nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
Granted, as to your point on Robertson. However, love is a subjective term, correct?
GOD DID NOT CREATE THE UNIVERSE (says my man Steve)
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by nat turner,
- Start date
Granted, as to your point on Robertson. However, love is a subjective term, correct?
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
Granted, as to your point on Robertson. However, love is a subjective term, correct?
b smooth 202
Banned
- 10,295
- 106
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
this doesn't mean much to me.
b smooth 202
Banned
- 10,295
- 106
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
this doesn't mean much to me.
- 4,849
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2009
Originally Posted by Nash
- 4,849
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2009
Originally Posted by Nash
- 88,441
- 47,544
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
i find it quite PATHETIC how some of you try so hard to discredit religion and their followers. What difference does it make what people believe in? Someone could believe in a flying robot pig with flamethrowing hooves for all i care. They aint %@*%$@% bothering me.
You guys either have no lives and way too much time on your hands or your lives are so sad you try so hard to be pompous and snobbish pricks to hide the pain of your own failure.
I would hate to have dinner with you guys. probably argue the whole time because everyone didnt order what you ordered....
You guys either have no lives and way too much time on your hands or your lives are so sad you try so hard to be pompous and snobbish pricks to hide the pain of your own failure.
I would hate to have dinner with you guys. probably argue the whole time because everyone didnt order what you ordered....
- 88,441
- 47,544
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
i find it quite PATHETIC how some of you try so hard to discredit religion and their followers. What difference does it make what people believe in? Someone could believe in a flying robot pig with flamethrowing hooves for all i care. They aint %@*%$@% bothering me.
You guys either have no lives and way too much time on your hands or your lives are so sad you try so hard to be pompous and snobbish pricks to hide the pain of your own failure.
I would hate to have dinner with you guys. probably argue the whole time because everyone didnt order what you ordered....
You guys either have no lives and way too much time on your hands or your lives are so sad you try so hard to be pompous and snobbish pricks to hide the pain of your own failure.
I would hate to have dinner with you guys. probably argue the whole time because everyone didnt order what you ordered....
- 11,315
- 57
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2004
seriously.. you guys are essentially agreeing on the same principles
- 11,315
- 57
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2004
seriously.. you guys are essentially agreeing on the same principles
- 1,539
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
There has been medical research that shows certain level of brain activity during what falls under the guise of religious experience(nirvana/bliss). Studies of cells healing themselves due to certain states of unison within the body. Outside and inside of religious texts, the prevalent theme is knowledge (not a belief) of an internal connection to something greater to what can be seen with eyes. This understanding is enough to change some people polarity of action and outlook on life which basically gives all those who may feel that there is no point to life, that there truly is something worth living a good life for and also respecting life outside of yourself because you may not know the scope of others connection, or if they have even realized that there is something to be connected to.Originally Posted by Nat Turner
Originally Posted by torgriffith
It's only superstition to someone on the outside looking in. The modern scientific(modern) community is not that dumb IMO. They just tell the public the appropriate "truth" for the time. Times change. So does what people are willing to except as truth. They are making the truth because whatever they deem as the truth, the rest of the participating world will take it and run with it. Teach it in school. write in into movie, preach it etc....Originally Posted by Nat Turner
Originally Posted by torgriffith
Didn't that article from the other post about 2012 solar flares talk about how scientist were wrong about their theory of carbon dating since there really is no accurate constant to measure it against. ( Decay rate not consistently the same across the universe).
My thing with modern science is that it's not complete. They are making it up as they go. Much like Hawkings is. Too bad for mental domes of the people that hang on to this guys every word.
Both modern religion and modern science are constantly evolving. Would you take that as evolution of science and religion, or creationism because like Mo Matik pointed out, God separated rather than create, so that when it comes back together, a witness would say that's evolution rather while the ( putter togetherer) would claim he simply recreated what once simply always existed. This brings it down to subjectivity of the viewer IMO on the universe and it's origins.
There is a big difference between making things up, and then learning something new that has actually been proven to exist. Religion and the thought of a "god" is made up, science is in the search a proven theory. The thought of a God through religion as being equal with scientific research is contradictory.
Superstition can never be equal to scientific fact.
Science means knowledge. from the latin word scientia. It's no secret that knowledge is hidden, lied about, and re shaped for whatever it's purpose may be. Science just ain't research of facts like you thinking.
The best way to measure what you are suggesting is in the medical field, correct? What disease has religion or God has ever cured...I mean outside of the examples shown in religious texts?
Neither has been proven to work, even against the disease of ignorance and fear. In fact, both are enhanced with the introduction of both religion and "god".
- 1,539
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
There has been medical research that shows certain level of brain activity during what falls under the guise of religious experience(nirvana/bliss). Studies of cells healing themselves due to certain states of unison within the body. Outside and inside of religious texts, the prevalent theme is knowledge (not a belief) of an internal connection to something greater to what can be seen with eyes. This understanding is enough to change some people polarity of action and outlook on life which basically gives all those who may feel that there is no point to life, that there truly is something worth living a good life for and also respecting life outside of yourself because you may not know the scope of others connection, or if they have even realized that there is something to be connected to.Originally Posted by Nat Turner
Originally Posted by torgriffith
It's only superstition to someone on the outside looking in. The modern scientific(modern) community is not that dumb IMO. They just tell the public the appropriate "truth" for the time. Times change. So does what people are willing to except as truth. They are making the truth because whatever they deem as the truth, the rest of the participating world will take it and run with it. Teach it in school. write in into movie, preach it etc....Originally Posted by Nat Turner
Originally Posted by torgriffith
Didn't that article from the other post about 2012 solar flares talk about how scientist were wrong about their theory of carbon dating since there really is no accurate constant to measure it against. ( Decay rate not consistently the same across the universe).
My thing with modern science is that it's not complete. They are making it up as they go. Much like Hawkings is. Too bad for mental domes of the people that hang on to this guys every word.
Both modern religion and modern science are constantly evolving. Would you take that as evolution of science and religion, or creationism because like Mo Matik pointed out, God separated rather than create, so that when it comes back together, a witness would say that's evolution rather while the ( putter togetherer) would claim he simply recreated what once simply always existed. This brings it down to subjectivity of the viewer IMO on the universe and it's origins.
There is a big difference between making things up, and then learning something new that has actually been proven to exist. Religion and the thought of a "god" is made up, science is in the search a proven theory. The thought of a God through religion as being equal with scientific research is contradictory.
Superstition can never be equal to scientific fact.
Science means knowledge. from the latin word scientia. It's no secret that knowledge is hidden, lied about, and re shaped for whatever it's purpose may be. Science just ain't research of facts like you thinking.
The best way to measure what you are suggesting is in the medical field, correct? What disease has religion or God has ever cured...I mean outside of the examples shown in religious texts?
Neither has been proven to work, even against the disease of ignorance and fear. In fact, both are enhanced with the introduction of both religion and "god".
- 5,258
- 11
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2003
nothing more annoying than a pushy atheist.
- 5,258
- 11
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2003
nothing more annoying than a pushy atheist.
- 2,699
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
such a confused man.
- 2,699
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
such a confused man.
bart simpson
Banned
- 16
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
bart simpson
Banned
- 16
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- 3,340
- 12
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
Maybe it's because Stephen Hawking is one of the world's best physicists that ever lived? But how are you sick of this dude? What else has he said? Maybe you just hate science...
True religion does evolve, but isn't God's word supposed to last eternally? And when religion does change, it changes accordingly to what science has discovered or the cultural climate to be open for more believers. That is what we call "making it up as they go."Originally Posted by torgriffith
Didn't that article from the other post about 2012 solar flares talk about how scientist were wrong about their theory of carbon dating since there really is no accurate constant to measure it against. ( Decay rate not consistently the same across the universe).
My thing with modern science is that it's not complete. They are making it up as they go. Much like Hawkings is. Too bad for mental domes of the people that hang on to this guys every word.
Both modern religion and modern science are constantly evolving. Would you take that as evolution of science and religion, or creationism because like Mo Matik pointed out, God separated rather than create, so that when it comes back together, a witness would say that's evolution rather while the ( putter togetherer) would claim he simply recreated what once simply always existed. This brings it down to subjectivity of the viewer IMO on the universe and it's origins.
Science on the other hand inherently allows for evolving or change. They constantly test their theories, and if there is something contradictory, they will test again.
What Mo Matik pointed out is irrelevant in the realm of science. It has no basis and there is no way to test it.
- 3,340
- 12
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
Maybe it's because Stephen Hawking is one of the world's best physicists that ever lived? But how are you sick of this dude? What else has he said? Maybe you just hate science...
True religion does evolve, but isn't God's word supposed to last eternally? And when religion does change, it changes accordingly to what science has discovered or the cultural climate to be open for more believers. That is what we call "making it up as they go."Originally Posted by torgriffith
Didn't that article from the other post about 2012 solar flares talk about how scientist were wrong about their theory of carbon dating since there really is no accurate constant to measure it against. ( Decay rate not consistently the same across the universe).
My thing with modern science is that it's not complete. They are making it up as they go. Much like Hawkings is. Too bad for mental domes of the people that hang on to this guys every word.
Both modern religion and modern science are constantly evolving. Would you take that as evolution of science and religion, or creationism because like Mo Matik pointed out, God separated rather than create, so that when it comes back together, a witness would say that's evolution rather while the ( putter togetherer) would claim he simply recreated what once simply always existed. This brings it down to subjectivity of the viewer IMO on the universe and it's origins.
Science on the other hand inherently allows for evolving or change. They constantly test their theories, and if there is something contradictory, they will test again.
What Mo Matik pointed out is irrelevant in the realm of science. It has no basis and there is no way to test it.
- 3,340
- 12
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
You really can't see how religion and people's religious beliefs harm people in the United States and this world? If you can't see that, I can understand why you don't want to accept what Hawking and science are saying.
and in a really big font for yall...
Hawking didn't say that there is no God. He said that God didn't create our universe. There is scientific evidence for this.
- 3,340
- 12
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2005
You really can't see how religion and people's religious beliefs harm people in the United States and this world? If you can't see that, I can understand why you don't want to accept what Hawking and science are saying.
and in a really big font for yall...
Hawking didn't say that there is no God. He said that God didn't create our universe. There is scientific evidence for this.
- 1,539
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
I'm more interested to see where this goes in the whole UFT( Unified Field Theory) and the idea of our universe being apart of a multi verse.
- 1,539
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2007
I'm more interested to see where this goes in the whole UFT( Unified Field Theory) and the idea of our universe being apart of a multi verse.
xtapolapacetl
Banned
- 6,841
- 126
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2006
I really can't understand how someone can be pessimistic enough to believe that the universe is so soulless. The universe is expanding and stars in the universe are travelling away from each other. That means that a long time from now, the universe will be completely dark with a bunch of extremely isolated dead rocks floating around it. I can't bring myself to believe that the origins and fate of the universe are so dull and without purpose. There must be something beyond this.
