Will Science Eventually Drown Religion?

First of all, anyone can join, even you. Secondly, they placed that disclaimer there for a reason, which is self-explanatory. They are providing unbiased views, something your religion does not offer.

Correction, having ignored the facts of this discussion, your use of disinformation is being clarified.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

glaucon

last I checked god was a noun - so to get back to the elusive distinction between no evidence and a A complete lack of historical evidence can you please provide one example of evidence that isn't compiled in a historical format, particularly in regard to an object?

So if I say that china is an imagination am I denying the existence of china?


“ Originally Posted by lightgigantic
The Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. presently contains over 70 million items (books, magazines, journals, etc.). Hundreds of thousands of these were written by scholars and specialists in the various academic fields.

What percentage of the historical body of work compiled in the volumes of this library would you say are within your own pool of knowledge and experience? ”

but in this example aren't you relying on the knowledge and experience that a triangle has three sides?

so to get back to the original statements ....

Me - is the historical body of evidence as easy to negotiate as the back of your hand? ”

you - Of course.

If you cannot fathom the extent of the washington library it seems to indicate that negotiating the body of historical evidence in the washington library is equally impossible, .... now how do you propose to negotiate the body of historical evidence which is even greater than what is held in the washington library (the washington library is after all not a complete selection)?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No matter what there will always be certain people who are more intelligent than the rest, like if there is a difference in intelligence levels then there must be a limit. In my opinion science might be so far behind a person of highest intelligence that it would be drowned by....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

could you clarify what you mean by historical, please.

 

glaucon posted it - not me

I am trying to determine exactly what he means myself

I guess we will have to wait and see how he responds

 

*************
M*W: Try these sites:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/july/14.22.html

http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm

To answer your question, Christianity Today

I did find an article commenting on a New York Post article about 'christianity dying in the USA' but it did not agree with that article so it cannot be the piece you refer to!

*************
M*W: According to the web sites I've listed above, christianity is declining in the US, UK, rest of Europe (including drastically in Roman Catholic Italy), and in Canada. It is thriving, however, in South America and Africa.

.

*************
M*W: I'd recheck the statistics on this, if I were you.

*************
M*W: I don't know about China. That needs further study. As I've stated, christianity is thriving in South America and Africa, most likely because of the high birth rates than missionary effort.

*************
M*W: This may be true.

*************
M*W: No, you're wrong about this. I am well-versed in Roman Catholic doctrine as well as christianity in general. Been there, done both of 'em. I stand by my statement that Roman Catholicism started about 1600 years ago. It was late in the third century before the early church fathers got their shit together and decided upon the virgin birth, the trinity, and the creation of the dying-rising demigod savior.

Conveniently, the printing press was invented some 1200 years later which brought us the best seller in christian history, the Malleus Maleficarum.

*************
M*W: I don't believe this last quote applies to my post, so I will leave it alone.

 

I bet Moses, Jesus, mohammad, and buddha are geniuses?

 

no. they are higher than geniuses: prophets. moses and jesus (don't know about the others) were even higher: they were god-men.

 

A quote from Moses---a "God-Man".

"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that has known a man by sleeping with him.(Num 31:17).

I know,I know..out of context,right?

Yes, I would say Moses demonstrated his noble God like qualities just fine!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You're such a crazy bastard, inventing definitions for words that have common usages without explaining yourself. Crazy crazy.

Yes. Out of context. You know how I can tell? You quoted a "therefore" and left out its "because." Really obvious.

What are you, a couple of fat dudes in a bar fight?

 

It's a quote from the Bible. I can't be sure if Moses really said that, but if he did, he had good reasons.

God created Life in 7 days:

1. Matter
2. Plants
3. Animals
4. Humans (the beginning of spiritual evolution)
>Geniuses
>Prophets
>God-humans

(4x3=12)

 

Damn right he did.

Little boys are a fucking pain in the ass. We all know it. We'd kill them too if we had the chance.

And as for women who sleep with men, let me tell you. Whores, every last one of them. Kill em' all. After we've "slept" with them, of course.

 

Just let me add:

>> Morons
>> Minotaurs
>> Alien-human hybrids
>>> Unicorns
>>> Narwhals

 

Originally Posted by nova900
A quote from Moses---a "God-Man".

"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that has known a man by sleeping with him.(Num 31:17).

As someone who does believe in a supreme being,your response reinforces all the problems I have with the depiction of God and his "god-men" as shown in both the Old and New testament of bloodshed and slaughter.

 

i don't undestand..
he (moses) really had good reasons (if he did it).

 

Please read those sections. Read the ones on Sodom and Gomorah while you're at it.

 

Science and religion aren't at odds. Science is simply too young to understand.

 

What does this mean?

 

Science and religion are completely incompatible. It is a comparison of reality and delusion. In spite of whatever delusions people have, an objective reality exists. Post-modernist nutters will undoubtedly have some comments about "what is real?", "how do you prove anything exists?", etc., but all gives rise to various nihilist and solipsist silliness.

In the end, religion is about rigidity and refusing to progress with new information. Religious texts of humanity are full of such examples where modern people maintain notions of Bronze and Iron Age people that, today, are complete and utter nonsense. They maintain these notions because they refuse to progress or adapt. They somehow believe that Bronze Age people had some insight into the world that we lack when it comes to observing and discovering or that divine beings did indeed communicate with various cult leaders that claim this to have occurred in spite of not a single shred of evidence that such communications are possible.

Science, on the other hand is all about revision and adaptation. Every scientific "truth" is a provisional statement, made with the best available data and ready to be challenged and revised with new information. There are no claims that science relies on the supernatural or the magical in the manner that religion does and, ironically, science is independent of religious delusions. Reality is independent of religious delusion.

And it is this fact that religious nutters and their cult leaders are desperate to deride, criticize, confuse, muddle, and out-right lie about to conceal. For, if the deluded masses should actually apply real thought to their cults -should they actually take an etic perspective of religion in general- they might actually discover the man behind the curtain and start asking questions about him.

 

Given the state of imbecility in a rapidly advancing technological world, I would say that science and religion both stand to be drowned

Image removed. Reason: copyright violation.
-from the Zippy the Pinhead website: Contents copyright © 2002-2003-2004-2005-2006 Bill Griffith