A view point.

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
That mentality resulted in the Crusades, the Inquisition, the travesties wrought upon Native Americans. That's an honest observation. One must examine the good and the bad that derives from "belief".

Cruelty, murder, depravity are part of human nature irrespective of religion.

Scientists and the tools of science were used in the Holocaust, the horror of chemical warfare in the trenches of the Great War, in the development and use of weapons of mass destruction, fire bombing of cities, and the development and implemention of torture and"enhanced interrogation".

For all the horrible things done in the name of religion and science, I try to remember that human nature and history is three dimensional and humans are not caricatures.
.
It doesn't hurt to remember that devout and pious Christians, aka Quakers, New England Congregationalists, etc were among the most proactive and effective abolitionists in the anti-slavery movement.

Yes, what you say in your last sentence is true...but then there's stuff like this: https://www.friendsjournal.org/experience-african-american-quaker/
https://www.ncronline.org/news/opin...ls-american-christianity-face-its-racist-past

Good with the bad, and all that.

 

[Jerome]

You seem to imply that one does not need religion.

They certainly do not. The most religious societies in the world happen to be the most corrupt and murderous (Middle East, Indonesia, Nigeria, Central African Republic, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, etc.).

Meanwhile, the most atheistic have the highest standard of living (UK, France, Germnany, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands, etc.)

 

[Truth Detector]

They certainly do not. The most religious societies in the world happen to be the most corrupt and murderous (Middle East, Indonesia, Nigeria, Central African Republic, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, etc.).

Meanwhile, the most atheistic have the highest standard of living (UK, France, Germnany, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands, etc.)

Yeah dumbass, UK, France, Germany, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands are atheistic.

You're the reason I don't like to argue with uneducated morons.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

In a world were one person's religion is another person's fantasy, and one person's fantasy is another person's reality, the only sane person is the honest observer.

Sounds like someone is still drunk from ringing in the new year.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Sounds like someone is still drunk from ringing in the new year.

Dude, I took you off of IA after a LONG time because I figured you might have matured from a intellectually impotent right wing wonk just grinding his axe from a previous butt whupp'in on these threads. I see you haven't. Adios.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

Dude, I took you off of IA after a LONG time because I figured you might have matured from a intellectually impotent right wing wonk just grinding his axe from a previous butt whupp'in on these threads. I see you haven't. Adios.

And another chicken shit wimp runs away.

 

[Mason Michaels]

And another chicken shit wimp runs away.

Just like General Bonespurs

 

[Cypress]

Yes, what you say in your last sentence is true...but then there's stuff like this: https://www.friendsjournal.org/experience-african-american-quaker/
https://www.ncronline.org/news/opin...ls-american-christianity-face-its-racist-past

Good with the bad, and all that.

Yes, you could spend the next three years posting examples of people claiming to be Christian and doing inexcusable, cruel, even criminal things ….

And I could spend the next three years posting examples of scientists and engineers who worked on the tools of the Holocaust, worked on the infrastructure of the GULAG, worked on human eugenics experiments, worked on chemical warfare, worked on weapons of mass destruction, worked on medical experiments with non-consenting humans, worked on nuclear bombs, worked in the military industrial complex to devise ever more lethal weapons to kill humans.

That is not a fruitful or worthwhile exercise.

To me, what this really comes down to is that science addresses practical technological questions or questions about how natural phenomena seem to work.

Religious faith, theology, and philosophical conjecture address metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical questions which are beyond the reach of scientific experiment and quantitative measurement.

We have no way of knowing if either intellectual tradition actually allows us to get a firm grip on objective reality. The only thing they might provide us is presumptive knowledge about natural phenomena, or insight into existential questions. That said, to pit science and faith in a contest against each other is to compare apples to oranges.

Wrapping up, yes I am aware that anyone who thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old or that Jonah lived in the belly of a whale is deluded and misguided. Those rubes do not represent all of humanity’s faith traditions.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Yes, you could spend the next three years posting examples of people claiming to be Christian and doing inexcusable, cruel, even criminal things ….

And I could spend the next three years posting examples of scientists and engineers who worked on the tools of the Holocaust, worked on the infrastructure of the GULAG, worked on human eugenics experiments, worked on chemical warfare, worked on weapons of mass destruction, worked on medical experiments with non-consenting humans, worked on nuclear bombs, worked in the military industrial complex to devise ever more lethal weapons to kill humans.

That is not a fruitful or worthwhile exercise.

To me, what this really comes down to is that science addresses practical technological questions or questions about how natural phenomena seem to work.

Religious faith, theology, and philosophical conjecture address metaphysical, epistemological, and ethical questions which are beyond the reach of scientific experiment and quantitative measurement.

We have no way of knowing if either intellectual tradition actually allows us to get a firm grip on objective reality. The only thing they might provide us is presumptive knowledge about natural phenomena, or insight into existential questions. That said, to pit science and faith in a contest against each other is to compare apples to oranges.

Wrapping up, yes I am aware that anyone who thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old or that Jonah lived in the belly of a whale is deluded and misguided. Those rubes do not represent all of humanity’s faith traditions.

Here's the thing Cy....the incredible contradictions in many religious scriptures makes any honest/objective reader to sit up and take notice. This is why my OP is pretty valid.

Yes, there is the faith of religion and the faith in the scientific method. Nary the twain shall meet...but occasionally they call each other on the phone (or should).

 

[Cypress]

Here's the thing Cy....the incredible contradictions in many religious scriptures makes any honest/objective reader to sit up and take notice. This is why my OP is pretty valid.

Yes, there is the faith of religion and the faith in the scientific method. Nary the twain shall meet...but occasionally they call each other on the phone (or should).

I cannot argue with that. Books that were written 2000 years ago undoubtedly should not be considered accurate historical accounts or infallible guides to human conduct. I am nevertheless willing to accept there is existential and metaphysical value to be found in the New Testament, the Jewish Bible, the Annalects of Confucius, the Quran, the Bhagadavida.

Speaking of contradictions, any layperson remotely familiar with Einstein's relativity, dilation of time and space, and quantum theory could easily convince themselves that modern physics is chock full of contradiction!

 

[Jerome]

Yeah dumbass, UK, France, Germany, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands are atheistic.

You're the reason I don't like to argue with uneducated morons.

You're not even arguing. You've literally added nothing to the discussion. Those countries are majority atheist population.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You're not even arguing. You've literally added nothing to the discussion. Those countries are majority atheist population.

Never try and debate with a willfully ignorant person who's proud of it. One of the reasons I have TD on in the Ignore bin.

 

[Truth Detector]

You're not even arguing. You've literally added nothing to the discussion. Those countries are majority atheist population.

Why argue with a fact challenged loon?

 

[Truth Detector]

Never try and debate with a willfully ignorant person who's proud of it. One of the reasons I have TD on in the Ignore bin.

I R O N Y!!!

 

[Mason Michaels]

I cannot argue with that. Books that were written 2000 years ago undoubtedly should not be considered accurate historical accounts or infallible guides to human conduct. I am nevertheless willing to accept there is existential and metaphysical value to be found in the New Testament, the Jewish Bible, the Annalects of Confucius, the Quran, the Bhagadavida.

Speaking of contradictions, any layperson remotely familiar with Einstein's relativity, dilation of time and space, and quantum theory could easily convince themselves that modern physics is chock full of contradiction!

"Jesus was either liar,lunatic,or LORD"
Thomas Aquinas

 

[Cypress]

I cannot argue with that. Books that were written 2000 years ago undoubtedly should not be considered accurate historical accounts or infallible guides to human conduct. I am nevertheless willing to accept there is existential and metaphysical value to be found in the New Testament, the Jewish Bible, the Annalects of Confucius, the Quran, the Bhagadavida.

Speaking of contradictions, any layperson remotely familiar with Einstein's relativity, dilation of time and space, and quantum theory could easily convince themselves that modern physics is chock full of contradiction!

"Jesus was either liar,lunatic,or LORD"
Thomas Aquinas

I am almost positive Jesus himself never claimed to be God.
That was a claim later advanced by Paul, the authors of the New Testament, and other early Christians.

Jesus considered himself a Jewish apocalyptic prophet who was compelled to teach about the impending Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus was not the only Jewish apocalyptic prophet of that era; you basically could not throw a stone without hitting one.

 

[Mason Melchizedek]

I am almost positive Jesus himself never claimed to be God.
That was a claim later advanced by Paul, the authors of the New Testament, and other early Christians.

Jesus considered himself a Jewish apocalyptic prophet who was compelled to teach about the impending Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus was not the only Jewish apocalyptic prophet of that era; you basically could not throw a stone without hitting one.

You're wrong the reason they had Jesus killed,was for saying "Before Abraham I Am"!
Why did that lead to his death?
Because YHWH told Moses tell them I Am,who I Am.

 

[Taichiliberal]

You're wrong the reason they had Jesus killed,was for saying "Before Abraham I Am"!
Why did that lead to his death?
Because YHWH told Moses tell them I Am,who I Am.

there were a LOT of "prophets" in those times claiming all sorts of things.....Jesus can thank Roman record keeping for his place in history. Note that AROUND THE WORLD there existed cultures and societies with their own deities, prophets, etc. WHO NEVER HEARD OF THE JEWS OR JESUS. They were no better or worse than any other people on the planet. Mind you, if it weren't for theocracy and colonialism....Christianity would have either been regulated to religious obscurity or have just been another quaint regional faith (IMHO, of course). I've got no particular axe to grind with Christians, as most of the New Testament has some pretty great ideas....I just don't ignore all the inconsistency and contradictions.

 

[Cypress]

You're wrong the reason they had Jesus killed,was for saying "Before Abraham I Am"!
Why did that lead to his death?
Because YHWH told Moses tell them I Am,who I Am.

You are right, but from what I understand, I believe it is only towards the end of the first century, in the Gospel of John is there such an indication that Jesus suggest that he was God.

In none of the earlier Gospels, or in the writings of Paul is there any indication that Jesus called himself God.

In the earliest Gospel, Mark, speaks of Jesus as human who is the son of God, which in Hebrew tradition is supposed to refer individuals who arbitrate God's will on Earth, but are not themselves divine beings.

One has to accept that the latest Gospel written by John is authoritative, and one has to suspend any scholarly examinations as to why the earlier Gospels do not explicitly state that Jesus is God or called himself God.

I have zero problem with anyone who wants to interpret and believe that the Gospels are a testament that Jesus is God. That is a matter of faith. But I think the New Testament is open to scholarly inquiry and investigation.

 

[Mason Melchizedek]

there were a LOT of "prophets" in those times claiming all sorts of things.....Jesus can thank Roman record keeping for his place in history. Note that AROUND THE WORLD there existed cultures and societies with their own deities, prophets, etc. WHO NEVER HEARD OF THE JEWS OR JESUS. They were no better or worse than any other people on the planet. Mind you, if it weren't for theocracy and colonialism....Christianity would have either been regulated to religious obscurity or have just been another quaint regional faith (IMHO, of course). I've got no particular axe to grind with Christians, as most of the New Testament has some pretty great ideas....I just don't ignore all the inconsistency and contradictions.

You every have a epiphany of the Holy Spirit?