Belief in a God, the existence of a higher power, and the concept of an afterlife. Science or Religion?

[ding]

I struggled with where, what forum (Science or Religion and Ethics), to put this: "Belief in a God, the existence of a higher power, and the concept of an afterlife. Science or Religion?"

Here we are...

Somebody said "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."(1)

I believe some people unknowingly, and some people purposefully conflate spontaneous creation with spontaneous generation, which takes any discussion of scientific theories into debating religion as somehow being just another scientific theory. There exits no science behind claims religions make for why we and the universe exists.


We now have scientists claiming they've created matter from nothing in a groundbreaking experiment. If they have, their claims can be proven by successfully repeating any experiment.

Scientists create matter from nothing in groundbreaking experiment

Scientists have managed to create matter out of nothing, a quantum physics feat previously thought impossible.

bgr.com

70-year-old quantum prediction comes true, as something is created from nothing

In our common experience, you can't get something for nothing. In the quantum realm, something really can emerge from nothing.

bigthink.com

1: Stephen Hawking

Philosphy informed by science and logic.

 

[Libby von H]

If unicorns make frisbees, how can dogs do calculus?

Fort, you illustrate the thing you show contempt for!!
It as if you eschew the positive comment and the discussion and just look for mud to stir and make muddier.

 

[Libby von H]

As I've pointed out before, the very question is illogical in the premise , the argument, and the conclusion.

1) Poster says that the greatest scientists are lying about their religion. If so, why say everything else they say is the Truth
"
over 65% of Nobel prize winners between 1901 and 2000 believed in God

The statistics were taken from Baruch Shalev’s 100 Years of Nobel Prizes (Los Angeles, 2005) and, far from being over–stated, the number of theists may even have been higher still, as the he records that just over 65% of the overall winners identified as Christian, whilst over 20% were Jewish
2) the argument assumes that we have 2 minds/2 brains !! If a scientist believes it is with the same thinking that he does everything else, soso 1) destroys the premise and 2) destroys the argument

3) You can have a true and valid conclusion from a wrong premise and fallacious reasoning but in this case BUT here it collpases entirely because in what sense must it be either Science or Religion. THere have beens tens of millions of theists with the conviction there must be a Creator and yet they were not religious. This is Natural Theology and poster seems caught unawares that there is such a thing

Cicero -- at least as smart as our poster says

“Nature herself has imprinted on the minds of all the idea of God”​

― Cicero

Poster can only take that on by saying it is religious but THAT MAKES HIS STATEMENT RELIGIOUS TOO
Cicero was not a Chrsitian or a Jew.

Further, just to show the imbecility of what is contended for in this question, more Cicero> This must puzzle the hell out of the poster. "How could he say such a thing "

There is a true law, a right reason, conformable to nature, universal, unchangeable, eternal, whose commands urge us to duty, and whose prohibitions restrain us from evil. Whether it enjoins or forbids, the good respect its injunctions, and the wicked treat them with indifference. This law cannot be contradicted by any other law, and is not liable either to derogation or abrogation. Neither the senate nor the people can give us any dispensation for not obeying this universal law of justice. It needs no other expositor and interpreter than our own conscience. It is not one thing at Rome and another at Athens; one thing to–day and another to–morrow; but in all times and nations this universal law must for ever reign, eternal and imperishable. It is the sovereign master and emperor of all beings. God himself is its author,—its promulgator,—its enforcer. He who obeys it not, flies from himself, and does violence to the very nature of man. For his crime he must endure the severest penalties hereafter, even if he avoid the usual misfortunes of the present life.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Fort, you illustrate the thing you show contempt for!!
It as if you eschew the positive comment and the discussion and just look for mud to stir and make muddier.

I think the point sailed over your head.

Look up truth values for conditional statements.

 

[sealybobo]

I struggled with where, what forum (Science or Religion and Ethics), to put this: "Belief in a God, the existence of a higher power, and the concept of an afterlife. Science or Religion?"

Here we are...

Somebody said "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."(1)

I believe some people unknowingly, and some people purposefully conflate spontaneous creation with spontaneous generation, which takes any discussion of scientific theories into debating religion as somehow being just another scientific theory. There exits no science behind claims religions make for why we and the universe exists.


We now have scientists claiming they've created matter from nothing in a groundbreaking experiment. If they have, their claims can be proven by successfully repeating any experiment.

Scientists create matter from nothing in groundbreaking experiment

Scientists have managed to create matter out of nothing, a quantum physics feat previously thought impossible.

bgr.com

70-year-old quantum prediction comes true, as something is created from nothing

In our common experience, you can't get something for nothing. In the quantum realm, something really can emerge from nothing.

bigthink.com

1: Stephen Hawking

We all want to believe in an afterlife. But then that is why it’s wishful thinking from superstitions primitive un evolved people being told made up stories that say he visited.

In 10,000 years after religions disappear people will still hope there is an afterlife.

You just made me realize something. The question isn’t is there a god. It’s is there an afterlife. Otherwise, who cares?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

We all want to believe in an afterlife. But then that is why it’s wishful thinking from superstitions primitive un evolved people being told made up stories that say he visited.

In 10,000 years after religions disappear people will still hope there is an afterlife.

You just made me realize something. The question isn’t is there a god. It’s is there an afterlife. Otherwise, who cares?

In truth, we all don't want to believe in an afterlife. I know I don't. Would it be nice if there were? That's like asking if I'd like to believe in Unicorns. I believe if and when religions disappear, only a cultish few would still hope for an afterlife. Then again, we have no idea how different people and the world would be by then.

Fear of Death. (Denial of Death - Ernest Becker) I believe the 'Why' do we exist, runs parallel to the other questions that lead us to wondering. And for me at a young age, the 'Who cares' helped.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

As I've pointed out before, the very question is illogical in the premise , the argument, and the conclusion.

Whatever you're striving for here gets lost in the first sentence. I'd think 'redundancy' but I am not feeling pity for fools today -- not yet anyway, but give it some time as the day unfolds. You list 'argument' as if a premise and a conclusion are separate from an argument, and your question here. You remind of the kids in school trying to look bright with failed attempts to impress the class, if not the teacher.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

2) the argument assumes that we have 2 minds/2 brains

Really? Good gawd, I've got to get away from this nonsense posing as rational and intelligent thought..

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In truth, we all don't want to believe in an afterlife. I know I don't. Would it be nice if there were? That's like asking if I'd like to believe in Unicorns. I believe if and when religions disappear, only a cultish few would still hope for an afterlife. Then again, we have no idea how different people and the world would be by then.

Fear of Death. (Denial of Death - Ernest Becker) I believe the 'Why' do we exist, runs parallel to the other questions that lead us to wondering. And for me at a young age, the 'Who cares' helped.

"Why do we exist?"

We already know the answer:

To be sacks of water that hold our genetic code. To be sacks of water that can move DNA through space to find other DNA with which to recombine.

Anything more than that is what we make of it.

 

[ding]

You just made me realize something. The question isn’t is there a god. It’s is there an afterlife. Otherwise, who cares?

I think that's a bad way of looking at it. Better to live in the present.

 

[badger2]

We all want to believe in an afterlife. But then that is why it’s wishful thinking from superstitions primitive un evolved people being told made up stories that say he visited.

In 10,000 years after religions disappear people will still hope there is an afterlife.

You just made me realize something. The question isn’t is there a god. It’s is there an afterlife. Otherwise, who cares?

Indeed, one should care. This is a fundamental illusion of Man: the illusion of not being dead once we already are. For example, this illusion was exploited by the theologians of the Neolithic during burial rituals (Hodder, The Domestication of Europe).

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Indeed, one should care. This is a fundamental illusion of Man: the illusion of not being dead once we already are. For example, this illusion was exploited by the theologians of the Neolithic during burial rituals (Hodder, The Domestication of Europe).

Yep. This is the carrot on the stick.

If not for the promise of the afterlife, we would be talking about Christianity only in academic settings where we talk about past, failed religions.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"Why do we exist?"

We already know the answer:

To be sacks of water that hold our genetic code. To be sacks of water that can move DNA through space to find other DNA with which to recombine.

Anything more than that is what we make of it.

The precocious child would ask "but why?'

You've describe a process, but not the ultimate, why. Or better, the To what end? Why carry dna, to what end? What is the goal?

For the Universe to become aware of itself?

 

[Libby von H]

I think the point sailed over your head.

Look up truth values for conditional statements.

If you knew Logic you would see you just committed a fallacy.
The truth values in a conditional statement are assumed for every value.
IF TRUE AND TRUE then True --- but the IF means you have to applly the same condition to the premise !!
I've tutored LOGIC

 

[Resnic]

The idea of a higher power, whether it be traditional god or not, is highly plausible and very likely.

Look at humans. Are we gods? No. But look at how say an ant might see us. Towering giants that fly through the clouds in steel tubes we created. We can simulate, create and manipulate life in a lab among all of our other wonderous inventions. So who is to say we aren't ants to something even more advanced than us? If I went back to ancient Egypt with a lighter, a pistol and a car I'd be a god to them. Fire coming out of my hands, loud noises that cause people to drop over dead not even close to me, and a metal beast I get in and it takes me places

Just because we can't see a higher power doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Space is infinite, a higher power might be able to see us but we can't it due to our limitations as a species. Going back to ants, to an ant in Florida the journey to Alaska is impossible and they aren't even aware Alaska exists, but to us we jump on a plane and watch a movie or two and we are there. Our technology closes the gap that is impossible for something like an ant. A higher power might be able to do the same thing across the vastness of space crossing distances inconceivable for us. Or, even cross dimensions like we do doorways. Hell, we could be just atoms to them.

An afterlife? That's also possible. Energy is never really destroyed. So when our bodies die what happens to the energy that keeps us alive and makes us who we are? Well it's going to disperse back into the cosmos. Maybe it just breaks down to it's simplest form and just floats off in all directions, or maybe it moves together to something or somewhere else as a collective to continue being "alive" but in another form

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Or better, the To what end? Why carry dna, to what end? What is the goal?

I answered that.

To recombine with other DNA. There is no other goal. It's just chemicals being chemicals.

If you ask why a rock rolls.downhill, you have to accept the answer.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I answered that.

To recombine with other DNA. There is no other goal. It's just chemicals being chemicals.

If you ask why a rock rolls.downhill, you have to accept the answer.

I've seen lots of rocks on hills. They haven't rolled downhill.
So dna traveled trough space in order to meet up with other dna? Did the dna early on know there was no dna on Earth?

Chemicals? Okay. What do you think of plants whose leaves sprout facing towards the Sun. They are seeking the Sun. The Sun moves, they petals move. Is there consciousness there?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The idea of a higher power, whether it be traditional god or not, is highly plausible and very likely.

Look at humans. Are we gods? No. But look at how say an ant might see us. Towering giants that fly through the clouds in steel tubes we created. We can simulate, create and manipulate life in a lab among all of our other wonderous inventions. So who is to say we aren't ants to something even more advanced than us? If I went back to ancient Egypt with a lighter, a pistol and a car I'd be a god to them. Fire coming out of my hands, loud noises that cause people to drop over dead not even close to me, and a metal beast I get in and it takes me places

Just because we can't see a higher power doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Space is infinite, a higher power might be able to see us but we can't it due to our limitations as a species. Going back to ants, to an ant in Florida the journey to Alaska is impossible and they aren't even aware Alaska exists, but to us we jump on a plane and watch a movie or two and we are there. Our technology closes the gap that is impossible for something like an ant. A higher power might be able to do the same thing across the vastness of space crossing distances inconceivable for us. Or, even cross dimensions like we do doorways. Hell, we could be just atoms to them.

An afterlife? That's also possible. Energy is never really destroyed. So when our bodies die what happens to the energy that keeps us alive and makes us who we are? Well it's going to disperse back into the cosmos. Maybe it just breaks down to it's simplest form and just floats off in all directions, or maybe it moves together to something or somewhere else as a collective to continue being "alive" but in another form

possibility vs probability.

IS space infinite? There is no agreement, no scientific consensus on that, is there?

And afterlife is possible? Probably not. Life ends. Energy is now life to you?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I've seen lots of rocks on hills. They haven't rolled downhill.

Um.... yes they have. And eventually they all will.

So dna traveled trough space in order to meet up with other dna?

Not outer space. Just, through space. Even a few centimeters of travel is travel through space. DNA does not act with "purpose", any more than the chemicals in your car battery do.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Um.... yes they have. And eventually they all will.



Not outer space. Just, through space. Even a few centimeters of travel is travel through space. DNA does not act with "purpose", any more than the chemicals in your car battery do.

Hmm...

I don't believe you.