We are brother’s separated by a common faith.
“Salvation is from the Jews”
Cool. Thanks for putting up the Carl Sagan essay. His wikipedia page is really fascinating. What a brilliant life. It sounds like he considered himself agnostic, but he made some interesting observations about nature and the laws of the universe that sound very spiritual, if not religious.
Gosh, I went to a philosophy of science lecture a couple of years ago on quantum mechanics. Just fascinating. You begin to appreciate that we humans may not be intelligent enough to ever fully comprehend our own world, but some of these philosophy of physics researchers are just operating on an entirely different plane. No pun intended. Haha.
Don’t worry. I forgive you. 
I have a good acquaintance from MIT who is nominally Jewish. I believe the last time he read the Torah was his bar mitzvah, and he was stoned at the time. He’s gone on to be a physics professor.
We discuss religion periodically. In his studies he’s decided he has no doubt the Cosmos was designed by an intelligent being who believes in symmetry, beauty, and has a sense of irony and humor. It is the identity of said Creator where he lacks knowledge or belief.
2 Likes
I can’t quote them off of the top of my head, but that seems to be a common theme among some great scientific minds.
Not that I have one. I just read some stuff from them and agree.
Actually, a study showed that 93% of members of the National Academy of Sciences were atheists or agnostics. However, another study showed that PhD science researchers at top Universities in the US were about 40% atheist, which was close to the number that said they has some type of belief in a God. So, as a whole, PhD scientists are far less likely to be religious and believe in a traditional God or supernatural being responsible for our existence compared to those who are not trained as scientists.
Also, Carl Sagan was a self-proclaimed agnostic. He did reject the traditional view of a God sitting on a throne in the sky, but was not an atheist. He thought an atheist could only be someone who has evidence against the existence of God.
That seems backwards to me. Are you sure about that? The same Carl Sagan who said (I’m paraphrasing here) that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” also said that an atheist must produce evidence against the existence of God to call himself an atheist?
Let’s explore that line of reasoning with some other supernatural examples.
Can you only declare your non-belief in sorcery if you have evidence against the existence of sorcery? I cannot say for sure that my neighbor is NOT casting spells, due to lack of evidence that this was not taking place. My grill cover disappeared recently, and I’m not sure what happened to it. Should I therefore entertain the possibility that he is, in fact, a sorcerer using magic to possibly teleport my grill cover into another dimension or on to another grill?
What about Bigfoot? Should the de-facto position be that he exists and leave it up to those who say he doesn’t to prove it?
I like the simple definition. Lack of belief is perfectly sufficient to call yourself an atheist. Attempting to disprove all of the invisible gods conjured up throughout history is really too much work.
True, and why bother anyway it’s only eternity that is at stake, sheesh how long could that be right?
How much time do you think I should invest into making the argument against Quetzalcoatl before I decide to risk the consequences of not worshiping that particular deity?
After reading through this thread a lot of people believe atheists/agnostics can’t get into heaven, am interested in hearing from those people on the pope saying they can get into heaven.
I don’t disagree with your argument, twojarslave. But here’s the quote from Carl Sagan giving his definition of an atheist:
“…is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists.
To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed.”
Thanks for producing that quote. I agree with his ideas, just not his definition of the word atheist. By his definition it is impossible to call yourself an atheist, and we lose distinction between very different views of the universe.
I don’t believe in God.
I don’t see any evidence of a God, but I think there’s a good chance of a higher power.
I believe there’s something out there, but I don’t know what it is and I don’t think religion has it right.
Those are all different, right? But according to Sagan, they are all agnostics.
Anyway, enough semantic quibbling.
I appreciate that! When do I have to get snipped?
TMI, Pat…TMI…!!! (lol!)
I kinda feel bad for those scientists who put all their eggs in the basket of astrophysics and quantum mechanics. They put forth a tremendous effort to understand, poorly, the makeup of 16% of the universe. There’s M Theory, Null Theory, Theory of Everything and then… Dark Matter happened. It’s been around for a while, but scientists have come to realize that something unknown, that cannot be seen, touched, heard, felt or otherwise detected is adding gravity to everything. Problem is, they have no idea what it is. They cannot find it and they have been looking a while.
“Pretty soon, it going to become embarrassing” said one famous scientist whose name I currently forget.
Then add to that Dark Energy, which if they know nothing about Dark Matter, they know less about Dark Energy. Dark Matter is a mysterious source of gravity, best guess is it’s a WIMP, some dorky kid with tape around his glasses who reads all the time and is awkward in every way and stupidly weak…
Well, no it’s a weakly interacting massive particle. But they cannot find it. All the massive millions of dollars updates at CERN are getting ready to try and find these WIMP’s.
They have no idea what Dark Energy is except they believe it’s a repulsive force that will eventually tear the universe apart.
There was a point just recently where scientists thought they had a good handle on the universe and all that, that makes it up. The choo choo train of the unknown came in and tore through the apple cart. Nobody ever claimed to know everything, but there was a point where they were starting to feel they had a pretty good handle on the universe, especially after they found the higgs-boson.
One thing these scientists are absolutely certain of, is that everything that exists is the result of these unknown… things… LOL… It’s true. Don’t take my word for it.
This is not really news, it’s been in Catholic Doctrine forever. Under the category of the un-evangelized. Basic premise is if you were in some situation where you were a good person, but for whatever reason you were not able to reach faith, though you tried, then you are not beyond redemption.
That’s a really short summary, but it would do people some good to search through the Catechism if they have questions about what Catholics\ Christians actually may believe about one topic or another. The Catechism is the authoritative teaching of the church, the Constitution if you will.
All these “Shockers” or “Whoppers” that the Pope throws down that floor people are no surprise to people who are familiar with the Catechism. It’s all in there, he has never taught anything outside of it. He may focus his mission on different parts of the Catechism then people are used to hearing, but it’s all there.
It’s free, online and searchable.
If you have a question about what the church teaches, why not go to the source and get it from the horse’s mouth, rather than through the hearsay of the media or friends who heard something once, or the old aunt who goes to church all the time.
I wasn’t saying it was news I was pointing it out to several posters who have said atheists can’t go to heaven. Also looking back on history I don’t think many popes were sympathetic to atheism, as Francis has been, this was also the first time I have heard a pope saying an atheist can still enter heaven, probably why the media reported on it. Also I looked at the section on atheism in the catechism and it doesn’t say as an atheist and are morally good you enter into heaven.
2123 "Many . . . of our contemporaries either do not at all perceive, or explicitly reject, this intimate and vital bond of man to God. Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time."58
2124 The name “atheism” covers many very different phenomena. One common form is the practical materialism which restricts its needs and aspirations to space and time. Atheistic humanism falsely considers man to be "an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history."59 Another form of contemporary atheism looks for the liberation of man through economic and social liberation. "It holds that religion, of its very nature, thwarts such emancipation by raising man’s hopes in a future life, thus both deceiving him and discouraging him from working for a better form of life on earth."60
2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.61 The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."62
2126 Atheism is often based on a false conception of human autonomy, exaggerated to the point of refusing any dependence on God.63 Yet, "to acknowledge God is in no way to oppose the dignity of man, since such dignity is grounded and brought to perfection in God. . . . "64 "For the Church knows full well that her message is in harmony with the most secret desires of the human heart."65
1 Like
I don’t know you, your background, where you are from or anything else about you. With that said you should invest enough time to make absoltuely certain that you are correct! As the consequences could be devastating should you be wrong.
That’s the best I can do on the Internet… Which as I have known for a very long time is practically useless relative to these types of conversations.
Good Luck
At quantum physics, dark matter, string theory, alternative quantum worlds and metaphysics.
I don’t have to go this far to find myself in WAY over my head, Pat. I admire the intelligence of the logic and philosophy of science people, but my mind tends to circle around much simpler mysteries. I’ve never taken calculus, and have an almost aphasia/anxiety related to math. That becomes very limiting when you start trying to really understand the natural laws that govern our universe. I think I’m too old to go back and change that. There are other things, probably much less profound, that cause me to feel that sense of awe or curiosity. I’ll leave metaphysics to the rest of you.
Could you give an example of this?