intelligent less likely to believe in god, page-190

woddonnee

i am not telling you whether im right or wrong but relating how i observe society. it is up to you to decide for yourself.

how can you call something evil (or good) when there is no reference or standard to rely on if as an athiest there is no god? and if there is no god then the fact that men rely on religion is suggestive that man will eventually invent it.

the whole arguement can be broken down to simply ask, is there a god who will eventually judge mankind or isnt there? i believe there is

and by the way i do believe most religious thought is or can be destructive, in particular your example of bomb strapping. to believe in god however does not make one religious.

we all have free choice and really the debate will continue to ebb to and fro

i take the liberty of posting a few questions that are posed by david berlinski, a secular jew who wrote the devils delusion: atheism and its scientific pretentions. he is a mathmetician and an iconoclast but he also describes that science is a religion -

Has anyone provided a proof of God’s inexistence?
Not even close.

Has quantum cosmology explained the emergence of the universe or why it is here?
Not even close.

Have the sciences explained why our universe seems to be fine-tuned to allow for the existence of life?
Not even close.

Are physicists and biologists willing to believe in anything so long as it is not religious thought?
Close enough.

Has rationalism in moral thought provided us with an understanding of what is good, what is right, and what is moral?
Not close enough.

Has secularism in the terrible twentieth century been a force for good?
Not even close to being close.

Is there a narrow and oppressive orthodoxy of thought and opinion within the sciences?
Close enough.

Does anything in the sciences or in their philosophy justify the claim that religious belief is irrational?
Not even ballpark.

Is scientific atheism a frivolous exercise in intellectual contempt?
Dead on.

cheers