Battle : Science vs. Religion

Recommended Posts

Yes, 'the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair and took them for wives.'

I don't have all the answers in my mind .. but I know they are in the book. Whatever the answers are, everything I learn of science confirms that God was an intelligent being who created all, and that we will find eternity a lovely place .. that is the comfort of believing the scriptures, above all else.

I don't think your getting what I"m saying. If scriptures were found, how does what's on the scripture compromise the legitimacy of the Ph. D. who translated it if it happens to be some weird belief ancient people had long ago? Besides, even if religion isn't entirely true, its the reason we have all the technology we have anyway. That may sound contradictory, but there was virtually nothing bringing people together and stopping them from basically being barbarians, until there was the fears and incentives of religion that is.

Edited by questionposter

• Replies 322
• Created

Posted Images

I don't think your getting what I"m saying. If scriptures were found, how does what's on the scripture compromise the legitimacy of the Ph. D. who translated it if it happens to be some weird belief ancient people had long ago? Besides, even if religion isn't entirely true, its the reason we have all the technology we have anyway. That may sound contradictory, but there was virtually nothing bringing people together and stopping them from basically being barbarians, that is until there was the fears and incentives of religions that is.

Community and culture was necessary for survival once the Garden was locked away. Humans naturally congregate if foir noit other reason than to survive the hunt.

False religion includes consensus .. consensus prevented science jnoiwuinbg theat the sun was the centre oif the solar system for 1,800 years (google Aristarchus oif Samos). The bible said in the old testament the earth is a sphere suspended on nothing (book of Job I think it is). New Testament tells us to love God with all our minds .. God is truth .. use all our minds to love truth is not a bad commandment, but sciuentuifuic consensus says, 'no need to reconsider, we have the truth." Blame false science for delay.

Share on other sites

Community and culture was necessary for survival once the Garden was locked away. Humans naturally congregate if foir noit other reason than to survive the hunt.

False religion includes consensus .. consensus prevented science jnoiwuinbg theat the sun was the centre oif the solar system for 1,800 years (google Aristarchus oif Samos). The bible said in the old testament the earth is a sphere suspended on nothing (book of Job I think it is). New Testament tells us to love God with all our minds .. God is truth .. use all our minds to love truth is not a bad commandment, but sciuentuifuic consensus says, 'no need to reconsider, we have the truth." Blame false science for delay.

I call you on this, no where in the bible does it state the earth is a sphere, show us where the bible says the earth is a sphere. You made the claim now show us the proof. Science did not hold back knowledge of the earth orbiting the sun, it was religion that did this mainly because religion backed up a false idea because it supported what the bible claims about the earth. The bible says the earth is a flat disc covered by a crystal dome and the flat disc of the earth was supported by pillars in the deep. You can believe anything you want but if you are going to make claims, even in the religion forum, you have to back them up....

Share on other sites

Besides, even if religion isn't entirely true, its the reason we have all the technology we have anyway. That may sound contradictory, but there was virtually nothing bringing people together and stopping them from basically being barbarians, until there was the fears and incentives of religion that is.

I know this is often repeated as if it were fact, but it's not. The much more accurate explanation is that social cooperation proved to have a much more dramatic effect on reproductive success than did pure focus on individual selfishness. You can see this quite clearly with a quick study of game theory.

We've long existed in cooperative tribes and packs for hunting, this group behavior and success expanded with the advent of agriculture and farming, and all of that social cooperation proved to be rather successful, so got selected for. It's really that simple, and there's no need for magical sky pixies to understand it.

Suggesting that somehow none of this was possible without the fear of god injected by religion is a bit like saying my computer cannot operate without little fairies flying around inside of it. It's rubbish, and really adds nothing to the truth of the matter except unnecessary obfuscation and myth.

Share on other sites

In addition to iNow's post that argument would imply that those without religion are morally better than religious people due to the fact they don't have the incentives to avoid immoral behavior. Although some anti-religious people would love that, it simply isn't true. People are inclined to behave within social mores with or without religion.

Not to mention that religious wars have been the most deadly in terms of body count next to WWI and WWII. And if the OT is to be taken at face value, it's a book of genocide after genocide.

Share on other sites

Community and culture was necessary for survival once the Garden was locked away. Humans naturally congregate if foir noit other reason than to survive the hunt.

Humans naturally congregate, but what also can naturally happen is a little story called Lord of the Flies.

Edited by questionposter
Share on other sites

I call you on this, no where in the bible does it state the earth is a sphere, show us where the bible says the earth is a sphere. You made the claim now show us the proof. Science did not hold back knowledge of the earth orbiting the sun, it was religion that did this mainly because religion backed up a false idea because it supported what the bible claims about the earth. The bible says the earth is a flat disc covered by a crystal dome and the flat disc of the earth was supported by pillars in the deep. You can believe anything you want but if you are going to make claims, even in the religion forum, you have to back them up....

You could at least follow your own advice and provide a url to support your claim of the flat disc which I KNOW is not in the bible.

This scripture is the best I can do right now.

Isa 40:22[it is] he that sitteth 3427 upon the circle 2329 of the earth 776

It just says that what we can know of God we can know through the study of natural phenomena.

Yes, that's what the scripture says indeed. If we can't truat nature, who can we trust.

Humans naturally congregate, but what also can naturally happen is a little story called Lord of the Flies.

Let's not forget WW2. "Love of money is the root of all evil," saith the Lord.

Let's alsonot forget elementary school cliques.

Share on other sites

A circle is not a sphere and the earth is not spherical anyway. If God made the Earth then why can't he understand kindergarten level geometry?

Share on other sites

First of all the Roman Catholic 'church' was an organization preceeded by about 300 years by the true Christian church which began in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, therefore anything the Roman Catholic organization did or does should not reflect on the Christian church or teachings.

Oh. You represent THE TRUE CHURCH. I didn't realize that. My bad.

The Douay bible which the modern RCs use says that anyone who forbids to marry has departed from the faith, the RCs forbid their priests to marry so they are not Christian. All accurate translations include that same passage, I bellieve it is 1 Timothy 4, 1 2, 3.

So... the largest Christian sect isn't really Christian at all. Now that I know you represent THE TRUE CHURCH, and that your translations are THE ONLY ACCURATE ONES, I'll pay closer attention to everything you say. That's a pretty sweet deal you've got going there.

The Jesuits were and are the secret police of the RC organization. They are dedicated to destroying the true Church and true believers, which is why the true church is in hiding, not found in the telephone book or on the web.

The Jestapo?

Actually, there are tons of Yellow Page listing for "true" churches. In fact, most of them claim to have "the truth". Some even claim to have "the only true church". You guys should get a lawyer and see about that copyright infringement. You could be as rich as those Catholic un-Christians.

I have no doubt I could be killed for saying these things if my influence on many was feared, in the same way bible translators and bible copyers were burned at the stake, killed by the hundreds, etc.

Well, keep your eyes peeled, we wouldn't want you to get hurt through a misunderstanding.

The quote "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just ..." is false because although James was Jesus' brother he also said false prophets would say, 'Go here, or go there .. but the kingdom of God is within you.' There is no need to go anywhere. Possibly the greatest miracle next to salvation through the blood of Jesus is that the bible is perfect, that it is available widely, that if it were followed all our earthly problems would be solved, that there would be no more war, that although there would still be poor people they would be cared for.

If we follow the Douay bible, don't some parts encourage us to make war against unbelievers (Numbers 31:7-18)? And if we capture them, can we still kill the helpless prisoners? What about the wives and male children? Can we still keep the virgins for ourselves? I'm not really comfortable with all of that, but if the bible is perfect....

"The poor you always have with you." I use the King James bible, but the Douay also seems perfect in every word. It is all we need. Will it survive the attack of the modern age for saying things like 'homosexuality is abomination to God' ? We will see what the future holds. The haters of truth might never see that those words are in the bible, God might blind them to them so the scripture will survive.

Perfect in every word, as long as you're the one interpreting it, right?

By the way, Muslims hold that the old as well as the new testament are true.
Share on other sites

I understand Phucket (the name gives a clue)was a hotbed similar to Sodom and Gomorah, which should be publishing huge headlines saying "Aids Killls" but can't seem to see a connection despite the statistics.

Hold the phone - are you attributing the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami - a natural disaster that indiscriminately killed a quarter of a million people and displaced tens of millions of people across the entire Indian Ocean region to a few naughty backpackers in the Thai town which is actually spelled Phuket?

Edited by Arete
Share on other sites

A circle is not a sphere and the earth is not spherical anyway. If God made the Earth then why can't he understand kindergarten level geometry?

I did say that was the best I could do at that time. I don't own a concordance or a perfect memory. True, the earth is said to be pear shaped blah blah blah but it's still viewed and taught as spherical, except in the rarified circles you and I congregate in, the upper echelon of the super brain blah blah.

Hold the phone - are you attributing the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami - a natural disaster that indiscriminately killed a quarter of a million people and displaced tens of millions of people across the entire Indian Ocean region to a few naughty backpackers in the Thai town which is actually spelled Phuket?

All I know is that God is a righteous judge. Remember Sodom? Was that the result of somneone kicking a candle over during an orgy? I said nothing about a few backpackers. I have read that sex was the major industry in Phuket. But there I go again, spouting without confirmation or references.

Oh. You represent THE TRUE CHURCH. I didn't realize that. My bad.

So... the largest Christian sect isn't really Christian at all. Now that I know you represent THE TRUE CHURCH, and that your translations are THE ONLY ACCURATE ONES, I'll pay closer attention to everything you say. That's a pretty sweet deal you've got going there.

The Jestapo?

Actually, there are tons of Yellow Page listing for "true" churches. In fact, most of them claim to have "the truth". Some even claim to have "the only true church". You guys should get a lawyer and see about that copyright infringement. You could be as rich as those Catholic un-Christians.

Well, keep your eyes peeled, we wouldn't want you to get hurt through a misunderstanding.

If we follow the Douay bible, don't some parts encourage us to make war against unbelievers (Numbers 31:7-18)? And if we capture them, can we still kill the helpless prisoners? What about the wives and male children? Can we still keep the virgins for ourselves? I'm not really comfortable with all of that, but if the bible is perfect....

Perfect in every word, as long as you're the one interpreting it, right?

You place me in a position of honour I am unworthy of, obviously, as the church is hiding from me also.

The RC organization forbids their priests to marry, 1 Timothy 4:1m,2 3 says they have departed from the faith. At least you can check that scripture out, I think it's the correct one, but I haven't quite learned how to use this internet system perfectly in order to bring the scripture up right now.

Jestapo, Gestapo, Jesuits, similar except the Jesuits have more power than a hundred Nazi Germanies.

Yes, the yellow pages 'churches' claim to have the truth, so why don't they follow it? Why do they support war when Jesus preached clearly against it?

If the Jesuits thought I was a threat they would do something about it .. but what threat am I talking to a bunch of whacked out science fanatics? I'm no threat to the yellow pagers either as love of money has taken the fight out of them.

The Old Testament of which you speak foretold the New Testament. Take hold of the New.

'Sripture is not open to any private interpretation, but Holy Men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.'

Muslims have imperfect knowledge, but they do know that Jesus is the Messiah who will return and destroy the anti-Christ empire which I am quite sure is the present new world order but which also was the old world order.

Share on other sites

Aristarchus in Exile,

Muslims have imperfect knowledge, but they do know that Jesus is the Messiah who will return and destroy the anti-Christ empire which I am quite sure is the present new world order but which also was the old world order.

I am not a Muslim, but I did read the Koran twice, and do not remember anything said like that.

Mohammed considered himself the "last" prophet, and considered Jesus only as a prophet like himself.

Mohammed did not consider Allah had any associates. He used this theme to discount Christian ideas like "the father, the son and the holy ghost". Of course I am paraphrasing, just remembering the "drift".

In the Koran Mohammed tells the same stories from the old and new testament, and puts his own spin on them, calling the spin "corrections", pointing out where Jews and or Christians, had fallen into error. Of course this was what the Archangel of Allah had told him was ALLAH's truth. (could never figure out how an Archangel was not "an associate".)

But I call you on your interpretation of what Muslim's believe, to point out a deficiency in what any religious person believes. That is that their idea of what is true, is actually true, and other's are in error.

Science does not have this same deficiency. In science, what is true is what is evident to anybody and everybody.

(If they are willing to stick to the facts.)

Regards, TAR2

and Kyote11 reads like a scientist who somewhere along the line decided not to stick to the facts

Edited by tar
Share on other sites

he carefully evades any test that you can come up with for testing his existence. In spite of thet they have an edict saying that you shouldn't try to test him anyway.

Hmm. I don't doubt what you are saying, but I would like to have a reference to look at.

The Earth is quite clearly square.

http://members.dslex...uare_earth.html

Well, I admit that it isn't really related, but I have found the possibility of God and heaven existing in a higher dimension intriguing, where perhaps this stuff would make more sense? I did find that link fascinating.

Oh. You represent THE TRUE CHURCH. I didn't realize that. My bad.

So... the largest Christian sect isn't really Christian at all. Now that I know you represent THE TRUE CHURCH, and that your translations are THE ONLY ACCURATE ONES, I'll pay closer attention to everything you say. That's a pretty sweet deal you've got going there.

The Jestapo?

Actually, there are tons of Yellow Page listing for "true" churches. In fact, most of them claim to have "the truth". Some even claim to have "the only true church". You guys should get a lawyer and see about that copyright infringement. You could be as rich as those Catholic un-Christians.

Well, keep your eyes peeled, we wouldn't want you to get hurt through a misunderstanding.

If we follow the Douay bible, don't some parts encourage us to make war against unbelievers (Numbers 31:7-18)? And if we capture them, can we still kill the helpless prisoners? What about the wives and male children? Can we still keep the virgins for ourselves? I'm not really comfortable with all of that, but if the bible is perfect....

Perfect in every word, as long as you're the one interpreting it, right?

Share on other sites

You could at least follow your own advice and provide a url to support your claim of the flat disc which I KNOW is not in the bible.

This scripture is the best I can do right now.

Isa 40:22[it is] he that sitteth 3427 upon the circle 2329 of the earth 776

Yes, that's what the scripture says indeed. If we can't truat nature, who can we trust.

Let's not forget WW2. "Love of money is the root of all evil," saith the Lord.

Let's alsonot forget elementary school cliques.

This is like shooting fish in a barrel, the very passages from the bible you quote back me up and show you to be in error. The bible quite clearly states the earth is a flat disc covered by a dome covered by water, the passages in Job is not god telling Job anything about the shape of the earth it is Job talking about his own feelings about the earth, anyone who is in the open at night over the course of a few days can see the earth appears to turn about a point in space, namely the pole star. Circle in the context of the passages clearly means a flat disc not a sphere, yes the ancient Hebrews did indeed have a name for sphere, if they meant sphere why didn't they use it? I do not speak or write ancient Hebrew, nor do i know how to translate it into English, if you do quite possibly you could show where brettpalmer is wrong, but if you truly care about truth and not just satisfying your own version of religious apologetics I did find a short series of videos about this very subject from a man who does indeed know how to speak and write not to mention translate the original Hebrew, I will post this series for you to see (I assume you are just repeating what you have been told and are willing to learn) because what you are trying to put over on us is a well known religious apologetic. 50 minutes of your life to gain real knowledge seems a small price to pay, to me anyway but I value the truth over belief. There are four parts to the series, brettpalmer is quite detailed in his explanation of this idea. There are four parts to the flat earth videos...

Share on other sites

earth looks like a sphere so we give it the benefit of the doubt, but when we do calculations it actually has a bulge. it's just god trying to piss us off, he does this often.

Share on other sites

All I know is that God is a righteous judge. Remember Sodom? Was that the result of somneone kicking a candle over during an orgy? I said nothing about a few backpackers. I have read that sex was the major industry in Phuket. But there I go again, spouting without confirmation or references.

Firstly, you either need to brush up on your geography or actually read a bit about the natural disaster you've just managed to attribute blame for. Casualties in India, Sri Lanka and Indonesia outnumbered those in Thailand. Casualites were also suffered in Malaysia, Somalia, the Maldives, Tanzania, Myanmar, Yemen, Kenya and South Africa. Look at a map. Note relative geographic location to Phuket.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake_and_tsunami

Secondly, some basic knowledge on Phuket (pronounced "poo-ket" and derived from the Thai "buhkit" meaning hill, incidentally - bearing no relation to the English profanity pertaining to coitus): as an avid scuba diver I've visited, multiple times. I've taken my family there, (grandparents and all). It's the largest city in Southern Thailand, capital of Phuket province. Built on a major trading route between India and China. With over 3 million visitors annually it's major industry is TOURISM - it's renowned for it's beautiful beaches and as a stepping stone to the rest of the Thai-Malay archipelago. Most visitors to Phuket (like myself and my family) are there to enjoy the beach, the national parks on the Phuket island and some of the world's best scuba diving. If you ever visit, you'll find the average citizen of Phuket friendly, hospitable and not involved in the sex trade. However there is a sex industry with a red light district and unlike many parts of the world, it is highly visible. Most of the women involved originate from poor rural regions in Isaan province. Most of the customers of the industry in Phuket are foreign tourists.

http://www.knowphuket.com/

So what it seems you've managed to do is take a particularly visible part of a global industry (I'd bet that a sex trade exists your location and cite a high likelihood that if it's major European or North American city its sex industry is considerably larger than Phuket's), which in this particular instance is an exploitative trade where transient, predominately Caucasian men exploit a poor, uneducated local population. You've then used an extreme level of hyperbole to claim that this sex industry is the predominant industry in the city, which it is not. Then you've managed to attribute blame for a widespread, indiscriminate natural disaster across the entire Indian Ocean to the fact that this industry and its participants do not subscribe to your personal belief system and moral viewpoints... if that is indeed what you're trying to say, such a comment is potentially interpretable as ignorant, self righteous, hypocritical and offensive.

Share on other sites

Science is a religion so this argument makes no sense. In science we must put faith that scientists are writing equations correctly and correctly describing the patterns they see and that they are writing the correct equations for them and interpreting those equations and using those equations correctly. This is why science can change so much. Our previous thinking was just a belief, and new evidence suggests another belief.

Science is also a 'religion' because most scientists congregate with like minded people instead of remaining independant and open minded.

Let's keep in mind what true religion is: James 1:27 (Whole Chapter)

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

Firstly, you either need to brush up on your geography or actually read a bit about the natural disaster you've just managed to attribute blame for. Casualties in India, Sri Lanka and Indonesia outnumbered those in Thailand. Casualites were also suffered in Malaysia, Somalia, the Maldives, Tanzania, Myanmar, Yemen, Kenya and South Africa. Look at a map. Note relative geographic location to Phuket.

http://en.wikipedia....ake_and_tsunami

Secondly, some basic knowledge on Phuket (pronounced "poo-ket" and derived from the Thai "buhkit" meaning hill, incidentally - bearing no relation to the English profanity pertaining to coitus): as an avid scuba diver I've visited, multiple times. I've taken my family there, (grandparents and all). It's the largest city in Southern Thailand, capital of Phuket province. Built on a major trading route between India and China. With over 3 million visitors annually it's major industry is TOURISM - it's renowned for it's beautiful beaches and as a stepping stone to the rest of the Thai-Malay archipelago. Most visitors to Phuket (like myself and my family) are there to enjoy the beach, the national parks on the Phuket island and some of the world's best scuba diving. If you ever visit, you'll find the average citizen of Phuket friendly, hospitable and not involved in the sex trade. However there is a sex industry with a red light district and unlike many parts of the world, it is highly visible. Most of the women involved originate from poor rural regions in Isaan province. Most of the customers of the industry in Phuket are foreign tourists.

http://www.knowphuket.com/

So what it seems you've managed to do is take a particularly visible part of a global industry (I'd bet that a sex trade exists your location and cite a high likelihood that if it's major European or North American city its sex industry is considerably larger than Phuket's), which in this particular instance is an exploitative trade where transient, predominately Caucasian men exploit a poor, uneducated local population. You've then used an extreme level of hyperbole to claim that this sex industry is the predominant industry in the city, which it is not. Then you've managed to attribute blame for a widespread, indiscriminate natural disaster across the entire Indian Ocean to the fact that this industry and its participants do not subscribe to your personal belief system and moral viewpoints... if that is indeed what you're trying to say, such a comment is potentially interpretable as ignorant, self righteous, hypocritical and offensive.

I said "I have read that sex is the major industry." I have also read that many of the women you describe in the sex trade there would be classified as children here, which is why caucasians from countries like Canada where I live go there, to escape the laws of this society, to exploit girls and women whose lusts for material goods, not food, drive them to the streets in the same way lust for drugs and shiny material things drive Canadian girls and women to the streets to sell themselves. I will repeat that God is a righteous judge. With one-third of Canadians dying of cancer, and another third dying of heart disease, it should be obvious that God is not partial to nations, and that I am not partial to 'blaming' everyone else outside of my nation, and I will also repeat that I am not the judge, just the observer. Speaking of offense, a word in the King James Bible, 'abominable' is now the object of a court case accusing hatred and involving the homosexual-lesbian community. Will the King James bible be burned because of the word 'abominable'? We will just have to wait and see.

This is like shooting fish in a barrel, the very passages from the bible you quote back me up and show you to be in error. The bible quite clearly states the earth is a flat disc covered by a dome covered by water, the passages in Job is not god telling Job anything about the shape of the earth it is Job talking about his own feelings about the earth, anyone who is in the open at night over the course of a few days can see the earth appears to turn about a point in space, namely the pole star. Circle in the context of the passages clearly means a flat disc not a sphere, yes the ancient Hebrews did indeed have a name for sphere, if they meant sphere why didn't they use it? I do not speak or write ancient Hebrew, nor do i know how to translate it into English, if you do quite possibly you could show where brettpalmer is wrong, but if you truly care about truth and not just satisfying your own version of religious apologetics I did find a short series of videos about this very subject from a man who does indeed know how to speak and write not to mention translate the original Hebrew, I will post this series for you to see (I assume you are just repeating what you have been told and are willing to learn) because what you are trying to put over on us is a well known religious apologetic. 50 minutes of your life to gain real knowledge seems a small price to pay, to me anyway but I value the truth over belief. There are four parts to the series, brettpalmer is quite detailed in his explanation of this idea. There are four parts to the flat earth videos...

I get my information from the bible, not Brett Palmer or videos or radio programs or television on Sunday morning or even 'church' on Sunday morning. The bible is accurately translated into English so there is no need to speak or read Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic. You fail twice to provide a biblical reference to your description of what the bible says of the earth being a flat disc covered by a dome. I also cannot at this time, because I don't own a Strong's Concordance, locate the scripture where it says 'the earth is a sphere suspended on nothing.'

Aristarchus in Exile,

I am not a Muslim, but I did read the Koran twice, and do not remember anything said like that.

Mohammed considered himself the "last" prophet, and considered Jesus only as a prophet like himself.

Mohammed did not consider Allah had any associates. He used this theme to discount Christian ideas like "the father, the son and the holy ghost". Of course I am paraphrasing, just remembering the "drift".

In the Koran Mohammed tells the same stories from the old and new testament, and puts his own spin on them, calling the spin "corrections", pointing out where Jews and or Christians, had fallen into error. Of course this was what the Archangel of Allah had told him was ALLAH's truth. (could never figure out how an Archangel was not "an associate".)

But I call you on your interpretation of what Muslim's believe, to point out a deficiency in what any religious person believes. That is that their idea of what is true, is actually true, and other's are in error.

Science does not have this same deficiency. In science, what is true is what is evident to anybody and everybody.

(If they are willing to stick to the facts.)

Regards, TAR2

and Kyote11 reads like a scientist who somewhere along the line decided not to stick to the facts

My knowledge of what Muslims believe comes from Muslims, many of them I have talked with, they are unanimous that Jesus Christ is the Messiah who will return to destroy the anti-Christ. They do not believe Jesus is the son of God, as they say God has no son. In science, what is thought by enough people to be true becomes consensus, which makes it extremely difficult to receive research funding for anything outside the consensus. Aristarchus of Samos declared that the earth orbited the sun, that the sun was the centre of the solar system. The consensus of his day exiled him and his truth was not 'discovered' fior 1,800 years. Scientific history is chock full of such examples. Read what Linus Pauling had to say about Quasi Crystals.

Hmm. I don't doubt what you are saying, but I would like to have a reference to look at.

Well, I admit that it isn't really related, but I have found the possibility of God and heaven existing in a higher dimension intriguing, where perhaps this stuff would make more sense? I did find that link fascinating.

Scripture says "seek and ye shall find." God wants us to find him and makes it possible.

earth looks like a sphere so we give it the benefit of the doubt, but when we do calculations it actually has a bulge. it's just god trying to piss us off, he does this often.

Pear shaped so they say.

In addition to iNow's post that argument would imply that those without religion are morally better than religious people due to the fact they don't have the incentives to avoid immoral behavior. Although some anti-religious people would love that, it simply isn't true. People are inclined to behave within social mores with or without religion.

Not to mention that religious wars have been the most deadly in terms of body count next to WWI and WWII. And if the OT is to be taken at face value, it's a book of genocide after genocide.

There are no religious wars unless you consider love of money a religion. Wars are ALWAYS made to enrich a group. Sometimes religion is used to recruit murderers, it is true, 'let's kill those barbaric protestants (who happen to own some nice sheep pastureland.) Or, let's kill those Catholic widows (who happen to own some nice tenemant properties.) Of course, nationalism can be a religion too, so, in the case of WW1 and WW2, 'let's kill those Germans' (who happen to have the best manufacturing and technology and who put the anglos, canadians and americans off the world marketplace.) Now it's 'let's kill those dirty arab Muslims (who happen to own the oil.)  - worship it!

Share on other sites

Science is also a 'religion' because most scientists congregate with like minded people instead of remaining independant and open minded.

I hadn't heard this one before. So sharing ideas makes science a religion?

I said "I have read that sex is the major industry."

Which is false.

I think people took offense when you made a discriminatory remark about an entire population based on what a small percentage of them do for a living. They probably also didn't think it was very funny of you to mispronounce the name of the place in a rather crude way to fit your argument. And I also think people didn't like the whole they-all-deserved-to-die-by-God's-tsunami stance regarding a horrible natural disaster. I'm guessing it all clashes with your True-Church-Christian-love and the benevolence-of-Jesus thing.

Not that I know what everyone was thinking. I wouldn't dream of assuming that.

Share on other sites

I get my information from the bible, not Brett Palmer or videos or radio programs or television on Sunday morning or even 'church' on Sunday morning.

I see so you read ancient Hebrew?

The bible is accurately translated into English so there is no need to speak or read Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic.

No it is demonstrably not accurately translated... and there are so many different translations it's difficult to keep track of them all... to really understand what is being said you have to go back to the original Hebrew, I tried that as to be fair but evidently your little dog and pony show can't stand up to real scrutiny, religion never does...

You fail twice to provide a biblical reference to your description of what the bible says of the earth being a flat disc covered by a dome.

Isaiah 40:22

Job 37:18

Ezekiel 1:22

Genesis 7:11

http://hypertextbook.com/eworld/geocentric.shtml

I can't quote it all you'll just have to read....

I also cannot at this time, because I don't own a Strong's Concordance, locate the scripture where it says 'the earth is a sphere suspended on nothing.'

Then why did you make that claim? I can give you the scripture that you are trying to twist into your own special brand of horse feathers....

Job 26:7

And it is indeed Job describing his thoughts on God not god telling Job what was what....

Share on other sites

I see so you read ancient Hebrew?

No it is demonstrably not accurately translated... and there are so many different translations it's difficult to keep track of them all... to really understand what is being said you have to go back to the original Hebrew, I tried that as to be fair but evidently your little dog and pony show can't stand up to real scrutiny, religion never does...

Isaiah 40:22

Job 37:18

Ezekiel 1:22

Genesis 7:11

http://hypertextbook...eocentric.shtml

I can't quote it all you'll just have to read....

Then why did you make that claim? I can give you the scripture that you are trying to twist into your own special brand of horse feathers....

Job 26:7

And it is indeed Job describing his thoughts on God not god telling Job what was what....

I've said before, you simply don't have the gift of faith that it takes to believe that God can do anything, including translating the bible from one language to another .. even people can do that. But to follow your argument, where are you going to find a copy in the original Hebrew? (I do repeat, I do not need it.)

In newspaper accounts I always read Phuket or Phucket as being spelled that way.

"True religion and undefiled before God is this, to visit the fatherless and the widows in their afflictuion, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world." With your apparent study of bible and bible history you should be able to loate that scripture for verification.

Share on other sites

Aristarchus in Exile,

How could a Muslim believe both that Christ is a Messiah that will return to defeat the antichrist, AND that Christ was merely a phophet of Allah, same as all the other Prophets, including Mohammed? Seems incongruent to me. Do any of your Muslim friends that believe these two things, also post here, that I might discuss this with them to find out if you really understood what they meant?

I did read this thread and join in, in the hopes of voicing an "inbetween" argument. Apologizing for both sides, so to speak. However, you, as a banner holder for the "religion" side, are not doing too well. Most of your arguments are...well...as it was put, "like shooting fish in a barrel".

Certainly scientists of the past did not know things that have been discovered in the meantime. But always when new facts came to light, the understanding of "what was true" changed in an appropriate manner. Not to say that new ideas are not met with scepticism, but this is entirely appropriate, since many "new ideas" turn out not to fly very well. In fact, probably a lot of the time, when someone comes up with a "new" idea, it is new only to them, and has been thought of before, and tested for its workability, against the facts of reality. Some test out well and are incorporated, some test out poorly and are discarded or debunked.

When I was small I was intrigued with a piece of string and how you could put a loop in a loop and a loop in that one.

My mom said "hey, you invented crocheting!" Of course, it had already been done, but the point is, that each of us is not the first to muse about their consciousness, and consider their connection with God/reality/universe/truth/nature/existence.

Fact is, we are all mortals, and know it. Fact is we are not "other than" the universe. Fact is, there is nothing we can do, that evidently the universe is not capable of doing. (cause if we do it, we do it as a part of the universe).

In this, our individual connection with GOD/nature/reality/universe/truth/existence, is a downright certainty. No one is wrong to claim it.

Where you are so easy to attack, and where Mohammed is so easy to attack, is in the regards that you feel you have a "special" connection. That you know this GOD/nature/reality/universe/truth/existence on a personal level, and think that you are the only one, and everyone should listen to you.

You say "well I am not the judge" while judging, and figuring that you "know" the real judge, and how the judgment will actually go.

I am rather certain that I have equal access to reality as you do. To imagine that "your" understanding trumps "my" understanding, is somewhat dubious. Seems that any leg, either of us would have to stand on, would also be available to the other.

In comes science, to break the tie.

What is true to both of us? How do we determine such?

This must be reality. Let's discover its nature together. The facts are wonderful enough. We need not make any up.

Regards, TAR2

Share on other sites

Aristarchus in Exile,

How could a Muslim believe both that Christ is a Messiah that will return to defeat the antichrist, AND that Christ was merely a phophet of Allah, same as all the other Prophets, including Mohammed? Seems incongruent to me. Do any of your Muslim friends that believe these two things, also post here, that I might discuss this with them to find out if you really understood what they meant?

I did read this thread and join in, in the hopes of voicing an "inbetween" argument. Apologizing for both sides, so to speak. However, you, as a banner holder for the "religion" side, are not doing too well. Most of your arguments are...well...as it was put, "like shooting fish in a barrel".

Certainly scientists of the past did not know things that have been discovered in the meantime. But always when new facts came to light, the understanding of "what was true" changed in an appropriate manner. Not to say that new ideas are not met with scepticism, but this is entirely appropriate, since many "new ideas" turn out not to fly very well. In fact, probably a lot of the time, when someone comes up with a "new" idea, it is new only to them, and has been thought of before, and tested for its workability, against the facts of reality. Some test out well and are incorporated, some test out poorly and are discarded or debunked.

When I was small I was intrigued with a piece of string and how you could put a loop in a loop and a loop in that one.

My mom said "hey, you invented crocheting!" Of course, it had already been done, but the point is, that each of us is not the first to muse about their consciousness, and consider their connection with God/reality/universe/truth/nature/existence.

Fact is, we are all mortals, and know it. Fact is we are not "other than" the universe. Fact is, there is nothing we can do, that evidently the universe is not capable of doing. (cause if we do it, we do it as a part of the universe).

In this, our individual connection with GOD/nature/reality/universe/truth/existence, is a downright certainty. No one is wrong to claim it.

Where you are so easy to attack, and where Mohammed is so easy to attack, is in the regards that you feel you have a "special" connection. That you know this GOD/nature/reality/universe/truth/existence on a personal level, and think that you are the only one, and everyone should listen to you.

You say "well I am not the judge" while judging, and figuring that you "know" the real judge, and how the judgment will actually go.

I am rather certain that I have equal access to reality as you do. To imagine that "your" understanding trumps "my" understanding, is somewhat dubious. Seems that any leg, either of us would have to stand on, would also be available to the other.

In comes science, to break the tie.

What is true to both of us? How do we determine such?

This must be reality. Let's discover its nature together. The facts are wonderful enough. We need not make any up.

Regards, TAR2

Tar2, the Muslims I talk to all say that Jesus was the greatest prophet, greater than Muhammad, because he could do miracles. I suggest you speak with Muslims .. go to a mosque for instance, or a corner store they own as I do, or stop them on the steet as I do, or talk to them in the public library as I do, or on vacation at the beach as I have done. They enjoy talking about their religion.

Your content is huge .. my internet time is limited.

Edited by Aristarchus in Exile
Share on other sites

Let me append that last statement. We can and do "make up facts". We invent and create all the time. This is what we do, bring "thoughts" into reality. I was talking about fabrications that don't hold up anywhere but in ones mind.

Aristarchus in Exile,

I stand corrected.

From the Wiki article on "messiah".

Islamic tradition holds the view that Jesus (Isa), son of Mary, was indeed the promised prophet and Messiah (Masih), sent to the Semitic Jewish tribes living in Israel. He will again return to Earth in the end times and descend from heaven to defeat the "great deceiver", the Dajjal (false messiah/antichrist).[5]

Regards, TAR2

Share on other sites

Two words; radiocarbon dating. As if any more evidence were needed to the contrary, radiocarbon dating offsets the entire premise of the Bible.

I don't even know where to start anymore, so very quickly I end up flustered and usually opt for, 'It's just b*ll*cks, alright?'

I used to be a touch militant but now I have little interest in 'fighting' the cause. Really, it's a patience and inclination issue - I have neither, it's just silly.

With those who should know better, I still get a little annoyed - chiefly because it requires a higher level of ignorance on their part, to remain even agnostic. For others though, I'm happy for them in a way. I couldn't tell an old lady dying in hospital, that she wasn't going to heaven because there isn't one - which made me think why I bothered trying to convince my friends and family. They aren't the problem. The problem exists at a much higher level, i.e. The Roman Catholic Church-Condoms-Africa-AIDS, and that is where the battle must take place. It's a battle Science is winning, the mini-victories don't come thick and fast, but they always come, eventually.

Edited by Frontie