Leaving religion behind...

[Seraphim]

Really, what I'm wondering is how a religious social scene transfers to the road. As I mentioned before, I grew up Catholic, saw the sense of community withing the larger secular community and found that a lot of people leaned on that for the majority of the social scene. Same with some of the other churches in town -- Methodist, Baptist, Congregational, etc. 

Does that community extend to travelers, on the road? When you head into a strange church in a new location, are you greeted as one of the flock in an inclusive sense, or is there some outsider ostracizing involved? How much do traveler's lean on churches or church social services -- take advantage of free meals/food pantry? Ask for a spot to overnight in a church parking lot? Meet up with others and accept invitations to dinner/a place to stay, shower, rest?

Sorry - didn't meant stray off topic. We really don't frequent churches when traveling, nor really discuss religion with people on the road nor choose whom we meet up with based on religion. Being introverts - on average - by nature, I doubt many of our members do. So while one would have certain expectations of a religious community, the reality might be different - people being what they are. Stop in during a service or an event , introduce yourself and see what's offered. I imagine each experience will be different, depending on the individual people.

 

[kyonu]

The expanded theory of evolution has not been 'proven'.  In fact, IMHO, it has more holes than Swiss cheese!

However, they "have" proven genetic code that connects everyone all the way back to simple trees.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution

That is a simple article equating our DNA to the past. Note that organisms who "theoretically" evolved separately from us have completely different genetic makeup. I'm not saying you're wrong, but saying it's not 'proven' isn't exactly accurate.

 

[concretebox]

I was raised Roman Catholic. We went to church every Sunday until I was about 14-16. I never really felt like I believed, but I do remember praying for Jesus's help to stop masturbating...at age 13. Thinking about it now, that seems f'ed up! I think my shame about my sexual desires comes from religion in part, and U.S. society in general. We stopped going to church every sunday, but for no particular reason I can remember. We were CE catholics for a while (attended only on Christmas and Easter). Then we just stopped going entirely. I never really developed a strong faith.

I've returned to the idea of a higher power here and there since then, but I've never developed a belief that any one religion is "correct." I'm a happy atheists now. We're on our own and that's OK.

Lastly, I hope this doesn't get me deleted, but the way some religious groups use their faith to attack others is disturbing. ISIS committing horrible crimes, The Westboro Baptists using Jesus to cover their hatred in truly tasteless protests, or just regular ol religious conservatives who want to keep evolution and sex ed out of classrooms or refuse to vaccinate their children or acknowledge climate change. Religion has become a cover for many who express their ignorance of scientific facts or social justice. I like to believe these people are a fraction of those who call themselves religious, but regardless the effect is clear. The U.S. is far behind in scientific understanding and we'll all be disadvantaged because of it.

 

[Seraphim]

Comcretebox

I agree with you. But people will use any excuse to attempt validate their questionable actions - religion is just one of their tools because it's convenient. Thats nothing new. But that's a dysfunction of people in general. Every religion has been used in an attempt to justify actions otherwise deemed unacceptable or outrageous. The crises in the Middle East are not about religion - they are about economics: unequal distribution of resources. But religion becomes the rallying cry because it offers an appearance - to those susceptible - of righteousness. God wants us to be happy and have all this stuff the others have, so it's Gods will we attack and kill them.

It's not something you can blame on the religion. It's people; and if those people are leaders in churches, then more shame them.

 

[kyonu]

It's not something you can blame on the religion.  It's people; and if those people are leaders in churches, then more shame them.

This right here is the problem with the hate-speak most people give religion. I blame religion in some cases (since there IS a set of rules to follow, many of which are still not followed by anyone today), but most of the time it's not the religion, its the person.

A person can follow whatever they want, but they call themselves religious by attacking others and using it as a cover. True Christianity (for example) is supposed to promote peace and being humble while not containing facets that make one a "bad" person. Most people don't care about this and use it to be righteous warriors whose zeal is unfounded. Thank you for pointing this out, Seraphim.

 

[Seraphim]

I don't blame religion, because I differentiate between the tenants of the religion itself and the doctrine and dogma created by men. Take for example, The Great Commission'.  According to the New Testament, Jesus sent the disciples across the world to spread the good news.  There was admonition, that if a village refused to listen, the disciple should brush the dust off his sandals and move on. Somewhere, somehow, this changed into a doctrine of conversion - the a great Commission - that God wants everyone to be a Christian and should be converted for their own good; which led to events like the Inquisition. Should the Inquisition be blamed on Christianity, or on the church which fostered the concept - a church composed of greedy men who shaped doctrine for their own selfish purpose and tried to justify it with a mantle of righteousness? We're just imprisoning and torturing Jews and Muslims, seizing their property and possessions BTW, because it's necessary to save their souls. And the ignorant people following the church fell for it because they were taught it was Gods Will...

 

[LeeRevell]

I suppose I consider everything in science a theorem, as would any good scientist (IMO); It's valid as long as nothing comes along to disprove  it, and the more evidence for its validity, the stronger the theorem. Don't get me wrong, I believe the process of evolution accounts for the biological status quo, but I'm hesitant to proclaim any theory as 'proven' - theorems undergo constant modification as new information is uncovered. And mathematics is the most theoretical of all. That's how they remain viable. We are constantly learning. Perhaps one day we'll know everything and can claim things are 'proven', but I doubt it lol.

I consider it 'proven' when I see it  is working in the real world.  "Theory" is when you THINK it should work based on your ideas of how it should work according to the understood laws.  Gravity works.  Yet it is still called a 'theory'...?  I think of that as 'dirty science'  Not necessarily 'bad' science, but not as elegant as it should be.
If it is seen, and can be quantitatively measured, it should be considered proven.  We see evolution working all around us.  I'd say that it is proven.  But I am not a 'scientist', and do not play one on TV.  So I am not bound by their academic rules.  I do not have the need to play semantic games.

 

[mockturtle]

Gravity is a 'law', not a theory.

 

[Seraphim]

Potato potahto ...

 

[kyonu]

Potato potahto ...

Not quite.  Law is accepted as truth, theory can be debated.

What gets me as some people still say it's a theory, then try to argue that it doesn't exist, and I'm like.. whaaa? Magic then? Isn't that heretical in religion? and I end up confused beyond belief... But that's just me.

Evolution and gravity have both been proven, we feel gravity every day and we've seen creatures adapt and "grow" into their environment, so that parts not in question (think how the human body grows stronger from a virus by mutating anti-bodies). What's really in question is the origin of life--where did we come from? I like the Panspermia theory myself, where bacteria hitched a cosmic ride on a smashing comet from Mars! Sounds silly, but actually is gaining traction in the scientific community...

 

[Seraphim]

http://thehappyscientist.com/study-unit/when-does-theory-become-law

Take it from a scientist...

 

[Seraphim]

http://adamkemp.newsvine.com/_news/...ature-of-science-why-gravity-is-just-a-theory

 

[Seraphim]

Conclusions

Conclusions: Current evidence and historical data show that evolution is both a fact and a theory.
Evolutionary biology is a strong and vigorous field of science. A theoretical framework that encompasses several basic mechanisms is consistent with the patterns seen in nature; and there is abundant evidence demonstrating the action of these mechanisms as well as their contributions to nature. Hence, evolution is both a theory and a set of established facts that the theory explains.

Like every other science, there is scientific debate about some aspects of evolution, but none of these debates appear likely to shake the foundations of this field. There exists no other scientific explanation that can account for all the patterns in nature, only non-scientific explanations that require a miraculous force, like a creator. Such super-natural explanations lie outside of science, which can neither prove nor disprove miracles. Science provides us with a compelling account and explanation of the changing life on Earth. It should also remind us of our good fortune to have come into being and our great responsibility to ensure the continuity of life.

© 2000, American Institute of Biological Sciences. Educators have permission to reprint articles for classroom use; other users, please contact [email protected] for reprint permission. See reprint policy.

So evolution is a theory to explain a group of known facts. The facts are obvious, the theory is a set of hypothesis to explain the facts, which is open change as new facts are discovered.

 

[Seraphim]

And I'm done with the topic lol.

 

[RVTravel]

1. The world and everything in it is much too complex to have formed on its own. The erroneous concept of evolution is the atheist attempt to explain away God. There never has been and never will be proof of evolution in the sense that humans came from an ape.
2. Faith is the belief in things unseen. You must have faith to be able to believe in a higher power. http://www.biblestudytools.com/hebrews/11.html

If you read the Bible from cover to cover, most people will find improvements in their life.

 

[Chancebond]

The expanded theory of evolution has not been 'proven'.  In fact, IMHO, it has more holes than Swiss cheese!

True story!

 

[Chancebond]

Are we talking about Marco, micro, cosmic, stellar, plant, organic, planetary or chemical evolution?!!!

We can't debate micro evolution, but we can debate macro evolution, considering tha nobody has ever seen macro evolution!

 

[vanman2300]

Frankly organized religion and I have never been a good match.....in fact the priest threw me out of church when I was only 16 so this was the case from an early age. Basically I believe in two things about religion 1) it is a very useful tool when raising kids to be morally anchored and 2) at some point I think "organized religion" becomes unnecessary for adults because they develop their own beliefs and either hold to morality or not.

I have a varied educational background but one area I'm very well educated in is the sciences. I find that as I learn more and more even to this day my belief that there is a God gets stronger and stronger because I find science actually supports that belief. Conversely I also find it odd when scientists or others who use science find their beliefs wane due to science. I guess it is the classic example of a glass being half full vs half empty.....depends on your point of view.

 

[mockturtle]

I have met very few physicians who do not at least believe in 'intelligent design'.

 

[Wabbit]

...I find that as I learn more...

As Socrates then Einstein said(ish)...."The more I know, the less I know"(my take on their sentiment)...