# God, Buddha, Shiva, Allah, Flying Spaghetti Monster, Jesus, Vishnu And Your Patient



## Sasha (Jul 13, 2009)

Do you believe patient's faith plays a major part in their prognosis? Do you feel that religious or spiritual patients generally have a better outcome or are more at peace with a poor prognosis? Why or why not?


----------



## emtbill (Jul 13, 2009)

Only in that religious patients may be more at ease and peace with a false sense of security that a divine power will heal them which may have physiologic benefits. That is, someone who is at ease may have lower blood pressure and heart rate which may benefit their prognosis. Whatever it takes to achieve that state will be beneficial to the patient. If it's religion, so be it. Outside of this do I believe religious patients have a better prognosis because of divine intervention? No way. If God was responsible for healing patients he would allow amputees to re-grow limbs. I think the idea of God is patronizing to the infinite complexity of the universe and biological processes.

It must be nice though, having that warm fuzzy feeling that God will make everything alright for the patient, that whatever happens is God's will and is no consequence of medicine. That is much easier to understand than the pathology of the patient's condition and is a major reason religion is so widespread today.


----------



## daedalus (Jul 13, 2009)

This is coming form a liberal atheist (me):

There was a major multi-center study a while back that showed ICU patients had improved outcomes when they or their families prayed for them. 

I saw this a while ago and cannot provide a link. Anyone have anymore on this please chime in. 

Whether this is purely the power of positive thought, or otherwise, we will never know.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 13, 2009)

> Whether this is purely the power of positive thought, or otherwise, we will never know.



Just to get this clear, I am an atheist as well. (Daedalus, I'm starting to think you and I are long lost dizygotic twins.).

I think positive thought has a lot to do with a patient's prognosis, and I think a faith that there is something "out there" taking care of them gives some comfort and the will to live. I'm starting to believe healing is just as much mental as it is physical.


----------



## rescuepoppy (Jul 13, 2009)

Where it comes from is not the most important part. What is important is that a positive out look will help a patient to have a better out come.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jul 13, 2009)

I learned it takes more faith to believe that this is all there is to life. I feel sad that anyone would place so much trust in just mere humans. That when one looks at a sunset or early morning, one could not believe in some form of higher power. The same as witnessing miracles that no man could had ever produced. If science was truly an exact we definitely would be healing more people. 

Laugh, if you want. I have seen prayer work where traditional medicine did not. I feel my faith is much more reliable than the majority of those that acclaims to be healers. Sorry, I have very little faith in traditional medicine and those that acclaim to be the wisest in it. I have seen the most famous of research to be only debunked and fraudulent. The most famous of "healers" are just mere humans that so happen to be having a better percentage diagnosis than others, nothing more nothing less.  

Are there concerned providers and great scientific minds? Yes; but that is only part of the medical care. The patient has to have faith in those providing care as well. You show me a patient that does not believe in the current therapy or care they will be getting  and I will show you patient that will not be responding to therapy. Even those that are in a  unresponsive state are usually labeled as "strong willed or determined", that makes a recovery. 

For every scientific study made, I will show you another one that disproves it. We acclaim that it is all scientific when in reality it is just a gamble that we use the most current and recent one that has a higher number. The best medicine today maybe the most lethal one tomorrow. It's just a little game, what is popular today will be dangerous tommorrow until 10 years from now, and regain popularity again. 

Many of you may not believe me, stay in the business for greater than 10 years and you will see the cycle.  

As one of the most famous heart transplant surgeons told me.. (he was Muslim)..."_ I am just an instrument, do you think I actually have any more power than that?"_

R/r 911


----------



## CAOX3 (Jul 13, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> I learned it takes more faith to believe that this is all there is to life. I feel sad that anyone would place so much trust in just mere humans. That when one looks at a sunset or early morning, one could not believe in some form of higher power. The same as witnessing miracles that no man could had ever produced. If science was truly an exact we definitely would be healing more people.
> 
> Laugh, if you want. I have seen prayer work where traditional medicine did not. I feel my faith is much more reliable than the majority of those that acclaims to be healers. Sorry, I have very little faith in traditional medicine and those that acclaim to be the wisest in it. I have seen the most famous of research to be only debunked and fraudulent. The most famous of "healers" are just mere humans that so happen to be having a better percentage diagnosis than others, nothing more nothing less.
> 
> ...



That paragraph couldnt be more truthful.

Medicines dirty little secret  I like it.

If I hadent seen some things with my own eyes in this field I would have never believed it.  

All I can do at some scenes is shake my head and say someones looking out for you.

Actually I say it to myself then take all the credit.


----------



## Maya (Jul 13, 2009)

It depends on whether you're talking about a long-term or short-term prognosis.  I'm an atheist, but I try to respect people's beliefs.  I think that positive-thinking and a belief in a higher power can have a short-term effect (ie. lowering blood-pressure, etc., like you said).  However, I don't think that religion can have a significant impact on prognoses in the long-term (ie. cancer, heart disease).

Although I try to respect people's beliefs, the problem occurs when people try to replace scientifically-proven treatments with faith-healing, when they have serious problems that require urgent medical attention.

You have to respect a person's right to choose to refuse treatment.  I can understand that some people are skeptical of medicine, when doctors push unnecessary drugs left and right, and pharmaceutical companies constantly advertise drugs that have a list of side-effects two-pages long.  It's unfortunate that that kind of irresponsibility can make people distrustful of medicine.

But ultimately, you can't wish Cancer away.  Unless by wishing, you change your behavior in more direct ways, like: taking medication, undergoing treatment, changing eating habits and exercise, and so on.


----------



## CAOX3 (Jul 13, 2009)

Maya said:


> But ultimately, you can't wish Cancer away.  Unless by wishing, you change your behavior in more direct ways, like: taking medication, undergoing treatment, changing eating habits and exercise, and so on.



So how do you explain cancer just going away.


----------



## Melclin (Jul 13, 2009)

Oh boy I can see this thread going south really quickly. This had better not turn into an Heathens Vs Bible bashers cage match. The question as I saw it has two parts: *their actual prognosis *and *how they feel about their prognosis*.

*Their actual prognosis*: Yes, regardless of interventionist gods sweeping down and plucking tumours from peoples heads, its well recognized that believing something will work as well as being happy/positive about you prognosis, will tend to improve your condition. We all know that one; placebo affects, lower stress etc. I believe that unless a person's religious beliefs gets in the way of their medical treatment (blood transfusions, denying treatment in favour of prayer etc) then I think it helps immensely (of course, as an atheist [once militant, now relaxed] I still think its a delusion, but in this case a very helpful one). 

Daedalus: I think the study you're referring to was one published in Archives of Internal Medicine in 1999 regarding prayer for pts. Have a look and see what you think, if you don't have journal database access, a free abstract can be found here: http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/159/19/2273
I seem to remember there being some considerable controversy over a study like this (can't remember if it was this one), and it certainly got brought up a lot in the old "A vs +" debates I used to have. 

*How they feel about their prognosis*: I seem to remember reading an article somewhere back in the old catholic school days about a study that discovered that religious people often dealt with death worse than atheists. I've been looking for that study for about 10 mins and can't find anything, but I'll get back to you on the matter if I do. 

The problem there, though, is that self declared atheists have often put a lot of thought into why they are atheists including the issues of death and dying. However, the average believer is less likely to have been forced to consider their beliefs critically; their religion is assumed, they grow up with it and have not thought out all of their views on life, death and universe. 

*I think the deciding factor there is the amount of thought and 'meditation' you've put into dying before it happens, not necessarily your stance on religion.* *Atheist and theist scholars, I feel, would both deal equally better with their prognosis than their uneducated and unintellectual counter parts.* It's just that atheists are forced to consider their position more often than believers because it is an anti-thesis, and a very controversial one too, in some parts of the world. 

As an interesting aside, I just read an article that I found doing a lit search for some other stuff, showing a clear correlation between religious belief and ability to deal with emotionally traumatic experiences as an emergency nurse. I didn't really look over it much, it was translated from some Hungarian magazine and I couldn't make much of it, but an interesting idea none the less.


----------



## Melclin (Jul 13, 2009)

*"For every scientific study made, I will show you another one that disproves it. We acclaim that it is all scientific when in reality it is just a gamble that we use the most current and recent one that has a higher number. The best medicine today maybe the most lethal one tomorrow. It's just a little game, what is popular today will be dangerous tommorrow until 10 years from now, and regain popularity again. "*

I know I shouldn't but I can't resist. God versus science aside: I'm very sorry to have to say this Rid because I respect you but this ^ is an old piece of faux wisdom that gets trotted out from time to time by those trying to make an uneducated, negative philosophical appraisal of science. And it most certainly is not science's/medicines dirty secret, CAOX3. More like science's greatest attribute. Accepted knowledge constantly evolves and changes based on evidence. Over time a knowledge base builds up and becomes more sedentary as it is backed up by more an more evidence. Yes studies are often conflicting, but over time as more evidence builds up, questions become more or less answered and new questions are asked. Basically, saying something like that shows a profoundly flawed understanding of the scientific method and the philosophy behind it. 

Usually encouraged by the media who constantly fallaciously report that "Scientists prove this" and five minds later "Scientists now believe the opposite".   ::


----------



## Maya (Jul 13, 2009)

CAOX3 said:


> So how do you explain cancer just going away.



Well, admittedly, I don't have any case studies on hand, and I am going to have to make a sweeping generalization for argument's sake -- whereas a patient's diagnosis and prognosis are very individual matters that rely on a multitude of factors in that individual's genetics and lifestyle.   

It is a very rare thing for Cancer to go into remission, much less disappear altogether, without any kind of treatment whatsoever.  But, if it were to happen, I wouldn't have any more reason to think that it was because of faith than any other factor in that person's lifestyle or genetics, unless there were a significant amount of research showing that to be the case.

The problem that I have is when someone has a very strong chance for recovery -- often with little risk to their health through medical treatment -- but they choose instead to refuse treatment.  Oftentimes they refuse treatment on the advice of an alternative faith-healer, when some of these faith-healer's are, in fact, charlatan's preying on the desperation of these people who are really very sick.  (Please don't take offense at this -- I don't mean to put down all types of prayer and belief.  I'm talking about psychics and the type of people who pull scams and know very well that they are not helping anyone.)

I don't want to put down anyone's beliefs.  People define their existence, their purpose in life, and their reason for living, through their beliefs.  In that sense, I think it is very important.  If someone puts their beliefs above their health and knowingly puts their life at risk by denying treatment, that's also a choice they make -- it's not one that I am going to judge them by.


----------



## reaper (Jul 13, 2009)

I can say that I believe in a higher power, but I am not religious. I do not believe in organized religion.

I think it is good for people to have faith. I do not like ones that fore go medicine, for prayer only. If there is a proven treatment that works, then use it.

That said, I think some of you that are just starting out in this field, will see things that will change your mind. The longer you are in medicine, you will see things that can not be explained in any scientific way! I have seen Pt's with stage 3 lung cancer, where all treatments failed. Multiple specialist tell the pt that they will die from it. Then it is gone, with no trace of the cancer! There is no explanation for it and Dr's are stumped by it. That my friend is called a miracle and something caused it.

I do not push anyone in that direction, but I respect their beliefs. That is all that counts in this world.

There are things that science or man can not explain or reproduce. Even the best scientist knows that there is more out there then can be explained!


----------



## Sasha (Jul 13, 2009)

> I think it is good for people to have faith. I do not like ones that fore go medicine, for prayer only. If there is a proven treatment that works, then use it.



I'm glad you brought that up! I just found an article on that. I think if the patient is religious, there should be a balance, not strictly faith and prayer, but their religious needs should be met to an extent.



> The longer you are in medicine, you will see things that can not be explained in any scientific way!



I think will power and a person's preception of their condition and desire to live for whatever reason is a powerful thing, that being said, I do not believe it's handed down from a higher power, I think it is depends entirely on the person.

Anyway, here's the study.

*Child Fatalities From Religion-motivated Medical Neglect *
Full Text Here: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/101/4/625


> Objective.  To evaluate deaths of children from families in which faith healing was practiced in lieu of medical care and to determine if such deaths were preventable.
> 
> Design.  Cases of child fatality in faith-healing sects were reviewed. Probability of survival for each was then estimated based on expected survival rates for children with similar disorders who receive medical care.
> 
> ...


----------



## subliminal1284 (Jul 13, 2009)

But you have to keep in mind also there could be a perfectly natural explaination of why someones health problems would suddenly disappear, We still have alot to learn about the human body so there may very well be a perfectly natural explaination as to why that occasionaly happens.


----------



## Tincanfireman (Jul 13, 2009)

I've missed way too many Sundays in church to ever consider myself knowledgable in the Bible, but I do believe in the power of positive feelings. We have all given O2 @ 1LPM via N/C to a patient with a 98% PSO2 as a pallitive measure to calm them. Now, we knew they needed that O2 as much as a fish needs crutches, but if it makes the pt. feel better and isn't contraindicated, there is no harm in my book. The same goes with prayer; it doesn't do any harm and it calms the person I'm treating. I have been asked to pray with more patients and their families than I can count. I've prayed with Muslims, Jews, a Taoist(!), and every Christian persuasion under the sun, and will continue to do so. The big caveat is *if it doesn't degrade/delay patient care*. I've told many families that they can pray, but I have a job to do and I can't delay care. Without exception that has worked for me. For the record, I've seen too much stuff to not believe in miracles, and while I may be a lapsed church-goer, my faith is strong and yes, I believe in the hereafter and a divine being. (also forgiveness, cause if I don't get it, I'm in a bunch of trouble...)


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jul 13, 2009)

Melclin said:


> *"For every scientific study made, I will show you another one that disproves it. We acclaim that it is all scientific when in reality it is just a gamble that we use the most current and recent one that has a higher number. The best medicine today maybe the most lethal one tomorrow. It's just a little game, what is popular today will be dangerous tommorrow until 10 years from now, and regain popularity again. "*
> 
> I know I shouldn't but I can't resist. God versus science aside: I'm very sorry to have to say this Rid because I respect you but this ^ is an old piece of faux wisdom that gets trotted out from time to time by those trying to make an uneducated, negative philosophical appraisal of science. And it most certainly is not science's/medicines dirty secret, CAOX3. More like science's greatest attribute. Accepted knowledge constantly evolves and changes based on evidence. Over time a knowledge base builds up and becomes more sedentary as it is backed up by more an more evidence. Yes studies are often conflicting, but over time as more evidence builds up, questions become more or less answered and new questions are asked. Basically, saying something like that shows a profoundly flawed understanding of the scientific method and the philosophy behind it.
> 
> Usually encouraged by the media who constantly fallaciously report that "Scientists prove this" and five minds later "Scientists now believe the opposite".   ::



Ever heard of Scientific Junk? Yep, you show me a study and many times I can show you a bribe or skewed numbers somewhere. Sorry my friend, I worked in academic research and there is usually a motive and reason to anything, as well as sponsors and funding of research grants that depend upon an outcome .(Ever read the amiodarone study?)  Do we find answers?... You bet & ironic many times it has nothing to do with the original study. 

I agree this is the best we have and can do. I am definitely not against Scientific Studies and one of the biggest supporters of such; but I am against some of the unethical process that I have personally seen from so called "Academic and Medical Mentors".  I have personally seen numbers skewed and variables change to meet the outcome that they wanted. Then to be published in well respected Journals and thought of as gospell. 

I do believe though as many; Science and Religion can get along and coincide. 

Wait till you been in medicine in a few decades and then inform me how much you trust most studies. Again, the majority in medicine do not know how to interpret the readings if they do read one. Even physicians sometimes are getting easily opinionated by a poor study that would never pass scrutiny on most professional levels.

One of the many reasons, I am so glad that statistics will be part of the new Paramedic Scope. Being able to interpret findings from studies and to potentially weed out Scientific garbage. 

R/r 911


----------



## Maya (Jul 13, 2009)

I'd agree with you that that happens, but juking the stats has more to do with politics and greed than with science.  It's unfortunate that that happens.  It's the same thing with doctors handing out unnecessary meds so they can get kickbacks from the Pharmaceutical Companies.

Have you ever watched the show 'The Wire?'  It's *awesome*!  Not EMT related (sorry, don't close down the thread.  I'm dropping it at that), but it shows how politics and administrative agendas get in the way of police work, the courts, and the school system.  I guess corruption filters down through every level of society, in that way.


----------



## Melclin (Jul 13, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> Ever heard of Scientific Junk? Yep, you show me a study and many times I can show you a bribe or skewed numbers somewhere. Sorry my friend, I worked in academic research and there is usually a motive and reason to anything, as well as sponsors and funding of research grants that depend upon an outcome .(Ever read the amiodarone study?)  Do we find answers?... You bet & ironic many times it has nothing to do with the original study.
> 
> I agree this is the best we have and can do. I am definitely not against Scientific Studies and one of the biggest supporters of such; but I am against some of the unethical process that I have personally seen from so called "Academic and Medical Mentors".  I have personally seen numbers skewed and variables change to meet the outcome that they wanted. Then to be published in well respected Journals and thought of as gospell.
> 
> ...



It's no big secret that most research has it's little biases here and there, some bigger than others. Of course there is good research and bad research. How to weed through the mess is taught in university as part of just about any academic curriculum; I've had two subjects on it so far with another to come. Anyone worth their weight in test tubes knows that a paper should have its importance weighted against things like who the stake holders were, who peer reviewed it, who published it, etc; and that no one paper ever really constitutes a proof in and of itself. Of course actually applying that knowledge when you have a major essay due can be more difficult  but I'm not sure why you think that this is all some big secret only available to the well experienced. Bias caused by internal and external factors like sponsors slows down the overall progression towards general scientific truth (it takes even more good research to overcome the damage done by the poor research), but it doesn't stop it. The answers do eventually come, and they come from scientific research, even if the original research into the matter turns out to be wrong. Don't get so hung up on which single paper said what. It's all about trends in knowledge and an understanding of what influences those trends.

Your original inference seemed to be that science is inherently fickle and its uses were ancillary to those of faith. That it's weakness lay in its fallibility. You still are, yet you also espouse the value of understanding it. Perhaps you are suggesting that the weakness lays in people's interpretation of it? If you are suggesting that people need to better understand research and statistics to overcome, or weed through the inevitable bias in the literature, then that's good but it is a far cry from what you were inferring in the original post. And what it has to do with the OP's post escapes me. 

Well its not particularly important in any case, I don't know why I let myself get drawn into these pointless arguments and fill threads with material the OP isn't interested in.


----------



## Summit (Jul 13, 2009)

I'm gonna die! Jesus, Allah, Buddha - I love you all!
-- Homer Simpson


----------



## firecoins (Jul 13, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> I feel sad that anyone would place so much trust in just mere humans.


My honest reply to this without censoring myself is that I feel sorry for people who believe is nonexistant beings claimed to exist since the bronze age.  These so called higher powers do little for me.  I think its more than reasonable to see and love amazing things without feeling the need to attribute them to a higher power.    



> We acclaim that it is all scientific when in reality it is just a gamble that we use the most current and recent one that has a higher number. The best medicine today maybe the most lethal one tomorrow. It's just a little game, what is popular today will be dangerous tommorrow until 10 years from now, and regain popularity again.


Science has proven the Earth to be more than 5 billion years old, the 3 rock gravitating around the sun and germs to cause disease.  All of this contrasts claims made by various religions to this day.  Just because we may switch between various medical protocols due to contrasting evidence doesn't make these ancient religions more believable.  At least Science tries to examine and re-examine its beliefs.


----------



## EMTinNEPA (Jul 13, 2009)

Just a few millenia ago, the sun coming up in the morning, going across the sky, and setting in the evening was considered some sort of supernatural, unexplainable event.  Now we use solar energy.  Imagine if we had never invented the telescope and looked towards the sky... where would we be today?  Fire was once considered supernatural, now we know how to make it, and how to control it if it should go out of control.  Look at how many things we burn for energy.  How many patients with psychosis or other mental disorders, or had just taken some mushrooms, were tortured and gruesomely killed because they were thought to be demonically possessed?  How many children have died because their parents refused to go to a hospital and instead looked to prayer?  How many parents have socially stunted their children for life by demonizing such natural processes as sex?  The bottom line is that science slowly and gradually explains more of the universe and how things in it work while more and more aspects of religion slowly become mythology.

There is nothing that science can't explain... just things that it hasn't explained yet.


----------



## DV_EMT (Jul 13, 2009)

I will note that there have been some miraculous healing that have occured in other parts of the world. As I noted in another thread, I am catholic and do believe in God and that he/she is a "Higher Power". I have heard from doctors in other countries that they some people have traveled to Medugorie (a place where a few (3 to be exact) see apparitions of the Blessed Mother. Now note, I'm not a doubter of God, and yes, I do believe in science as well, but when someone who has had cancer for a year and a half and has a prognosis to die by some of the best doctors in the world, goes to Medugorie and prays during an apparition, returns home, and is miraculously cured..... well then I say thats a gift from God.

But as I said, I believe in science and if something can be proven scientifically, then its true. but miraculous healings.... that's something that (I think) we'll never understand.


**on a side note.... not to thread-jack this one cause I like it

I will say this though. to defend religion over science. I went to medugorie, was present for an apparition, and left. When we returned home from medugorie, my parents had a rosary (for those who don't know what it is... catholic prayed beads). During praying with it, it just started smelling of roses. though there are rosary that do smell of roses because they're made of wood and soaked in rose petal oil, this roasary is made of plastic and metal. We looked online everywhere for "plastic rosary..... smells like roses" and to no avail... there was none.... Let science prove that one and I'll be impressed


----------



## subliminal1284 (Jul 13, 2009)

DV_EMT said:


> I will note that there have been some miraculous healing that have occured in other parts of the world. As I noted in another thread, I am catholic and do believe in God and that he/she is a "Higher Power". I have heard from doctors in other countries that they some people have traveled to Medugorie (a place where a few (3 to be exact) see apparitions of the Blessed Mother. Now note, I'm not a doubter of God, and yes, I do believe in science as well, but when someone who has had cancer for a year and a half and has a prognosis to die by some of the best doctors in the world, goes to Medugorie and prays during an apparition, returns home, and is miraculously cured..... well then I say thats a gift from God.
> 
> But as I said, I believe in science and if something can be proven scientifically, then its true. but miraculous healings.... that's something that (I think) we'll never understand.
> 
> ...




It could very well be a trick of the mind. When you look at optical illusions do you believe what you are seeing is actually how you are seeing it? Same concept. 

Power of suggestion can also play tricks on your mind.


----------



## Meursault (Jul 13, 2009)

sagesagesagesagesagesagesage
a...Why have you made this?...g
g...all productive discussion.....a
e...just goes here to die...........s
sagesagesagesagesagesagesage


----------



## DV_EMT (Jul 13, 2009)

subliminal1284 said:


> It could very well be a trick of the mind. When you look at optical illusions do you believe what you are seeing is actually how you are seeing it? Same concept.
> 
> Power of suggestion can also play tricks on your mind.



idk man, optical illusions are one thing. but sense of smell.... thats pretty hard to confuse. and for it to spontaneously happen.... as in.... outta the blue. I've never heard of any optical illusions that havent worked that magically start working.


----------



## mmorsepfd (Jul 13, 2009)

This conversation is evidence enough for me of a higher power. I think I'm going to like it here.

"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."  Dr. Wayne Dyer


----------



## fma08 (Jul 13, 2009)

My personal belief was actually stated quite well on an episode of House (just stating for the record, yes, it was what I was thinking before watching House, the show isn't my gospel). "I find it more comforting to believe that all this isn't simply a test." Then adding on my portion, I believe that what we do here, matters here. Just because we can't explain why some tumors simply disappear now, doesn't mean we won't be able to later. They didn't know how DNA actually worked or what it was back when Mendel was doing his experiments, but we could see the effects it had on living organisms. It takes time to develop equipment and methods to thoroughly prove or disprove a theory. Take String Theory/M Theory for an example. That is wayyyyyyy beyond our ability to prove or disprove right now, but, in 100 years, who knows what kind of technology and understanding we might have then. Granted, it is pretty easy to just write something off as either one of life's mysteries or the powers of some almighty being. But then again, I haven't really seen much proof of one either. I'm just a kid though, so what do I know anyway


----------



## mycrofft (Jul 14, 2009)

*A relaxed confident patient does better.*

Faith can promote that. Or, it can terrify folks who think they are doomed to perdition.
Religion (versus faith) can furnish social support.
However, if treatment is delayed or hampered by faith or religion, then, no.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

Show me how to make something out of nothing... and then explain to me how the entire world, the oceans, the universe, and every single life form.... in all its sophistication.... was made from nothing... I dont buy that just by some mere 1,00304050,0505684904.4040400506,494956996054 in 1 chance this world and life was created by chance... at the right split second the right chemicals came together and created all that we are... or wait... there were no chemicals present in the beginning... there was nothing... so what collided to burst life into existence?

Its easy to believe in what is tangible and you can put your hands on and gaze ur eyes onto. Faith on the other hand takes discipline, heart, and trust which is where the power of faith comes from... faith requires sacrifice and in return gains reward.

I've noticed there is a large number of those in science and medicine who are atheist. Being in medicine reaffirms my believe that there is a GOD and grateful there is something better than the tragedy, pain, hurt, and death I see. For it to all just go black would make life a real waste.  

God uses people to do his work, uses their hands, minds, and talents he grants to them to heal and comfort. 

This all is in response to previous posts and my personal stance.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> Show me how to make something out of nothing... and then explain to me how the entire world, the oceans, the universe, and every single life form.... in all its sophistication.... was made from nothing... I dont buy that just by some mere 1,00304050,0505684904.4040400506,494956996054 in 1 chance this world and life was created by chance... at the right split second the right chemicals came together and created all that we are... or wait... there were no chemicals present in the beginning... there was nothing... so what collided to burst life into existence?
> 
> Its easy to believe in what is tangible and you can put your hands on and gaze ur eyes onto. Faith on the other hand takes discipline, heart, and trust which is where the power of faith comes from... faith requires sacrifice and in return gains reward.
> 
> ...



So you'd rather believe in a magical higher power than a rational, explained and tangible answer? You would rather believe in that than chance? Just think of it as a lotto. One in a million but the circumstances were right. 

Where did he/she/it come from? What were they doing before, and how did they get established?


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> *Show me how to make something out of nothing*... and then explain to me how the entire world, the oceans, the universe, and every single life form.... in all its sophistication.... was made from nothing... I dont buy that just by some mere 1,00304050,0505684904.4040400506,494956996054 in 1 chance this world and life was created by chance... at the right split second the right chemicals came together and created all that we are... or wait... there were no chemicals present in the beginning... there was nothing... so what collided to burst life into existence?
> 
> Its easy to believe in what is tangible and you can put your hands on and gaze ur eyes onto. Faith on the other hand takes discipline, heart, and trust which is where the power of faith comes from... faith requires sacrifice and in return gains reward.
> 
> ...



That statement works for both sides


----------



## Maya (Jul 14, 2009)

Not to split hairs, but I happen to find it incredibly fascinating, and hence my *love* for science.  Which I suppose would be akin to some believers' love for God.

But... you can make something from nothing.  Scientists are able to create a universe in a laboratory -- one that continually expands, as ours is expanding now, *without ever* impinging on our 3-dimensional space.  It's what the Large Hadron Collider is for, in seeking the 'God Particle.'  M-Theory and String Theory are extremely elegant and beautiful.  Even though I don't believe in God, I can recognize beauty in the Universe.  Many would say that this is compatible with a belief in God, but I will resign judgment either way on that matter.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

To preface, I believe in the Bible as being God's spoken word left for us to follow throughout this time period until the return of his son Jesus Christ. 

To answer your question....
I keep things in perspective... we are mere human and when compared to God, we are much less intellectually. How can I or any other human being be smarter than the designer and creator of life? God is on an intellectual level so high and so much greater that we can never, ever begin to realize this vastness and some things we will never, ever be able to explain.... such as who was before God. 

I've asked myself that question and pondered it and it used to give me a headache honestly...lol... until I've realized there was nothing before God... God always was.... I have no idea how this can be... but I realize my rational is based on the concept that everything must have a beginning and an end which is just human thinking... just because something cannot be explained does not mean it cannot be. God tests our faithfulness by FAITH.

Read the book of Revelation and look at the world around you. Ask yourself if what is written in Revelation isn't taking place verbatim right in front of your eyes. The Bible isnt a story book of fiction.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> To preface, I believe in the Bible as being God's spoken word left for us to follow throughout this time period until the return of his son Jesus Christ.
> 
> To answer your question....
> I keep things in perspective... we are mere human and when compared to God, we are much less intellectually. How can I or any other human being be smarter than the designer and creator of life? God is on an intellectual level so high and so much greater that we can never, ever begin to realize this vastness and some things we will never, ever be able to explain.... such as who was before God.
> ...



I disagree! God simply couldn't have always been. There had to be some way for him to get created.

I think the bible is fiction, it has be rewritten and translated countless times and was written by men who claimed to talk to God with no proof that they in fact did... We call those people schizophrenics now days!

If there really is a God, why is he not apparent in hard tangible evidence to everyone?

And who is to say it's even God? Why not Zeus or Venus or Anubis?


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

You asked so I answered... Im not trying to convince... every person has to find out for themselves... one way or another.



> If there really is a God, why is he not apparent in hard tangible evidence to everyone?



He is... I see him every day I walk outside and see this world and think what an awesome body he designed. God loves... he does not force you... which is why people have the option to follow or not. This is where FAITH comes in.... it takes much greater love in a persons heart to believe in what they cannot see than what they can. 

Would you trust me to navigate you blindfolded in a room full of holes in the floor without knowing ne thing about me? Or would you just standstill and not budge because of your fear of falling? 

Or, would you trust someone you love with all your heart and soul who you know will not fail you or let ne thing happen to you, to get you around the holes and to the other side all while blindfolded?

This is faith... to walk blindly without seeing but to love, trust, and hope. If you can do this, you will make it to the other side. If you cannot, you will standstill and remain in that same spot.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

If I ever converted it would probably be to Pastafarian!


----------



## Maya (Jul 14, 2009)

whoa!  Those are GIANT meatballs


----------



## HotelCo (Jul 14, 2009)

Well, I thought this would be an interesting topic but, it looks like it's just turned into a God bashing thread.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Science contradicts itself.


Science says you can't make something out of nothing, and that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, yet the "Big Bang" theory is widely accepted.



Choose one or the other science!  Can't play both sides of the fence!


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Science contradicts itself.
> 
> 
> Science says you can't make something out of nothing, and that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, yet the "Big Bang" theory is widely accepted.
> ...



Science never said that matter can't change form or size.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

I find it interesting how people justify the non-existence. I been to some Atheist forums before, and they are so hard core in defending their position.... Atheists almost make Atheism a religion! 

If you dont believe something exists, I dont understand why Atheist go through all the trouble of defending Atheism.... what is there to defend if there is nothing? Its almost as if they feel threatened.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Where did the very first matter ever come from, than?


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Where did the very first matter ever come from, than?



Same place God came from!


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

The giant meatball created it...


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> To preface, I believe in the Bible as being God's spoken word left for us to follow throughout this time period until the return of his son Jesus Christ.
> 
> To answer your question....
> I keep things in perspective... we are mere human and when compared to God, we are much less intellectually. How can I or any other human being be smarter than the designer and creator of life? God is on an intellectual level so high and so much greater that we can never, ever begin to realize this vastness and some things we will never, ever be able to explain.... such as who was before God.
> ...



Haven't seen the sun turning black, the moon becoming as blood or the 4 horsemen quite yet...


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Same place God came from!



So, it's within the realm of possibility that matter never existed and POOF, just appeared, but totally impossible for a supreme being to exist?


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> I find it interesting how people justify the non-existence. I been to some Atheist forums before, and they are so hard core in defending their position.... Atheists almost make Atheism a religion!
> 
> If you dont believe something exists, I dont understand why Atheist go through all the trouble of defending Atheism.... what is there to defend if there is nothing? Its almost as if they feel threatened.



I find it incredibly interesting people refuse to accept rational answers, yet will widely accept what men thousands of years ago once wrote in a book without any tangible evidence that the universe was the work of a higher power.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

FAM08... give it time.... JC hasn't returned yet either.... give it time.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> I find it incredibly interesting people refuse to accept rational answers, yet will widely accept what men thousands of years ago once wrote in a book without any tangible evidence that the universe was the work of a higher power.



And without any tangible evidence that it wasn't.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> So, it's within the realm of possibility that matter never existed and POOF, just appeared, but totally impossible for a supreme being to exist?



I don't have the answer, I'm not a science major, but I am more apt to believe that than in God.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> And without any tangible evidence that it wasn't.



Doesn't work that way! If you want someone to believe your theory you must prove it, not disprove it!


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> I don't have the answer, I'm not a science major, but I am more apt to believe that than in God.



Like I said, science contradicts itself.


You can't say something doesn't exist because of some reason, but everything else exist for the same reason.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Doesn't work that way! If you want someone to believe your theory you must prove it, not disprove it!



Exactly.  And aethist have yet to prove a thing.


Just because you don't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

Rational answers according to who? you? Your rational does not define the universe or who created it. Its only rational to you  because its what you want to believe. 

I've considered other possibilities. I'm not narrow minded. Creation makes much more sense to me.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Like I said, science contradicts itself.
> 
> 
> You can't say something doesn't exist because of some reason, but everything else exist for the same reason.



So does the bible!


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> So does the bible!



Ahh.. so it's ok to say it when it's for the athiestical view, but un-ok to say it if it's for the religious view?


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha... so you read the Bible and found out for yourselve that the Bible contradicts itself? Or is that just what your Atheist friends have told you?


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Ahh.. so it's ok to say it when it's for the athiestical view, but un-ok to say it if it's for the religious view?



What I am saying is that you can't simply base your theory on the fact that something contradicts itself. The bible contradicts itself just as much as science! 

ResTech, I respect you very much. I think it's amazing someone can have so much faith in something and discuss it so passionately. It is truly a powerful thing!


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> Sasha... so you read the Bible and found out for yourselve that the Bible contradicts itself? Or is that just what your Atheist friends have told you?



I was raised Catholic, love! I did the bible thing for awhile.

And the guilt.. Oh god the guilt!


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

These debates are pointless, they all lead back to the same question of where did *insert either god or matter/energy here* come from? A question that neither side can provide a logical, rational theory that can be proven to be true.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

Thank's for the Love, Sasha...


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

My theory isn't based on the Bible.  My theory is based solely on logical thinking.


Science says God can't exist because that would be someone popping out of nothing, but then can't explain how the big bang theory happened, or how matter happened in the first place.  It's an argument of convenience. 


I believe in God.  I'm not overly religious.  There are just so many things that science alone can not explain, no matter how hard they try.  It's way too much of a coincidence to think that an explosion happened, and life just appeared, all in perfect harmony, in perfect design.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

> it's way too much of a coincidence to think that an explosion happened, and life just appeared, all in perfect harmony, in perfect design.



****** exactly! *******


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> My theory isn't based on the Bible.  My theory is based solely on logical thinking.
> 
> 
> Science says God can't exist because that would be someone popping out of nothing, but then can't explain how the big bang theory happened, or how matter happened in the first place.  It's an argument of convenience.
> ...



Actually the theory of the big bang is explained in string theory/m theory.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

"Explained" doesn't matter.  It's still just a theory, and a theory that holds little water at that.  Again, science contridicts itself.  Where did the matter, the same matter that exist throughout billions of lightyears of space today, come in to existence in the first place to HAVE that explosion?

And how did the explosion occur without a catalyst?


----------



## Maya (Jul 14, 2009)

Well, I don't really expect people to watch this, as it's a 10 minute clip, but this is an *intro* to M-Theory, a controversial subject in quantum physics.  It hasn't been proven yet, but that's what they're trying to do with the Large Hadron Collider -- they will be able to create a universe in a laboratory, essentially.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOkAagw6iug

This video is a very rough intro, and doesn't explain everything clearly, because it is a complicated subject and I don't feel that I could condense into a short forum post, myself.  The show, itself, is very interesting though and I highly recommend looking it up if you find the topics in the short video interesting.

M-Theory attempts to explain what happened before, during, and after the Big Bang.

I'm not trying to convince anybody.  I just think it's interesting.  I really don't think non-believers and believers can change one anothers minds.


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> "Explained" doesn't matter.  It's still just a theory, and a theory that holds little water at that.  Again, science contridicts itself.  Where did the matter, the same matter that exist throughout billions of lightyears of space today, come in to existence in the first place to HAVE that explosion?
> 
> And how did the explosion occur without a catalyst?



Not all reactions need a catalyst. And the matter came from the energy produced from 2 membranes colliding with each other. It's only holding little water since there is no current way to prove or disprove it. There's no way to prove or disprove the bible either. So again I say, these debates are pointless.


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Maya said:


> Well, I don't really expect people to watch this, as it's a 10 minute clip, but this is an *intro* to M-Theory, a controversial subject in quantum physics.  It hasn't been proven yet, but that's what they're trying to do with the Large Hadron Collider -- they will be able to create a universe in a laboratory, essentially.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOkAagw6iug
> 
> ...



Go onto the PBS website and look up "The Elegant Universe", you can watch it online there. 3 Hours long, but quite interesting.


----------



## Maya (Jul 14, 2009)

Cool, thanks!  Um, I think we're gonna get shut down soon..  It was a really interesting discussion though


----------



## HotelCo (Jul 14, 2009)

Yep. Because people can't stay on topic and discuss the original question.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Screw it, I'm making the 12th dimension:  The Donut Theory.


Before time, there were 2 super tiny groups of what I like to call, Donuts. These donuts are made up of millions of trillions of 2-dimensional objects, all positive in charge.

These "Donuts" never collided, like other theories.  Instead, they "rolled" away from each other so fast that they tore a hole in "black matter"


And the universe began.


----------



## Momof7 (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> So you'd rather believe in a magical higher power than a rational, explained and tangible answer? You would rather believe in that than chance? Just think of it as a lotto. One in a million but the circumstances were right.
> 
> Where did he/she/it come from? What were they doing before, and how did they get established?



She is not talking about a MAGICAL Higher power. She is talking about God. The Bible says "In the beginning God created". Pretty much black and white if you ask me, but then you would have to believe what the Bible says is true in order to to believe or even care. God have always been there according to this verse.


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Screw it, I'm making the 12th dimension:  The Donut Theory.
> 
> 
> Before time, there were 2 super tiny groups of what I like to call, Donuts. These donuts are made up of millions of trillions of 2-dimensional objects, all positive in charge.
> ...



Got the math to back it up?


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

fma08 said:


> Got the math to back it up?



1 + 1 x 1 = 4


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Yep, this thread is done with. The sarcasm is setting in.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Nope, just proving a point:   That you can't prove crap when it comes to this, using math and theories with no actual evidence other then the same repeated, and un-proven 'evidence'.



^_^


----------



## emtbill (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Do you believe patient's faith plays a major part in their prognosis? Do you feel that religious or spiritual patients generally have a better outcome or are more at peace with a poor prognosis? Why or why not?





Linuss said:


> Exactly.  And aethist have yet to prove a thing.
> 
> 
> Just because you don't see something doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



Here's something I wrote recently for a religion class in response to a C.S. Lewis (a prominent christian apologetic) clip that touches on what a lot of you are talking about:

We may consider that Jesus was simply mistaken in making his divine claims, or more likely that his words were exaggerated in scripture. So is it all a hoax? Jesus was not the first, and definitely not the last person charismatic enough to believe obvious falsehoods. This is covered extensively in The God Who Wasn't There. We have numerous examples of exaggeration occurring in the Old Testament. Furthermore, the gospels were written some forty years after Jesus' death, which is a significant amount of time for these events to be skewed. When we consider that the Jews in Palestine were actively searching for a Messiah, the argument for the exacerbation of Jesus is enhanced.

Another possibility entirely is that Jesus was a composite figure used by early Christians to promote their religion. Jesus is, after all, quite similar to other religious leaders. When we consider that elements of Christianity are found in other contemporary religions it does seem plausible that Jesus was a mere myth used by early Christians to sew together a sect. Either way, the pillars used by Lewis in his argument are sketchy at best. Lewis is trying to argue psychologically; he's quite the sophist!

So where does this put us? I believe Lewis' description of religion as a myth is adequate. There are simply too many unknowns in scripture. As it exists today the Bible has been glued together from many authors whose claims directly contradict each other in certain places. We know that large parts of the gospels and in some cases entire books (Judas, for example) were left out entirely! Lewis touches on this in the video clip. He says that Christianity isn’t any more likely than any of the other religious myths, but that it was the only one that came true in Jesus (I have already elaborated on why this is unlikely above). Without missing a beat though, Mrs. Gresham tells him this is cerebral thinking! Is it wrong of Lewis to think this way? Don’t theists act on faith, a blind belief in the unknown? In a way, this cries to Lewis’ atheist roots in questioning divinity.

Remember that in a way, we are all atheists. The word atheist comes from the Greek theos (θεός) literally meaning “without god”, but nonspecific to which god. Everyone is an atheist with respect to other religion’s gods, such as the ancient Greek gods on mount Olympus. Mrs. Gresham touches on this when she tells Lewis that these gods are wacky. Let me give you another example. Do you believe in unicorns or the flying spaghetti monster? You might say that you don’t know, but that’s not the question. We don’t know if they exist or not, but you can still believe is they do or do not exist without knowing for sure, but do you know regardless of your knowledge? Most people would say no, and that would be an atheist response. You can say that you can’t know if these things exist but it’s evident you don’t believe in them. The argument for God is equally irrational, but Christians seem to believe that one God exists from the plethora of gods, although it falls to the same logic as unicorns described above. Atheists simply take this thought process a step further, and say that no gods exist, which is the most logical outcome. I think Lewis realizes this and it is mirrored in the film clip, as he seems quite timid of his beliefs having just reconverted to Christianity.


----------



## emtbill (Jul 14, 2009)

ResTech said:


> Sasha... so you read the Bible and found out for yourselve that the Bible contradicts itself? Or is that just what your Atheist friends have told you?



http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Nope, just proving a point:   That you can't prove crap when it comes to this, using math and theories with no actual evidence other then the same repeated, and un-proven 'evidence'.
> 
> 
> 
> ^_^



Like I said earlier


----------



## mmorsepfd (Jul 14, 2009)

I don't really know the rules around here but I would hope the thread wouldn't be shut down because of some sarcasm.

Anyway, it is my belief that the answers to everybody's questions will be answered eventually, and I for one am in no rush to find out.

I don't think we are capable in our present form to understand all of the answers, we are here to learn, improve and move on.

I have enjoysd reading everybodies take on things, I can't wait for the political thread!


----------



## Meursault (Jul 14, 2009)

mmorsepfd said:


> I don't really know the rules around here but I would hope the thread wouldn't be shut down because of some sarcasm.



No such luck. Looks like I have to work harder.


----------



## Momof7 (Jul 14, 2009)

mmorsepfd said:


> I don't really know the rules around here but I would hope the thread wouldn't be shut down because of some sarcasm.
> 
> Anyway, it is my belief that the answers to everybody's questions will be answered eventually, and I for one am in no rush to find out.
> 
> ...



Oh my gosh that will be worse!!! I have just one quick observation... For as many people in the world who do not believe in God, they sure don't have any problem using is name when they talk. Why don't people go around and say  "Oh my Big Bang theory"

The answer is because I think they really do believe in God they just don't want to admit it. Because if they did they would have to become accountable for there actions. 

Someone said that he or she needed to see to believe. Really? Can you see the air that you breath? No, but you enjoy the benifits of it and you can see it move things. Such is God, you can't see him but you can see him through what he has created, Look in the mirror!!!


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jul 14, 2009)

"_Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.".._Albert Einstein


----------



## reaper (Jul 14, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> "_Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.".._Albert Einstein



Come on Rid, you know that no one would listen to that guy, he was an idiot!


----------



## Momof7 (Jul 14, 2009)

I hate that word religion.  It can mean so many things to so many people. Kind of like the word Christian. Everyone seems to be one just ask em. LOL


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Momof7 said:


> Oh my gosh that will be worse!!! I have just one quick observation... For as many people in the world who do not believe in God, they sure don't have any problem using is name when they talk. Why don't people go around and say  "Oh my Big Bang theory"
> 
> The answer is because I think they really do believe in God they just don't want to admit it. Because if they did they would have to become accountable for there actions.
> 
> Someone said that he or she needed to see to believe. Really? Can you see the air that you breath? No, but you enjoy the benifits of it and you can see it move things. Such is God, you can't see him but you can see him through what he has created, Look in the mirror!!!



Or "oh my god" is a phrase that's been ingrained into our verbal culture. Is it sad if I see a sperm and an egg when I look in the mirror??


----------



## Maya (Jul 14, 2009)

You can have a code of ethics and a sense of accountability without believing in God.  I take my notions of right or wrong from Philosophy.  I think that I am actually harder on myself than some (maybe not all) religious people, in terms of the standards to which I hold my actions.

I believe that I only have this life.  If I do something wrong, I deal with the immediate consequences in this lifetime.  I can't do something wrong and then ask forgiveness of God, because I don't believe that there is anyone to forgive me for my sins.

I also don't believe in an absolute 'right' or 'wrong.'  Life is too complicated for that, but I do try to live by Utilitarianism (greatest good for the greatest number of people -- although that argument does not *always* work.)  I also, to some extent, follow Existentialism, which can have several different logical outcomes.  There is a lot of cruelty, pain, and injustice in the world.  I don't believe that there is a meaning to life -- *except* for the meaning you create.  How can there be a divine purpose for warfare, genocide, or child-abuse?  The meaning I give my life is to try to act justly, help others as much as I can, and try to make the world a better place.

I respect your beliefs in God, but even though I don't believe in God, I am able to follow a code of ethics and to maintain a sense of accountability for my actions.


----------



## Momof7 (Jul 14, 2009)

You are right that phrase has been said since the beginning of time  And as far as what you see, yep that is sad. God created you in His image. You are way more then just an egg and a sperm.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

> The answer is because I think they really do believe in God they just don't want to admit it. Because if they did they would have to become accountable for there actions.



Wrong. I use oh my god all the time. I accept accountability for all my actions, I think it's opposite. Without God, no one could claim anything was God's will, or it was that way because of God!

I use "oh my god" because it's what my friends used in high school, middle school, elementary school. It has no meaning to me!


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Momof7 said:


> You are right that phrase has been said since the beginning of time  And as far as what you see, yep that is sad. God created you in His image. You are way more then just an egg and a sperm.



Well there's a few other cell types in there too obviously


----------



## Momof7 (Jul 14, 2009)

So you don't believe in Heavan or Hell? So when you die you think that is that you are just dead in the ground? I am sorry that you believe that and if I thought for one second that me talking would make you believe any differant I would keep typing, but I don't so I won't. Thank you for respecting me and I will respect by not being a thorn in your side. If you don't believe in God or the Bible then my continuing to go on is pointless.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Look up Dane Cooks sneezing atheist.


----------



## fma08 (Jul 14, 2009)

Momof7 said:


> So you don't believe in Heavan or Hell? So when you die you think that is that you are just dead in the ground? I am sorry that you believe that and if I thought for one second that me talking would make you believe any differant I would keep typing, but I don't so I won't. Thank you for respecting me and I will respect by not being a thorn in your side. If you don't believe in God or the Bible then my continuing to go on is pointless.



I'm not trying to take you with me or change your beliefs, most of what I was arguing before was because of problems with their argument for a religion or against scientific explanations. I'm glad that you believe in something so fully. I realize that there is nothing to say definitively the world is one way or the other. It comes down to what people want to believe. Questions no one has an answer to (or proof of the answer).


----------



## daedalus (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Wrong. I use oh my god all the time. I accept accountability for all my actions, I think it's opposite. Without God, no one could claim anything was God's will, or it was that way because of God!
> 
> I use "oh my god" because it's what my friends used in high school, middle school, elementary school. It has no meaning to me!



Right. Same here.

I am accountable to myself for my actions. Atheists actually have a pretty strong moral compass!


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Momof7 said:


> So you don't believe in Heavan or Hell? So when you die you think that is that you are just dead in the ground? I am sorry that you believe that and if I thought for one second that me talking would make you believe any differant I would keep typing, but I don't so I won't. Thank you for respecting me and I will respect by not being a thorn in your side. If you don't believe in God or the Bible then my continuing to go on is pointless.



Why feel sorry? I am happy with my beliefs. I believe dying is just like going to sleep. But for a much longer time than my afternoon nap.


----------



## MSDeltaFlt (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> Do you believe patient's faith plays a major part in their prognosis? Do you feel that religious or spiritual patients generally have a better outcome or are more at peace with a poor prognosis? Why or why not?


 
Threads evolve and at times might stray off topic.  This particular one, I believe, has strayed so far it has gone left of the foul line.

To get back on topic, Sasha, yes I do believe a pt's faith plays a major part in their prognoses.  And here's why.

God is not a genie.  You don't rub on a lamp (cross) in order to get what you want.  You do not use religion and/or faith healing in order to make you "feel better".  Religion does not make or break your health.  You love for and of God does not get you to feel better, it strengthens and heals you soul by getting your relationship with stronger and closer.  Period.  Nothing more.  Faith is an action verb.  It is also not something you feel, think, guess, wonder, or hope.  It is something you *know*.  And those with a healthy soul, my dear, have a shot at a better chance of healing than those that do not. 

There's no secret to it, hon.  It is just that simple.


----------



## firecoins (Jul 14, 2009)

MSDeltaFlt said:


> God is not a genie. [


 Well, not in your religion. He, She or them might be in someone else's.



It is just that simple.[/QUOTE]It certainly isn't


----------



## Tincanfireman (Jul 14, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> Well, I thought this would be an interesting topic but, it looks like it's just turned into a God bashing thread.


 
There are passionate beliefs on both sides of the fence, and while I am firmly in the believer camp, I think it's interesting to hear other's opinions. Now, as far as my passion, that would be chocolate chip ice cream...


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

Tincanfireman said:


> There are passionate beliefs on both sides of the fence



Isn't that an oxy-moron?

A passionate atheist?


----------



## EMTinNEPA (Jul 14, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> "_Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.".._Albert Einstein



A few more Einstein quotes...

_A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man.

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.

The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.

One strength of the Communist system ... is that it has some of the characteristics of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion.

I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.

What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of "humility." This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism._

I hate when people quote Einstein out of context.


----------



## akflightmedic (Jul 14, 2009)

Momof7 said:


> The answer is because I think they really do believe in God they just don't want to admit it. Because if they did they would have to become accountable for there actions.



This statement is teetering on the classic notion that atheists are immoral and heathens in their behavior, a horrible fallacy in this debate as it is not true.

My only comment to that is this....If it takes religion to be accountable for all YOUR actions, then by all means...PLEASE stay religious and never leave the faith, as it keeps me and my family safe. I mean without god in your life, you would be raping, murdering, killing and thieving from me because you have no accountability to a higher power for your actions...

See how illogical the quoted comment is?

I said it before and I say it again..morality and all the wonderful qualities associated with being a good person (kindness, empathy, passion, love of fellow man, etc) are all INDEPENDENT of religion. These qualities existed BEFORE Christianity and they exist today in countries/communities that have never had exposure to religion or this type of Judeo Christian belief...

Below is a definition of Atheism, please note the second paragraph:

The following definition of atheism is drawn from a 1959 lawsuit initiated by a family who challenged prayer recitation in a public school.  Murray v. Curlett was a landmark in American jurisprudence on behalf of our First Amendment rights.

"Your petitioners are Atheists, and they define their lifestyle as follows.  An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god.  An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now, here on earth, for all men together to enjoy.  An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it.  An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help to reach a life of fulfillment."

Atheism may also be defined as the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a lifestyle and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jul 14, 2009)

EMTinNEPA said:


> A few more Einstein quotes...
> 
> _A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty - it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man.
> 
> ...





Ever read very many biographies of Einstein? Did you know when he was younger he attended a Catholic school as the only Jewish student? Even though his parents very secular he maintained his zeal for Judaism. He observed Jewish religious holidays and scripture in every detail as per his sister. He even composed his own hymns and for the "Glorification of God", which he sang to himself. 

Alike other myths about Einstein that many attempt to make known that supposedly failed  mathametics but in reality he was far above average and by the age of 12 already started solving complicated mathametical problems.


----------



## Tincanfireman (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Isn't that an oxy-moron?
> 
> A passionate atheist?


 
Touche'...you got me there.  How about "passionate in the belief that there is nothing to believe?"


----------



## EMTinNEPA (Jul 14, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> Ever read very many biographies of Einstein? Did you know when he was younger he attended a Catholic school as the only Jewish student? Even though his parents very secular he maintained his zeal for Judaism. He observed Jewish religious holidays and scripture in every detail as per his sister. He even composed his own hymns and for the "Glorification of God", which he sang to himself.
> 
> Alike other myths about Einstein that many attempt to make known that supposedly failed  mathametics but in reality he was far above average and by the age of 12 already started solving complicated mathametical problems.



And?  I went to church for the first 17 years of my life, every Sunday.  What one believes in their youth can drastically change upon reaching adulthood.  An I still have an appreciation for Catholicism. I have an appreciation for many religions... doesn't make them true.  And yes, I still observe Catholic holidays, but in a purely traditional sense.

And also, who needs to read biographies when you have quotes from the man himself?


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Isn't that an oxy-moron?
> 
> A passionate atheist?


Just because you do not believe in a diety, does not imply you have nothing to be passionate about.  I hate when people assume that "atheist" = "apathy" or a total lack of beliefs.  



Sincerely,

USAFMEDIC45, someone who had planned on becoming a Presbyterian minister but became an atheist because of something that happened on duty and now is working towards becoming an Episcopal deacon.


----------



## firecoins (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> Isn't that an oxy-moron?
> 
> A passionate atheist?



no actually its only an oxy moron for people who believe athists to lack passion.


----------



## Ridryder911 (Jul 14, 2009)

I guess my point is not to criticize, just feel sad. Sad that so many actually believe that they believe that this is all there is. Geez.. I would hope not. Concerned, because so many then must not believe that a person has no soul either. 

The great point is as a Christian, I do understand that is your right to choose. Even if the chance I was wrong (but I really don't believe I am ) what have I lost? Teachings to love one another, to have a faith that one can conquer obstacles,to be faithful to those you love, be honest and not lie, observe a day of rest. To have some morale guidance that does not go against the laws of nature or condone lifestyles that might cause regrets later. No it's true; one does not have to have faith to exemplify these things, but I personally have comfort and reassurance. 

I realize that I am no better than anyone else, part of the responsibility of having faith. Know, that even though I do wrong, I can be forgiven (with the acknowledgement of admittance and strength to change) for my faults. 

So what have I lost? Any regrets.. No. Again to each his own, but just what if?.... 

All of this will be solved someday, we all will die and yes that even includes you.  If one chooses not to, so be it. You had been informed and made your own decision. I don't believe in attempting to "thump" anything into someone. 

I ask not to label Christians as right wing wackos or unintelligent, non-scientific when that is not true (as many Universities are faith founded and funded). The same as atheist as being labeled cold hearted, non caring individuals. 

R/r 911


----------



## firecoins (Jul 14, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> Did you know when he was younger he attended a Catholic school as the only Jewish student?


Having attended catholic school as a non catholic doesn't mean Einstein endorsed the Roman Catholic church.  



> Even though his parents very secular he maintained his zeal for Judaism


 Even though I am atheist, I maintain enthusiam for my Jewish roots. I am a big supporter of Israel.


----------



## EMTinNEPA (Jul 14, 2009)

Ridryder911 said:


> Even if the chance I was wrong (but I really don't believe I am ) what have I lost?



Ye 'Ole Pascal's Wager...

Rid, just for the sake of debate, let's explore this age-old idea.

The idea behind Pascal's Wager is as follows: If I believe in God, and there is a God, awesome!  If I believe in God and there is no God, I didn't lose anything.  If I don't believe in God and there is no God, I didn't lose anything.  If I don't believe in God and there IS a God... oh crap!

I propose a new variable to break the false dichotomy of God or no God: different Gods.

On the other side of death, you are just as likely to find Zeus, Thor, Krishna, Odin, Hades, Allah, Joseph Smith, or a rhinoceros surfing on the rings of Saturn.  What if you're worshiping the wrong one?

And the point of this question is not to instigate, but to promote intelligent discussion and new ways of thinking.


----------



## HotelCo (Jul 14, 2009)

emtbill said:


> http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html



Have you, personally, gone through those passages and read through them, to get the context of the passage? Or did you just google "Bible contradictions" and paste what came up? For some reason I'm leaning toward the latter.


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

Many Atheist like to alter context and not take time to fully study the Bible and understand it. 

For example I write, "For today, the sky was full of great marshmallows, that made my mouth water to be outside"... (lame I know but spare me...lol)

What do you as a reader think it means? To someone who would know the author (me) would know the context I am speaking and what I am saying. To someone who wants to argue I am a delusional, crazy person, they would claim that I was hullucinating when I wrote that without taking the time to understand my context and the metaphors used to describe something. 

Translation: "Today, the sky looked awesome with the puffy white clouds in the blue sky. The skies and weather made me want to be outside".

Again.. lame but serves to illustrate my point!


----------



## enjoynz (Jul 14, 2009)

Well I just hope there is something, somewhere over the other side of this coin (world). Because the way people treat each other and themselves in this world..isn't working out so wonderful thus far!

If every person on this planet treated nature and each other with more respect. Then maybe, just maybe, there will be a future for our generations to come. 
Why else are the world leaders getting together for so many talks about the environment.

Helping your fellow man goes a small way...for some of us (only some of us), that is what EMS means. Know matter what your personal beliefs are!

Enjoynz


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

> Isn't that an oxy-moron?
> 
> A passionate atheist?



That's really offensive. Atheism does not mean cold, unfeeling with a complete lack of apathy, it just means they don't believe in a higher power.


----------



## HotelCo (Jul 14, 2009)

Sasha said:


> That's really offensive. Atheism does not mean cold, unfeeling with a complete lack of apathy, it just means they don't believe in a higher power.



I believe he meant that you're passionate about believing that there is nothing to believe in. He didn't say compassionate.


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> I believe he meant that you're passionate about believing that there is nothing to believe in. He didn't say compassionate.



Heck yes! I am passionate about my belief that there is no higher power! You think just because you have a God you can be passionate about your beliefs and we cannot?


----------



## HotelCo (Jul 14, 2009)

I never said that.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

HotelCo said:


> I believe he meant that you're passionate about believing that there is nothing to believe in. He didn't say compassionate.




DING DING DING we have a winner.




Sasha: Fantastic job taking the smiley face out of the post, to try to flip and turn a quite obvious joke in to something you deem 'offensive'.  Sasha and Firecoins fail at noticing the smiley face.





Anyone notice how atheism vs religion has pretty much the same reactions as vegetarian vs meat eater?


----------



## ResTech (Jul 14, 2009)

This says a lot...

http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c038.html


----------



## Sasha (Jul 14, 2009)

Linuss said:


> DING DING DING we have a winner.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You can have a smiley face and still be offensive. The smiley face doesn't make it okay to say it. It was a joke? I couldn't tell, because it wasn't funny.


----------



## Shishkabob (Jul 14, 2009)

My bad, I'll be sure all future jokes are routed through you before I post them.








So, back to the original post-- It shouldn't matter much what your religion is.  Make the patient feel good for the whole 30 seconds they decide to pray for, whether or not they are the same religion, or just religious.


----------



## usafmedic45 (Jul 14, 2009)

Children, stop fighting and go to your rooms.  :lol:


----------



## ffemt8978 (Jul 14, 2009)

usafmedic45 said:


> Children, stop fighting and go to your rooms.  :lol:



Too late...this thread had potential but has turned into a debate about religion so it is being sent to it's room.


----------

