Do you go to church?

There is so much irony here. I will say these days isn't atheist and other liberals that go on about how the world would be better if we were more accepting and tolerant of each other, yet as soon as they encounter some who has different political beliefs or has religion they all that stuff about tolerance and respect goes out the window.

Once atheist and liberals meet someone who does not share their views, they have to "debunk", mock, and question their intelligence. The irony is that it makes them no better than the right wing " bigots" they hate so much. They themselves are bigots and don't even notice.

Tolerance, respect, acceptance according to liberals and atheists only applies to their views, and the LGBT community. All else is open mockery and hate. SMH I going to continue celebrating Easter and Jesus today so I not gonna bother with this thread.

@thehig1: it's not worth my time discussing with you guys either. Because is the concept of God is over your heads. To you, science is your religion in a since because to you it has all the answers. Like I mentioned, I have absolutely no problems with science but I don't think it disproves God or the Bible.

Like I said, I know people who were assured by doctors ( best in their craft) that they cancer they had was not curable and nothing could be done. That was many, many years ago and those people are still alive. Those people as Christians who believes God would cured them and were prayed over.

Today there still is no scientific explanation for that and the doctors still don't know. You guys are saying well one day us we will have an answer, but one thing is certain is wasn't because of God because reasons. Call it luck, or she was healed by the sun rays, or by their own will power anything but God...

My point is how do you are anyone else knows for sure? Show me undeniable proof that God or the afterlife does not exist. Don't worry I will wait....

I wouldn't say Science is a religion, Science is just a method we use study the natural world through observation and experiment.

I have never said Science has all the answers, and you'll find most logical people would agree Science doesnt have all the answers. However if you dont have an answer just saying God isn't the way to go, the default logical position would be "I dont know"

Science doesnt disprove God or the Bible, its just that God is not needed for any of the scientific explanations of the natural world we have discovered so far, and there is no evidence presented to suggest there is a God. The Bible clearly exists, however the origin of its content and its meaning cant even be agreed upon in Christianity. There is no evidence to suggest its the word of God, because there is no evidence there is a God.

People live longer than doctors estimations, with cancer and other life threatening conditions, there's a lot we still dont understand, however because Scientists cant explain how these people have outlived there expectancy doesnt make prayer or God true. Thats a logical fallacy known as "Argument from Ignorance"

Steven Hawking is an Atheist, he was expected to die in his early 20s due to motor neurone disease, however hes now 75, he wasnt Christian so he wouldn't have prayed.

You finish your paragraph off with an attempt to shift the burden of proof, you cant prove a negative. One who believes there is a God is the one making claims that need to be proven.

Only the religious would call asking for evidence beyond "because" insulting. The facts are as they are, how you interpret them is up to you, but you gotta have more knowledge of your position to back up your beliefs other than "because it says in The Bible" if you want to be taken seriously.

As I can read Hebrew and Greek, I'm pretty sure I could school you on The Bible too, especially if all you know is a translated version (and woe to you if you're fond of the KJV, ugh). It really is an entirely different story in the original languages. You don't think you can take seven different words and translate all of them as "hell" when only one of the original seven means anything near what you think hell means and call it authoritative, do you?

If people know their religion, it's history and nuances then I can respect that even if I disagree with them. But most people just shout off verses, in English, not knowing what it really means because they have not studied the contemporary conditions to understand where the speaker was coming from. "Turn the other cheek" isn't a call to passivity, for instance, it's a demand for equality. If you turn the other cheek, the person would have to slap you with an open hand as they would an equal, rather than the back of the hand as they would a servant/lower class.

It's things like this that pervert what was originally written. People think they know their religion because they know The English Bible, but without studying Judaism, you cannot really understand Christianity. Without reading Hebrew, you cannot understand Judaism.

If someone is really seriously devoted to their religion, they would want to study. People who are PROUD of the their religion, on the other hand, just take the common understandings, which are often wrong, and wield it like a prize.

Oh, and ever wonder what the name "Easter" means? It's the name of a fertility Goddess. Haven't you ever wondered what bunnies and eggs have to do with Jesus?

No. I'm a nonbeliever, and never really did find church to be entertaining even when I was a child and tried so hard to push away my doubts. I'd rather spend Sundays living for this life, because it's the only one I know I have.

Yeah well...it's reply or try to find something on Netflix. ;)

I wish more people would understand this. Science is the method, not the result. The results are called knowledge. Knowledge means, literally, understanding.

You can bring a new, never-before-theorized element to scientists right now. Once they take a few basic measurements of it, they can tell you how it would react to every known element without having to introduce the two. It takes more than one calculation, but the formula for the calculation is already understood. Most of the values are already understood. If you're solving for π you never have to calculate what π is because it's value is known. You just plug in the rest of the formula (most of which would be known values) and the result is notguesswork.

By using these known values, these known laws known to be true and consistent, much can be figured out about unknown values.

You can't physically view a photon because there is no 'there' there. It has no mass. It has only 2 dimensions (frequency, amplitude). But we can mathematically describe a photon. And the math bears out through experimentation. We know it travels like a wave until observed or is interfered with at which point it briefly behaves as a particle due to the double-slit experiment. From this experiment and others we can infer even more: superposition and the weird probabilistic properties of the quantum world where linear causality becomes meaningless. Each new answer is a rabbit hole; understanding the complex nature of X has led us to a basic understanding of Y.

What makes humans special is our unique ability to pass down information in forms other than genetics. It's a fragile thing reliant on continuity of not just life but education. Global war, disease, or a myriad of other defeats can (and have) set us back centuries or more.

It is knowledge that makes us more than animals. The world around us, society, our ability to progress, relies on two words: Why, How.

Those two words make us human. It is, quite literally, the two single concepts that permit us to be masters of our own existence.

That's fucking beautiful.