has science refuted religion

[cranster]

I've just started listening to The Great Debate, "Has science refuted religion?".

I have a few thoughts on Michael Shermers reductionist theory of how Christianity began. I'm not through with the debate yet, but here goes...

How religion arose is essentially this... prior to five thousand years ago there were small bands of hunter gatherers who had informal ways of enforcing behavior control. When their populations grew they needed better forms of behavior control so they established the first governments who basically told their populations... here are the rules, break them, and suffer the consequences, The establishment of religion was necessary to supplement the government with better behavior control by saying... if you think you got away with it, you didn't, because there is an invisible eye in the sky watching everything you do, and if you break the rules then you will pay for it in the next life.

Ok, based on that premise let me see if I got this correct... two thousand years ago a handful of Galilean fisherman, and a tax collector whom they despised, took time out of their day to collaborate on a better form of behavior control by creating a myth in which a magical Jewish itinerant preacher would rise from the dead and become the eye in the sky who would set them on fire forever if they broke the rules. The primary motivation in establishing this myth, being, to subject themselves, and their fellow Jews to a likely grisly death at the hands of the Romans for believing in the myth to better assist the Romans with population control.

Edited June 25, 2012 by cranster

[cranster]

I am bringing this stuff in here because of the recent aggressive attacks by atheists on religion.

At one point in the debate Dr. Sean Carroll made the claim that we definitly know there is no life after death, because once a person is dead there is no longer a living body for a soul to be attached. If that's the case then would someone please give a rational explanation for this.

and the second part

She was completely unplugged. No brain activity, no mind, and yet, not only did she have mind activity she accurately described things she both saw and heard that were impossible in her state to either see or hear.

Dr. D'Souza addresses the new atheism in this video. http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dinesh+d%27souza+demolishes+new+atheism&oq=dinesh+d%27souza+demolishes+new+atheism&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=youtube.3...131421.150477.0.150859.27.26.1.0.0.0.114.2456.19j7.26.0...0.0.PZPs6j81TRw

Here is a debate by two highly qualified people on both ends of the spectrum Christopher Hitchens, and Dr. William Lane Craig who debate the existence of God... approximately 2 hours : If Mr.s Hitchens had a doctorate I am unaware and apologize for not including it. I truly pray that God had mercy on Mr. Hitchens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KBx4vvlbZ8

Here Dr. Craig addresses the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus... approximately one and a half hours:

William Lane Craig and Sam Harris debate God and morality... approximately 2 hours:

Watch these and you decide. of course depending on your world view the convincing arguments are going to fall in the side of an already existing world view.

On the Craig, Harris debate I would like to point out that Dr. Harris presents a caricature of God that is unrecognizable to Christians. In this video He essentially frames his argument this way. First I will tell you what it is that you believe about God, illustrate what a monster he is, and that you should reject God based on the unrecognizable picture I just painted of him. Why such antipathy for something you don't believe exists Dr. Harris? Why such hatred? Why are you putting so much energy into this, apart from the millions you make from your bestselling atheist tome's? What other people believe doesn't affect you. If as you claim God doesn't exist just like there are probably no fairies in the garden then you should be neutral about it, and just get on with your day, and leave it at that rather than waste any precious time on a clock that is very soon going to run out. The question has to be asked what is the purpose of secular humanists attempting to destroy what other people believe in for which they have insufficient evidence to refute.

Whether God exists or not is the most fundamental question there is, and it should not be given minor treatment through sound bites from either people of faith, or Atheists on the internet. Being the most fundamental issue for a human it should be given serious study and reflection over time. It should be treated with the gravity inherent in the question itself. Empiricist's and secular humanists are aggressively asserting that the empirical method is the only way we can know reality. In making that claim it is necessary to dismiss, historical analyses, philosophy, metaphysics, theology, eye witness testimony, and anecdotal evidence as ways to also know reality. By definition God is immaterial, unobservable, and unmeasurable which makes the empirical method uniquely unqualified to address the question of the existence of God, and eternal life. The empirical method is the wrong tool to address this most fundamental question. It is like trying to take someones temperature with a tire pressure gauge... nope... there is no evidence of a temperature so they don't exist. The secular humanists and empiricists are putting up a straw man argument that because science has made such great strides, and that we know so much about the cosmos, physics, mathematics and reality itself through scientific research that based on the gravity of that alone you should accept their contention that neither God exists, nor does eternal life, for which they have no evidence of either. If God does exists and is immaterial, unrestricted, the creator of natural law, and to whom all things are possible then it is highly improbable that God wouldn't work miracles in the natural world. A being like that can work in and through nature in ways we don't understand while maintaining His requirement of faith, and denying the demands of those who refuse to believe without sufficient empirical evidence. I've been down this road with atheists before, and have come to the conclusion there exists no acceptable evidence. Everything can be explained away. They don't believe because there is no evidence. They don't believe because they don't want to believe.

This shouldn't be treated as either benign, or a mere intellectual exersize. They want you to abandon your faith for hopelessness, and despair, and some how convince you there is meaning in meaninglessness. Are there fairies in the garden? There is no evidence so we must assume they don't exist, is not the same question as is Jesus Christ God who all of history is centered around, who changed the course of history, and had more impact on humanity than any other human being in the history of the world. those two questions don't have the same gravity based on the impact either have had on the world.

The secular humanist empiricists have an agenda, and that is to destroy your faith. What is at stake here is, do you forfeit the possibility eternal life based on the arguments of atheists who have nothing to offer in return but hopelessness and despair. Science is not equipped to answer the question of the existence of God, or the question of life after death. The best both we, and they can say is... we don't know for sure. To me that is not a sufficient reason to squander the possibility of eternal life.

I highly recommend this book for those questioning the historicity, and the reality of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, by one of the leading biblical scholars N.T. Wright who does an exhaustive analyses of the resurrection from both a historical, and Christian perspective. It is an exhaustive look in to the historicity of the resurrection from many different sources both non religious and religious alike.

http://www.amazon.com/Resurrection-Christian-Origins-Question-Vol/dp/0800626796/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1340700619&sr=8-1&keywords=n.t.wright+and+the+resurrection+of+jesus

I can recommend other great books defending against, and refuting the so called new atheists if anyone is interested.

Edited June 26, 2012 by cranster

[Black Swan]

Cranster...I admire your attempt to quantify the debate. And you are presenting it in somewhat of a qusi-scientific way, so mind if I jump in and give it a spin? I sincerely hope you don't find it "aggressive", but I do hope you find it "challenging".

I first must admit, I find it very interesting the points you bring up. However, I think there are some unfortunate rather gaping hole in your attempt.

From what I gather, you are trying to assess the credibility of Christianity and only Christianity. And there lies the rub, babe. There are thousands of religions out there. So before you can go to the “mat “ regarding whether Christianity is "the right path" over science, first you have to get pass the...what makes Christianity the "right path" over something like say, Hinduism????

After all Hinduism is MUCH older than Islam, Christianity or Judaism. And trust me, Vishnu isn't anything like JC. For one thing, he has blue skin and he hangs out with another God that resemble an elephant. But then again, Satan was a serpent, so maybe they are closer than I thought?

Anyway, so here you have religions out there that are much older, and BILLIONS of people believe in them just as much as you do with your religion. So...I ask the question: what makes you think YOUR religion is any better than theirs?

Now before you start, please be mindful of two potential arrows in your quiver that can't be used:

First is Ethnocentrism – the belief that one’s own culture, religion, or nation is superior to all others – aids survival by strengthening our bonds to our primary social groups and thus increasing our willingness to work, fight and occasionally die for them.

Second is Group Think - Irving Janis defined it as a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ striving for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action. Its symptoms include: censorship of dissent, rejection or rationalization of criticisms, conviction of moral superiority, and the demonization of those who hold opposing beliefs. It typically leads to the incomplete or inaccurate assessment of information, the failure to seriously consider other possible options, a tendency to make rash decisions and the refusal to reevaluate or alter those decisions once they’ve been made.

Group Think: disproportionate exposure to support for our beliefs, underexposure to the opposition, and a tendency to discount that opposition even if we do encounter it.

Ok, do your homework and get back to me. I'll wait here.

Edited June 26, 2012 by Black Swan

[ayrnay22]

Black swan I was wondering what u believe personally about religion and its place in society not just Christianity I personally don't believe in anything other than my family and friends and what I do for them and myself on a daily basis my thoughts on religion as a whole is that primitive religions or ancient ones usually were polytheistic as opposed to monotheistic because people of the time didn't consider the creation of earth itself rather they prayed for rain or a good hunt or victory in battle and when people started to live in larger groups and started to form opinions and debate there own existence they reasoned that a singular god in control of everything would be easier to tell in stories and easier for larger groups to follow or govern themselves I had once seen a video of the creation of monotheism from before Egypt to present day but can't remember the name of it I'm by no means great at spelling or as well versed in religion as you or others here but I stopped going to ccd when I was seven because I didn't see the point in praying to something I couldn't see or prove to be real I've read about different religions throughout school and most to me seemed to basically want people to be morally good

[Black Swan]

Black swan I was wondering what u believe personally about religion and its place in society not just Christianity I personally don't believe in anything other than my family and friends and what I do for them and myself on a daily basis my thoughts on religion as a whole is that primitive religions or ancient ones usually were polytheistic as opposed to monotheistic because people of the time didn't consider the creation of earth itself rather they prayed for rain or a good hunt or victory in battle and when people started to live in larger groups and started to form opinions and debate there own existence they reasoned that a singular god in control of everything would be easier to tell in stories and easier for larger groups to follow or govern themselves I had once seen a video of the creation of monotheism from before Egypt to present day but can't remember the name of it I'm by no means great at spelling or as well versed in religion as you or others here but I stopped going to ccd when I was seven because I didn't see the point in praying to something I couldn't see or prove to be real I've read about different religions throughout school and most to me seemed to basically want people to be morally good

Ayrnay...yes, I think I agree with most of what you have interrupted. Nicely done!

OBTW, A lot of people seem to think that I’m Anti-religion. I’m not, I’m rather pro-Atheism. May sound like the same, but they aren’t. I really really don’t care if people believe in Christ, or Vishnu or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. What I do care about is when they seem to think their way is the ONLY way. And more so, when they start going off the wall regarding another person’s ideology. If any, and I mean any believer, comes in and says, Black Swan, I’ve looked it all over, and I agree that based solely on evidence, there doesn’t seem to be any reason to believe in God. But I do, I simply feel that he is there in my heart. Guess what I’d do?

I would slap that person on the back and say, hey..the first round is on me.

On the other hand, when they start thinking that they have physical evidence to diss evolution or another’s belief, well that’s when my trigger finger gets itchy.

But, in my heart of heart, I don’t believe the majority of mankind is ready to go it alone yet, that is, not to have the background of religion showing them the way. It takes an intelligent and moral person to make their way without those parameters. The Journey from belief to disbelief is a very challenging one. One that at the end can produce an intense morning of identity.

Specifically, it is what philosophers call: First Person Constraint on Doxastic Explanation.

I’m going to jettison this cumbersome name and call it “Cuz It’s True Constraint”. Here is how it works: Let’s say I believe that drinking green tea is good for my health. Let’s also say that I’ve been drinking three cups of green tea a day for 20 years, that I come from a long line of green tea drinkers and that I’m the CEO of a family-owned corporation, Green Tea International.

An impartial observer, who we will name Ayrnay22, would instantly recognize that I have three compelling reasons to believe in the salubrious effects of green tea, none of which have anything to do with whether those effects are real.

First, having ingested vast quantities of it, at least partially in the conviction that I was boosting my chances for a long and healthy life, I’m going to be resistant to any suggestions that all that tea had zero effect on me (or, worse, a deleterious one).

Second, because my allegiance to green tea is part of an entrenched and presumably sacrosanct family tradition, questioning it could seriously damage my most intimate relationships, not to mention my share of the family fortune.

Finally, I have staked my financial and professional status on the belief that green tea is good for one’s health.

In short, I have powerful social, psychological and practical reasons to believe in the merits of green tea. The gist of the “Cuz It’s True Constraint” is that I myself can’t believe that these reasons contribute in any significant way to my conviction that green tea is good for me. Instead, I must believe this conviction is based on the facts: in this case, on the physical (rather than emotional, financial or familial) benefits of green tea. In other words, I must believe that I believe it, cuz it’s true.

Viewed in a certain light, the ‘Cuz It’s True Constraint can appear self-evident or even circular.

Now I’ll leave the astute reader to replace the allegory “green tea” with religion of his or her choice as they see fit.

,

BS

[ATHIM]

Black Swan. God comes through all different religions because God knows we are complex so He puts a little truth in all of them so that all people, from all nations can pick and choose what suits them best.

God is a higher being who presents Himself as undefined, different, changing, evolving, contradicting. A Buffet God for the picking.

That sums up the Bahai kind of belief system, everyones right. God fortunately is, unchanging and consistant. We are all in moral rags. Unbelievers in theirs will be assessed by God according to their deeds, good and bad, how their concience dealt with the daily conflicts and ultimately the love they showed towards others. The difficulty with this path is that God who is real, is limited in His capacity to be a life partner because He established a specific way and this person is not partaking of that way. It's like trying to win the Olympics without a trainer, it can happen but its rare. Believers in their moral rags will use the garment of sacrifice that Christ weaved with His own blood on the cross, and the righteousness it lead them to as justification before God.

God does not want to destroy us any more than we want to wreck a new car but we are all wear big pants and will be held accountable for everything we thought, did and said, so we have to be able to take whats coming and take it like the adults we are.

Just because God, the real One, because there is only one, does not know people and they don’t know Him, it doesn’t mean they will get away with it. We can no longer claim ignorance and will be held accountable.

BTW

Satan was not a snake.

[Black Swan]

Black Swan. God comes through all different religions because God knows we are complex so He puts a little truth in all of them so that all people, from all nations can pick and choose what suits them best.

God is a higher being who presents Himself as undefined, different, changing, evolving, contradicting. A Buffet God for the picking.

That sums up the Bahai kind of belief system, everyones right. God fortunately is, unchanging and consistant. We are all in moral rags. Unbelievers in theirs will be assessed by God according to their deeds, good and bad, how their concience dealt with the daily conflicts and ultimately the love they showed towards others. The difficulty with this path is that God who is real, is limited in His capacity to be a life partner because He established a specific way and this person is not partaking of that way. It's like trying to win the Olympics without a trainer, it can happen but its rare. Believers in their moral rags will use the garment of sacrifice that Christ weaved with His own blood on the cross, and the righteousness it lead them to as justification before God.

God does not want to destroy us any more than we want to wreck a new car but we are all wear big pants and will be held accountable for everything we thought, did and said, so we have to be able to take whats coming and take it like the adults we are.

Just because God, the real One, because there is only one, does not know people and they don’t know Him, it doesn’t mean they will get away with it. We can no longer claim ignorance and will be held accountable.

BTW

Satan was not a snake.

ATHIM...I can understand why you want to say that all religions are basically different paths to the one God...but sorry, that ain't going to wash. I've lived in both the East and the West, and they are VERY different. Let's take the two extremes, christiantiy vs hinduism. Pls see the summary of the differences here: http://sunandshield.wordpress.com/2007/03/07/a-quick-comparison-between-hinduism-and-christianity/

As far as the rest of your propaganda, regarding the "real God", I would have to file it under what is know as the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Let’s say you believe that no Scotsman puts sugar in his porridge. I protest that my Uncle Angus McGregor of Glasgow puts sugar in his porridge.” ‘Aye” you reply, but no TRUE Scotsman puts sugar in his porridge” So much for my counterevidence-and so much the better for your belief. This is an evergreen rhetorical trick especially in religion and politics. As everyone knows, no true follower of the Qur’an supports suicide bombings, no true Christian supports legalized abortion et cetera

BTW, I didn't say snake Pumpkin, I said Serpent.

Serpent in Eden

In the Book of Genesis, the Serpent is portrayed as a deceptive creature or trickster, who promotes as good what God had forbidden, and shows particular cunning in its deception. (cf. Gen. 3:4–5 and 3:22) The talking snake appears in the Garden of Eden who tempts Eve to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and denies that death will be a result. The Serpent has the ability to speak and to reason: "Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made" (Genesis 3:1). There is no indication in the Book of Genesis that the Serpent was a deity in its own right, although it is one of only two cases of animals that talk in the Pentateuch (Balaam's donkey being the other).

The Hebrew word nahash is used to identify the creature that appears in Genesis 3, in the Garden of Eden. God placed Adam in the Garden to tend it (Genesis 2:15), but he has warned both Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, "or you will die". (Genesis 3:3, NIV) The serpent tells Eve that this is untrue, and that if she and the man eat the fruit they will have knowledge and will not die. So Adam and Eve eat the fruit, but the knowledge they gain is loss of child-like innocence, and they are banished from the Garden. The Snake is punished for its role in their fall by being made to crawl on its belly in the dust, from where it continues to bite the heel of man. According to the Rabbinical tradition, the serpent represents sexual desire.[1][3]

The legged and speaking serpent of Genesis plays the role of trickster, a speaking animal which even shares knowledge with God which is hidden from man. As with other trickster-figures, the gift it brings is double-edged: Adam and Eve gain knowledge, but lose Eden. The choice of a venomous snake for this role seems to arise from Near Eastern traditions associating snakes with danger and death, magic and secret knowledge, rejuvenation, immortality, and sexuality. It is also possible that the association of the snake with the nude goddess in Canaanite iconography lies behind the scene in the Garden between the reptile and naked Eve, "Mother of all life",[4] the "Great Mother Goddess of the Canaanites"[5] Qetesh.

Debate about the Serpent in Eden is whether it should be viewed figuratively or as a literal animal. Voltaire, drawing on Socinian influences, wrote: "It was so decidedly a real serpent, that all its species, which had before walked on their feet, were condemned to crawl on their bellies. No serpent, no animal of any kind, is called Satan, or Belzebub, or Devil, in the Pentateuch."[6]

20th Century scholars such as W. O. E. Oesterley (1921) were cognisant of the differences between the role of the Edenic serpent in the Hebrew Bible and any connection with "ancient serpent" in the New Testament.[7] Modern historiographers of Satan such as Henry Ansgar Kelly (2006) and Wray and Mobley (2007) speak of the "evolution of Satan",[8] or "development of Satan".[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpent_(Bible)

,

Tiff

[ayrnay22]

Well I'm of the mind that until without a doubt science can prove that the galaxy space etc was created by one thing be it god or stars exploding but the catch would be the stars came from somewhere right maybe the Greeks had it right maybe the Christians have it right etc that there god created space and from there we evolved I'm going to live my life day to day and try and be grateful for the time I have on earth with my friends and family and not spend time praying to god or Vishnu or yahweh or odin I feel that's time wasted but the irony is I'm wasting time thinking about it and maybe that's all god if there is one wants is for people to think about it and form there own conclusion or beliefs morally or otherwise but like u black I don't think wars should be waged over who's god is the one true god or people on this forum to belittle another for there nonbelief or difference in beliefs

[ATHIM]

Blackswan, Its not what I was getting at. There is one God with one way, the rest are not the way to Him.

I am familiar with Hinduism and several other religions they are deceptive models based on humanistic wisdoms and imagination. The Isrealites were the selected by God to receive finite wisdom and knowledge through the law. The law upon which our society in the West and also since the incarnation of God in the East confirmed, fullfilled, established and explained in detail thorugh Jesus.

The Qur'an is a fallacy written by quarreling scribes who were instructed by an Arianistic heretic who blended local wisdom and some Christian understanding into a mesh of godless lies. There are Suras that condone the killing of Christians and suicide bombings would fall into that category, so no I disagree, the Qur'an is OK with suicide bombings.

The Serpant does not share knowledge with God, it is used by Satan to deceive man, the serpant was a pawn. The knowlede man gained was to know good and evil, prior to that man knew only good. The price of disobedience was removal from the garden and the one that would bruise Satans head is Jesus.

I am not familiar with the writers you mentioned, I know that Satan is a spirit and is not evolving, he does not need to evolve he aquires wisdom as a spirit and uses it for the same as his original purpose to deceive man. He has done an amazing job, humanity is so diluded but final judgement is coming shortly and all but the faith confirmed and fullfilled by Jesus will stand.

[NEODinar]

<br /><font size="3">Blackswan, Its not what I was getting at. There is one God with one way, the rest are not the way to Him.<br />I am familiar with Hinduism and several other religions they are deceptive models based on humanistic wisdoms and imagination. The Isrealites were the selected by God to receive finite wisdom and knowledge through the law. The law upon which our society in the West and also since the incarnation of God in the East confirmed, fullfilled, established and explained in detail thorugh Jesus.<br /><br />The Qur'an is a fallacy written by quarreling scribes who were instructed by an Arianistic heretic who blended local wisdom and some Christian understanding into a mesh of godless lies. There are Suras that condone the killing of Christians and suicide bombings would fall into that category, so no I disagree, the Qur'an is OK with suicide bombings.<br /><br />The Serpant does not share knowledge with God, it is used by Satan to deceive man, the serpant was a pawn. The knowlede man gained was to know good and evil, prior to that man knew only good. The price of disobedience was removal from the garden and the one that would bruise Satans head is Jesus.<br /><br />I am not familiar with the writers you mentioned, I know that Satan is a spirit and is not evolving, he does not need to evolve he aquires wisdom as a spirit and uses it for the same as his original purpose to deceive man. He has done an amazing job, humanity is so diluded but final judgement is coming shortly and all but the faith confirmed and fullfilled by Jesus will stand.</font><br />

<br /><br /><br />

It is absolutely perplexing how you believe all this stuff ATHM. If I may, were you raised chistian, or are you born again?

[ATHIM]

<br /><br /><br />

It is absolutely perplexing how you believe all this stuff ATHM. If I may, were you raised chistian, or are you born again?

Uncle Neo, you are very naughty. You have not read my posts to you in other threads, and I worked so hard on them. Your question shows me that you do not know God's way. But for the sake of what this is, an argument, I was Baptized as an infant but fell away from the church, in fact I was an atheist. At 24 I saw things from the next world and this one that made me do an about face. I have studied faith carefully and closely, I am Greek and I understand the scripture God is not only real but He is so real that in comparison we are not. Those who refute His existence do not know Him and He, likewise, has not chosen them and if you think that this sounds like a privilege state, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. God saw my heart and called me. If I might say, God is the God of truth and to propose that Christianity is a lie and that the Apostles were part of a con will have you kneeling before God's throne in need of mercy. NEO you and blueswan twist, as the devil does, the truth to suit your own earthly, very short lived justification. God will not be found in your earthy prepositions. Tell me where your heart is and I will direct it to Him and when you see the truth you will never look back, trust me the ONLY truth was thrust upon me by Him. So either I am a raving madman or you are wrong and you are WRONG. I will call you in the next life I will call NEO of the lost matrix and you will hear my voice. If you wait, till it's too late, you might not like what’s caused by what you negate. What proof do you want?

[blugrass60]

Uncle Neo, you are very naughty. You have not read my posts to you in other threads, and I worked so hard on them. Your question shows me that you do not know God's way. But for the sake of what this is, an argument, I was Baptized as an infant but fell away from the church, in fact I was an atheist. At 24 I saw things from the next world and this one that made me do an about face. I have studied faith carefully and closely, I am Greek and I understand the scripture God is not only real but He is so real that in comparison we are not. Those who refute His existence do not know Him and He, likewise, has not chosen them and if you think that this sounds like a privilege state, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. God saw my heart and called me. If I might say, God is the God of truth and to propose that Christianity is a lie and that the Apostles were part of a con will have you kneeling before God's throne in need of mercy. NEO you and blueswan twist, as the devil does, the truth to suit your own earthly, very short lived justification. God will not be found in your earthy prepositions. Tell me where your heart is and I will direct it to Him and when you see the truth you will never look back, trust me the ONLY truth was thrust upon me by Him. So either I am a raving madman or you are wrong and you are WRONG. I will call you in the next life I will call NEO of the lost matrix and you will hear my voice. If you wait, till it's too late, you might not like what’s caused by what you negate. What proof do you want?

What specifically did you see? Why and how did you go from athiest to fundamentalist? Im not trying to show an attitude.. I would actually like to hear, in detail what happened. I'll probably ask you questions about your experience and beliefs if you respond. I am genuinely curious.

[BruceV]

As a christian ... I believe it will be proven that God and science are closely connected one in the same. That's all I plan to say on that.

[Black Swan]

Blackswan, Its not what I was getting at. There is one God with one way, the rest are not the way to Him.

I am familiar with Hinduism and several other religions they are deceptive models based on humanistic wisdoms and imagination. The Isrealites were the selected by God to receive finite wisdom and knowledge through the law. The law upon which our society in the West and also since the incarnation of God in the East confirmed, fullfilled, established and explained in detail thorugh Jesus.

The Qur'an is a fallacy written by quarreling scribes who were instructed by an Arianistic heretic who blended local wisdom and some Christian understanding into a mesh of godless lies. There are Suras that condone the killing of Christians and suicide bombings would fall into that category, so no I disagree, the Qur'an is OK with suicide bombings.

The Serpant does not share knowledge with God, it is used by Satan to deceive man, the serpant was a pawn. The knowlede man gained was to know good and evil, prior to that man knew only good. The price of disobedience was removal from the garden and the one that would bruise Satans head is Jesus.

I am not familiar with the writers you mentioned, I know that Satan is a spirit and is not evolving, he does not need to evolve he aquires wisdom as a spirit and uses it for the same as his original purpose to deceive man. He has done an amazing job, humanity is so diluded but final judgement is coming shortly and all but the faith confirmed and fullfilled by Jesus will stand.

Look who isn't reading who's postings now. ha ha

If you go to my orginal post on this thread, I mentioned that you can't go high and mighty on me by using Ethocentrism – the belief that one’s own culture, religion, or nation is superior to all others – aids survival by strengthening our bonds to our primary social groups and thus increasing our willingness to work, fight and occasionally die for them. You Sir did exactly that with the statements you made above.

Remember, Hindi is MUCH older than Christianity or even it's forefather, Judiasm. And BILLIONS of people believe in it, so you can't simple foo foo it away and still hold a creditable argument.

I suggest you re-load there partner and try it again.

Read more:

[ATHIM]

Blacksawan, not going to go high and mighty on you. Just sharing what God did to me personally outside of the will of man and earthly knowledge. Since then I have taken the initiative and performed my due dilligence which confirms my initial experience. From my experience, perspective and unearthly interactions, there are only wrong ways to approach God and ONE right way, the rest of the ways will be history. I am not diminishing the experiences of the individuals in other religions but I do know hod God wants to be spoken to and what falls into the neccessary area in becoming one of His disciples.

[Black Swan]

Blacksawan, not going to go high and mighty on you. Just sharing what God did to me personally outside of the will of man and earthly knowledge. Since then I have taken the initiative and performed my due dilligence which confirms my initial experience. From my experience, perspective and unearthly interactions, there are only wrong ways to approach God and ONE right way, the rest of the ways will be history. I am not diminishing the experiences of the individuals in other religions but I do know hod God wants to be spoken to and what falls into the neccessary area in becoming one of His disciples.

ATHIM...saw your comment about "eathly knowledge' and thought to myself...what has God done to help us escape these "earthly bonds"...and this came to me.

I hear what you are saying but, for me my friend, I'll stick to the road to reason...each to his (or her) own. Peace

Edited June 28, 2012 by Black Swan

[tim228]

Am I the only one that is getting sick of this stuff? Its kind of depressing. I can especially think of Black Swan. I have different views than you. Obviously, I think I'm right and you think you're right. We are locked in a stale-mate. That's not the problem. The issue comes down to these "christians" that don't really know what they are arguing. At least you know what and why to your beliefs. Its those that have this joke picture of God Almighty and are trying to paint him as their idea of perfection. If you are going to use the Bible as your basis, please for the sake of everyone, KNOW THE BIBLE.