Why can't science and religion just get along?

[John Picard]

^^ Paul was extremely misogynistic.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Anyways, the whole point is that God was meeting Man where he was at until He could come down in the flesh and die on the cross for his sins.

Why would he first punish and exile them, only to free them of their sins a couple of thousand years later? Did he change his mind? Did he have regrets? The Almighty?

Jarod:

No. He had a plan and knew full well what was to come. I said God predicted His own sacrifice in the Old Testament. This was to show that He is a God of mercy and that He keeps His Word. Plus, even if I listed all of the reasons of God's actions in the Old Testament. I mean, all He wants to do from day one is show us that He wants to be close to us (by eliminating sin in our lives) and that He loves us (When He died on the cross for us).

 

[JarodRussell]

Yeah. For example: OT: "eye for an eye". NT: "turn the other cheek". What do you follow?

Why did the Almighty even have to change his mind?

Jarod:

Jesus was fully aware of what He said. In fact, he mentioned both of them in the same discussion. This is not contradictory information or teachings. The Old Testament were teachings for THAT time. It was to reach Man where he was at and teach His people valuable lessons.

"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."

So the New Testament contains just a reinterpretation of the Old Testament by a mere man. Jesus was a jewish teacher and healer, who was baptized by John the Baptist, and who set his task of bringing a reinterpretation of the old texts to people's attention. He was a charismatic founder of a Jewish restauration movement. The claim he was the son of God is the questionable part.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Faith is not a good way to assess reality. It's really more like wishful thinking, and subscribing to the claims and values of those living in the Bronze Age is not very prudent.

On the other hand, that risks falling into the "ancients were stupid" fallacy.

It is a fact that "ancients" for example thought that thunder and roar were a sign of the wrath of Gods, as with every phenomenon for which a perfect rational explanation was found centuries later. So one needs to read these texts very carefully.

Does that tell you anything about their IQ, though, or their caliber as people? They had not discovered everything we had yet, but consider that the first person to discover everything we now consider "obvious" had to be extremely intelligent to make that connection. (And really, I wonder how well we would fare if we were thrown into their world--what would seem obvious to them that we would not see until it was explained to us.) Education is the difference...essential intelligence, and quality of character, is not.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

^^ Paul was extremely misogynistic.

Addressed in my previous post already (the one speaking of subversion)--basically, it only looks that way if you view it in a modern context, but when you realize what he's actually doing, it's not. Unfortunately a lot of readers took it VERY much the wrong way, to disastrous and painful results. I could go into this in much, MUCH further detail right now...however, I am currently late for an appointment, so I will have to take a rain check on that.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Urg. This is very insulting. And you know it.

No. It was not meant to be insulting but as a heart felt comparison of how things are.

Dude, you compared other people's honest faith to disgusting garbage. There is no way you can save it, but at least you should have the courage of owning your own words instead of hiding behind vacuous excuses.

Let's say someone bla bla bla

Stop it. You are just digging deeper in your own hole.

The reason why you think that is because I know this isn't just some mere divergence of beliefs, but rather a battle for men's souls. That is why everyone is getting so worked up over my belief in God's Word in the first place.

No, people are getting so worked up because we have short patience for dogmatic humbugs. Don't feel special because we spent time replying to you: bring here a dogmatic follower of any religion, be it Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Jedi and we will debate them with the same intensity as we did with you. The fact that we are more focused on Christianity is just a because we happen to live in mostly Christian nations.

I want nothing but the best for you and everyone here.

Me too. I hope that with the help of smart people like Epicurus, Lucretius, Spinoza, Voltaire, Jefferson, Russell, Sartre, Feynman, Sagan, and many, many others you will turn away from blind superstition and embrace the light of reason. I hope you will find the way to discern that which seems to be, and that what you wish it to be, from what truly is. I hope you will free yourself from the burden of ancient tomes, and realize that in you have nothing to lose but your own chains. I hope you realize that religion is nothing else but mankind's pacifier, used to keep us quiet and submissive while we should be out exploring the world. I hope you will find that respect is earned and not given, and that people will treat you only as well as you treated them.

Maybe you don't believe it now, but if you really want to understand, everything will be clear to you. Because of that, I'm sure you will appreciate my heartfelt wishes exactly in the same way we appreciate yours.

And since you seem fond of quotes: "We are starstuff. We are the universe made manifest, trying to figure itself out." - Delenn, Entil'zha

 

[Luther Sloan]

Once again, what I said went RIGHT over your head.

John:

That's exactly what I was going to say, friend.

Simply put -- the NT is supposed to be the final covenant between God and his people. It is to have done away with everything beforehand (IIRC there were *AT LEAST* 11 covenants up until then). So, if the NT is the final piece of the pie, why bother with anything of the OT? Christians LOVE to preach against homosexuality, citing the OT, but when asked about beating an unruly child, gathering slaves, concubines, and stoning people for committing various acts -- WHOOPS -- suddenly it's pick and choose what to believe/practice

Alright. Think of the Old Testament as school for His children.
He was trying to teach His people valuable lessons and yet show us that He is a God who keeps His word. Everything has a place and a time and a purpose. Trust me. The Old Testament was not a mistake or a revised version of God's plan. It was meant to be to reach His people where they were at.

And a lot of things you mentioned in the Bible are not as you describe them, either. You are pointing at passages and taking them out of their context within the lesson of what God was trying to teach His people.

You can cite all of the bible verses you want and it's not going to mean anything to me. I spent many a summer being sent to Christian indoctrination camp as well as many a Sunday of my youth in church. The funny thing is, a lot of it didn't just didn't add up back then, and then I did something bad -- I got an education. Heck, even in high school I knew about the monks who assembled the Christian bible (picking and choosing from various manuscripts). I bet you can't answer me why churches use grape juice for communion even though Jesus told his disciples to drink the wine, for it was his blood.

Well, monks are associated with Catholicism (which goes against the teachings of the Bible). Plus, in the Bible: Jesus never told His people to drink wine saying it was His blood.

Then, ask yourself why the Christians had to take over everyone else's holidays (holy days), like the Winter Solstice and the Spring Equinox. So sorry, but stop trying to peddle your hokey religious beliefs on people and insist that said beliefs "make sense".

This was not a practice brought about by people who follow the Bible as their soul authority. There are many Christians who call themselves Christians and even claim to follow the Bible. But they don't really believe everything in it, though. So they pick and choose what they want to believe in.

 

[StarryEyed]

It's interesting to take note of the effects of Luther Sloan's insane rantings. This thread started off mostly asserting that religion need not be incompatible with science. Than he shows up and leaves the casual reader with the impression that religion is howl at the moon, bat-shit insane. And he's doing it as effectively as the most persuasive atheist could.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Dude, you compared other people's honest faith to disgusting garbage. There is no way you can save it, but at least you should have the courage of owning your own words instead of hiding behind vacuous excuses.

Well, from God's point of view these other religions are disgusting. It is showing a lack of belief in their Creator. In other words: my statement was not an attack on the individual but an attack on Man's sin.

There is a difference.

But like I said before. If I came off offensive by using the wrong words... I apologize. It was not my intent to attack the person but the sin itself.

Anyways, I can continue to keep drumming up rebuttals to every single post here and not make any head way. You guys are either going to accept God one day or you won't. It is just that simple.

And I pray that you folks do.
Because it is the most important decision in your entire life that you will ever make. Trust me.

God is real. The devil is real. And the Bible (King James Version) is God's inspired word.

Again, I wish all of you peace and may you seek out the truth and keep an open mind.


Lovingly,

~JM.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Peace be unto you my friends.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Right over your head. Meh.

 

[scotpens]

Jesus was a jewish teacher and healer, who was baptized by John the Baptist, and who set his task of bringing a reinterpretation of the old texts to people's attention. He was a charismatic founder of a Jewish restauration movement.

So does that mean he opened the first delicatessen?

 

[Angela 0077]

It's interesting to take note of the effects of Luther Sloan's insane rantings. This thread started off mostly asserting that religion need not be incompatible with science. Than he shows up and leaves the casual reader with the impression that religion is howl at the moon, bat-shit insane. And he's doing it as effectively as the most persuasive atheist could.

Do you know this really gets on my nerves when certain people have ago at others and name.
it is a real shame also that you have to name call to get attention

Mr Sloan is a lovelly man and he is not like what you are saying he is.

He is just stating the facts of his religion and he is showing you the positive things which have helped him through difficult times.

There is nothing wrong with him stating about what things have worked through this religion.
He does not beleive in every single thing that Jack Chick is against he is only stating the things that have had a positive effect on him as a person

He is not ranting about it he is trying to tell you the positive things and you are just having a go at him because of it.

I know Mr Sloan and myself on accasion will talk about religion but he does not go silly about it.
Try to get to know a person before you attack them and then you will see what he is really like

He is so fu loving and great to be around

So you are wrong about that remark mate.

I think if there is a God out there he would be not too happy to see what has been written here on this thread.

I can tell you that there is a quite a few religions that are not very nice look at islam and what it states about women.

In islam it states that women have quite a few rights but it is the men of today which change it to suit them selves





I

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Mr Sloan is a lovelly man and he does not deserve this.

he is just stating the facts of his religion...

He's doing nothing of the kind. He's stating his beliefs, which are not the same as facts.

If God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good, why would he choose to use Evolution as his tool?

For the sake of argument, perhaps this "God" person is not in fact a Westerner and did not approach the Universe as some sort of gadget to be constructed. Maybe "he" grew it, or it grew out of him.

 

[Kestra]

Do you know this really gets on my nerves when certain people have ago at others and name.
it is a real shame also that you have to name call to get attention

Mr Sloan is a lovelly man and he is not like what you are saying he is.

He is just stating the facts of his religion and he is showing you the positive things which have helped him through difficult times.

He's been unnecessarily insulting and unwilling to have a discussion of facts. It's a turnoff and makes discussion pointless.

 

[Angela 0077]

Well l shouldnt have said facts smiles.

What l am saying is that he is trying to show people what he beieves in and there are members here having a go at that.

Maybe some might not believe in certain things he has stated on this thread but it has helped hom to become happy within himself which is great.

There is nothing wrong in trying to show people this on a postive side.

He is not saying to join him in his faith but to show the good things in life

 

[Rek]

he is just stating the facts of his religion...

Wait, facts of religion?

I thought religion was based on faith. If it was a fact then everyone would see it as so.

Define Fact: a statement or assertion of verified information about something. A statement that is objectively true and can be verified.

If god or his words where a fact there would be no argument over his existence.

I have no problem with people having faith or believing in things - such as big foot or in this example, god - but religion is not a fact, its about having faith that something exists and is true.

 

[Angela 0077]

Do you know this really gets on my nerves when certain people have ago at others and name.
it is a real shame also that you have to name call to get attention

Mr Sloan is a lovelly man and he is not like what you are saying he is.

He is just stating the facts of his religion and he is showing you the positive things which have helped him through difficult times.

He's been unnecessarily insulting and unwilling to have a discussion of facts. It's a turnoff and makes discussion pointless.

Well you are saying he is insulting and unwilling.

I had a look at the previous page on this thread and l can see he is explaining certain things because members are asking him certain questions on the God subject.

So he is giving his advice on this.

 

[gturner]

But a major part of most religious texts relates factual events. The participants' interpretations and explainations of those events will necesarily involve their views of the universe, gods, hidden agents, mythologies, etc., but there will also be a big dose of historical facts in them.

 

[iguana_tonante]

He is just stating the facts of his religion and he is showing you the positive things which have helped him through difficult times.

He's been unnecessarily insulting and unwilling to have a discussion of facts. It's a turnoff and makes discussion pointless.

Pretty much. His point is "I believe because I do, and the Bible tells me so". Not much for debate. Plus, he's under the mistaken impression that a cursory read of the King James Bible and shaking hands with Jack Chick made him an expert on worlds religions and comparative mythology.