To be irritated by religious views...

[Frume]

I know I'll get flamed here. Of course it goes without saying that you are entitled to believe whatever you believe. And I understand that sometimes people turn to 'God' because that's their last hope. But..

My example that prompted me to write this...

I was on Instagram and catching up with a poor girl that I follow. She is 19 and has battled cancer 3 times. The page is updated by her mum and she says things like:-

'In Him we trust to heal his child'

'This is all part of His plan'

'He knows what he is doing'

Something good happens & then it's, 'God is good' or 'Thank you to Our Father in Heaven for making our prayers come true and healing his child'

Ok. Sure, that was it.. or probably science

The general 'Thoughts and prayers' when there is any kind of disaster. Because obviously that's all that's needed in a time of crisis.

Sate, not date!

There are quite a few people who believe in 'God' on this thread so I was wondering if you could help me? On Zombie Jesus Day are we meant to wear the chocolate eggs to ward off zombie jesus akin to garlick for vampires or do we through the chocolate eggs at him like silver bullets at werewolves, I've read the bible from cover to cover and still cant find an answer

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

*Throw

carm.org/atheism/epicurus-god-willing-to-prevent-evil

The problems with Epicurus' statements are as follows.

Evil is not defined. Therefore, the assessment of the statements cannot be validated.
If evil were defined, what would justify the definition as being the right one?
Epicurus presupposes a moral absolute that if God can prevent evil, then he should. But how is such a moral absolute justified as being true?
The problem of how much evil (all, most, some) ought to be prevented is not addressed.
The problem of preventing evil thoughts and intentions with its implication of denying free will is also not addressed.

Zombie Jesus Day

I have never heard of this, so can't help you

Though I would never throw chocolate eggs at anyone - I'd rather scoff them myself

Zombie Jesus day is surely Sunday? i think you're supposed to go to a garden centre for zombie-proof plants.

Nitpicking the Epicurus quote around the definition of evil doesn't work, and people who try to do so tend to get very literal with the term "evil". Think about it terms of things like, say, a child born with conditions like epidermolysis bullosa, or hundreds of people being killed by reason of an earthquake, or someone being gradually incapacitated and ultimately dying from a progressive incurable condition like MS, CF or MND. There is no issue of free will there. It's reasonable to ask why an omnipotent, beneficent god allows such things to happen.

If your garden centre is open on a Sunday...

Some posts are best ignored.

Not least because they give Christians the opportunity to go all trendy vicar ......

If science and religion are incompatible there would be no religious scientists

The same would also apply for medicine

But in both areas of work and research there is

JustAnotherPoster00 Are you a trendy vicar?

I see no reason why you can’t be a medic and religious. And there are a lot of jobs using science where there wouldn’t be an issue. I think there must be a conflict for research scientists, particularly physics. I think they must have to turn the religious bit of their brain off for the duration.

Please don’t mention Lemaitre or the list of Nobel prize winners!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins

Francis Sellers Collins (born April 14, 1950) is an American physician-geneticist who discovered the genes associated with a number of diseases and led the Human Genome Project. He is director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland, United States.

By graduate school Collins considered himself an atheist. However, a conversation with a hospital patient led him to question his lack of religious views, and he investigated various faiths. He familiarized himself with the evidence for and against God in cosmology, and on the recommendation of a Methodist minister used Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis as a foundation to develop his religious views. He eventually came to a conclusion and became a Christian after a "leap of faith" when he saw a frozen waterfall during a hike on a fall afternoon.[67] He has described himself as a "serious Christian".[28]

In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins wrote that scientific discoveries were an "opportunity to worship" and that he rejected both Young Earth creationism and intelligent design. His own belief, he wrote, was theistic evolution or evolutionary creation, which he preferred to call BioLogos. He wrote that one can "think of DNA as an instructional script, a software program, sitting in the nucleus of the cell".[68] He appeared in December 2006 on The Colbert Report television show and in a March 2007 Fresh Air radio interview to discuss this book.[69][70] In an interview with D. J. Grothe on the Point of Inquiry podcast he said that the overall aim of the book was to show that "one can be intellectually in a rigorous position and argue that science and faith can be compatible", and that he was prompted to write the book because "most people are seeking a possible harmony between these worldviews [science and faith], and it seems rather sad that we hear so little about this possibility.[71]

Christopher Hitchens referred to Francis Collins as a 'Great American' and stated that Collins was one of the most devout believers he had ever met.[75] He further stated that Collins was sequencing the genome of the cancer that would ultimately claim Hitchens's life, and that their friendship despite their differing opinion on religion was an example of the greatest armed truce in modern times.

millions of Christians have experienced direct contact with God in their lives or during prayer

And others me will tell you they never felt a thing in decades worth of trying even when they've been indoctrinated in Christianity from the get go.

“theistic evolution or evolutionary creation,”

Aka intelligent design.

religion is a personal belief many areas of work you are going to have to put that aside and also if you are an atheist supporting people who are deeply religious you also have to put your views aside

Faith is meant to be tested constantly

The teaching of religion doesn’t not always and mainly discourages questioning your faith

Back to the OP, I don't think YABU by being irritated unless the irritation is affecting your life in any major way and it doesn't seem like it is?

Some people need a magic man in the sky, some people need to believe that this magic man is testing his follows. They can't bare to believe that actually life is shit. And bad things happen to good people. With no reason at all.

The thing is, my life was fine for nearly 50 years as an atheist so I wasn't looking for a "magic man" to fix me. Since I have come to believe, a very terrible thing suddenly happened to a member of my family and it is ongoing and won't get better. I don't think life is shit though and never have as an atheist or a believer.

ClaryFray you also get many people believe If the power of positive thinking

Most believers and non are somewhere in the middle of both beliefs

I've yet to hear about someone who was an atheist for X number of years who hadn't originally been a churchgoer in their childhood.

I grew up in a completely non-religious family. I haven't even been christened. When I was 24, on the he back of an English degree in which I read a lot of work by people wrestling with their faith, I tried very hard to believe in god for about two years: I went to a weekly bible study group, church every Sunday, prayed etc. but I always felt like a fraud. There was simply nothing there.

Later, the more I learned about comparative religion the more I understood that the Jesus narrative was just another version of many similar older stories about death and resurrection, a chosen man who does miracles with disciples etc.

Now I just think of the bible as a collection of curated stories cloaked in effective poetry: they are a great jumping off point for discussion of the meaning of life but no more worthy of respect than Greek stoic philosophy or the cult of Mithras (to pick a random legend).

Sorry, should read "was an atheist for X number of years before becoming a practicing Christian later in like who ... " etc

I think there must be a conflict for research scientists, particularly physics. I think they must have to turn the religious bit of their brain off for the duration.

Not really. Certainly my religion does not collide with exposing the physical nature of the universe in any sense. Not public water cooler talk here, but internally, awe at the glory and mystery of creation only serves to fire my curiosity, and discoveries often serve to make me feel more like there is a God, not less.