Notices
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: If God exists is the scientific study of religion irrelevant

  1. #1 If God exists is the scientific study of religion irrelevant 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    It would be a bit pointless if he existed.

    Obviously not much point answering god does nnot exists as that is excluded in the question.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    The study of religion really has nothing to do with whether god(s) really exist or not, and not all religions even have god(s) per say.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Considering there are thousands of extant and extinct religions in human history and prehistory, many of which are mutually exclusive and contradictory and, therefore, not of the same god(s), it would be scientifically irresponsible not to study this human condition even if one or more gods were shown to exist.

    Is there any reason to continue this discussion further?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    If the little green refrigerator light man was actually CAUGHT running back to his hiding place too slowly after turning on the fridge light when you open the door, should we study him scientifically?



    Like this is a valid question? It's the same thing this thread asks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: If God exists is the scientific study of religion irrele 
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    It would be a bit pointless if he existed.
    You know what a theologian is?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    New Member BUGZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sofia, Bulgaria
    Posts
    4
    Let's say that God really exists. Let's say He/She/It (I don't know) created the Universe, life and all the rest. Then who created God? That's the interesting question for me.
    So you see! There's no end to the thing you might know, depending how far beyond Zebra you go.
    Dr. Seuss
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: If God exists is the scientific study of religion irrele 
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    It would be a bit pointless if he existed.
    You know what a theologian is?
    Are there any Theologians who do a scientific study of religion? I don't think so. My impression is very few actually do anything resembling science, most starting from certain unprovable truths.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: If God exists is the scientific study of religion irrele 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by Pong
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    It would be a bit pointless if he existed.
    You know what a theologian is?
    No.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    Considering there are thousands of extant and extinct religions in human history and prehistory, many of which are mutually exclusive and contradictory and, therefore, not of the same god(s), it would be scientifically irresponsible not to study this human condition even if one or more gods were shown to exist.

    Is there any reason to continue this discussion further?
    The point is that if God is outside science, then it would be pointless using science to study him, rather like using computer to prove humans existed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    Your god exists wholly within science; it's nothing more than a fantasy created by the human brain. In fact, it would fall wholly in the realm of psychology: why does the human brain insist on creating a father figure that it will staunchly deny contrary science proof in favor of?

    It's something that makes me shake my head in puzzlement. For decades now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    Considering there are thousands of extant and extinct religions in human history and prehistory, many of which are mutually exclusive and contradictory and, therefore, not of the same god(s), it would be scientifically irresponsible not to study this human condition even if one or more gods were shown to exist.

    Is there any reason to continue this discussion further?
    The point is that if God is outside science, then it would be pointless using science to study him, rather like using computer to prove humans existed.
    There's your error: this isn't "The Scientific Study of Esbo's God" subforum, its the scientific study of religion. Religion is an affliction that affects every human culture with thousands of extant and extinct gods other than your own. Therefore, your premise is so utterly flawed as to be embarrassing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    Considering there are thousands of extant and extinct religions in human history and prehistory, many of which are mutually exclusive and contradictory and, therefore, not of the same god(s), it would be scientifically irresponsible not to study this human condition even if one or more gods were shown to exist.

    Is there any reason to continue this discussion further?
    The point is that if God is outside science, then it would be pointless using science to study him, rather like using computer to prove humans existed.
    What's outside of science? The utterly unobservable, whatever has no detectable presence or influence. If a God exists that is "outside science", then that God has no measurable influence on the universe. No creation, no intervention, no miracles, no relevance to anything.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    Considering there are thousands of extant and extinct religions in human history and prehistory, many of which are mutually exclusive and contradictory and, therefore, not of the same god(s), it would be scientifically irresponsible not to study this human condition even if one or more gods were shown to exist.
    I don't think there is any academic consensus about this (about the nature of it being mutually exclusive, contradictory, etc etc)

    In fact its not uncommon to encounter an atheist who determines theism to be some sort of primeval response to something deeply seated in our DNA/subconsciousness since the evidence of similarity between cultures that are (geographically, culturally and/or chronologically) separated is overwhelming



    Is there any reason to continue this discussion further?
    Depends on what sort atheist one is I guess.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo

    The point is that if God is outside science, then it would be pointless using science to study him, rather like using computer to prove humans existed.
    What's outside of science?
    philosophy, a subject which details issues that that surround our coinage of terms like "reality"

    The utterly unobservable, whatever has no detectable presence or influence.
    so do you want to argue that reality does not house that which can not be measured?

    If a God exists that is "outside science", then that God has no measurable influence on the universe. No creation, no intervention, no miracles, no relevance to anything.
    You began with something to the effect that god cannot be measured. (perhaps a detail of the idea that something is required to be measured in order to exist)

    Now you are making the claim : therefore there are no issues of intervention etc that surround god.

    This is quite strange since the nature of taking measurement, being propped up by implied and inferred terms, is incomplete. For instance, its easy to refer to a cup of water, but no amount of funding on the planet can tell you exactly what it contains ..... this doesn't make it any less real however .....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15 Re: If God exists is the scientific study of religion irrele 
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,255
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    It would be a bit pointless if he existed.
    Did he mean that we shouldn't bother studying things that exist? The man's an idiot. :x
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    Quote Originally Posted by loftmarcell
    I don't think there is any academic consensus about this (about the nature of it being mutually exclusive, contradictory, etc etc)
    Why would there need to be a "consensus?" One need only observe the cult records of ancient civilizations and read the cult texts of modern ones to simply observe the differences between the many gods, LG.

    In fact its not uncommon to encounter an atheist who determines theism to be some sort of primeval response to something deeply seated in our DNA/subconsciousness since the evidence of similarity between cultures that are (geographically, culturally and/or chronologically) separated is overwhelming
    It's also not uncommon to encounter those deluded by their own particular notions of theology and the supernatural who claim that there is one god and that all of humanity's gods and religious beliefs are but many ways of achieving the same goal, purpose, ends, etc. These sorts of "theists" are generally given to post-modern notions and rant on an on about "atheist materialists" and the like, but never stop to actually observe humanity and human culture to see where the cult differences actually are; where the contradictions actually reside between their different gods; or show how the post-modernist flavor of "theology" is demonstrably true.

    Instead, they'd prefer that you just take their word for it. After all, this type of theology 'must' be true since nothing can really be proved anyway, therefore the 'materialists' have it all wrong.

    By the way, LG, you'll need to pick one username and stick with it. Consider this official warning #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by SkinWalker
    Quote Originally Posted by loftmarcell
    I don't think there is any academic consensus about this (about the nature of it being mutually exclusive, contradictory, etc etc)
    Why would there need to be a "consensus?"
    because you talk with an air of finality about the subject.
    One need only observe the cult records of ancient civilizations and read the cult texts of modern ones to simply observe the differences between the many gods, LG.
    and hence the issue about their said mutual exclusiveness/similarity continues .....



    In fact its not uncommon to encounter an atheist who determines theism to be some sort of primeval response to something deeply seated in our DNA/subconsciousness since the evidence of similarity between cultures that are (geographically, culturally and/or chronologically) separated is overwhelming

    It's also not uncommon to encounter those deluded by their own particular notions of theology and the supernatural who claim that there is one god and that all of humanity's gods and religious beliefs are but many ways of achieving the same goal, purpose, ends, etc. These sorts of "theists" are generally given to post-modern notions and rant on an on about "atheist materialists" and the like, but never stop to actually observe humanity and human culture to see where the cult differences actually are; where the contradictions actually reside between their different gods; or show how the post-modernist flavor of "theology" is demonstrably true.

    Instead, they'd prefer that you just take their word for it. After all, this type of theology 'must' be true since nothing can really be proved anyway, therefore the 'materialists' have it all wrong.
    Actually I was discussing atheists who entertain the notion that a primeval similarity underrides theism as it crops up.
    Even though I am not interested in hearing your opinion of it, I'm sure you've heard of the "god gene".

    You may have your own special form of atheism, and even your own special form of criticism of theism (which arguably all that a special form of atheism is about anyway).

    Demanding that this is the last word on the subject however makes for a disingenuous discussion

    By the way, LG, you'll need to pick one username and stick with it. Consider this official warning #1.
    If its a crime to create a new username when one loses the password/email details of the last one, the warning is duly acknowledged.

    (Check the log in details if you think I have simultaneously been sockpuppeteering)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •