It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Faith in science.

page: 3
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by etherical waterwave
That which is religious only is religion. Let's just call religion by it's name. Religion.

Where does it come from? I see it as something that can have it's origin within people. I'll translate it freely out of dutch; what does a candle and glasses matter when the owl does not want to see.

Religion is religion, nothing else. There is only one God. Religion is human.

Could it be it is the essence of life?


Love

Matthew 12: 34 ..For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of.



Some people just have a psychological need for the imagined safety in any 'answer' at all. The true seeker seeks.


edit on 28-6-2011 by bogomil because: pasting went wrong




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


Wasn't it the bible that said "seek and ye shall find"?



But then it states things like this:-


"Doubtless you are the people, and wisdom will die with you!



"Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."


Well....no because you're making extraordinary claims and failing to provide even ordinary evidence for them.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
so therefrom comes the saying 'blind faith'. Believing without seeing, just believing another on his word. Blind faith is faith. All extraordinary one sees in movies is possible..
Who wants you to believe what you see on television

Imagination. We are so pleased with miracles and extraordinary scenes in movies. We need to have faith.

One could say faith trancends the propterties of the physical but in any case isn't linked to one another. The illusionary world that was fed to us isn't correct. Openminded. Maybe we need to be superficial to it.

One should have never been intellectualised with knowledge of atoms and such. It's a hole one is falling in. This is difficult. Get rid of your atomminded mind. It doesn't exist. It's illusionary to the natural mind. Never have I seen an atom in my life. Go figure, who wants to know when have one can have faith. These things aren't taught by teachers of God.

Is a spirit also build up out of atoms?

Feels like I am tuning into something.

Bogomil, is it science that turned ourselves away from what we knew and what was more important than anything we accepted from science? Now science has the metaphysical area, maybe this was a piece science was missing. I don't hear much about it. Wasn't manipulating always a dark side of science? Science is illogical.


edit on 2011/6/28 by etherical waterwave because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by etherical waterwave
 



One should have never been intellectualised with knowledge of atoms and such.


Now i'm quite sure you're a troll.

Goodbye.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare



"Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."




Maybe that's a punishment.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by etherical waterwave
 


It would take some extraordinary evidence to prove a creator, to prove a deity. (Some would suggest "life" is the evidence) To prove the God(s) of Christianity, Islam, Bhuddism, Hinduism would take further extraordinary evidence; The metaphysical claims; afterlife, reinarnation, heaven, hell, pork being unholy, respecting the sabbath day, how would you go about proving those metaphysical claims true to an atheist? You can't, beacuse it takes blind faith.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by ExistentialNightmare
 


Kirlian pornography, capturing something 'spiritual' on a photograph. Is science contradicting itself?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by etherical waterwave
reply to post by ExistentialNightmare
 


Kirlian pornography, capturing something 'spiritual' on a photograph. Is science contradicting itself?


Pornography
Perhaps it's spiritual pornography, but science definetly isn't "contradicting" itself.

Science doesn't make any claims regarding spirituality; because it can't be equated, it's an abstract concept; and it's very much "in the eye of the beholder" - Some people don't claim to be "spiritual" but none-the-less; are full of spirit


Spirituality can be defined as "Concern for that which is unseen and intangible, as opposed to physical or mundane" - There's nothing to stop a scientist from investigating or hypothesising the unknown.

Similarly, there's nothing to stop an atheist or non-believer from being curious of the unknown or the trancendent.

www.spiritualatheist.co.uk... - Have a good gander.
edit on 28-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by bogomil
 


Wasn't it the bible that said "seek and ye shall find"?



But then it states things like this:-


"Doubtless you are the people, and wisdom will die with you!



"Unless you people see miraculous signs and wonders," Jesus told him, "you will never believe."


Well....no because you're making extraordinary claims and failing to provide even ordinary evidence for them.


I hope, you don't intepretate my posts, as if I'm supporting a pro-theist position. I'm not; actually quite the contrary.

With a 'true seeker' I mean a seeker after truth/reality.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 



I hope, you don't intepretate my posts, as if I'm supporting a pro-theist position. I'm not; actually quite the contrary.


Of course not. I would be ignorant if i didn't understand your position by now - i was merely (attempting) to compliment your post.

I was also highlighting that Christianity contradicts itself by stating that we should be curious ("seek and ye shall find") however on the other hand, and to the contrary; it criticises people for their doubt or questions in regards to the faith.

I feel people searching for answers with Religion as a basis will inevitably suffer from Confirmation bias and a pathological methodology to science

Just to re-assert, i fully i agree with you; and i would never suspect you of being pro-theist; unless sufficient evidence revealed the truth of a particular theism, because i believe you are honest like that. Honest with yourself, and honest with others.
edit on 28-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by bogomil
 



I hope, you don't intepretate my posts, as if I'm supporting a pro-theist position. I'm not; actually quite the contrary.


Of course not. I would be ignorant if i didn't understand your position by now - i was merely (attempting) to compliment your post.

I was also highlighting that Christianity contradicts itself by stating that we should be curious ("seek and ye shall find") however on the other hand, and to the contrary; it criticises people for their doubt or questions in regards to the faith.

I feel people searching for answers with Religion as a basis will inevitably suffer from Confirmation bias and a pathological methodology to science

Just to re-assert, i fully i agree with you; and i would never suspect you of being pro-theist; unless sufficient evidence revealed the truth of a particular theism, because i believe you are honest like that. Honest with yourself, and honest with others.
edit on 28-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)


I'm glad to see, that it only was a communication-problem. I'm prepared to take the 'blame' for that, so no worries.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by etherical waterwave
reply to post by ExistentialNightmare
 


Kirlian pornography, capturing something 'spiritual' on a photograph. Is science contradicting itself?


Kirlian photography isn't necessarily a trans-cosmic, theistic phenomenon. The (alleged) scientific implication of it is a registration of an electro-magnetic field. Such would be considered an 'anomaly' rather than a break-down of cosmic laws.

I could (again) suggest, that you get some basic knowledge about competing truth-seeking systems you criticize. It's not the first time, you start from a un-informed basis.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


My fault, brethren - My post wasn't very clear.

Peace



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join