Doing God's will.

[psyche101]

38 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

No making a choice based on scientific data is not cherry picking  It is what logical, rational, human beings, such as scientists, do best. 

What sort of idiot makes a choice which is NOT "selfish" ie who will choose a belief or behaviour that hurts or harms them, and offers no advantages  ? 

How about those cherry picking to get the facts they want? 

I have no desire to hear your personal opinion on religion and longevity. Its BS as 3rd world countries well illustrate. 

[Mr Walker]

6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

How about those cherry picking to get the facts they want? 

I have no desire to hear your personal opinion on religion and longevity. Its BS as 3rd world countries well illustrate. 

No This shows the danger of willful ignorance You one quoted a source which showed that religious 3rd world countries had worse health outcomes than rich first world countries Well of course they  do.

 

You refused to accept or look at the proper statistical analysis or comparison Ie religious people in poor countries, and non religious in poor countries  OR non religious in rich countries, with religious in rich countries 

In every and each case, where you compare groups of people, where the only difference is faith /belief/religious(church)  attendance, the  people who attend a church or have a faith live longer and have healthier lives( there are of course individuals who are outliers  but statistically the benefits are huge )

  tens of thousands of studies  from all over the world now prove this, yet you wont listen because it goes  against what you want  (and need) to believe about religion being bad for people 

It is this sort of belief -driven denial of science which makes me wary of any of your claims about science and god. You claim to follow science, yet discard it when it proves you wrong, and goes against your beliefs  

none of it is my personal opinon

 quote

2018

A new nationwide study of obituaries has found that people with religious affiliations lived nearly four years longer than those with no ties to religion.

That four-year boost – found in an analysis of more than 1,000 obits from around the country – was calculated after taking into account the sex and marital status of those who died, two factors that have strong effects on lifespan.

The boost was slightly larger (6.48 years) in a smaller study of obituaries published in a Des Moines, Iowa, newspaper.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-06-religious-affiliation-linked-year-longevity.html

 

Could 95,000 Women Be Wrong?

A study using data from the Women's Health Initiative found that women aged 50 and up were 20% less likely to die in any given year if they attended religious services weekly (15% reduction if they attended less than weekly) compared to those that never attend religious services. This analysis was controlled for age, ethnicity, income level and (most importantly) current health status. 

Add 2 to 3 Years With Religion

Another study also found benefit to attending religious services, this time expressed in added years of life. Researchers have found that weekly attendance at religious services is associated with 2 to 3 additional years of life. These findings were controlled for other factors such as amount of physical exercise and taking cholesterol medications.

How Good Are 2 to 3 Additional Years?

Pretty good. Exercise will increase life expectancy by 3 to 5 years, and taking statin-type cholesterol-lowering drugs will increase life expectancy by 2.5 to 3.5 years.

https://www.verywellmind.com/religion-improves-health-2224007

 

Scientific studies over the last four decades have examined the role of both public and private religious expression on health and longevity. The studies have shown that the practice of religious activity improves health and increases longevity. The effect is seen even when other social/psychological differences are taken into account. For example, one 16-year study examined mortality rates in 11 religious vs. 11 secular kibbutzim in Israel. Although both communities were demographically-matched and provided similar levels of social support, three time more people died in the secular kibbutzim compared to the religious kibbutazim. The following is a short list of some recent studies that have shown the positive influence of religion on health and longevity.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/religionhealth.html

 

A recent study published in the journal PLOS One has revealed that regularly attending religious ceremonies such as mass may lead to greater health and increased longevity in middle-aged people and seniors.

Death risk cut by 40 percent

Prof. Idler and her collegues focused on the data gathered between 2004 and 2014 on more than 18,000 participants. The scientists applied Cox proportional hazards models to calculate the link between religious attendance and all-cause mortality during the decade studied.

The researchers included variables such as religious attendance, the importance of religion, and religious affiliation. Gender, race or ethnicity, education, and income were also considered as potential determinants of health.

They sum up the findings, saying, "After adjustment for confounders, attendance at religious services had a dose-response relationship with mortality, such that respondents who attended frequently [i.e., at least once a week] had a 40 [percent] lower hazard of mortality [...] compared with those who never attended."

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/320581.php

 

Interestingly, there is a large body of research on the health, economic, educational, and other benefits (or lack thereof) of religion. Most researchers have found that the myriad non-spiritual benefits of religion are related to regular religious attendance. It is less the strength of your faith than the dependability of your arrival at religious services and other events that matters. This suggests that the mechanism for these benefits may be as much or more the social network that a religious community provides than the actual practice of the religion in a theological sense. Or it may be that those with the most faith also attend services regularly.

Also, all the results presented here are benefits found to derive from religious attendance or involvement in any religion, so there is nothing here to suggest that one’s particular beliefs are the key to the results. It is having the beliefs, practicing them, and regularly joining with other like-minded adherents that produce the benefits.

First, studies have shown that religious attendance once or more per week leads to an extra seven years of life expectancy. Other studies have shown other health benefits such as a stronger immune system and lower blood pressure. Further, religious involvement has been linked to less depression and less alcohol and drug use.

Religious participation by kids has been shown to result in less juvenile delinquency, less drug use including less smoking, better school attendance, and a higher probability of graduating from high school. Graduating from high school has a large positive economic impact, so that is a big benefit to the economy. Less juvenile delinquency also provides big savings through the avoided costs of incarceration and rehabilitation.

Similarly, adults who regularly attend religious services also commit fewer crimes. Again, this comes with huge savings as both crime and prisons are very expensive. They also end up on welfare and unemployed less often. More cost savings for those entitlement programs.

People who are regular religious attendees give more money to charity than other people, which does much good in their communities.

How much does all this add up to, in terms of economic gains? According to Rodney Stark, a professor of sociology, the American economy benefits to the tune of $2.6 trillion per year thanks to being a quite religious country. That is about one-sixth of our total economic output.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2013/12/22/religion-is-good-for-all-of-us-even-those-who-dont-follow-one/#702b463864d7

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by Mr Walker

[psyche101]

I said I don't want to hear your opinion. I know the benefits of group therapy. The only groups picked for those studies are religious ones. The outcome is tainted. You waffle on to ridiculous lengths to avoid answering a  very simple question. 

That's called flooding and it weakens your case rather than strengthens it. The only positive thing here is this time you didn't quote the bigots at Conservapedia. 

I'll be here if you muster the courage to answer the one simple question that shows on a large scale that religious affiliation means squat. Group therapy on the other hand logically helps. 

[Mr Walker]

20 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I said I don't want to hear your opinion. I know the benefits of group therapy. The only groups picked for those studies are religious ones. The outcome is tainted. You waffle on to ridiculous lengths to avoid answering a  very simple question. 

That's called flooding and it weakens your case rather than strengthens it. The only positive thing here is this time you didn't quote the bigots at Conservapedia. 

I'll be here if you muster the courage to answer the one simple question that shows on a large scale that religious affiliation means squat. Group therapy on the other hand logically helps. 

First, it is not my opinion  it is the opinion of medicine and science 

Second you ALWAYS claim that scientific results which disagree with your views are tainted or wrong, while those which support you are right  

it is true that group membership also helps, as does being married, and owning a dog,  yet you deny that religious attendance, in itself, has a similar effect

  Some of the studies compere religious attendance with other social attendance. In some cases both seem to be beneficial but, in many, religious attendance confers an ADDITIONAL benefit not found by attending a bowls club or social group 

i didnt see any waffle i included the first half dozen sources i found on google to make  a point 

the evidences for the benefit of faith and of church attendance are conclusive and overwhelming and cited by all sorts of reputable groups 

If i didn't include the highlights, I do not believe you would have even looked at the sources. You don't want to look at anything which contradicts your world view 

[danydandan]

24 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

First, it is not my opinion  it is the opinion of medicine and science 

Second you ALWAYS claim that scientific results which disagree with your views are tainted or wrong, while those which support you are right  

it is true that group membership also helps, as does being married, and owning a dog,  yet you deny that religious attendance, in itself, has a similar effect

  Some of the studies compere religious attendance with other social attendance. In some cases both seem to be beneficial but, in many, religious attendance confers an ADDITIONAL benefit not found by attending a bowls club or social group 

i didnt see any waffle i included the first half dozen sources i found on google to make  a point 

the evidences for the benefit of faith and of church attendance are conclusive and overwhelming and cited by all sorts of reputable groups 

If i didn't include the highlights, I do not believe you would have even looked at the sources. You don't want to look at anything which contradicts your world view 

Do you even have access to up to date medical journals?

Do you attend conventions in your spare time? 

Are you up to date in SOPs and various standards of care in the psychological or neurological medical fields? 

Or is Google your only opinion? What exactly did you input into the search bar to get your results? 

Edited March 21, 2019 by danydandan

[psyche101]

16 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

First, it is not my opinion  it is the opinion of medicine and science 

The conclusion of the studies is your personal opinion. 

Quote

Second you ALWAYS claim that scientific results which disagree with your views are tainted or wrong, while those which support you are right  

That's not true Walker. I pointed out the flaws in your long winded claims but you can't hear then over yourself so you keep flooding the threads and misinterpretimg the results, just like those clowns over at Conservapedia. 

Quote

it is true that group membership also helps, as does being married, and owning a dog,  yet you deny that religious attendance, in itself, has a similar effect

No I don't. I said it has the same effect. Its not anything to do with god or religion. Its got to do with the natural therapy that group involvement offers, and the benefits of a shared load. 

Quote

  Some of the studies compere religious attendance with other social attendance. In some cases both seem to be beneficial but, in many, religious attendance confers an ADDITIONAL benefit not found by attending a bowls club or social group 

And what do you think that's attributed to? Are you suggesting the a god enables longevity? Spit it out man. 

Quote

i didnt see any waffle i included the first half dozen sources i found on google to make  a point 

You don't need to post waffle to make a point. 

If you had a point that would be obvious. 

Quote

the evidences for the benefit of faith and of church attendance are conclusive and overwhelming and cited by all sorts of reputable groups 

If i didn't include the highlights, I do not believe you would have even looked at the sources. You don't want to look at anything which contradicts your world view 

Group therapy doesn't contradict my world view. You trying to say God has a hand in it is refuted by third world countries. God doesn't overcome bad conditions. You entirely omit tfe first world factor. Your blinkered view results in a fanatical conclusion. 

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

The conclusion of the studies is your personal opinion. 

That's not true Walker. I pointed out the flaws in your long winded claims but you can't hear then over yourself so you keep flooding the threads and misinterpretimg the results, just like those clowns over at Conservapedia. 

No I don't. I said it has the same effect. Its not anything to do with god or religion. Its got to do with the natural therapy that group involvement offers, and the benefits of a shared load. 

And what do you think that's attributed to? Are you suggesting the a god enables longevity? Spit it out man. 

You don't need to post waffle to make a point. 

If you had a point that would be obvious. 

Group therapy doesn't contradict my world view. You trying to say God has a hand in it is refuted by third world countries. God doesn't overcome bad conditions. You entirely omit tfe first world factor. Your blinkered view results in a fanatical conclusion. 

The science is just coming to understand  the causation of the   links though the  links have been known for a few decades  

For example the effect of belief reduces stress and  anxiety and thus reduces a major cause of heart disease 

Some people follow a lifestyle based on health   practices from  their religions   and that helps

the beleifs and values of many religions promote practices which reduce risks and danger  

there have even been found significant differences in the chemicals in the bodies of believers and non believers with believers having more  beneficial and healing chemicals  

This can even cause more remission in cancer patients and higher survival rates   

because  so much of our body is regulated by our mind and religion is a mind based belief, it affects things like wound recovery rates and time  and healing of bones which both occur faster in believers.

It reduces pain for believers because pain is a mental construct also  From memory only, pain can be reduced by up to 50% using faith and belief 

I am not an expert but i am widely read on this.  

it has nothing to do with god but with BELIEF in god it is an evolved survival advantage conferred on believers through evolution/  And yes it markedly improves conditions for people in third world countries  who would be doubly worse off with out modern medicine OR faith.  

 

 

 

Understanding the impact of religion on health has become an important question guiding research on health and healthcare practice. “Religion gives meaning to life … [and] spirituality and religious beliefs affect perceptions of pain, symptoms, and beliefs about the causes of illness and its course” (Walsh 1999). “Spirituality serves as a source of meaning and purpose, a framework within which people interpret their lives and experiences” (Johnson, Elbert-Avila et al. 2005). Multi-disciplinary research has indicated that the relationships between religion/spirituality and health outcomes are mostly positive (Aldridge 1991; Levin 1994; Hill 1995; Ellison and Levin 1998; Koenig 1999).

The finding of positive associations among religious belief, healthy behaviors, and better health outcomes is consistent across a number of populations. Recent studies have begun to use more stringent measurement, methodological, and data analytic techniques and scientists continue to find a positive association between religion and a variety of health variables (MacDonald 2000; Bussing, Ostermann et al. 2005; Carrico, Gifford et al. 2007). Using both prospective and cross sectional designs, measures of religious involvement have been associated with better physical and mental health and decreased mortality in older populations (George, Ellison et al. 2002). Religious attendance has been positively associated with decreased depression, improved physical health and lower blood pressure, boosted immune functioning, enhanced physical functioning and improved subjective health (Hill 1995).

Recent studies have also found a relationship between religious attendance and mortality. A meta-analysis published in 2000 (McCullough, Hoyt et al. 2000) indicated that religious involvement was significantly associated with lower mortality, and that this relationship was robust across a number of studies. More recently, Hill’s 2005 study found a relationship between these factors within a geriatric population, even after accounting for socio-demographic factors and health status (Hill 2005). Reviews of the literature provide a more thorough description of these associations (Koenig 2000; Levin 2001; Plante 2001; Oman and Thoresen 2002; Thoresen and Harris 2002; Jones 2004; Newberg and Lee 20

 

Beneficial physiological changes have been attributed to certain religious practices such as prayer and meditation. Herbert Benson, a cardiologist, termed this phenomenon the “relaxation response.” He theorized that the physiological changes associated with regular religious practices were beneficial by acting through the autonomic nervous system and endocrine pathways that make daily stress detrimental (Benson, 1975). For many, religion also provides a network of social support that helps in coping with physical, emotional and mental stressors (Davis 1994; Ferraro and Koch 1994; Droege 1995; Sutherland, Hale et al. 1995; Wilson 2000; Strawbridge, Shema et al. 2001). Religion can have a positive effect on health by directly influencing the health habits of individuals through the prohibition of health damaging behaviors (e.g., smoking) and/or the prescription of health enhancing behaviors (e.g., vegetarianism) (Levin 1996; Ellison and Levin 1998; George, Ellison et al. 2002; Eckersley 2007). Other potential mechanisms, such as psychosocial resources -- important for self-esteem, self-efficacy, and coping -- have also been discussed as potential mediating mechanisms through which religion impacts health (George, Ellison et al. 2002).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4753840/

Edited March 21, 2019 by Mr Walker

[XenoFish]

On 3/19/2019 at 6:14 AM, psyche101 said:

Xeno is, if he ever returns you can ask him how often I tried to sway him.

Never. You simply present your point and let it be. A lot of members have open me up to new ideas, none of them have tried to indoctrinate me into a belief system. I found atheism to be cold and empty, theism felt like mental slavery. So I hit the indifferent agnostic path. 

[Stubbly_Dooright]

16 hours ago, XenoFish said:

On 3/19/2019 at 6:14 AM, psyche101 said:

Xeno is, if he ever returns you can ask him how often I tried to sway him.

Never. You simply present your point and let it be. A lot of members have open me up to new ideas, none of them have tried to indoctrinate me into a belief system. I found atheism to be cold and empty, theism felt like mental slavery. So I hit the indifferent agnostic path. 

You know, you (and psyche being one too) have made me reflect on my belief because of thoughtful and thought provoking things you mentioned in the past. I think it was you as well, as some here, that mentions that belief is brought on by a selfishness. (Correct me please, if I’m recalling it wrong.  ) This made me reflect on my belief, and I think you are right. (It was you, right?) 

It hasn’t swayed me, but put in a real perspective for me. I think a personal strong belief does need that kind of questioning to show if it is strong for the individual, it will show how strong at the same time, grounding them. 

[XenoFish]

Hey mama bear.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

And oh yeah, Xeno........ my boy..........

  (((HUGS)))   

[+Desertrat56]

On 2/5/2019 at 12:28 PM, Will Due said:

 

What is God's will? It can be pretense to make believe it isn't knowable. 

Tell me how it changes your free will to seek and do God's will?

 

 

How do you seek god's will?  An unknowable entity or what ever you believe what god is determines how you seek it.  So you choosing to seek god's will is free will, because you don't have to do that, you choose it.

[+Desertrat56]

On 3/19/2019 at 8:12 PM, Mr Walker said:

No The y might find a way to compromise, but if they chose one as their guiding light then the other cannot be 

For example one legitimate approach is for a scientist to study, and conclude that faith is a significant positive in Human life The y could then decide scientifically to choose faith over non faith or theism over atheism based on statistics and clinical findings.

You misunderstand faith and science.  Science is proof of god or some design to the universe.  If you were a true scientist you would know that, and you would also know that you do not and cannot KNOW everything, including who designed the universe or how it came to be with or without a designer.  Even when you understand atoms, there is another layer and once you get to that layer there is quantum physics to change everything again.  And once that is understood there will be something beyond that.

[+Pettytalk]

17 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

You misunderstand faith and science.  Science is proof of god or some design to the universe.  If you were a true scientist you would know that, and you would also know that you do not and cannot KNOW everything, including who designed the universe or how it came to be with or without a designer.  Even when you understand atoms, there is another layer and once you get to that layer there is quantum physics to change everything again.  And once that is understood there will be something beyond that.

We may not know everything, but it seems that you know more than Mr. Walker. And I would venture to say that you are closer to God, since you understand infinity. Infinity is infinite in all directions. In and out are infinite directions. In other words, I'm saying the same as you are. To us, there will always be something beyond our newly reached point, whether inwards towards the micro or outward towards the macro. And by us I mean mankind. Although some scientists will argue that there is a limit to the micro, as they theorize on strings being the limit of minuteness of our physical universe. Then again, perhaps not. Some scientists will put forth the idea that we may be living in an illusion, a world of illusion. Or perhaps we ourselves are part of the illusion.

In my endeavor to understand faith and science, I came across the string theory, and while trying to understand this controversial theory to the point where it could make some sense to me, I noted that some of the more brilliant physicists working on the various variations of string theory, have come to the same conclusion that there will always be something beyond, more dimensions and more universes. In truth, according to one controversial idea, even if we were to ever reach the smallest, indivisible particle in our physical universe, there seems to be a lower-realm dimension that influences our dimension. Quoting, " The force of gravity and one of the dimensions of space might be generated out of the peculiar interactions of particles and fields existing in a lower-dimensional realm.  

I also strongly agree that science is proof of God, who is the creator and designer of this universe. And of an infinite number of universes, if the super string theory proves to be correct. Otherwise, it may be the case that we just have one infinite one. However, science is only part of the proof for God. And we must look elsewhere for the remainder of the proof, perhaps a myth or two may supply us with additional proof. I agree wholeheartedly with a very wise person, who long ago gave us a good part of the proof of God, scientifically, generally speaking, mixed in with myths. 

"For the Deity, intending to make this world like the fairest and most perfect of intelligible beings, framed one visible animal comprehending within itself all other animals of a kindred nature. Are we right in saying that there is one world, or that they are many and infinite? There must be one only, if the created copy is to accord with the original. For that which includes all other intelligible creatures cannot have a second or companion; in that case there would be need of another living being which would include both, and of which they would be parts, and the likeness would be more truly said to resemble not them, but that other which included them. In order then that the world might be solitary, like the perfect animal, the creator made not two worlds or an infinite number of them; but there is and ever will be one only-begotten and created heaven."

And is not a hologram a created copy, and image?

Such a scenario strains the imagination. Yet an analogous phenomenon occurs in everyday life. A hologram is a two-dimensional object, but when viewed under the correct lighting conditions it produces a fully three-dimensional image. All the information describing the three-dimensional image is in essence encoded in the two-dimensional hologram. Similarly, according to the new physics theories, the entire universe could be a kind of a hologram.  https://web.archive.org/web/20131110061237/http://www.sns.ias.edu/~malda/sciam-maldacena-3a.pdf

We must be enlightened by individuals who receive direct inspiration from God to understand just how enlightened or unenlightened we are at this very moment in space and time. Individuals from both sides of the equation, science and faith. But better still from individuals that receive inspiration from both ends.

And now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened: --Behold! human beings living in a underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets.
I see.
And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent.
You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.
Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?
True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?
And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows?
Yes, he said.
And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?
Very true.
And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow?
No question, he replied.
To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.
That is certain.
And now look again, and see what will naturally follow it' the prisoners are released and disabused of their error. At first, when any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn his neck round and walk and look towards the light, he will suffer sharp pains; the glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see the realities of which in his former state he had seen the shadows; and then conceive some one saying to him, that what he saw before was an illusion, but that now, when he is approaching nearer to being and his eye is turned towards more real existence, he has a clearer vision, -what will be his reply? And you may further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the objects as they pass and requiring him to name them, -will he not be perplexed? Will he not fancy that the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the objects which are now shown to him?
Far truer.
And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he not have a pain in his eyes which will make him turn away to take and take in the objects of vision which he can see, and which he will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which are now being shown to him?
True, he now
And suppose once more, that he is reluctantly dragged up a steep and rugged ascent, and held fast until he 's forced into the presence of the sun himself, is he not likely to be pained and irritated? When he approaches the light his eyes will be dazzled, and he will not be able to see anything at all of what are now called realities.
Not all in a moment, he said.
He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper world. And first he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves; then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and the stars and the spangled heaven; and he will see the sky and the stars by night better than the sun or the light of the sun by day?
Certainly.
Last of he will be able to see the sun, and not mere reflections of him in the water, but he will see him in his own proper place, and not in another; and he will contemplate him as he is.
Certainly.
He will then proceed to argue that this is he who gives the season and the years, and is the guardian of all that is in the visible world, and in a certain way the cause of all things which he and his fellows have been accustomed to behold?
Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason about him.
And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the den and his fellow-prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself on the change, and pity them?
Certainly, he would.

An important lesson that one can draw from the holographic conjecture, however, is that quantum gravity, which has perplexed some of the best minds on the planet for decades, can be very simple when viewed in terms of the right variables. Let’s hope we will soon find a simple description for the big bang!

Is there anything more simple than this? And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light

ONLY God knows, said Socrates. Only God knows how to make light. At best, we can only try to catch a glimpse of his light through our own blindness, using a little bit of His math/magic. Is it not Magic when all this mass of material in the universe is moved and controlled by a few equations? I meant mess of material, so that light does not escape our math control. Does light travel for ever? Or does it ever reach the limit of infinity? God only knows.

[Mr Walker]

On 19/04/2019 at 5:52 AM, Desertrat56 said:

You misunderstand faith and science.  Science is proof of god or some design to the universe.  If you were a true scientist you would know that, and you would also know that you do not and cannot KNOW everything, including who designed the universe or how it came to be with or without a designer.  Even when you understand atoms, there is another layer and once you get to that layer there is quantum physics to change everything again.  And once that is understood there will be something beyond that.

Sorry.  I don't understand what you are trying to say.

My point was that, if faith, belief, or religious attendance creates positive outcomes in humans, this can be determined scientifically.

 In response to your points

Everything  is knowable, given  enough time, technology and  background knowledge.

If it is not knowable, it does not exist.  if it exists, it is potentially knowable.

The universe is not infinitely complex, even though it is complex.

Of course we can, and one day  (if we survive long enough)   will, understand it all.  

Given time, technology and knowledge, humans will  eventually be able to build their own universes, engineer their own life forms, etc.  

[Will Due]

 

We will survive.

Faith in the Fatherhood of God and the sonship of men and women, is the only thing needed. Including the desire to seek and do God's will, as best as possible. And the resurrection of Jesus proves this forever. 

We will survive.

 

 

Edited April 21, 2019 by Will Due

[Horta]

41 minutes ago, Will Due said:

And the resurrection of Jesus proves this forever. 

That's ancient fairy tale only proves human gullibility. There was no biblical jesus. It's a myth.

[Will Due]

33 minutes ago, Horta said:

That's ancient fairy tale only proves human gullibility. There was no biblical jesus. It's a myth.

 

But how do you know for sure that the ultimate of gullibility isn't to believe that the fact of the resurrection is a fairytale?

 

 

[Horta]

13 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

But how do you know for sure that the ultimate of gullibility isn't to believe that the fact of the resurrection is a fairytale?

 

 

Because evolution gave us common sense, and because the jesus of the bible didn't exist. It isn't history, it's mythology.

[Will Due]

 

Happy Easter. 

 

 

[jmccr8]

1 minute ago, Will Due said:

 

Happy Easter. 

 

 

Hi Will

And to you as well.

jmccr8

[+Pettytalk]

52 minutes ago, Horta said:

Because evolution gave us common sense, and because the jesus of the bible didn't exist. It isn't history, it's mythology.

Apparently evolution passed you by! Happy Resurrection! 

[Horta]

2 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

Apparently evolution passed you by! Happy Resurrection! 

[+Pettytalk]

12 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Happy Easter. 

 

 

Happy Resurrection is more appropriate for most believers. However, if we want to be factual, and philosophically true, then it's Happy Reincarnation.

[Horta]

A merry passover to one and all.