everyone else on earth" remains 100% ironic.

Do you think the claim "Leprechauns exist" is true or untrue? Would it be presumptuous to say "People that claim Leprechauns exist are not telling the truth"? Would you object to that?

Thousands of years of serious philosophical debate by some of history’s greatest minds have centered on theism, whereas leprechauns are treated as cultural fun or folklore with no serious adult following.

The "God hypothesis" is treated as a serious philosophical candidate for the origin of the universe, whereas mythical creatures are treated as cultural folklore.

But not a scientific candidate. No scientist seriously believes that god(s) created the universe. Or, maybe more precisely, no scientist who believes that god(s) created the universe are taken seriously.

If a scientist happens to believe in the supernatural, it's compartmentalized from their scientific understanding of the world. They don't co-exist on the same plane.

The only difference between various mythical creatures is the level of popularity.

That’s bold. Have you queried every scientist? I’d LOVE to see you back up your statements here.

Isaac Newton was deeply religious. He isn’t taken seriously?

In 2026, any religious explanations that he made about the scientific world (e.g., creation of the universe) wouldn't be taken seriously.

Perhaps by you. Plenty of us would have no problem. Again: back up your statement above. Show me research about scientists and religious beliefs, and preferably not conducted by a distillery.

And, since I suppose it’s you who rejected my contribution of Georges Lemaître to this thread, do you reject the big bang theory because it was first theorized by a Catholic priest?

Are you a scientist?

How about this -- show me a peer-reviewed scientific paper today that proposes that supernatural forces are behind the creation of the universe.

I clearly rejected Lamaître because it wasn't relevant to this discussion. I also never said that some scientists are religious. And there are multiple posters - I didn't make any distillery references.

This is such silliness.

There are SO many things that you base your life on — theories of justice, love, equality, humanity, truth, what is right and wrong, how you live your life — and there is no “reviewed scientific paper” telling you any of those things. In fact, if you take the atheist position to its natural conclusion, most of these things, either don’t exist at all, or they only exist in a “strong eat the weak” kind of way that is perfectly acceptable. Yet, you absolutely reject that view in the way that you live your life everyday. The most important aspects of our life are almost always lived based on a faith driven belief system be it Christianity, another religion, or the more popular secular version today of “I just try to be good and treat other people well” — which has no scientific basis whatsoever of course.

People have been — rightfully — outraged by Donald Trump for the last decade — but if there is no God, then why? It all comes back to moral reasons — Trump is selfish, he is greedy, he lies, he is cruel — yet whether someone should or should not engage in this conduct cannot be scientifically proven in a paper.

Beyond that … it’s entirely plausible to be a scientist and say that my respect for science has led me to believe that there other mysteries of life that can only be explained by forces that we don’t see with our own two eyes. That is essentially the position of Francis Collins who is more of a scientist than any of us posting on an anonymous internet message board late at night.

Even a more contemporary specific example — the guys who were just up by the moon — they saw a view of the universe that none of us will ever see. And what was the first thing that the non-religious astronaut asked to do when he came back to earth? He wanted to see a chaplain and burst out crying when he spotted a cross. It’s such a wonder, such an awe impressive thing … the full world is simply beyond comprehension and words. Which is exactly of course how God is described in the Bible.

I used to think this way — that everything needed to be neatly proven in a scientific paper. And then I woke up and realized that’s not how I was actually living my life and it’s not how anybody with a heart actually lives their life either. It’s actually not how even the most non-religious people I meet in the DMV and NYC live their lives.

Once I made that realization, it led me to start reconsidering my entire theory of the universe and back to a religion that I previously rejected.

This is the best comment I have seen on the forum.

DP and I agree. It’s the most thoughtful response I’ve seen.

I also rejected the religion of my parents. Maturing throughout adulthood, I came to accept that the world is full of things I can see and that I can’t see, and I don’t need to be so restrictive in my thinking.

I suspect I’m about to get a negative comment, but that’s okay. It won’t hurt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

That’s false. No where on the Bible does it state God grants wishes.

I did not state it was in the Bible. I said many in the US believe God grants wishes and they do. They believe God will solve their infertility, help them afford a house, cure their cancer, elect the right president. You name it, they believe God is going to do it because they prayed for it. “The power of prayer.” They absolutely believe this.

Asking God in prayer is different than asking a genie to grant a wish.

People ask God for help in prayer for every human hope and fear imaginable.

People pray for help and healing for other people, even people they don’t personally know.

People use prayer as confession, meditation, worship, surrender, reflection, or to feel connected to something greater than oneself.

Even people who are unsure whether God exists sometimes pray during moments of fear, grief, love, or desperation.

You are offended that someone is praying privately and not harming, pressuring, or targeting anyone, it says more about you (and none of it flattering) than the person praying to God.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just like how the “physics research scientist” never came back to explain how physics led her to believe in god: it isn’t a rational explanation.

Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world. They exist only in your mind to explain the unknown and fill the gaps.

As we learn more about the universe these gaps will continue to close.

“Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world.“

Citation?

You lecture everyone on how the world really is but lie and claim to know something no one knows. You are dishonest and lying willfully, why should anyone believe anything you say?

It’s not a lie; it’s reality.

If supernatural forces existed, we’d have at least one documented example of them, but we don’t.

Citation?

Why are you claiming that you know something no one else in history to this present day knows?

Everyone who isn’t brainwashed knows this.

You are expressing hard skeptical/anti-religious views, not an established facts.

You frame disagreement as stupidity or manipulation instead of engaging with why people believe differently.

Some people are more susceptible to supernatural beliefs:
“While supernatural tendencies can be put to good, social use, their primacy in our thinking seems to reflect a deep-rooted human need to understand this mysterious world around us.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/strange-journeys/202307/the-psychological-origin-of-supernatural-thinking

“While this correlational study does not definitively prove how supernatural thinking originated, overall the results most strongly support the psychological perspective.”

Yes, none of us were there when the first caveman started worshipping the first “god”.

Historians and archaeologists avoid claiming certainty about whether prehistoric people believed in one god, many gods, spirits, ancestors, nature forces, or something else entirely.

But not anonymous dcum posters. They know things that have been debated by the greatest minds for centuries! How? Their opinion, the greatest opinions of all the opinions. Hail the mighty dcum atheist opinion.

It’s cute that the DCUM believer thinks their gods are any different than the caveman gods.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

That’s false. No where on the Bible does it state God grants wishes.

I did not state it was in the Bible. I said many in the US believe God grants wishes and they do. They believe God will solve their infertility, help them afford a house, cure their cancer, elect the right president. You name it, they believe God is going to do it because they prayed for it. “The power of prayer.” They absolutely believe this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

That’s false. No where on the Bible does it state God grants wishes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just like how the “physics research scientist” never came back to explain how physics led her to believe in god: it isn’t a rational explanation.

Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world. They exist only in your mind to explain the unknown and fill the gaps.

As we learn more about the universe these gaps will continue to close.

“Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world.“

Citation?

You lecture everyone on how the world really is but lie and claim to know something no one knows. You are dishonest and lying willfully, why should anyone believe anything you say?

It’s not a lie; it’s reality.

If supernatural forces existed, we’d have at least one documented example of them, but we don’t.

Citation?

Why are you claiming that you know something no one else in history to this present day knows?

Everyone who isn’t brainwashed knows this.

You are expressing hard skeptical/anti-religious views, not an established facts.

You frame disagreement as stupidity or manipulation instead of engaging with why people believe differently.

Some people are more susceptible to supernatural beliefs:
“While supernatural tendencies can be put to good, social use, their primacy in our thinking seems to reflect a deep-rooted human need to understand this mysterious world around us.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/strange-journeys/202307/the-psychological-origin-of-supernatural-thinking

“While this correlational study does not definitively prove how supernatural thinking originated, overall the results most strongly support the psychological perspective.”

Yes, none of us were there when the first caveman started worshipping the first “god”.

Prehistoric humans had some form of spiritual or religious behavior, but we cannot know exactly what they believed or whether they worshipped “a god” in the modern sense.

You again are claiming to know things nobody knows.

There will always be things that no by knows for sure.

We can investigate and come up with reasonable theories without resorting to explanations involving supernatural forces.

At least though of us who use reason over intuition.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just like how the “physics research scientist” never came back to explain how physics led her to believe in god: it isn’t a rational explanation.

Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world. They exist only in your mind to explain the unknown and fill the gaps.

As we learn more about the universe these gaps will continue to close.

“Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world.“

Citation?

You lecture everyone on how the world really is but lie and claim to know something no one knows. You are dishonest and lying willfully, why should anyone believe anything you say?

It’s not a lie; it’s reality.

If supernatural forces existed, we’d have at least one documented example of them, but we don’t.

Citation?

Why are you claiming that you know something no one else in history to this present day knows?

Everyone who isn’t brainwashed knows this.

You are expressing hard skeptical/anti-religious views, not an established facts.

You frame disagreement as stupidity or manipulation instead of engaging with why people believe differently.

Some people are more susceptible to supernatural beliefs:
“While supernatural tendencies can be put to good, social use, their primacy in our thinking seems to reflect a deep-rooted human need to understand this mysterious world around us.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/strange-journeys/202307/the-psychological-origin-of-supernatural-thinking

“While this correlational study does not definitively prove how supernatural thinking originated, overall the results most strongly support the psychological perspective.”

Yes, none of us were there when the first caveman started worshipping the first “god”.

Historians and archaeologists avoid claiming certainty about whether prehistoric people believed in one god, many gods, spirits, ancestors, nature forces, or something else entirely.

But not anonymous dcum posters. They know things that have been debated by the greatest minds for centuries! How? Their opinion, the greatest opinions of all the opinions. Hail the mighty dcum atheist opinion.

It’s cute that the DCUM believer thinks their gods are any different than the caveman gods.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

There are definitely many, particularly in the US, who believe God grants wishes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me it’s the concept of prayer. It just doesn’t make sense. That a loving benevolent god would answer some prayers and not others. Deem some worthy of saving and not others, especially innocent children. It just cannot be reconciled with any modern definition of religion.

Eastern religions are more based on practice than belief. When you see prayer as practice for yourself to meditate and find a good answer, prayer ceases to be confusing. Because there is no God who grants wishes. Prayer is just a mechanism to reach higher intellect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP I believe the Bible is an accurate historical record, has true geneologies, and explains the correct origin of the species: In the beginning God created...and both male and female God created on the same day.

God created plants and flowers and two days later created bees and other pollinating insects. The hypothesis (it is not a theory) of Evolution is presented as a plausible explanation but it is an explanation grasping at straws couched in science-y language and parroted by intellectuals to give a fetid pile of baloney called Evolution some semblance of credibility, hoping to persuade themselves and others that there is no God who created anything. Drugs, alcohol, and insistent denial assist in this self deception.

It is the atheist who thinks gaps in our knowledge will be solved by science. The origin of atomic particles and human beings will never be explained by science because it was an historical event that happened once in the far past (the Bible does not say how long ago).

These origins cannot be replicated or observed again, only a choice made between God, or a lucky sequence of random events that magically caused it all to happen, such as flowers to have evolved "just in time" for bees to make honey from nectar, a female to have evolved "just in time!" for the male to mate with and produce offspring. The atheist pounds his chest, dripping with snotty condescension and arrogance, "It just so happened just in time on our insignificant planet that life by lucky chance arose and reproduced, producing all that we see today. It is true because we are sure we know more than you and our science says so. Nanny-nanny boo-boo, stick your head in doo-doo, Creationists!"

The Bible speaks true. Jesus quoted the Bible, including the book of Genesis therefore validating the scriptures. Those who have rejected Jesus will refuse to believe that God created all things. The unbelievers call the Bible foolishness but will perish in their sins.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18)

"Well which god?" the atheist will whine and mewl. It is the God who said in the Bible, "I am". Jesus said in John 14:6

I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

Either Jesus spoke the truth that there is only one God and only one way to heaven, or Jesus did not speak the truth thus causing all religions to be a lie. All religions that say Jesus was not the messiah, not the son of God, are false:

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

Exactly. Jesus as the son of God is a lie and all organized religions that teach about some being that we cant explain having power over us and the world are also lies. That doesnt mean we cant wonder about things we don't know and that there isn't a positive life force that needs to be nurtured to continue to grow things in this world. We just clearly know that Jesus wasn't a God and that Mohammed didn't actually hear God and write down word for word what he said and that Moses didn't actually part the Red Sea and that there aren't many headed God's running around the world.

What is it with atheists thinking they know things for everyone else on earth?

The irony of this statement is unbelievable. It is the theist that says they have the answers, and the atheist says “we don’t know yet” all the time.

My personal relationship with God doesn’t involve you or anyone else on earth. I don’t tell atheists they have to believe in God or religion or be spiritual or whatever. I don’t unilaterally declare my own opinions are valid for everyone on earth, as pp atheist did.

No scholar, academic, historian, theologian, etc, has declared that everyone must accept that Jesus Christ is the Son Of God and everyone must believe. Nor has any scholar, academic, historian, or theologian declared Jesus Christ isn’t the Son of God.

Pp who claimed “we” know Jesus as the Son of God to be a “lie” is the person lying. They can’t know, and no one else does either. It’s odd I have to explain this.

DP - what they KNOW is that there is no evidence it is true and therefore no reason to believe it. The same reason you don't believe in everything else you don't believe in.

I might not have chosen PP's wording, but I certainly agree with their sentiment. And your statement about "atheists thinking they know things for everyone else on earth" remains 100% ironic.

Do you think the claim "Leprechauns exist" is true or untrue? Would it be presumptuous to say "People that claim Leprechauns exist are not telling the truth"? Would you object to that?

Thousands of years of serious philosophical debate by some of history’s greatest minds have centered on theism, whereas leprechauns are treated as cultural fun or folklore with no serious adult following.

The "God hypothesis" is treated as a serious philosophical candidate for the origin of the universe, whereas mythical creatures are treated as cultural folklore.

But not a scientific candidate. No scientist seriously believes that god(s) created the universe. Or, maybe more precisely, no scientist who believes that god(s) created the universe are taken seriously.

If a scientist happens to believe in the supernatural, it's compartmentalized from their scientific understanding of the world. They don't co-exist on the same plane.

The only difference between various mythical creatures is the level of popularity.

That’s bold. Have you queried every scientist? I’d LOVE to see you back up your statements here.

Isaac Newton was deeply religious. He isn’t taken seriously?

In 2026, any religious explanations that he made about the scientific world (e.g., creation of the universe) wouldn't be taken seriously.

Perhaps by you. Plenty of us would have no problem. Again: back up your statement above. Show me research about scientists and religious beliefs, and preferably not conducted by a distillery.

And, since I suppose it’s you who rejected my contribution of Georges Lemaître to this thread, do you reject the big bang theory because it was first theorized by a Catholic priest?

Are you a scientist?

How about this -- show me a peer-reviewed scientific paper today that proposes that supernatural forces are behind the creation of the universe.

I clearly rejected Lamaître because it wasn't relevant to this discussion. I also never said that some scientists are religious. And there are multiple posters - I didn't make any distillery references.

This is such silliness.

There are SO many things that you base your life on — theories of justice, love, equality, humanity, truth, what is right and wrong, how you live your life — and there is no “reviewed scientific paper” telling you any of those things. In fact, if you take the atheist position to its natural conclusion, most of these things, either don’t exist at all, or they only exist in a “strong eat the weak” kind of way that is perfectly acceptable. Yet, you absolutely reject that view in the way that you live your life everyday. The most important aspects of our life are almost always lived based on a faith driven belief system be it Christianity, another religion, or the more popular secular version today of “I just try to be good and treat other people well” — which has no scientific basis whatsoever of course.

People have been — rightfully — outraged by Donald Trump for the last decade — but if there is no God, then why? It all comes back to moral reasons — Trump is selfish, he is greedy, he lies, he is cruel — yet whether someone should or should not engage in this conduct cannot be scientifically proven in a paper.

Beyond that … it’s entirely plausible to be a scientist and say that my respect for science has led me to believe that there other mysteries of life that can only be explained by forces that we don’t see with our own two eyes. That is essentially the position of Francis Collins who is more of a scientist than any of us posting on an anonymous internet message board late at night.

Even a more contemporary specific example — the guys who were just up by the moon — they saw a view of the universe that none of us will ever see. And what was the first thing that the non-religious astronaut asked to do when he came back to earth? He wanted to see a chaplain and burst out crying when he spotted a cross. It’s such a wonder, such an awe impressive thing … the full world is simply beyond comprehension and words. Which is exactly of course how God is described in the Bible.

I used to think this way — that everything needed to be neatly proven in a scientific paper. And then I woke up and realized that’s not how I was actually living my life and it’s not how anybody with a heart actually lives their life either. It’s actually not how even the most non-religious people I meet in the DMV and NYC live their lives.

Once I made that realization, it led me to start reconsidering my entire theory of the universe and back to a religion that I previously rejected.

This is the best comment I have seen on the forum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just like how the “physics research scientist” never came back to explain how physics led her to believe in god: it isn’t a rational explanation.

Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world. They exist only in your mind to explain the unknown and fill the gaps.

As we learn more about the universe these gaps will continue to close.

“Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world.“

Citation?

You lecture everyone on how the world really is but lie and claim to know something no one knows. You are dishonest and lying willfully, why should anyone believe anything you say?

It’s not a lie; it’s reality.

If supernatural forces existed, we’d have at least one documented example of them, but we don’t.

Citation?

Why are you claiming that you know something no one else in history to this present day knows?

Everyone who isn’t brainwashed knows this.

You are expressing hard skeptical/anti-religious views, not an established facts.

You frame disagreement as stupidity or manipulation instead of engaging with why people believe differently.

Some people are more susceptible to supernatural beliefs:
“While supernatural tendencies can be put to good, social use, their primacy in our thinking seems to reflect a deep-rooted human need to understand this mysterious world around us.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/strange-journeys/202307/the-psychological-origin-of-supernatural-thinking

“While this correlational study does not definitively prove how supernatural thinking originated, overall the results most strongly support the psychological perspective.”

Yes, none of us were there when the first caveman started worshipping the first “god”.

Historians and archaeologists avoid claiming certainty about whether prehistoric people believed in one god, many gods, spirits, ancestors, nature forces, or something else entirely.

But not anonymous dcum posters. They know things that have been debated by the greatest minds for centuries! How? Their opinion, the greatest opinions of all the opinions. Hail the mighty dcum atheist opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just like how the “physics research scientist” never came back to explain how physics led her to believe in god: it isn’t a rational explanation.

Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world. They exist only in your mind to explain the unknown and fill the gaps.

As we learn more about the universe these gaps will continue to close.

“Supernatural forces don’t exist in the real world.“

Citation?

You lecture everyone on how the world really is but lie and claim to know something no one knows. You are dishonest and lying willfully, why should anyone believe anything you say?

It’s not a lie; it’s reality.

If supernatural forces existed, we’d have at least one documented example of them, but we don’t.

Citation?

Why are you claiming that you know something no one else in history to this present day knows?

Everyone who isn’t brainwashed knows this.

You are expressing hard skeptical/anti-religious views, not an established facts.

You frame disagreement as stupidity or manipulation instead of engaging with why people believe differently.

Some people are more susceptible to supernatural beliefs:
“While supernatural tendencies can be put to good, social use, their primacy in our thinking seems to reflect a deep-rooted human need to understand this mysterious world around us.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/strange-journeys/202307/the-psychological-origin-of-supernatural-thinking

“While this correlational study does not definitively prove how supernatural thinking originated, overall the results most strongly support the psychological perspective.”

Yes, none of us were there when the first caveman started worshipping the first “god”.

Prehistoric humans had some form of spiritual or religious behavior, but we cannot know exactly what they believed or whether they worshipped “a god” in the modern sense.

You again are claiming to know things nobody knows.