*Long lecture is long. Religion is a malleable idea because it does not require proof in the scientific sense to believe. You can mold it into any shape you want; sometimes it's molded to fit the world and sometimes a person's idea of the world is molded to fit the religion (which sometimes takes the form of out right denying scientific evidence).

The problem of why so many people think religion and science can't co-exist is because there is a very vocal and active religious populations that see science as an assault on their beliefs. They don't want to see religion as malleable, they want it to be TRUTH (as they express on the bumpers of their horseless carriages powered by internal combustion engines). We, us non-believers, see this and are offended, because after all we base our understanding of the world on observable and measurable phenomena, while all their 'facts' are based on things a bunch of drunk goat/sheep herders were going on about 2000+ years ago.

As an atheist I've often given the the existence of a god/s thought, my conclusion has been it doesn't matter what I think since its subject to change at whim. I'd be most likely to see God as the watchmaker, in which case I'm benefited more by figuring out how the watch works than wondering what the maker wanted. I outright reject the God as the psycho jealous controlling girlfriend/boyfriend. 'If you really loved me you'd kill your first born, OMG you were really going to do it? I was just testing you, I wouldn't really make you do that. Now go slaughter some sheep and goats for me. No seriously... do it.'

Video is already flagged long - ignoring long request by Crosswords.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, September 10th, 2010 5:09pm PDT - promote requested by Crosswords.

>> ^Crosswords:

Long lecture is long. Religion is a malleable idea because it does not require proof in the scientific sense to believe. You can mold it into any shape you want; sometimes it's molded to fit the world and sometimes a person's idea of the world is molded to fit the religion (which sometimes takes the form of out right denying scientific evidence).
The problem of why so many people think religion and science can't co-exist is because there is a very vocal and active religious populations that see science as an assault on their beliefs. They don't want to see religion as malleable, they want it to be TRUTH (as they express on the bumpers of their horseless carriages powered by internal combustion engines). We, us non-believers, see this and are offended, because after all we base our understanding of the world on observable and measurable phenomena, while all their 'facts' are based on things a bunch of drunk goat/sheep herders were going on about 2000+ years ago.
As an atheist I've often given the the existence of a god/s thought, my conclusion has been it doesn't matter what I think since its subject to change at whim. I'd be most likely to see God as the watchmaker, in which case I'm benefited more by figuring out how the watch works than wondering what the maker wanted. I outright reject the God as the psycho jealous controlling girlfriend/boyfriend. 'If you really loved me you'd kill your first born, OMG you were really going to do it? I was just testing you, I wouldn't really make you do that. Now go slaughter some sheep and goats for me. No seriously... do it.'


That's all fine and whatnot... the problem is, religion is constantly retreating, and science constantly advancing.
People are rationalizing more and more. Which is pretty stupid and pathetic.
Religious people, ignorants or not, absolutely refuse to face reality. We see it every single day.
Being religious is, in my opinion, being intellectually dishonest. For example... how can someone say he/she is a christian, and then rationalize their way out from believing in most of the stuff that comes in the bible? The bible is the foundation for their belief (or it should be), yet only a complete ignorant would believe in shit as stupid as the beginning of the universe and creation of men, as described in Genesis. Or the great flood and the Moses story. etc, etc. There are people like that of course, but I doubt that it is the majority.

People are retreating from religious belief (even if unaware) and into empirical knowledge ever more.
Yet, they still consider themselves religious, even if whatever it is they believe in, has absolutely no real relation with what their religion is supposed to be about.

IF science ever reaches a point, where it can be said, with absolute certainty that god is not real, there would still be idiots trying to argue against it.

Shit... look at the amount of morons trying to discredit Evolution.

To conclude, I DO think science and religion are incompatible. One searches for the absolute truth, including the origin of the universe, how we came to be, and all that, no matter how pleasant it is (or isn't), and the other is about defending a stand, even if proven wrong (although every once in a while, they have to take a step back and admit they are being assholes. Nowadays you have the pope saying evolution is real.Oh really??? Well, that's not what it says in your holy book, you might wanna check that).

An institution such as the Catholic Church wanting to be side-by-side with science, after its "awesome" track record in support of science and knowledge, makes me wanna puke in disgust.

I was prepared to hate this video, but I think he has some answers, not to my questions, but the questions of the secular masses.

I am a Christian and a techie. They work fine together for me. Even at Christian university I went to (Azusa Pacific University), we have techies, science, etc. as well.

For example... how can someone say he/she is a christian, and then rationalize their way out from believing in most of the stuff that comes in the bible?

I think he actually touches on this in the video. You're seeing Christianity as a concrete unmalleable idea that deals in absolutes. And indeed this is how a lot of people see it and treat it despite the fact I think everyone shapes it to their needs. But at one point he was talking about how many of the people he spoke to weren't looking for religion to explain the world, but for transcendental purposes (I think that's the term he used). I guess you could say cherry picking from the bible is cheating, but only if they believe its the absolute word of God and not the word of God as interpreted by people who also wrote in their own agenda over the thousands of years. Kierkegaard comes to mind as someone who absolutely abhorred organized religion and felt it destroyed an real connection people had to God. And when you think like that, suddenly to be a Christian has nothing to do with what a church preaches, or even the book they preach from.

This is a topic I have a hard time defending because I, like you, see the tremendous harm, through ignorance and force of will, religion has done to the world. But I've also known many religious people that aren't like that. Justibecause it seems the majority of religious people are ignorant and hateful doesn't mean they all are. Though It would be nice if the Brother Consolmagno's were louder than the Pastor Phelps'

I'm a Christian. I mean obviously I don't believe in God or agree with anything in the bible, but I'm a Christian. Also, I'm Japanese.

Thanks for Sifting this. I think it is really important, especially here on the Sift where so many people seem to equate religion with fundamentalism and dogma or as the antithesis of science. It's too bad it seems like people are ignoring it. I'd promote it if I could.

I love this quote from the end of the talk, btw. I wish fundamentalists of ALL religions would realize this and ponder its implications.

"That's a fundamental point of Catholicism... The church doesn't have rules; the church has teachings. Rules--you follow the rules or you're not playing the game. Teachings, you go, 'Oh, I never thought of that.' But then you still have to go back and apply it to your own life."

Moving this video to bleedmegood's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.