I’d be happy to keep discussing this with you, but perhaps I should send you a PM. I tried to get Tirib to lose interest, but he’s climbed all the way up on his soap box now. lol[/quote]
Ben,
You are welcome to PM me, or post here. You can do what I do with tirib and simply ignore the posts. It’s effective. He cannot piss you off if you don’t read it. I have gone around and around with him already. Like I said, according to him, we’ll be neighbors in hell, and God already decided that, so there’s nothing you could do. If I believed that garbage, I wouldn’t even bother. I mean seriously, if I have no say anyway, why bother? Besides that, it goes directly against the scriptures he endlessly quotes. I can and have proved it, it had little effect. He just calls me and my faith names and whines about how ‘blind’ I am. An irony I do find rich…
Either way… I do enjoy these discussions when everybody calms down. I just don’t put up with being mocked. I think it’s better in public, but I will happily answer any questions you have privately.
Tirib, won’t go away, he’s “competing” with me for your soul. I don’t want your soul, just your respect and understanding will do.
[quote]Christine wrote:
So, I will agree with you on this: The Grateful Dead rules!
[/quote]
Really? Was it that unclear? Well it doesn’t actually seem like your all fired interested in the discourse, so I’ll leave it at that.
And yes they sure as hell do. To bad Bobby had all the sound boards pulled off the internet. It’s hard to find a good quality '80’s show. That clown they had in the booth (I forgot his name) at that time massacred the recordings, so good '80s shows are hard to find. Know anybody with and FTP site? Now the want the $$ for them…Some hippies they turned out to be! :)[/quote]
I used to have a few tapes, but I have no idea what happened to them. Sorry, I can’t help you out.
I really don’t have a dog in this fight, so it is difficult to get fired up.[/quote]
Here ya go, a little peace offering. You can listen at work and get your Dead on, provided your firewall allows streaming. http://www.gdradio.net[/quote]
Thanks.
And I do apologize if I have offended you by what I have written in the past. My intent is never to offend, but I tend to be blunt and this is the internet. It is very easy to turn into an asshole here. Something I need to watch.
You do come across here as a cool person, and I think that we would get along just fine IRL.
[/quote]
Let’s have us a virtual fist bump …If you do need anything, feel free to ask…Thanks for your kind words.
Can you prove that Santa doesn’t exist? No. Do you highly suspect that he was made up? Yes.
On that note, I’m going to re-read you what you wrote so you can see it through my eyes:
I’,m saying you ARE certain of a whole myriad of things because you ARE created in the image of Santa who is Himself the only possible source of certainty and you ARE also certain of that. It’s not difficult for me at all. I see staring me in the face the truth of Romans 1:18-27 every time I read one of your posts, or anybody else’s.
It has nothing whatever to do with intelligence. You’re a smart enough girl (though you try a bit too hard). It has everything to do with spiritual death and blindness. Everywhere are the “invisible attributes, eternal power and divine nature” of the most high Santa clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that you are without excuse, but even though you know Santa, you do not honor Santa as Santa or give thanks, but you became futile in your speculations, and your foolish heart is darkened. Professing to be wise, you’ve became a fool, exchanging the glory of the incorruptible Santa for an image in the form of corruptible man and his alleged scientific method. In other words yourself. That’s my accurate Oleena-ward paraphrase, but it applies to everybody.
I’m certain that very much of what you know is true. I’m also pretty sure there is plenty in your domain of expertise that you could teach me. Maybe elsewhere too. What I am most certain of all though is that all of this is so because we are both creatures of the same ultra holy and intelligent designer [Santa].
[/quote]
I am certain Santa doesn’t exists as we think of him. St. Nicholas did exist and is a real Catholic saint though. That aside, cosomology puts forth an argument that doesn’t require divine inspiration. It’s an approach from the other side, the secular side. A side we can understand with out having to rely on the ‘trust me’ factor.
I’d be happy to keep discussing this with you, but perhaps I should send you a PM. I tried to get Tirib to lose interest, but he’s climbed all the way up on his soap box now. lol[/quote]
Ben,
You are welcome to PM me, or post here. You can do what I do with tirib and simply ignore the posts. It’s effective. He cannot piss you off if you don’t read it. I have gone around and around with him already. Like I said, according to him, we’ll be neighbors in hell, and God already decided that, so there’s nothing you could do. If I believed that garbage, I wouldn’t even bother. I mean seriously, if I have no say anyway, why bother? Besides that, it goes directly against the scriptures he endlessly quotes. I can and have proved it, it had little effect. He just calls me and my faith names and whines about how ‘blind’ I am. An irony I do find rich…
Either way… I do enjoy these discussions when everybody calms down. I just don’t put up with being mocked. I think it’s better in public, but I will happily answer any questions you have privately.
Tirib, won’t go away, he’s “competing” with me for your soul. I don’t want your soul, just your respect and understanding will do.[/quote]
Well if we’re going to be neighbors I’m warning you right now; stay off my fucking lawn
Nah nevermind, people are too deeply entrenched in their positions for this to do anyone any good. I’m out.
Can you prove that Santa doesn’t exist? No. Do you highly suspect that he was made up? Yes.
On that note, I’m going to re-read you what you wrote so you can see it through my eyes:
I’,m saying you ARE certain of a whole myriad of things because you ARE created in the image of Santa who is Himself the only possible source of certainty and you ARE also certain of that. It’s not difficult for me at all. I see staring me in the face the truth of Romans 1:18-27 every time I read one of your posts, or anybody else’s.
It has nothing whatever to do with intelligence. You’re a smart enough girl (though you try a bit too hard). It has everything to do with spiritual death and blindness. Everywhere are the “invisible attributes, eternal power and divine nature” of the most high Santa clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that you are without excuse, but even though you know Santa, you do not honor Santa as Santa or give thanks, but you became futile in your speculations, and your foolish heart is darkened. Professing to be wise, you’ve became a fool, exchanging the glory of the incorruptible Santa for an image in the form of corruptible man and his alleged scientific method. In other words yourself. That’s my accurate Oleena-ward paraphrase, but it applies to everybody.
I’m certain that very much of what you know is true. I’m also pretty sure there is plenty in your domain of expertise that you could teach me. Maybe elsewhere too. What I am most certain of all though is that all of this is so because we are both creatures of the same ultra holy and intelligent designer [Santa].
[/quote]
I am certain Santa doesn’t exists as we think of him. St. Nicholas did exist and is a real Catholic saint though. That aside, cosomology puts forth an argument that doesn’t require divine inspiration. It’s an approach from the other side, the secular side. A side we can understand with out having to rely on the ‘trust me’ factor.[/quote]
No, it requires a few leaps of faith though, which incidentally does not help very much.
So people get pissed when you mess with their favorite bedtime stories.
That does not even come close to what allegedly happened to Galilei but didnt.
What we are looking for here though is “hundreds of cases” where “scientific discoveries have been opposed and nearly squashed by a religious body, starting with Galileo discovering that the planets travel around the sun”.
If most of those cases touched on bible exegesis, well, yes, religion kind of got involved.
Somehow I doubt that what you meant with your original assertion is that a catholic Scholar disputed that Zebediah the Elder spoke Sumerian or some such. [/quote]
Read the whole outline on the first link. Plenty of cases of religion directly opposing release of scientific findings of everything from the age of the earth, to what makes lightening, to sanitation, to inoculation, mental illness… I am tired man. Read the link.[/quote]
And look, we never heard of these concepts.
Oh wait, it did.
People trying to squash unwelcome opinions?
Dunno, The Harvard president who speculated that men could be superior when it comes to math comes and subsequently lost his job to mind and of course those detailed emails describing how climate change dissenters were ridiculed and prevented from being published and then there was of course a whole era where you either had to be a fascist or a communist to be an economics professor, everything else would have been ridiculous, or hey, the fat is bad for you scare that really took off when dissenters lost their jobs and people blowing the new paradigms horn got showered with grants…
[quote]Oleena wrote:<<< Can you prove that Santa doesn’t exist? No. Do you highly suspect that he was made up? Yes. >>>[/quote]As soon as you can tell me why YOU are certain that 2+2=4, something else you say may actually have some meaningful content. I really miss Elder Forlife. WHERE ARE YA MAN?!?!?!?! These people need yer help. Even I didn’t realize how good he really is. He should found an international school for skeptics. Nobody I’ve ever known has been more right while being more wrong than him. I honestly do not mean this as an insult my sweet, but you are waaay behind.
[/quote]
I can easily tell you why 2+2=4 → because if it didn’t the meaning of 2 and 4 would be different.
I think it’s funny that you didn’t even respond to my post “So let me get this straight: because I am sure of one thing, I am sure of something that is by definition impossible to know.” with regards to your [quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’,m saying you ARE certain of a whole myriad of things because you ARE created in the image of the God who is Himself the only possible source of certainty and you ARE also certain of that. [/quote] That would be a good start for sorting out which of us has even a basic understanding of logic.
Another problem I have with a god belief is that once you insert a god, you stop looking for scientific answers.
[/quote]
Friend, you have some of the most foundational scientific answers today due to the work of god-believing folk, long before you were born.
[/quote]
That’s a pretty interesting point.
I think I remember reading Darwin struggled with his Christian beliefs when he uncovered evolution.[/quote]
I have to look that up. I cannot see what discovering Evolution had to do with Christian belief and why that would invalidate the other.[/quote]
The field of biology initially started as the study of god’s creation. The idea was, because god created nature, understanding it would bring you closer to god.
So every discovery that’s been made which opposes what you find in a Bible was most likely set into motion by someone who started researching with the goal of trying to know god better through his works.
It’s incredibly ironic that religion now views science, especially biology, as a threat. It’s even more ironic that less people are religious because of science. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot and never seeing it coming.[/quote]
A threat? LOL!
Where the hell did you get that notion? Unbelievable. Don’t let facts get in the way you hate filled bigotry.
Apparently you don’t know shit about religion except what you read on those idiotic atheist propaganda websites. Besides, if atheism isn’t a belief, why does it need propaganda in the first place?
I do find it irronic that all you little atheists all say the same thing like you all read the same book, but them claim it’s about 'independent thought. But you all babble on about fair tales, Sky God, Magic Sky fairy and yes the inevitable and venerable flying spaghetti monster.
There is no conflict between religion and science. Save for some little out post sects on the outskirts of Christianity. Plenty of scientists also happen to be Christian.
But no, go on being complete ignorant and to you little ignorant hate filled rants, despite the fact that they have no basis in fact.
OR, maybe you should do some research and find out what verious religions really believe before you come here and say stupid shit that has no validy…
“Oooooooo, look at me! I can copy and paste from atheist web sites and mock these stupid Christians. I am soooo smart and they are like sooooo stupid!”
[/quote]
Wow that touched a nerve didn’t it?!
Let’s look at the assumptions you just made:
[/quote]
Assumptions I made? Like the ones where you said that science is a big, bad scary monster to religion? But ok, I’ll play.
Hmm, so ok, you don’t hate it, you just mock it proclaim the stupidity of Christians based on, uh, love? Forgive me if that sounds disingenious. Further, I didn’t say you ‘hate religion’, I said your a ‘hate filled bigot’. A bigot being someone who discriminates and thinks less of people based on misconceptions and ignorance which you are clearly displaying.
Let me break it down for you, you see, you cannot draw any sort of conclusion of a mythical creature to solve deductive issues. You have this idiotic idea, we (Christians) just read the bible and ‘Whamo!’ we believe it like a Harry Potter book, or some other fictional book. We just arbitrarily assign it to be sacred.
This is where you are a bigot, because you do not understand that, nor can you be bothered to do a little research. There is a logic behind it as well, and once you understand that, then you can begin to understand what religion is about. But no, it’s a made up fairy tale even though it’s not.
Oh so it’s all about you? If your comparing God to Santa Claus and saying how it’s a fairy tale, pardon me, but your full of shit. But it’s all about you I suppose.
I didn’t read the website since I already believe that evolutionary science is good science and well founded, that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and that the current universe likely was the result of an explosion from about 13-15 billion years ago. But earlier, you did in fact post athiest propaganda as I have seen those sites before. You know the whole ‘flying spaghetti monster’ bullshit you tried to peddle as if it were something new.
It’s interesting as well that you mentioned, Catholics as separate from Christians? First, I am Catholic; second, we were the Origional Christians. All the other sects brached out from us.
So your argument for this is that hundreds of years ago, when the affairs of the church, state and pretty much all things were mixed together, some people thought that some scientific discoveries were frowned upon so that’s just the way it is forever?
I went to a Catholic high school that’s where I first learned about evolution.
So by that logic we can go ahead and say science is full of shit too. Because along time ago, it thought the Earth was flat.
Not one of those things nor any newer theories are a problem for religion. Hell, there’s plenty of scientists who also happen to be Christian as well. To think that science is a threat to religion is another sign of your ignorance.
What kind of horseshit are you trying to feed me now? You were being deliberately insulting and arrogant and you are making assumptions about what I believe and attacking that. Don’t give me that happy crap that I took it wrong. I ‘attacked’ you? I gave what I received. You cannot go around saying “You guys believe in fairy tales and God is like the flying spaghetti monsters, you’re stupid”. And then come back and say that’s not what you meant or that you meant it in the best possible way. Your Jedi mind trick won’t work on me.
Rather than getting to the heart of the matter, i.e. does God exist and is there any point of worshiping he, she and/or it. You get all personal. “You attacked me”, well, no shit. You didn’t start any kind of dialog looking for honest discourse, you went out to prove how very stupid we Christians are and how very smart you atheists are because you can’t sense God with your 5 senses, so he must not exist.
“Oh my God!” scratch that… “Oh my nothing! You used derogatory language!” Really? Apparently, you can dish it, but you cannot take it.
Why the hell would I go look for a ‘Christian’ web page on the topic of evolution discussing it as a science? I am not sure what you think that would prove at all. However, if your interested, here is a link to an article that discusses how evolution theory in not in conflict with Christianity.
Please tell me what evidence you based your decision to believe in Catholicism on? BTW, I will never tell you for sure that god DOESN’T exist, but I do know for sure that you can’t know for sure, so anyone who says that they do obviously used faulty logic to make such a claim. I also know that there are older religions then Christianity and Catholicism and that people lived before even the oldest religions we know about came into existence, so I do not believe that those religions are anything other than another made-up answer about a topic humanity has always wondered about.
[/quote]
Well it depends on which angle you want to take, but for atheists/ agnostics, I usually use cosmology. It’s a deductive argument form. The one i rely on is the cosmological argument from the point of contingency. Aristotle first introduced the argument, St. Thomas Aquinas perfected it, and it’s maintained it’s existence unrefuted for a couple thousand years and not because it hasn’t been tried. This is an argument for the existence of God, not Catholicism per se, but you cannot put the cart before the horse. If you don’t believe in God religion makes no sense.
But if you believe in God, you believe in God as the Hebrews understood him, and you believe Jesus said is who he said he was, then Catholicism is really the most logical choice. Catholicism is the only Christian faith that can trace it’s roots directly to Matthew 16:18. Before the splintering off of Christian sects, there was only one church so it wasn’t call anything back then. All Christian sects trace their roots to Catholicism, and Catholicism can trace it’s roots to the words right out of the mouth of Jesus himself.
Now unlike ,ahem, others, I will not quote you a bunch of random scripture so you can wipe your ass with it. I think that does the Word an injustice.
Please do shut the hell up with this dishonest shit.
I never supported teaching that religion and science are the same thing at all much less replacing one another. They are different disciplines all together. I think science should be studied with the utmost determination and vigor and the results, not opinions should be the guide of where it goes next. I damn sure ain’t afraid of science. It does more to prove my points than it ever would destroy them.
You don’t necessarily think I am stupid? LOL! That’s an interesting way of calling someone stupid.
Now please do shut the fuck up about the fact that you mock and make fun of Christians and please do humor me by doing it and then telling me it’s not what it seems. I may be stupid, but I am not that stupid.
Well it seems to me your the one making assumptions here, I am telling you that what you think is the case, is not the case. I even provided an article that showed that evolution is no threat what so ever. That people using ‘evolution’ and as a spike in the spokes of Christianity is really slaying a strawman. It’s an issue that doesn’t exist, save for fringe elements. But there are backward people every where, Christian and not, like your a fore mentioned friend. Yes, some Christians are backwards and close minded, but I have met far more close minded atheists. Most cannot handle anything rattling the ‘antigod’ cage. Fear of being wrong I suspect.
Saying that believing in God is like believing in the flying spaghetti monster is not arguing against giving religion equal footing with science. That’s a statement to mock and make ridiculous a belief in God. So you are lying.
Second, I would never argue that science and religion are similar or one is like the other. One isn’t equal with another. One is an observation about the physical world the other is a metaphysical discipline to interact with that on which all that exists is dependent. Perhaps, you cannot interact with it, and we our fooling our selves, but my personal experience says different. What you cannot say or prove, say ultimate dependence does not exist.
To be a proper athist, you should talk to Kamui. He did not have to change the nature of existence to fit in to his paradigm. He simply doesn’t beleive you can interact with that Necessary Being. I do, can, and I get results, none that I could convince you of.
Personal experience is not good evidence for others, just yourself.[/quote]
But that’s not really why you like him, is it? You like Kamui because he ardently defends your moral convictions. If he started arguing with you about, say, abortion, he’d fall out of favor.
On the Flying Spagetti Monster topic- can you give me some good reasons to NOT believe in him? Can you prove he doesn’t exist?
BTW, your response to my [quote]“There’s a huge difference between religion’s assumptions about the physical world and science’s; science overcame their assumptions by themselves.”[/quote] had nothing whatsoever to do with my point. I have no idea where you thought I was still talking about how compatible evolution and Catholicism are. My point, once again, was that science can disprove it’s own ideas whereas religion cannot. What about that wasn’t clear?
I don’t mock Christians on a personal level; I literally find many of the things funny in a non-personal manner. For instance, literal interpretation of most of the stories in the Bible is pretty funny. I’m sure you’d be amused if I believed that Santa was a loving, perfect God who helped a man build a boat while he flooded the rest of his “failed” creation. If you’re objective about it, it’s hilarious! Stand back, take off your religious glasses, and look at this stuff. If it was another religion, you would be amused without being able to help it.
You did not answer what convinced you that Catholicism was the right “version” of religion of god.
Finally, don’t mistake my disagreement with religion as me saying that god does not exist. If he does exist, I am sure he’d do a better job of seeing over mountaintops than we’ve observed in any religion to date.
So people get pissed when you mess with their favorite bedtime stories.
That does not even come close to what allegedly happened to Galilei but didnt.
What we are looking for here though is “hundreds of cases” where “scientific discoveries have been opposed and nearly squashed by a religious body, starting with Galileo discovering that the planets travel around the sun”.
If most of those cases touched on bible exegesis, well, yes, religion kind of got involved.
Somehow I doubt that what you meant with your original assertion is that a catholic Scholar disputed that Zebediah the Elder spoke Sumerian or some such. [/quote]
Read the whole outline on the first link. Plenty of cases of religion directly opposing release of scientific findings of everything from the age of the earth, to what makes lightening, to sanitation, to inoculation, mental illness… I am tired man. Read the link.[/quote]
And look, we never heard of these concepts.
Oh wait, it did.
People trying to squash unwelcome opinions?
Dunno, The Harvard president who speculated that men could be superior when it comes to math comes and subsequently lost his job to mind and of course those detailed emails describing how climate change dissenters were ridiculed and prevented from being published and then there was of course a whole era where you either had to be a fascist or a communist to be an economics professor, everything else would have been ridiculous, or hey, the fat is bad for you scare that really took off when dissenters lost their jobs and people blowing the new paradigms horn got showered with grants…
Religion, gotcha.
[/quote]
Hey now. You didn’t ask what was the CAUSE of people resisting new ideas was, you and several others on here just asked for EXAMPLES of when religion had opposed science and acted like I was crazy for stating that it had many times. So I delivered that information and it’s a LONG ASS read.
Different endeavors, and not exclusive. They deal with different things. Man, I love having all three to study. Math, Science, and my Catholicism. I west to mass last night for the Immaculate Conception (beautiful!), and got my final scores in a math & a science, today, thank you very much.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Different endeavors, and not exclusive. They deal with different things. Man, I love having all three to study. Math, Science, and my Catholicism. I west to mass last night for the Immaculate Conception (beautiful!), and got my final scores in a math & a science, today, thank you very much. [/quote]
You can stretch and change religious beliefs to encompass new scientific findings (see giant ass list above of examples of this), but religion doesn’t change to be more accurate without science. Do you get what I’m saying? Religion needs science to progress, but science doesn’t need religion in the same way. If you choose to believe in one religion, you have to admit that you’re not using the same logic as you are to believe that when you look under a microscope, you’ll see cells.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Religion needs science to progress, but science doesn’t need religion in the same way. .[/quote]
Religion doesn’t ‘need’ science. No more than it ‘needs’ silverware. Creating new industrial materials, or a nuclear/biological weapon, needs science. They answer different questions. Science is simply a tool for the atheist or the religious, much like the fork I use to eat my salad. Religion is more of a way of life.
Of course, science needs leisure time for intellectual pursuits. Which needs societies. Which needs laws informed by common values. Which needs faith in moral laws written by an absolute authority. Which means needing faith in an unassailable law-giver. Pretty much the history of the west.
No, it requires a few leaps of faith though, which incidentally does not help very much.
I will stick with meh, above my paygrade. [/quote]
It requires an understanding of logic, faith has is not required at that level. Geez, you ought to know that as many times as you have been involved in these discussions. There is a side that, yes requires faith. But you live on faith everyday anyway, so I really don’t see a leap.
No, it requires a few leaps of faith though, which incidentally does not help very much.
I will stick with meh, above my paygrade. [/quote]
It requires an understanding of logic, faith has is not required at that level. Geez, you ought to know that as many times as you have been involved in these discussions. There is a side that, yes requires faith. But you live on faith everyday anyway, so I really don’t see a leap. [/quote]
Well the leap occurs when you apply it to matters that you cannot possibly test empirically.
And draw a lot of assumption from it, because even if I accepted your premises, which I dont, I would be left with some sort of a prime mover and little else.
Might be a fluke, whatever that would look like outside a time/space continuum.
[quote]Oleena wrote:<<< Can you prove that Santa doesn’t exist? No. Do you highly suspect that he was made up? Yes. >>>[/quote]As soon as you can tell me why YOU are certain that 2+2=4, something else you say may actually have some meaningful content. I really miss Elder Forlife. WHERE ARE YA MAN?!?!?!?! These people need yer help. Even I didn’t realize how good he really is. He should found an international school for skeptics. Nobody I’ve ever known has been more right while being more wrong than him. I honestly do not mean this as an insult my sweet, but you are waaay behind.
[/quote]
Men smarter than us have looked at the logical underpinning of numbers. You refuse to look at their work, you claim to have an answer that you cling to to assuage your fear of the unknown. And your arrogance and presumption is overwhelming.
[quote]Oleena wrote:<<< Can you prove that Santa doesn’t exist? No. Do you highly suspect that he was made up? Yes. >>>[/quote]As soon as you can tell me why YOU are certain that 2+2=4, something else you say may actually have some meaningful content. I really miss Elder Forlife. WHERE ARE YA MAN?!?!?!?! These people need yer help. Even I didn’t realize how good he really is. He should found an international school for skeptics. Nobody I’ve ever known has been more right while being more wrong than him. I honestly do not mean this as an insult my sweet, but you are waaay behind.
[/quote]
Men smarter than us have looked at the logical underpinning of numbers. You refuse to look at their work, you claim to have an answer that you cling to to assuage your fear of the unknown. And your arrogance and presumption is overwhelming.[/quote]
What, he has a point.
Mathematics is a lot like religion in that it is axiomatic and that a lot of surprising things can be deducted from those axioms.
Where it falls flat on its face though is that we know that we flat out made up mathematics, I doubt that he would draw the necessary conclusion.
No, it requires a few leaps of faith though, which incidentally does not help very much.
I will stick with meh, above my paygrade. [/quote]
It requires an understanding of logic, faith has is not required at that level. Geez, you ought to know that as many times as you have been involved in these discussions. There is a side that, yes requires faith. But you live on faith everyday anyway, so I really don’t see a leap. [/quote]
Well the leap occurs when you apply it to matters that you cannot possibly test empirically.
And draw a lot of assumption from it, because even if I accepted your premises, which I dont, I would be left with some sort of a prime mover and little else.
Might be a fluke, whatever that would look like outside a time/space continuum.
As I said, totally above my paygrade. [/quote]
The problem with empiricism is it’s far from exact. It’s correlational and based on best proabaility. Deductive truths are absolute, solid and irrefutable once established.
But that’s not really why you like him, is it? You like Kamui because he ardently defends your moral convictions. If he started arguing with you about, say, abortion, he’d fall out of favor.
[/quote]
Nope. See there you go with your silly assumptions. I like plenty of people here who disagree with me. Ephrem, forlife to name a couple right off the bat. I happen to like Kamui because he thinks, he’s very intelligent and doesn’t act spoon fed. And he can argue anybody under the table.
See ironically, you atheists tend to have more common robotic expressions than Christians do. You all say the same things and you all say the same things about us Christians with an almost identical smugness and arrogance.
Do ask me why, it’s like there is some atheist school where you go to learn it.
You can believe in it if you want to, I don’t really give a shit, but you cannot say that’s the same basis for belief as my belief in God. No I cannot prove he doesn’t exist. But I can prove, beyond the shadow of any doubt, it’s not God. Like I said, start with Cosmology. If you got a real, actual counter argument, I am all ears. And I will personally nominate you for the Nobel Prize if you do.
Everything. Science can disprove it’s own ideas? Seems you must be unfamiliar with the deductive nomonoligcal method that science uses.
Science is based on inductive reasoning, mere correlation and from it infers causal relationships to a degree.
There is nothing to compare. They are all together different disciplines. They do not explore or study the same things and they do not use the same methodology. Sure they intersect, everything does at some point, but they are not the same thing, at all. To replace one with the other is hopelessly misguided. Religion isn’t really all that interested in discoveries of the physical world. Those things are just tools for relgions to make moral/ spiritual points.
You really don’t know anything about relgion at all do you? So far everything you’ve said about it is wrong.
So your dislike is based completely on falsehoods. Perhaps you should do some like real, actual research. I mean, you can say you don’t care, but we both know that’s false now, don’t we?
Oh no doubt, there are some amusing stories in the Bible. The story of Noah, wasn’t one of them, though. I was thinking more along the lines of the fact that God has to repeatedly tell the Hebrews not to fuck goats. That to me is funny.
You know what else is really funny? Atheists seem to be the only demographic that is a-ok with ripping on a book they did not read. I mean, that’s hysterical.
“Nope, never read it, but I just know it’s wrong, cause like it is!”
So, how much of the Bible have you read?
I don’t remember you asking, but somebody else did. The nutshell version is that Catholicism is the only Christian faith that can directly trace it’s roots to words that came out of Jesus’s mouth. Mt 16:18. All other Christian sects are offshoots of us. We were the first and only in apostolic times and we had no name until people broke off and identified themselves as something different.
So as far as Abrahamic traditions go aside from Judaism we’re the only ones who can trace our roots to scripture itself.
Considering you take his existence to be equal to that of a flying spaghetti monster and you criticize his work as if you could do better, I am going to go out on a limb say you don’t believe he exists.
You disagree with things you don’t know about. Don’t you need to know about something with some degree of accuracy, to know you actually do disagree with it? I mean, everything you say, we say is wrong. Everything you say we believe is far from accurate so what you disagree with, more or less, doesn’t exist.I personally would disagree with what your view of religion is too, sounds ridiculous to me.
