Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Science Didn't Need God...

IntellectVsSpirit5000
Posts: 1,266
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2015 6:01:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Science didn't need God once it was found that our reality was much bigger than originally thought. But now Cosmologists are being forced to reconsider this position...

https://youtu.be...

King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 3:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 9:53:59 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.

I agree
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 10:17:02 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 6:01:30 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science didn't need God once it was found that our reality was much bigger than originally thought. But now Cosmologists are being forced to reconsider this position...

https://youtu.be...


King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 3:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

Without God science would not exist because he is the original scientists who created everything that science tries and frequently fails to understand..

One reason science often fails is because you cannot solve a mathematical equation if you leave out one of the factors.

Jehovah is the most important factor in existence so to ignore him automatically put scientists in error.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/26/2016 10:17:44 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Absolutely.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 9:31:34 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/26/2016 9:53:59 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.

I agree

Good.
Do you still pray to God as if he was a person who could actually hear you ?
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 9:59:08 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.
You know I wish God would hurry up. I'm done with the lesson now I just want peace and bliss and fun and stuff, ya know.
RedAtheist912
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:14:26 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.

Are you Christian or pantheist?
RedAtheist912
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:17:41 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Which equation?
RedAtheist912
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:21:00 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/26/2016 10:17:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 11/10/2015 6:01:30 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science didn't need God once it was found that our reality was much bigger than originally thought. But now Cosmologists are being forced to reconsider this position...

https://youtu.be...


King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 3:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

Without God science would not exist because he is the original scientists who created everything that science tries and frequently fails to understand..

Do you have evidence that God created the universe?

One reason science often fails is because you cannot solve a mathematical equation if you leave out one of the factors.

Where has science often failed?

Jehovah is the most important factor in existence so to ignore him automatically put scientists in error.

And where is God the most important factor? 1+God=2?

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:56:05 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 10:21:00 AM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 4/26/2016 10:17:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:



King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 1:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

Without God science would not exist because he is the original scientists who created everything that science tries and frequently fails to understand..

Do you have evidence that God created the universe?

The evidence lies in the inevitable conclusion that this world was created, designed, not just allowed to happen by accident.

The evidence lies mainly in micro-biology, which has revealed more and more the things which cast doubt on evolution and initially sparked the "Intelligent Design" idea.


One reason science often fails is because you cannot solve a mathematical equation if you leave out one of the factors.

Where has science often failed?

It would be easier to say where hasn't it.

Apart from in the application of such things as physical laws it has failed dismally.

For instance Cosmology was thrown into a turmoil from which it is yet to recover, by the discovery of the effects of "Dark Force" which they cannot see, measure or describe other than by the visible effects it has on planets and galaxies.

It has tried to measure time back into pre-history, but has been unable to provide reliable evidence of the accuracy of it's methods and what they are based on. Unfortunately for those who claim otherwise, the only way they could do so would be by travelling back in time and taking measurements every few millennia, an absolute impossibility.

It tied to measure the changes in the size of the hole in the Ozone Layer over Antarctica, until they finally realised they had neglected to take cumulative effect into account and they had missed it becoming irreversibly, by any human method, large.

They have tried to prove evolution and only succeeded in proving adaptation within kinds as per the creation account.

The list is almost endless and is inevitably caused, at root, by two things:

Failure to recognise their own limitations

and

Failure to include the Creator in their calculations.


Jehovah is the most important factor in existence so to ignore him automatically put scientists in error.

And where is God the most important factor? 1+God=2?

God is the most important factor in anything to do with life, it's origins, it's eventual "destination", interpersonal relationships, recognition of the commonality of humanity everywhere.

And most of all in the recognition of what we are actually having to live through, what mankind has had to live through for 6,000 years, what we will be able to soon enjoy for the best part of the next 900 years, and what that will then give us for eternity.

Where we came from, why we are really here, and what is planned for our futures.

In other words anything of real importance.


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.

Einstein never got anything more right than that. Science should not try and tread in areas that are not within its real purview, and more than Adam and Eve should have.

After all, look what that left us with.

Look what happened when Abraham stepped briefly outside his purview and gave the world IS, and other Islamic extremists through his temporary folly.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:57:41 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 10:14:26 AM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.

Are you Christian or pantheist?

Well she isn't Christian that is the only thing anyone should be able to be sure of, but then very few are in reality. They just want to think they are and don't really care abut what Christ thinks.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 11:00:47 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 9:59:08 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.
You know I wish God would hurry up. I'm done with the lesson now I just want peace and bliss and fun and stuff, ya know.

Yeah, we all want that, and when the time is right for it, we will get it.

Jehovah has a set time-scale, and it has been set for the roughly last 6,000 years.

His own laws of justice mean he cannot vary it without being accused of cheating, and he never cheats.

Don't worry, the next stage is due to start any time soon.
Lonely-Bird
Posts: 51
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 11:13:43 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
No such thing as an inevitable conclusion based upon the writings of one group of Semitic people used to justify, rationalize and explain their own actions.

The creation stories of that group of Semitic people are no more true than the creation stories of any other people.

Dark matter has not thrown science into anything. Science seeks answers and develops theories. When theories are shown to be inaccurate they are discarded.

Evolution doesn't occur on human time.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 1:21:20 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 11:13:43 AM, Lonely-Bird wrote:
No such thing as an inevitable conclusion based upon the writings of one group of Semitic people used to justify, rationalize and explain their own actions.

except that the Bible is not such a book.

It is the story of the development of Jehovah's plan to bring mankind back to the state Adam and Eve enjoyed before the fall.

If you look at the Bible from the right starting point the results are indeed inevitable.

If you insist on viewing it purely from a human and therefore highly fallible viewpoint you will inevitably be proved wrong.


The creation stories of that group of Semitic people are no more true than the creation stories of any other people.

The creation account in the Bible is not only true it actually fits the available evidence if read correctly and with reason. It is a unique account of creation in so many ways.

If you cannot see that it is almost certainly because you do not wish to.


Dark matter has not thrown science into anything. Science seeks answers and develops theories. When theories are shown to be inaccurate they are discarded.

I was not referring to Dark Matter, but Dark Force which may be a totally different thing if they ever manage to find out what it actually is, or is caused by. Apparently Cosmologists think it has.


Evolution doesn't occur on human time.

Evolution doesn't occur. Period.
RedAtheist912
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 1:49:39 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 10:56:05 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 10:21:00 AM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 4/26/2016 10:17:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:



King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 1:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

Without God science would not exist because he is the original scientists who created everything that science tries and frequently fails to understand..

Do you have evidence that God created the universe?

The evidence lies in the inevitable conclusion that this world was created, designed, not just allowed to happen by accident.

That's your assumption. If you take a rock from the roadside, you would probably say it has many picturesque edges and you admire the pure complexity and beauty of the rock. But that doesn't mean it was designed. Same goes for the universe. Just because we have not found out its origins does not mean it was designed, we just haven't found the answer.

The evidence lies mainly in micro-biology, which has revealed more and more the things which cast doubt on evolution and initially sparked the "Intelligent Design" idea.

How has microbiology cast doubt on evolution and spark the designer idea?


One reason science often fails is because you cannot solve a mathematical equation if you leave out one of the factors.

Where has science often failed?

It would be easier to say where hasn't it.

Where hasn't science failed: technology, biology, medicine, astronomy, basically everything that separates us from the medieval ages. Science was what got us where we are today, it's interesting to hear you say science has failed.

Apart from in the application of such things as physical laws it has failed dismally.

For instance Cosmology was thrown into a turmoil from which it is yet to recover, by the discovery of the effects of "Dark Force" which they cannot see, measure or describe other than by the visible effects it has on planets and galaxies.

They made a new discovery. What's the turmoil? That's how science works, they make a new discovery, their explanations are changed to fit the observations best. That way, science is always, always on the side of evidence, producing the most observable and best known explanations for the natural world.

It has tried to measure time back into pre-history, but has been unable to provide reliable evidence of the accuracy of it's methods and what they are based on. Unfortunately for those who claim otherwise, the only way they could do so would be by travelling back in time and taking measurements every few millennia, an absolute impossibility.

For biology, we do have fossils to see back into the past. The layer of rock the fossils were found in would say when the organism died, and lived. Logical? We have telescopes to see galaxies and nebulae all moving away from a singularity, thus supposing they came from a single point in the past. Make sense? You have yet to provide evidence that science is unreliable when judging the past.


It tied to measure the changes in the size of the hole in the Ozone Layer over Antarctica, until they finally realised they had neglected to take cumulative effect into account and they had missed it becoming irreversibly, by any human method, large.

And then what did they do? Once they found out the flaw, they admitted the previous findings were wrong and adopted the new findings. See above, science would always be on the side of evidence. Another thing is they are prepared to admit they are wrong.

They have tried to prove evolution and only succeeded in proving adaptation within kinds as per the creation account.

Do you have any evidence for that? Are you a biologist? Did you do research on macroevolution before this? The evidence is there: embryology, geographical distribution, fossils, genetics... I'll admit we can't prove things to 100%, but for sure evolution is 99.99% absolute fact. In this case we have all the evidence pointing in one single direction: evolution. And for sure 99.99% is a whole lot better than a 6000 year old Earth and a global flood which has no evidence of.

The list is almost endless and is inevitably caused, at root, by two things:

Failure to recognise their own limitations

Well, go live in a jungle and keep yourself away from science then. Don't let your child attend science lessons then.

and

Failure to include the Creator in their calculations.

Failure to agree with you, you mean?



Jehovah is the most important factor in existence so to ignore him automatically put scientists in error.

And where is God the most important factor? 1+God=2?

God is the most important factor in anything to do with life, it's origins, it's eventual "destination", interpersonal relationships, recognition of the commonality of humanity everywhere.

And most of all in the recognition of what we are actually having to live through, what mankind has had to live through for 6,000 years, what we will be able to soon enjoy for the best part of the next 900 years, and what that will then give us for eternity.

Where we came from, why we are really here, and what is planned for our futures.

In other words anything of real importance.

Is all of that true because you say so?


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.

Einstein never got anything more right than that. Science should not try and tread in areas that are not within its real purview, and more than Adam and Eve should have.

One side is evidence, the other blind speculations. One side prospered and gave us the Dark Ages, the other prospered and gave us the scientific revolution. What would be more beneficial to humanity?

After all, look what that left us with.

Look what happened when Abraham stepped briefly outside his purview and gave the world IS, and other Islamic extremists through his temporary folly.

Abraham gave the world IS? Perhaps extreme Jihadists have something to do with that?
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 4:32:21 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 1:49:39 PM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 4/27/2016 10:56:05 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

The evidence lies in the inevitable conclusion that this world was created, designed, not just allowed to happen by accident.

That's your assumption. If you take a rock from the roadside, you would probably say it has many picturesque edges and you admire the pure complexity and beauty of the rock. But that doesn't mean it was designed. Same goes for the universe. Just because we have not found out its origins does not mean it was designed, we just haven't found the answer.

No it is not an assumption, it is a conclusion based on the available evidence.

It is based on the absolute impossibility of some biological mechanisms being far too complex to have developed in stages. i. e. the complex "Gearboxes", for want of a better description, of some simple single celled organisms.


The evidence lies mainly in micro-biology, which has revealed more and more the things which cast doubt on evolution and initially sparked the "Intelligent Design" idea.

How has microbiology cast doubt on evolution and spark the designer idea?

See the above answer.


Where has science often failed?

It would be easier to say where hasn't it.


Where hasn't science failed: technology, biology, medicine, astronomy, basically everything that separates us from the medieval ages. Science was what got us where we are today, it's interesting to hear you say science has failed.

All of the above include examples of sciences failures. For example, in the medical world Thalidomide.

I suggest you learn a little about the problems that being "separated from the middle ages have led to. Climate Change, Pollution, Crop failures, Increased desertification, etc.. The list is very long.


Apart from in the application of such things as physical laws it has failed dismally.

For instance Cosmology was thrown into a turmoil from which it is yet to recover, by the discovery of the effects of "Dark Force" which they cannot see, measure or describe other than by the visible effects it has on planets and galaxies.

They made a new discovery. What's the turmoil? That's how science works, they make a new discovery, their explanations are changed to fit the observations best. That way, science is always, always on the side of evidence, producing the most observable and best known explanations for the natural world.

That is the point. They have discovered neither it, nor it's source, all they have discovered is how it's effect makes a mess of some of their theories.


It has tried to measure time back into pre-history, but has been unable to provide reliable evidence of the accuracy of it's methods and what they are based on. Unfortunately for those who claim otherwise, the only way they could do so would be by travelling back in time and taking measurements every few millennia, an absolute impossibility.

For biology, we do have fossils to see back into the past. The layer of rock the fossils were found in would say when the organism died, and lived. Logical? We have telescopes to see galaxies and nebulae all moving away from a singularity, thus supposing they came from a single point in the past. Make sense? You have yet to provide evidence that science is unreliable when judging the past.

Except that there is no way of knowing how old the rock is with any provable certainty. They claim success in that bt in fact it is not possible for them to know of any changes that may have occurred without a time machine to go back and make measurements in.



It tied to measure the changes in the size of the hole in the Ozone Layer over Antarctica, until they finally realised they had neglected to take cumulative effect into account and they had missed it becoming irreversibly, by any human method, large.

And then what did they do? Once they found out the flaw, they admitted the previous findings were wrong and adopted the new findings. See above, science would always be on the side of evidence. Another thing is they are prepared to admit they are wrong.

If science were always on teh side of evidence Evolution woul not be a science since the evidence supports creation better than evolution.


They have tried to prove evolution and only succeeded in proving adaptation within kinds as per the creation account.

Do you have any evidence for that? Are you a biologist? Did you do research on macroevolution before this? The evidence is there: embryology, geographical distribution, fossils, genetics... I'll admit we can't prove things to 100%, but for sure evolution is 99.99% absolute fact. In this case we have all the evidence pointing in one single direction: evolution. And for sure 99.99% is a whole lot better than a 6000 year old Earth and a global flood which has no evidence of.

No, but I have seen reports of ones who are qualified in those disciplines.

Scripture does not claim that the earth is only 6,000 years old. In fact carefully avoids giving us even the smallest hint as to the age of the earth or the rest of the universe at all.

All it does give us. by carefully recording human genealogy, is the age of humanity, and it only gives us that because it is essential for us to be able to work it out.


The list is almost endless and is inevitably caused, at root, by two things:

Failure to recognise their own limitations

Well, go live in a jungle and keep yourself away from science then. Don't let your child attend science lessons then.

How else is my child to see the holes in what science claims unless they learn about it?


and

Failure to include the Creator in their calculations.

Failure to agree with you, you mean?

No. I mean precisely what I say. It is nothing to do with me, it is purely based on available evidence.




Einstein never got anything more right than that. Science should not try and tread in areas that are not within its real purview, and more than Adam and Eve should have.

One side is evidence, the other blind speculations. One side prospered and gave us the Dark Ages, the other prospered and gave us the scientific revolution. What would be more beneficial to humanity?

No, not in the least everything I believe is based on the available evidence, all of it. I cannot form an opinion unless I have evidence to base it on.

I only wish more scientists were prepared to be the same, they would get far less wrong if they were.


After all, look what that left us with.

Look what happened when Abraham stepped briefly outside his purview and gave the world IS, and other Islamic extremists through his temporary folly.

Abraham gave the world IS? Perhaps extreme Jihadists have something to do with that?

Yes. The Islamic races are, by their own claims, as well as History, all descended from Ishmael, Abraham's illegitimate son, who was only conceived because Abraham didn't trust Jehovah's promise to him to provide a son from Sarah.

I did say "and other Islamic extremists" since they are a part of all Islamic races.
Lonely-Bird
Posts: 51
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 8:32:47 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 1:21:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 11:13:43 AM, Lonely-Bird wrote:
No such thing as an inevitable conclusion based upon the writings of one group of Semitic people used to justify, rationalize and explain their own actions.

except that the Bible is not such a book.

It is the story of the development of Jehovah's plan to bring mankind back to the state Adam and Eve enjoyed before the fall.

If you look at the Bible from the right starting point the results are indeed inevitable.

If you insist on viewing it purely from a human and therefore highly fallible viewpoint you will inevitably be proved wrong.


The creation stories of that group of Semitic people are no more true than the creation stories of any other people.

The creation account in the Bible is not only true it actually fits the available evidence if read correctly and with reason. It is a unique account of creation in so many ways.


If you cannot see that it is almost certainly because you do not wish to.


Dark matter has not thrown science into anything. Science seeks answers and develops theories. When theories are shown to be inaccurate they are discarded.

I was not referring to Dark Matter, but Dark Force which may be a totally different thing if they ever manage to find out what it actually is, or is caused by. Apparently Cosmologists think it has.


Evolution doesn't occur on human time.

Evolution doesn't occur. Period.
The bible is none of the things you claim. The Jewish people who wrote it get to decide what it means, you and every other religionist do not.

The article in scientific American re: dark matter and dark force hasn't caused upheaval and stirred cosmology toward any so-called designer. There is no "right starting point." There is a Semitic people attempting to rationalize why bad things happened to them, why their actions in wholesale murder were acceptable and why land theft was ok'd by deity. They borrowed from various other religions in creating their own.

The bible fits no evidence re: creation. None. You wish that it does and you believe that it does because you have chosen to believe in a young world universe. It also has two stories of human creation. Which one is the story? As for further nonsense how many animals were allegedly taken on the ark?
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 9:14:25 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 8:32:47 PM, Lonely-Bird wrote:
At 4/27/2016 1:21:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

Evolution doesn't occur. Period.
The bible is none of the things you claim. The Jewish people who wrote it get to decide what it means, you and every other religionist do not.

If you knew the Bible well enough you would know that it is in fact everything I claim for it an more besides, all yu are revealing is your ignorance of the thing you criticise in ignorance..

I could prove any of the things I say, but obviously it all takes time, and certainly isn't something that can be done on a site like this.

However any experienced JW will be happy to prove it to you, and all it will cost you is about 1 hour a week at a mutually convenient time..

How much effort is the truth worth to you?


The article in scientific American re: dark matter and dark force hasn't caused upheaval and stirred cosmology toward any so-called designer. There is no "right starting point." There is a Semitic people attempting to rationalize why bad things happened to them, why their actions in wholesale murder were acceptable and why land theft was ok'd by deity. They borrowed from various other religions in creating their own.

Again you show your ignorance of scripture, and your willingness to judge it on so little knowledge.


The bible fits no evidence re: creation. None. You wish that it does and you believe that it does because you have chosen to believe in a young world universe. It also has two stories of human creation. Which one is the story? As for further nonsense how many animals were allegedly taken on the ark?

That is a very stupid claim to make which is easy to disprove.

Have you actually read it?

It states that:

Verse 1: The universe was created. The Universe is the suns, al of them, the planets moons and all.

Verse 2: At first, as the earth cools it is covered with water and has no real form. Due to the volcanic activity the atmosphere is completely opaque so the surface of the earth is still in darkness

Verses 3 - 5: As the Atmosphere clears light is able to reach the surface of the earth, but the sun moon etc. are still not visible.

Verses 6 - 11: God separates the water into two lots, one of which is taken into the high atmosphere, almost certainly as vapour. (It is this water which is brought down to the earth in the deluge). This causes land to appear and since the oceans are gathered into one place that naturally follows that the land is in one place. (Genesis 10:25 tells of the land splitting).

Verses 12 - 13: Grass etc. appears.

Verse 14 - 19: The atmosphere finally clears enough for the sun moon and stars to be made visible.

Verse 20 - 23: Sea creatures are created, as well as Flying Creatures also.

Verse 24 - 25:

Verse 26 - 28: Man is created

Now find me another religious story of creation that is as accurate as that.

True it gives very few details and absolutely no idea of how long each stage took, but what details it gives us fit in completely with modern scientific knowledge.

Deny it all you like, that remains true, and always will.

I suggest that you stop criticising the Bible in ignorance of any idea of what it contains and what it is other than the words of those who have reason to try and convince you of what is not true.

Get to know it yourself and then you will be able to make up your mind in know;ledge rather than ignorance as you are doing at present.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 9:47:43 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 9:14:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 8:32:47 PM, Lonely-Bird wrote:
At 4/27/2016 1:21:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

Evolution doesn't occur. Period.
The bible is none of the things you claim. The Jewish people who wrote it get to decide what it means, you and every other religionist do not.

If you knew the Bible well enough you would know that it is in fact everything I claim for it an more besides, all yu are revealing is your ignorance of the thing you criticise in ignorance..

I could prove any of the things I say, but obviously it all takes time, and certainly isn't something that can be done on a site like this.

However any experienced JW will be happy to prove it to you, and all it will cost you is about 1 hour a week at a mutually convenient time..

Just like they "proved" 1874, 1878, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1926, and the entire decade of the 1930's? They same way they "proved" their "before the end of the millennium?" In fact, they've had about 140 years of "proving" stuff - until none of it ever happened.

You know, one of the "litmus tests" for a possible cult member is this: "To which do you ascribe more importance, (1) unity of the group or (2) accuracy of the beliefs?" Almost always, a prospective cult member will answer, "Unity". I would ask you, but since you seldom really answer the question, I'll forego that.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Athomos
Posts: 401
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:18:32 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 10:56:05 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

The evidence lies in the inevitable conclusion that this world was created, designed, not just allowed to happen by accident.


The evidence lies in the conclusion?
Freudian slip.

The evidence lies mainly in micro-biology, which has revealed more and more the things which cast doubt on evolution and initially sparked the "Intelligent Design" idea.


Says the individual who does not understand the first thing about biology. The overwhelming majority of scientists actually studying biology disagree with you.

I'm not saying you're wrong just because the overwhelming majority of professional biologists disagree with you. You're wrong, for reasons already stated, AND the overwhelming majority of professional biologists disagree with you.


One reason science often fails is because you cannot solve a mathematical equation if you leave out one of the factors.


Please specify which equations pertaining to Biology you're alluding to and which factors have been left out.

Where has science often failed?

It would be easier to say where hasn't it.

Apart from in the application of such things as physical laws it has failed dismally.

For instance Cosmology was thrown into a turmoil from which it is yet to recover, by the discovery of the effects of "Dark Force" which they cannot see, measure or describe other than by the visible effects it has on planets and galaxies.


*facepalm*

It has tried to measure time back into pre-history, but has been unable to provide reliable evidence of the accuracy of it's methods

Show evidence of that.

and what they are based on. Unfortunately for those who claim otherwise, the only way they could do so would be by travelling back in time and taking measurements every few millennia, an absolute impossibility.


You have no idea how science works.

It tied to measure the changes in the size of the hole in the Ozone Layer over Antarctica, until they finally realised they had neglected to take cumulative effect into account and they had missed it becoming irreversibly, by any human method, large.


That would be a testament to Science's strengths not its weaknesses. The fact you cannot realize that shows you do not understand science at a fundamental level.

They have tried to prove evolution and only succeeded in proving adaptation within kinds as per the creation account.


What is the scientific definition of a kind? What is its phylogenetic equivalent?

The list is almost endless and is inevitably caused, at root, by two things:

Failure to recognise their own limitations

and

Failure to include the Creator in their calculations.



*facepalm*

Include the Creator in the calculations?

*facepalm*


Jehovah is the most important factor in existence so to ignore him automatically put scientists in error.

And where is God the most important factor? 1+God=2?

God is the most important factor in anything to do with life, it's origins, it's eventual "destination", interpersonal relationships, recognition of the commonality of humanity everywhere.

And most of all in the recognition of what we are actually having to live through, what mankind has had to live through for 6,000 years, what we will be able to soon enjoy for the best part of the next 900 years, and what that will then give us for eternity.


Mankind is 6 000 years old?

*facepalm*

Where we came from, why we are really here, and what is planned for our futures.

In other words anything of real importance.


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.

Einstein never got anything more right than that. Science should not try and tread in areas that are not within its real purview, and more than Adam and Eve should have.


So you're not even aware of the context of that Einstein quote? So you're not even aware of Einstein's religious beliefs?

*facepalm*

After all, look what that left us with.


Progress?
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 10:25:57 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 9:47:43 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 4/27/2016 9:14:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 8:32:47 PM, Lonely-Bird wrote:
At 4/27/2016 1:21:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

Evolution doesn't occur. Period.
The bible is none of the things you claim. The Jewish people who wrote it get to decide what it means, you and every other religionist do not.

If you knew the Bible well enough you would know that it is in fact everything I claim for it an more besides, all yu are revealing is your ignorance of the thing you criticise in ignorance..

I could prove any of the things I say, but obviously it all takes time, and certainly isn't something that can be done on a site like this.

However any experienced JW will be happy to prove it to you, and all it will cost you is about 1 hour a week at a mutually convenient time..

Just like they "proved" 1874, 1878, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1926, and the entire decade of the 1930's? They same way they "proved" their "before the end of the millennium?" In fact, they've had about 140 years of "proving" stuff - until none of it ever happened.

You know, one of the "litmus tests" for a possible cult member is this: "To which do you ascribe more importance, (1) unity of the group or (2) accuracy of the beliefs?" Almost always, a prospective cult member will answer, "Unity". I would ask you, but since you seldom really answer the question, I'll forego that.

There are two factors needed for true worship.

1: is unity of belief.

That is what the Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem were al about.

That is what the modern day equivalent of the Governing Body is all about.

2: is trust in Jehovah to make sure that our beliefs are as accurate as he requires them to be.

That is faith is about.

Faith in Jehovah's guidance.

Faith also that, if we are in error because of ignorance Jehovah will correct that ignorance exactly when he needs us to know the truth of what we are in error about.

If he is not supplying us with accurate information we cannot be expected to be accurate in our teachings. Nor will he.

Remember the words of the inspired man?

Psalm 130:3-4
3 If errors were what you watch, O Jah,
Then who, O Jehovah, could stand?
4 For with you there is true forgiveness,
So that you may be held in awe.

Yes we are going to make errors, whoever we are, and we have to accept that we are only human.

However Jehovah forgives error.

He does not forgive disobedience so easily.

If Jehovah forgives error should you not do so also?

The JWs have always learned from their errors.

You do not.

Not only that but you hold the errors of others against them even when corrected.

That says an awful lot about you Anna, and none of it nice or good.

Physician, heal thyself. Sort out your own spiritual sickness first and then maybe, just maybe Christ will be able to heal you Matthew 13:15.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/27/2016 11:58:03 PM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 10:25:57 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 9:47:43 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 4/27/2016 9:14:25 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 8:32:47 PM, Lonely-Bird wrote:
At 4/27/2016 1:21:20 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

Evolution doesn't occur. Period.
The bible is none of the things you claim. The Jewish people who wrote it get to decide what it means, you and every other religionist do not.

If you knew the Bible well enough you would know that it is in fact everything I claim for it an more besides, all yu are revealing is your ignorance of the thing you criticise in ignorance..

I could prove any of the things I say, but obviously it all takes time, and certainly isn't something that can be done on a site like this.

However any experienced JW will be happy to prove it to you, and all it will cost you is about 1 hour a week at a mutually convenient time..

Just like they "proved" 1874, 1878, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1926, and the entire decade of the 1930's? They same way they "proved" their "before the end of the millennium?" In fact, they've had about 140 years of "proving" stuff - until none of it ever happened.

You know, one of the "litmus tests" for a possible cult member is this: "To which do you ascribe more importance, (1) unity of the group or (2) accuracy of the beliefs?" Almost always, a prospective cult member will answer, "Unity". I would ask you, but since you seldom really answer the question, I'll forego that.

There are two factors needed for true worship.

1: is unity of belief.

That is what the Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem were al about.

That is what the modern day equivalent of the Governing Body is all about.

2: is trust in Jehovah to make sure that our beliefs are as accurate as he requires them to be.

That is faith is about.

Faith in Jehovah's guidance.

Faith also that, if we are in error because of ignorance Jehovah will correct that ignorance exactly when he needs us to know the truth of what we are in error about.

If he is not supplying us with accurate information we cannot be expected to be accurate in our teachings. Nor will he.

Remember the words of the inspired man?

Psalm 130:3-4
3 If errors were what you watch, O Jah,
Then who, O Jehovah, could stand?
4 For with you there is true forgiveness,
So that you may be held in awe.

Yes we are going to make errors, whoever we are, and we have to accept that we are only human.

However Jehovah forgives error.

He does not forgive disobedience so easily.

If Jehovah forgives error should you not do so also?

The JWs have always learned from their errors.

You do not.

Not only that but you hold the errors of others against them even when corrected.

That says an awful lot about you Anna, and none of it nice or good.

Physician, heal thyself. Sort out your own spiritual sickness first and then maybe, just maybe Christ will be able to heal you Matthew 13:15.

OK, I'll ask it:

"You know, one of the "litmus tests" for a possible cult member is this: "To which do you ascribe more importance, (1) unity of the group or (2) accuracy of the beliefs?" Almost always, a prospective cult member will answer, "Unity". Which is it, MadClown?

I ask, knowing full well that you won't answer. You might "reply", but you won't answer.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2016 2:51:22 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 10:14:26 AM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.

Are you Christian or pantheist?

Neither.
I am a realist.
RedAtheist912
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2016 7:41:13 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/28/2016 2:51:22 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 4/27/2016 10:14:26 AM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 11/10/2015 11:03:38 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.

Science studies God and does not even realize it is studying God.
God is LIFE.
God is ENERGY.
God is EVERYTHING.
God is not some invisible supernatural character who invented everything. That character is a human creation, an anthropomorphism of the POWERS that be or the ENERGY of the universe.

Are you Christian or pantheist?

Neither.
I am a realist.

Your description of God sounds more like a pantheist's. A realist would not conclude speculations without evidence.
Overhead
Posts: 106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2016 8:03:04 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/26/2016 10:17:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.

Actually, this proves the point that religion should stay out of science it's just that you're warping it by taking it out of context.

The comment comes from his talk at The Conference on Science, Philosophy and Religion in Their Relation to the Democratic Way of Life

http://www.update.uu.se...

In this he specifically points out that the religion is helpful in that it is part of the world that forms values judgements, not because it is in any way useful to forming actual valid theories of how the world works. Indeed he views attempts by religion to assert what is true as wrong and meddlesome, citing examples like Galileo and Darwin.

"Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts."

So to try and cite Einstein as agreeing that religion is necessary to find truth is completely incorrect, that was the exact opposite of the point he was making in the speech you quote.

Not only that but that was a public statement in a conference on religion where he was being polite. In private correspondence where he didn't have to worry about that, he lambasted religion as childish : https://www.theguardian.com...
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2016 11:02:54 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 11/10/2015 6:01:30 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science didn't need God once it was found that our reality was much bigger than originally thought. But now Cosmologists are being forced to reconsider this position...

https://youtu.be...


King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 3:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

Science needs an immaterial object or entity.

This required entity is god.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2016 11:05:58 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 9:59:08 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/10/2015 10:23:46 PM, IntellectVsSpirit5000 wrote:
Science needs God to finish the equation.
You know I wish God would hurry up. I'm done with the lesson now I just want peace and bliss and fun and stuff, ya know.

Be wants you to have the morals of Jesus, a perfect entity.

But since we are flawed and tainted by sin
we can never become perfectly moral.

You will never be done with your lesson.

Also your job is to save as many people as possible.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6
Dragon_of_Christ
Posts: 1,293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/28/2016 11:18:08 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 4/27/2016 1:49:39 PM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 4/27/2016 10:56:05 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 4/27/2016 10:21:00 AM, RedAtheist912 wrote:
At 4/26/2016 10:17:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:



King James Bible
Daniel 12:4
"But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."

1 Corinthians 3:19
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."

1 Corinthians 1:26-28
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound those who think themselves wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

Without God science would not exist because he is the original scientists who created everything that science tries and frequently fails to understand..

Do you have evidence that God created the universe?

The evidence lies in the inevitable conclusion that this world was created, designed, not just allowed to happen by accident.

That's your assumption. If you take a rock from the roadside, you would probably say it has many picturesque edges and you admire the pure complexity and beauty of the rock. But that doesn't mean it was designed. Same goes for the universe. Just because we have not found out its origins does not mean it was designed, we just haven't found the answer.

That is a terrible example.

Just sayian.

The evidence lies mainly in micro-biology, which has revealed more and more the things which cast doubt on evolution and initially sparked the "Intelligent Design" idea.

How has microbiology cast doubt on evolution and spark the designer idea?

That is a better example of complexity, just too delacate.

You aren't gohan to win this one buddy.

One reason science often fails is because you cannot solve a mathematical equation if you leave out one of the factors.

Where has science often failed?

It would be easier to say where hasn't it.

Where hasn't science failed: technology, biology, medicine, astronomy, basically everything that separates us from the medieval ages. Science was what got us where we are today, it's interesting to hear you say science has failed.

We are constantly krillin old theories, current ones will be disposed of too.

Apart from in the application of such things as physical laws it has failed dismally.

For instance Cosmology was thrown into a turmoil from which it is yet to recover, by the discovery of the effects of "Dark Force" which they cannot see, measure or describe other than by the visible effects it has on planets and galaxies.

They made a new discovery. What's the turmoil? That's how science works, they make a new discovery, their explanations are changed to fit the observations best. That way, science is always, always on the side of evidence, producing the most observable and best known explanations for the natural world.

^^^ Proof for above comment, that hit is a destructo disk upon you.

It has tried to measure time back into pre-history, but has been unable to provide reliable evidence of the accuracy of it's methods and what they are based on. Unfortunately for those who claim otherwise, the only way they could do so would be by travelling back in time and taking measurements every few millennia, an absolute impossibility.

For biology, we do have fossils to see back into the past. The layer of rock the fossils were found in would say when the organism died, and lived. Logical? We have telescopes to see galaxies and nebulae all moving away from a singularity, thus supposing they came from a single point in the past. Make sense? You have yet to provide evidence that science is unreliable when judging the past.

The fossil record has been kamihamehaed (destroyed) as reliable evidense.

Google it.

It tied to measure the changes in the size of the hole in the Ozone Layer over Antarctica, until they finally realised they had neglected to take cumulative effect into account and they had missed it becoming irreversibly, by any human method, large.

And then what did they do? Once they found out the flaw, they admitted the previous findings were wrong and adopted the new findings. See above, science would always be on the side of evidence. Another thing is they are prepared to admit they are wrong.

They have tried to prove evolution and only succeeded in proving adaptation within kinds as per the creation account.

Do you have any evidence for that? Are you a biologist? Did you do research on macroevolution before this? The evidence is there: embryology, geographical distribution, fossils, genetics... I'll admit we can't prove things to 100%, but for sure evolution is 99.99% absolute fact. In this case we have all the evidence pointing in one single direction: evolution. And for sure 99.99% is a whole lot better than a 6000 year old Earth and a global flood which has no evidence of.

The list is almost endless and is inevitably caused, at root, by two things:

Failure to recognise their own limitations

Well, go live in a jungle and keep yourself away from science then. Don't let your child attend science lessons then.

and

Failure to include the Creator in their calculations.

Failure to agree with you, you mean?



Jehovah is the most important factor in existence so to ignore him automatically put scientists in error.

And where is God the most important factor? 1+God=2?

God is the most important factor in anything to do with life, it's origins, it's eventual "destination", interpersonal relationships, recognition of the commonality of humanity everywhere.

And most of all in the recognition of what we are actually having to live through, what mankind has had to live through for 6,000 years, what we will be able to soon enjoy for the best part of the next 900 years, and what that will then give us for eternity.

Where we came from, why we are really here, and what is planned for our futures.

In other words anything of real importance.

Is all of that true because you say so?


"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". Albert Einstein.

Einstein never got anything more right than that. Science should not try and tread in areas that are not within its real purview, and more than Adam and Eve should have.

One side is evidence, the other blind speculations. One side prospered and gave us the Dark Ages, the other prospered and gave us the scientific revolution. What would be more beneficial to humanity?

After all, look what that left us with.

Look what happened when Abraham stepped briefly outside his purview and gave the world IS, and other Islamic extremists through his temporary folly.

Abraham gave the world IS? Perhaps extreme Jihadists have something to do with that?

"Prehaps" really?

"Proof" i say to that.

Sorry, didn't have time to respond to anything else.
Jesus loves you.

////////////

-Funny Links-
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...

Stupid atheist remarks #: 6