Atheism vs religion which bird is a better bird?

[Shadow Wolf]

My point was that it would be extremely difficult to prove it and there would be no conclusive proof either way.

Not really. You gather two groups, one religious, one non-religious, and compare the average IQ of the two groups, look at various mitigating and extraneous circumstances in individuals (such as, if one group is disproportionately impoverished, based on that we can predict a probable lower average IQ) and repeat it several times and see what the results tell us. But they have never told us there is a link between religiousness and IQ. It especially helps to destroy the idea of any link when our brightest thinkers have been atheists and theists of all flavors and varieties.

Check this out.

It's a big, fat myth that all scientists are religion-hating atheists

However this link would support your view as it applies to America.

Scientists and Belief

I never claimed all scientists or that they hate religion. However, most scientists are not religious themselves, and describe themselves as atheist or agnostic.

However I believe the need for religion will be become apparent again, but the teachings must provide assistance for humanity during this challenging era of history.

I don't believe there truly is a need for religion. It is an ancient institution, one that has remarkably not been updated with the rest of the world. An Oxford education today only resembles an Oxford education from 1000 years ago in name only, but yet people still cling to these ancient traditions that today we know just cannot be real or literal as they are presented. Rather, we should replace religion with a new approach to spiritualism. Something that is not shackled to the past, laced with dogma, or filled with false claims and immoral commandments.

 

[james bond]

So why is it atheists and agnostics can fly just as well as Anglicans and Adventists?

As most of us know, neither the practice of science or religion has any bearing on one's intelligence.


.

I didn't think you guys flew unless you were dinosaurs first ha ha.

Agreed. To fly, one has to take things lightly. I don't think it matters which one subscribes to.

Do you know what are the three things in life and afterlife? By afterlife, you can just say the end, i.e. that's all folks.

 

[james bond]

They are actually two wings of the same bird!

Science and religion are the two wings of one bird. Both must be equally strong for the bird to fly: “Religion and science are the two wings upon which man’s intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone!” (`Abdu’l-Bahá, Paris Talks, pg. 143).

Science, Religion, and the Bahá'í Faith | The Huffington Post

And you told me you didn't read HuffPo ha ha.

 

[james bond]

People don't need wings to fly. We have several ways of doing that already, compliments of SCIENCE.

Which technologies has religion given us again?

You crashed and burned. Christians gave you both science and flight (Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, Galilei, Wright Bros).

 

[Scott C.]

Atheists view of religion. Old folks on old technology old science antiquated and dangerous.




View attachment 16202

Next, religions view of atheists as immoral science is God fanatics that do unnatural acts. Not natural for Harleys to do that so it must be immoral!! And unfriendly as well.
View attachment 16203 which is the correct bird?

The one that is correct is the best.

 

[Cephus]

Because the lights of religion have faded

And that's a good thing.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You crashed and burned. Christians gave you both science and flight (Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, Galilei, Wright Bros).

Science existed before Christianity and is not beholden to any religion in particular.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't believe there truly is a need for religion. It is an ancient institution, one that has remarkably not been updated with the rest of the world...Rather, we should replace religion with a new approach to spiritualism. Something that is not shackled to the past, laced with dogma, or filled with false claims and immoral commandments.

That's a mighty broad brush you're painting with. Whittle it down a bit, because you cannot possibly be speaking of all religions in existence.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That's a mighty broad brush you're painting with. Whittle it down a bit, because you cannot possibly be speaking of all religions in existence.

No, I see all religions as relics of the past. Reconstructed pre-Christian religions have better realized the modern world, but they are still based on primitive ideas (and often left with many gaps and holes to fill), frequently promote pseudo-science, and it's long past due we outgrow personal deities as a species and put them aside like a child eventually puts aside belief in Santa Clause.

 

[Skwim]

You crashed and burned. Christians gave you both science

This is patently absurd.

The pre-Socratic philosopher Thales (640-546 BC), dubbed the "father of science", was the first to postulate non-supernatural explanations for natural phenomena. For example, that land floats on water and that earthquakes are caused by the agitation of the water upon which the land floats, rather than the god Poseidon. Thales' student Pythagoras of Samos founded the Pythagorean school, which investigated mathematics for its own sake, and was the first to postulate that the Earth is spherical in shape. Leucippus (5th century BC) introduced atomism, the theory that all matter is made of indivisible, imperishable units called atoms. This was greatly expanded on by his pupil Democritus and later Epicurus.

The astronomer Aristarchus of Samos was the first known person to propose a heliocentric model of the solar system, while the geographer Eratosthenes accurately calculated the circumference of the Earth. Hipparchus (c. 190 – c. 120 BC) produced the first systematic star catalog. The level of achievement in Hellenistic astronomy and engineering is impressively shown by the Antikythera mechanism (150-100 BC), an analog computer for calculating the position of planets.
source: Wikipedia​

and flight (Bacon, Copernicus, Kepler, Galilei, Wright Bros).

This is like saying being white gave us flight. And which Bacon are you referring to, Francis or Roger? And in what manner did either of them give us flight?


.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, I see all religions as relics of the past. Reconstructed pre-Christian religions have better realized the modern world, but they are still based on primitive ideas (and often left with many gaps and holes to fill), frequently promote pseudo-science, and it's long past due we outgrow personal deities as a species and put them aside like a child eventually puts aside belief in Santa Clause.

Wow. Religion is part of what makes us human. Unless you prefer us to be robots? There are biological and evolutionary reasons why humans have the need be religious. Religion stems from the experience of what can be called the awesome or the numinous. We also love to tell stories and ponder the meanings and purposes of existence. There is also the impact of ritual, altered states of consciousness and so on. We're just wired that way. We're not completely rational beings and there's nothing wrong with it. No animal is. Check the poem that is the first part of my sig. That was sung by an oral poet after she was apparently struck by lightning or a meteor (probably ball lightning). It made her into a shaman. That was just a natural chain of events.

I, myself, never believed in Santa because I always knew it was my mom, but I still enjoy the stories.

 

[David T]

Christianity and the church did play a big role in the process that led to the emergence of modern science...

Historically, clergy were also major contributors to scientific and technological fields as they were both well educated and had ample free time to work on their hobbies.

Exactly! Without Harley Davidson no Ducati moto

Science existed before Christianity and is not beholden to any religion in particular.

I think it means contemporary accedemic structionalism. You know like school.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think it means contemporary accedemic structionalism. You know like school.

And that existed before Christianity, too.

 

[David T]

Wow. Religion is part of what makes us human. Unless you prefer us to be robots? There are biological and evolutionary reasons why humans have the need be religious. Religion stems from the experience of what can be called the awesome or the numinous. We also love to tell stories and ponder the meanings and purposes of existence. There is also the impact of ritual, altered states of consciousness and so on. We're just wired that way. We're not completely rational beings and there's nothing wrong with it. No animal is. Check the poem that is the first part of my sig. That was sung by an oral poet after she was apparently struck by lightning or a meteor (probably ball lightning). It made her into a shaman. That was just a natural chain of events.

I, myself, never believed in Santa because I always knew it was my mom, but I still enjoy the stories.

Shadow wolf probably enjoys Harry potter and tolkien. Never mind Tolkien was a devout Catholic and jk rolling wrote hp while attending the church of Scotland. Btw notice atheists are humorless

 

[David T]

No, I see all religions as relics of the past. Reconstructed pre-Christian religions have better realized the modern world, but they are still based on primitive ideas (and often left with many gaps and holes to fill), frequently promote pseudo-science, and it's long past due we outgrow personal deities as a species and put them aside like a child eventually puts aside belief in Santa Clause.

What motorcycle do you ride?

 

[David T]

I really don't like either choice.
I change my beliefs when warranted, the only filter I have, is reason, jntuition and my own honesty.
I am a seeker and an alchemist, neither of which require dogma, just a desire to know.

So Harleys for around town sport bikes for the twisties?

 

[David T]

I wish I knew why people keep presenting "atheism vs religion" as if it were a real choice.

It isn't. It has never been, and ought to never be.

There is nothing whatsoever wrong nor unadvisable with atheism. And any religion worth its salt will not have any problem with atheism either.

A true multi bike lover. !!!

And if there was such a thing as a 'meaning of life', would you expect it to come to us via rational, structured investigation, or by falling flat on your face and singing praises to bronze age bogeymen?

I think which ever induces sex probably wins. I have never have never heard oh my square root oh my square root

 

[allfoak]

So Harleys for around town sport bikes for the twisties?

Don't know a thing about motorcycles.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What motorcycle do you ride?

Neither.

 

[David T]

Neither.

Neither.

Oh...thats too bad.