What Natural Physical Principle Was Responsible

[Guest end3]

I believe the title of the thread speaks for the question. Thoughts?

[Brakeman]

Hmm.. I'm sure I'm not really getting the question right, but I'd say evolution first, to get me to a contemplating human, then the physics of light emission, so I could see to read and observe.

[Ouroboros]

"What Natural Physical Principle Was Responsible For Your Deconversion?"

 

I can't really say. I had lived with a fairly good understanding of the conflict of science and religion for many years. Since I come from a very non-religious country, I learned evolution and all arguments against religion and Christianity already in middle school. So I knew all those things for a great part of my Christian life. My problem wasn't really related to that because I had to live in faith because I believed, not because I had some fancy argument or reason. It came from inside. I felt it to be right. It was emotional more than rational. So when the emotion was gone, my faith was gone. Then of course all the knowledge I had in the back of my head started to come out, and I realized how dumb I had been to not see the truth.

[Mriana]

I didn't actually convert to begin with. I mean, I never went to the altar to be saved. Xianity was forced upon me, but be that as it may, my pets at a young age and I never actually let go of that. It's difficult to explain, esp to Xians.

[Dave Chan]

A lifelong question for the ages, to be sure. But some processes, some complexity just arises from simple rules:

 

http://www.math.com/students/wonders/life/life.html

[florduh]

Humans evolving to the point where some of us can reason.

[Legion]

I learned End. My understanding grew.

 

If you can tell me what physical principles are responsible for learning then you'll have your answer.

[par4dcourse]

End, I gotta hand it to you. You're persistent. You're going to continue to ask vague, leading philosphical questions over and over until someone mistakenly gives you a "ha, gotcha" moment.

You're like my black lab who stares intently at my dinner plate, hoping some little nugget will drop.

[oddbird1963]

Isn't the question so simplistic as to be irrelevant?

 

I think there could be a number of complex physical principals involved. But I think there are less than physical principles such as social, economic and political principals involved.

 

I think a complicated set of overlapping systems utilizing multiple natural systems could be involved.

 

So "which?" IDK.

[Shyone]

I believe the title of the thread speaks for the question. Thoughts?

Yes.

[Dagan]

I think the question is too specific. It's not like I learned about evolution and was all like "holy crap Genesis can't be true so therefore the rest of it can't be either!!!11"

 

For many years I believed science and the bible could co-exist in harmony. I could accept that where the bible and science didn't like up the bible was history or poetry and didn't need science to back it up, and I was OK with that.

 

My deconversion came about from reading the bible thoroughly, and seeking the answers to a few simple questions: Who wrote the bible? When? For what audience? Why? What proof is there that these scriptures are accurate?

 

The answers to those questions revealed to me that most of what I had come to believe about Christianity was not true, that what is taught in all Christian churches today is not what Jesus taught at all, and that there is a lot more evidence to prove Christianity is a made-up cult than there is evidence that it is true.

 

So the "natural physical principle" I guess was "thinking."

[godlessgrrl]

Reality.

 

 

 

 

As much as I'm able to figure out what that is, anyway.

[Franko47]

There was no physical principle. Religion and God form a system of existence within the mind, entertained by the thinker through consciousness. There came a point where I was able to separate the tangible and rational from what was magical thinking.

 

If the physical principle you're looking for is some kind of decision based upon nature, or materialism, you're barking up the wrong tree. The age of the Universe, evolution, quantum physics- none of these had an effect upon my deconversion. Even when I was a Christian (gosh darn, a real one, too) I already accepted these scientific notions.

 

Ultimately, nobody quits believing because they read a science book. I've never met anyone who quit believing because the theory of evolution became acceptable. To me it's just a practical method of nature that could be used by a God, or it's a mechanism without a God.

 

And why so cryptic about the question ? A couple of examples of what you're talking about would be helpful to some members who might want to comment.

[ghost_warlock]

Gravity.

 

If god was really up there in the sky he'd either burn up in the atmosphere or go splat on the pavement.

[Vigile]

You're like my black lab who stares intently at my dinner plate, hoping some little nugget will drop.

 

[godsfavoritecolor]

The answer is in your question -- the natural physical principles in the world.