Is god material?

[Yusef]

Like medicine?

I've never been interested in science in relation to religion and comparisons. Learned that on RF to be honest

Who You are that have made yourself as the criterion!!?
Are you self-centered!?
Should your minds be centered!?? And anyone compares his thoughts with your minds!????

 

[Yusef]

What is the purpose of punishment? What is it's goal?

Bcz of the sin.
Arrogance,
Jealousy,
Adultery,
Theft,
Lie,
Betraying,
Foolishness,
Worshipping other gods,
Etc...

 

[Yusef]

Perhaps I have misjudged you. I can communicate in English and in Hebrew. If you want to write in one of those languages maybe we can converse and clear up those misunderstandings.

Really!??
I thought you are a Chinese,
For the same reason i could read your name that written in Indian..
You yourself didn't think that how could i read your name in Armenian!???
Well, it shows i can read Korean.
If i can read Japanese, it's not meaning that i can converse German too!!
Nope.
I can only read.
And convers only in Persian.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Who You are that have made yourself as the criterion!!?
Are you self-centered!?
Should your minds be centered!?? And anyone compares his thoughts with your minds!????

Wow. You're going to have to rephrase this to a actual conversation point rather than an insult.

 

[Valjean]

Bcz of the sin.
Arrogance,
Jealousy,
Adultery,
Theft,
Lie,
Betraying,
Foolishness,
Worshipping other gods,
Etc...

I understand what elicits it, what I'm asking is what it's intended to accomplish.
I often get the impression that it doesn't really correct the problem, but is done more to assuage the ire of the punisher.

 

[gnostic]

Science is greater at doing science than religion is. Religion is greater at doing religion than science is. Problem solved.

Next?

Meaning science is terrible at doing religion. And religion is god damn awful at doing science.

 

[Valjean]

Meaning science is terrible at doing religion. And religion is god damn awful at doing science.

Pretty bad at coming up with evidenced claims, as well, to say nothing of reasonable defenses thereof.

 

[Valjean]

Meaning science is terrible at doing religion. And religion is god damn awful at doing science.

Science doesn't even try to do religion -- not within it's purview. Religion, however, doesn't hesitate to make claims more accurately addressed by science.

 

[chinu]

Science always works for the happiness of human body. Whereas, Religion works for the happiness of soul.

There’s NO doubt that human soul also experience happiness when human body is happy, but, such kinda happinesses are always unstable and impermanent.

Human body also has births and deaths. Whereas, human soul has NO deaths and births.

Hence, smart choice for a human is to subscribe the agency which works for the happiness of soul.

 

[Valjean]

Science always works for the happiness of human body. Whereas, Religion works for the happiness of soul.

Science couldn't care less about the human body. Science works for objective truth. How the truth is applied is usually the province of industry or politics.

There’s NO doubt that human soul also experience happiness when human body is happy, but, such kinda happinesses are always unstable and impermanent.

But there is a doubt. For this to be true you first have to establish the reality of a human soul.
Your premise is unsupported.

Human body also has births and deaths. Whereas, human soul has NO deaths and births.

Again, an unsupported premise.

Hence, smart choice for a human is to subscribe the agency which works for the happiness of soul.

The American Psychological Association (APA)?

 

[gnostic]

Science doesn't even try to do religion -- not within it's purview.

Yes, you are right.

Science don’t have to do with religion. There are no interests in conversion, nor worships. And the whole god or spirit thingy, the whole heaven, hell and transcendence things, the miracles and supernatural that are associated with religions - are all unfalsifiable and unsupported.

And yet there are some qualified scientists who do try to mix science with their respective religions and religious philosophies.

We all know that some followers of Abrahamic religions, especially that of Christianity and Islam (along with their hybrid offshoots), have tried to such mixing, especially when it comes to their versions of creationism.

But there have been some working scientists who tried to mix science with Eastern religions, in particular with Quantum Mechanics and the transcendent consciousness.

Regardless of which - East or West - religions or philosophies they tried to mix with science, they are all ultimately unfalsifiable and they are all delving into the fringes of pseudoscience.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I don't believe religion and science are in conflict; they're not trying to do the same thing.

I assume this thread also has something to do with the Salafist belief in All-h having body parts?

Yes, I agree and I think what follows is a reasonable observation regarding the difference between science and religion, including his dig at some in the science community whose beliefs go beyond the 'this is our/my present understanding'.

"Knowledge does not mean you are 100% sure, but that you have enough facts to have a reasoned opinion. But many people are offended when scientists change their mind: That is normal! Science is just THAT the opinion changes when the facts change. This is because science is not a doctrine of salvation, not a religion that proclaims absolute truths. And those who constantly shout, “Follow science!” have obviously not understood this. Science does not know everything, but it is the only reasonable knowledge base we have. That is why it is so important.” - Dieter Nuhr (German, high profile satirist)

As to the OP, 'Is God Material?', depends on one's definition of God. If one posits that God is omnipresent in all that is manifest and all that is not, as I do, then God is both material and not material. God is one.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, you are right.

Science don’t have to do with religion. There are no interests in conversion, nor worships.

Well there are some alarmist climate scientists who do seem to spend a lot of time in trying to convert the skeptical scientists to become true believers in their computer based bleak future predictions, else they try to 'excommunicate' them from gaining research funding if they remain recalcitrant deniers. Climate science imho does seem to have become a sort of cult that persecutes those who keep an open mind as to what the climate will be like in the future.

 

[gnostic]

Well there are some alarmist climate scientists who do seem to spend a lot of time in trying to convert the skeptical scientists to become true believers in their computer based bleak future predictions, else they try to 'excommunicate' them from gaining research funding if they remain recalcitrant deniers.

Actually, in the US and in Australia, the Republican and Liberal governments have respectively done exactly that - cutting off fundings to science researches, if scientists kept bring up climate changes, and going against president’s and prime minister’s support for oil companies and mining industries.

Scientists have no political powers, so federal governments have repeatedly threatened scientists. And it is these same federal governments that cut off funding hospitals and aged care and care for the disabled.

Trump is still denying the current pandemic, denying the death tolls in the US, and now suffering from severe shortages in medical staff and other resources.

 

[Valjean]

Well there are some alarmist climate scientists who do seem to spend a lot of time in trying to convert the skeptical scientists to become true believers in their computer based bleak future predictions, else they try to 'excommunicate' them from gaining research funding if they remain recalcitrant deniers. Climate science imho does seem to have become a sort of cult that persecutes those who keep an open mind as to what the climate will be like in the future.

Alarmist in the sense of raising an alarm, true, but not in the sense of an exaggerated alarm. The research does point to a planet-wide catastrophe.

The rest I think you've got pretty much backwards. There are very, very few skeptical scientists in relevant fields who have actually studied the data. The skeptics tend to be industry-sponsored, in unrelated fields; or religiously or ideologically biased.
It's the climate believers who usually find themselves out the door.

Climate catastrophe threatens industry and those with wealth and political power. They've been actively suppressing Cassandras for years, funding right-wing think tanks and university chairs, installing compliant puppets in research and regulatory agencies, manipulating media, &c.

Speaking of media, I get the impression from your post that you may have swallowed Ben Stein's Cool-Aid from his propaganda 'documentary "Expelled...." 08-04-17

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Actually, in the US and in Australia, the Republican and Liberal governments have respectively done exactly that - cutting off fundings to science researches, if scientists kept bring up climate changes, and going against president’s and prime minister’s support for oil companies and mining industries.

Scientists have no political powers, so federal governments have repeatedly threatened scientists. And it is these same federal governments that cut off funding hospitals and aged care and care for the disabled.

Trump is still denying the current pandemic, denying the death tolls in the US, and now suffering from severe shortages in medical staff and other resources.

Unfortunately politics does affect science, like just about everything including religion these days. The world is mainly polarized by a left - right divide, goodness me even the pope is wanting climate change politics be preached from the pulpit because he's a leftie.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Alarmist in the sense of raising an alarm, true, but not in the sense of an exaggerated alarm. The research does point to a planet-wide catastrophe.

The rest I think you've got pretty much backwards. There are very, very few skeptical scientists in relevant fields who have actually studied the data. The skeptics tend to be industry-sponsored, in unrelated fields; or religiously or ideologically biased.
It's the climate believers who usually find themselves out the door.

Climate catastrophe threatens industry and those with wealth and political power. They've been actively suppressing Cassandras for years, funding right-wing think tanks and university chairs, installing compliant puppets in research and regulatory agencies, manipulating media, &c.

Speaking of media, I get the impression from your post that you may have swallowed Ben Stein's Cool-Aid from his propaganda 'documentary "Expelled...." 08-04-17

Yes, the most extreme of the computer projections on climate change do paint a bleak picture, but based on observed temps versus projections, the worst case scenarios are just hot air. But the point is, these projections and the programs underlying them are revised from time to time in order they better match reality, That is how science is meant to work. Unfortunately the leftist agenda is to have a carbon tax and they need people to believe the world is in danger, so again it is this present world problem of the left right political divide.