Page 51 of 89 FirstFirst ... 41464748495051525354555661 ... LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,020 of 1780
  1.    #1001  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    Good luck people.
    Keep a blind eye and a deaf ear to anyone who questions your faith (as is obviously happening here). ...
    I will check back here again to see if I there is anything new to respond to but based on what I see here it is repeating the same 'blind faith' and 'I just believe so there' over and over.
    Have a good one. ...
    You are being inconsiderate to the spirit of the thread. Do you really expect anyone to provide answers to any of your outstanding questions when you essentially are saying you are "checking out" and that your mind is made up? I expect dialog and participation. If you are unwilling to participate in that, I'm unsure whether I want to invest my time on your behalf.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  2. #1002  
    Quote Originally Posted by soccerbudd View Post
    As for Horus, no...I haven't looked it up before, but I question the validity of your points. What proof backs up each of those items? Is there a text, or archeaological evidence that supports such a man existed? Either way, Jesus claims to be God in the flesh. In the Old Testament, God defeated the Egyptian gods. Isn't Horus an Egyptian god? If so, God/Jesus has defeated Horus. If Jesus and Horus are the same, how can one defeat himself?
    The point was not whether or not Horus was real, but that the "Legend of Horus" provably predates Jesus, or even the old testament of the bible, and yet it seems that nearly all of the information we have about Jesus was copied directly from the story of Horus.

    What's most likely? There are only three possibilities:

    1. That the Jews who knew these stories from their Egyptian masters passed them down and they were eventually copied over to describe Jesus when they formed Christianity, abandoning the facts about him (if Jesus was real) or fabricating Jesus entirely from the old legend.

    2. That God was such a fan of the Horus story, and just to confuse us a couple thousand years later, he arranged things so they would be so similar.

    3. Neither is true and it's a huge cosmic coincidence.
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1003  
    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    The point was not whether or not Horus was real, but that the "Legend of Horus" provably predates Jesus, or even the old testament of the bible, and yet it seems that nearly all of the information we have about Jesus was copied directly from the story of Horus.

    What's most likely? There are only three possibilities:

    1. That the Jews who knew these stories from their Egyptian masters passed them down and they were eventually copied over to describe Jesus when they formed Christianity, abandoning the facts about him (if Jesus was real) or fabricating Jesus entirely from the old legend.
    The Jews didn't form Christianity. False choice.
    2. That God was such a fan of the Horus story, and just to confuse us a couple thousand years later, he arranged things so they would be so similar.
    Snarky. False choice.
    3. Neither is true and it's a huge cosmic coincidence.
    This isn't the only option if the first two aren't true.

    But I'm still intrigued by this whole Horus thing. I'll have to research it. Thanks!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4.    #1004  
    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    There are only three possibilities:

    1. That the Jews who knew these stories from their Egyptian masters passed them down and they were eventually copied over to describe Jesus when they formed Christianity, abandoning the facts about him (if Jesus was real) or fabricating Jesus entirely from the old legend.

    2. That God was such a fan of the Horus story, and just to confuse us a couple thousand years later, he arranged things so they would be so similar.

    3. Neither is true and it's a huge cosmic coincidence.
    Why do you limit yourself to these three possiblities? #2 is ridiculous and illogical. It's possible for parts of #1 to be true without taking the whole enchilada. #3 is a definite possibility.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  5. #1005  
    I think the scientific consensus is pretty clear on the fact that the earth is at least 4 billion years old and lets say plus or minus a billion if you want but it is not less than 10,000 years old for sure (and definitely not the fictitious number that you made up.) Again , your selective beliefs are astounding.

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerbudd View Post
    As for Horus, no...I haven't looked it up before, but I question the validity of your points. What proof backs up each of those items? Is there a text, or archeaological evidence that supports such a man existed? Either way, Jesus claims to be God in the flesh. In the Old Testament, God defeated the Egyptian gods. Isn't Horus an Egyptian god? If so, God/Jesus has defeated Horus. If Jesus and Horus are the same, how can one defeat himself?
    Of course you question it. They were not the same person they I am saying Jesus was copied from the Egyptian god Horus. Yes there is proof that he was worshiped in hieroglyphs the stuff is carved in stone and...geez never mind. You believe that there were Egyptian gods too? Wow, just wow.
    Last edited by donovan34; 02/26/2010 at 05:22 PM. Reason: typo
  6.    #1006  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    It's possible for parts of #1 to be true without taking the whole enchilada.
    This and #3 are the possibilities we should explore. #3 might be a good logical conclusion if explorations of the former do not work.

    A summary of my understanding is that when the Christian Church enters a new cultural area, they examine the beliefs of the culture to determine which ones are "true" with respect to the teachings of God and which ones are "false" or incorrect understandings. They adapt their message to the cultural aspects of this society (so the people can keep the parts of their prior understanding that don't violate Christ's teachings). I would expect that you should be able to see this principle being used at least from Christ's time to the present. There should also be evidence consistent with the practice in early christian writings.

    Here is a recording of a recent radio show that addresses the topic (at least as it applies to the Church today).
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  7. #1007  
    Quote Originally Posted by sudoer View Post
    You are being inconsiderate to the spirit of the thread. Do you really expect anyone to provide answers to any of your outstanding questions when you essentially are saying you are "checking out" and that your mind is made up? I expect dialog and participation. If you are unwilling to participate in that, I'm unsure whether I want to invest my time on your behalf.
    Sorry about the inconsideration. Don't worry about answering my questions then because unless I see some real proof my mind IS made up. Just as I think your mind is. Look, like I have said I don't believe in any god today just like I don't believe in unicorns. However, the first one of those to stand in front of me gets my belief. I don't need to hear the same thing again.

    You wanted to know other viewpoints and why and I am pretty sure I have stated my reasons. There is not much else you are going to gain from me. If you do take the time to go through the things I have pointed out and peruse some of the suggested reading and you want to discuss some of that, I said I would.

    This is good discussion but I am not going to change your mind and you are not going to change mine - how about we agree to disagree?
  8. Xerlot's Avatar
    Posts
    8 Posts
    Global Posts
    10 Global Posts
    #1008  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    I think the scientific consensus is pretty clear on the fact that the earth is at least 4 billion years old and lets say plus or minus a billion if you want but it is not less than 10,000 years old for sure (and definitely not the fictitious number that you made up.) Again , your selective beliefs are astounding.



    Of course you question it. They were not the same person they I am saying Jesus was copied from the Egyptian god Horus. Yes there is proof that he was worshiped in hieroglyphs the stuff is carved in stone and...geez never mind. You believe that there were Egyptian gods too? Wow, just wow.
    Wow thanks for having a scientific consensus on the matter. We all know how acurate science is, wasn't it science that also said the world was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe. Science has a tendancy to bring out facts that are pure theory. Don't buy into theory and you have no way to prove anything from the above. And you claim christians fabricate things look at your mess. LOL
  9. #1009  
    Quote Originally Posted by Xerlot View Post
    Wow thanks for have a scientific consensus on the matter. We all know how acurate science is, wasn't it science that also said the world was flat and that the earth was the center of the universe. Science has a tendancy to bring out facts that are pure theory. Don't buy into theory and you have no way to prove anything from the above. And you claim christians fabricate things look at your mess. LOL
    No, that was religion and scientist were persecuted for saying the earth rotated around the sun. Check the name Copernicus.

    As a matter of fact in one of my post I listed a number of scientist that were persecuted by religious. Look at your mess.
  10.    #1010  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    I think the scientific consensus is pretty clear on the fact that the earth is at least 4 billion of years old and lets say plus or minus a billion if you want but it is not less than 10,000 years old for sure (and definitely not the fictitious number that you made up.)
    You would get along very well with "Fundamentalist Christians" as they also believe every word in the Bible is to be taken literally. The Catholic Church says that science cannot contradict revelation from God. Once you prove them wrong you pretty much have won your case.

    The "truth" in stories like this are the theological meaning. You also have to understand the writing styles of the time to know what various numerical references mean. I'm not a Bible scholar (and I suspect you aren't either) so I'm pretty sure neither of us are qualified to debate this. That does not mean we can't evaluate the work others have done (and discuss that). It would help to read a good bible commenatary (Like the Navarre Bible), or to look in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (starting with the
    Catechesis on Creation section). This backs up what I said and refutes your assertion that the creation story in Genesis 1 is to be taken literally. Here are some tips for reading the Bible.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  11. Xerlot's Avatar
    Posts
    8 Posts
    Global Posts
    10 Global Posts
    #1011  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    No, that was religion and scientist were persecuted for saying the earth rotated around the sun. Check the name Copernicus.

    As a matter of fact in one of my post I listed a number of scientist that were persecuted by religious. Look at your mess.
    No actually it was the scientists the church hired that said the earth was flat. And just like today if you bring 10 scientist into a room you will have differing opinions on how old the earth is. Science is always evolving and changing as we learn more and more on how God created the universe around us. The Bible and it's concepts have stood the test of time and have not changed.
    Just look at the relationship of the Holy Trinity. God the Father: the bulding block of everything. Jesus the Son: the husband in a relationship. Love God first and Love your wife as Jesus loves the church. The Wife in a relationship. Respect your Husband just like the Holy Spirit respects the wishes of Jesus in our lives. If we implemented the Trinity relationship in all of our doings ie: family, business, state/federal government. You would see a much more repectful and loving world today.
  12.    #1012  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    Sorry about the inconsideration. Don't worry about answering my questions then because unless I see some real proof my mind IS made up. Just as I think your mind is.
    You and I have a philosophical difference in that I'm open to testing the assertions made in the Bible and you've already dismissed it as possibly being what it says it is. Yes, I have a belief, but that's based on logic and I continually seek to validate it against all the evidence I'm presented in this world. It would be highly illogical for me to continue in my belief if I am proven wrong. I'm simply giving you the opportunity to do so, but I believe you do not wish to continue this quest. That's fine. You have fought the good battle. You can leave gracefully if you like but you are welcome to stick around if you still find this interesting.

    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    This is good discussion but I am not going to change your mind and you are not going to change mine - how about we agree to disagree?
    My aim here is to learn and I don't expect to change anyone's mind. Scripture tells me that I'm not the one in charge so whatever God's will is is fine with me. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and the reasons behind your beliefs. I wish you the best in life! -- Bob
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  13. #1013  
    Quote Originally Posted by Xerlot View Post
    No actually it was the scientists the church hired that said the earth was flat. And just like today if you bring 10 scientist into a room you will have differing opinions on how old the earth is. Science is always evolving and changing as we learn more and more on how God created the universe around us. The Bible and it's concepts have stood the test of time and have not changed.

    I agree and disagree, I agree the bible has withstood the test of time but disagree that it has not changed. You state that if 10 scientists are put into a room they will have a different opinion but same could be said in religion, that is why there is so many denominations of the "Church".
    Also some mentioned that some teachings in the bible were not interpreted as figuritive until the 1900's. Science still never found any evidence of the great flood? But yeah science evolves just like the interpretaions of the bible change. For example someone just mentioned that the bible was written with laws reflective of the time and not to be put in force now, the bible still stands but a new twist to its interpretation but on the flip side science once thought the sun circled the earth...

    We have to face that religion and science still have a tremendous amt of learning and their has been a lot of advancements on both fields. Unfortunately they havent united yet, and IMO they never will. We just need to accept that both of our learnings are still immature no matter how old
  14.    #1014  
    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    Nope, not offended, and I hope you aren't either. I never mind a spirited discussion on spirituality.
    This is starting to be a very fun discussion - and I believe you and I are very much alike. Just about everything in your response rings true with my heart. Thanks for sharing your answers.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    True! I find that through it all the schools and church wanted me to memorize it and follow it more than understand it, but I find that true of the church still today, as an adult. They would rather I follow and not ask questions than try to explain any of it to me.
    This is very unfortunate and I felt the same way. On top of that, my catechesis was not very strong. The first time that my faith was challenged (by friends in a Baptist congregation shortly after college), I failed open, and (mostly) gave up on religion (but with the intent to come back to it when I was "mentally ready".

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    3 Philosophy classes (100, 200, and 300 level) and two World Religion classes in the 100 level.
    I was just trying to get a sense of what to expect from you in the discussions. I've had zero religion classes in college, so you've had a bigger exposure than me. We haven't had much discussion in this thread outside of Christians, agnostics, and atheists. I'd like to encourage some discussion of other world religions, but I can't "get the ball rolling" because I don't know the "provocative questions" to ask.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    I was saying that the bible is not easy to understand. ... the point I was making there was not whether or not the doctrine is true, but that the bible is not easy to understand, nor does it even make much sense at all in places.
    I still feel intimidated by the Bible to this day. Like you, I feel like I "know my faith" but that (until recently) the Bible was more or less "impossible" for me to understand. I wanted to learn how to read and understand scripture. This part only started coming together for me in the past year or so.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    I've been confirmed at Saint Louis Cathedral in New Orleans. I know the whole deal. But what makes you think I am rejecting God? I thought I made it clear that I believe in God, but I think the bible is silly.
    I have to admit I can be quite an arrogant SOB sometimes. I'm sorry for letting my "attitude" get the best of me. When I saw the human side of you, I saw "me" in you. I wouldn't want to be held up to the standard I sometimes set for "other people". I feel like you are rejecting God by rejecting his word. What you are really saying is that "his word seems illogical to me" and "I don't understand it". I can empathize with what you are saying. I still believe his word is understandable and that you might find some good Catholic Bible studies or listening to Catholic Radio will help fill in many of the "missing pieces" in your understanding.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    ... a way he has affected my life in a provable, quantifiable way ...
    I won't ask you to share, but I believe what you say to be true.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    Sounds like you explain things like the people at Catholic school. I prefer the simpler definition.
    This is terrific feedback. I just cut and pasted that definition from the Greek dictionary in the Bible software that I use. I believe the definition boiled down to "belief and trust". An Evangelical preacher recently taught me this means "belief and obey". (His definition squares with mine as I see obey/trust as essentially meaning the same things.)

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    Something I believe is a thing that is true to me.
    That's called "moral relativism". The problem with it is that it causes belief to change over time. If God is an absolute, his message should remain true for all ages. If his message cannot do this, he is not "God".

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    Some things are true to me because I have seen empirical evidence, like that I believe the sky is blue. Some things are true to me because they are the best explanation I can come up with for something I have witnessed, but I may not have direct evidence, such as seeing the way the universe is justifies my belief in God, because there is too much order in it to be all random, especially once you learn that the universe tries to tend towards chaos. I do not throw reason out of the window to believe in God, reason backs up my belief. But I would have to throw out reason to believe in 90% of the bible.
    I agree with everything you said except the last sentence. I'm "taking it on faith" that the "Bible is explainable". I'm currently in a phase of my life where I'm testing this assertion, and so far that's been working out okay.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    Can you site some that do? And by that I mean, physical or mental harm, not harm to a soul, ...
    We had different definitions of "harm" in mind. Thanks for pointing this out. I'll use the example of the temptation of Adam and Eve in the garden as an example. You may not "buy into" what I'm saying, because the meaning is theological rather than literal: Before the fall, Adam and Eve were to live immortally, but the consequence of their original sin was mortal life on Earth. That's physical harm. Also I'm told that the Greek word for "serpent" is more something like what we'd think of today as a "basilisk". While Satan may not be able to "physically harm" people, he does trick them into otherwise thinking he can. Why do you think Eve was tempted and Adam did not stand up to the serpent. If he was simply just a snake, Adam might have just called upon the name of God. Adam felt physically threatened and it affected the physical actions that he took.

    Another example in Mark 5:1-14 is where Jesus cast a Legion of unclean , spirits out from a man and into a herd of swine, and the swine killed themselves running down a steep bank and into the sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    because part of my argument was that the god (small g on purpose) presented in much of the bible does not seem like someone you want your soul to belong to. At least in the old testament. Set up a scoreboard, get a body count, see who comes out on top.
    I have a lot of study to do concerning the OT. I'd encourage you to use the strategy of looking at the "Index of Citations" in the CCC to find which sections of the Catechism are discussing various parts of the Bible. (I can't find this index in any of the "online versions" of the CCC. This software has it with the index. I just downloaded a trial version this week which gives you three uses, so just don't close out the program. I did that by mistake once so far. It costs about $50 if you should find you like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    People know right from wrong, and the problem, devil or not, is that wrong is usually easier and almost always more fun. That's not a trick, it's just a fact.
    Reminds me of the "Billy Joel" song.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    So it begs the question, WHY? God made us, and even while giving us free will, could have made our instincts different, made us desire different things. A lot of that is just built in, not learned or taught by society. Most of the things you want, you would still want if you had been raised by lions in the jungle. So if God loves us and wants us to be with him, why stack the odds against us from birth, with our very genetic code?
    I felt the same way too until I wanted to say a "Divine Mercy Chaplet" for some friends and my parents (I was offering up any indulgences for their benefit). The Church makes a stipulation that one has to not have an attachment to sin in order for this to work. That (plus a priest in a confession telling me some of my sins were "not normal", and learning about the meaning of "concupiscence" in a study of Romans 7) was enough to get me over the hump so I could see this in God's way.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    ... the church has provided a means to understanding the bible to mean what they think it means, and rejects outside thought on the matter. They do not want to know how I interpret a passage in the bible. If I don't interpret something the way they do, I get exactly what you just gave me, not "I didn't think about it like that" but "You need to learn how to understand it the right way." The church does not want me to THINK.
    I understand how you feel and you are not alone. 38,000 denominations that have split from the Catholic Church agree with you. The trouble is that either 1/38,000 of them is right and Catholics got it wrong, or we are the Church that Christ intended, or God does not exist. I leave it to you to make your own decision. Logic seems to be keeping me exactly where I am - and this has nicely solved all the issues raised in this discussion for me so far.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverity View Post
    The only possible intended message from that is "Follow my word exactly or perish. No matter that I put a natural instinct for curiosity within you, so it's my fault that you even want to look, do EXACTLY what I say or you are worthless to me."
    That is definitely part the message but not the whole message. The Church gives us a Magesterium that is like a "fence around the Bible playground". It protects you from getting too near the toxic dump or falling off cliff and drowning. There is still plenty of room for independent and critical thinking beyond what the Catholic Church teaches. The fence is designed to prevent the problems defined as heresy that the Church has defended since the earliest days.

    EDIT: CAUTION: This next part is controversially "Catholic Preachy" so I threw it in quotes:
    Quote Originally Posted by BobOnHisSoapBox
    Let me close by briefly bringing up the Protestant notion of "sola scriptura" and say that this is essentially putting on a set of "ecclesiastical blinders". Nowhere is is stated in the Bible that it is the only source of Revelation. Jesus' message (and the Judaic message) were each preached orally and "heard" right up to the invention of the printing press. During this same time, there was a group of chosen men (in apostolic succession from Jesus' time) to explain and defend this message. I assert this method of teaching is the one that Christ intended and he gave the Church the Holy Spirit so the "gates of hell would not prevail against it". This is what I call "believing/trusting/obeying" both Christ and his chosen successors. I know this is a strong confession of faith and I thank everyone for bearing with me. I hope I'll be able to "tone things down" for a while now. Please feel free to disagree with my beliefs as I feel this Church is only worth defending if it is really true.
    You had a few more comments that I'm skipping, but I'm pooped after writing this. I probably already covered them above or in earlier posts anyway.

    thanks (and I'll try to write shorter posts in the near future).
    Last edited by sudoer; 02/26/2010 at 08:19 PM.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  15. #1015  
    donovan34 -- check back soon. I've learned a lot about religion and the bible from your posts and responses. The information regarding the similarities between Horus and Jesus, which is new to me, was particularly interesting. I love a good conspiracy, which is why religion is so fascinating to me (the BIG lie?). I'll definitely take a closer look at that angle.
  16.    #1016  
    Quote Originally Posted by gsonspre View Post
    Why was God so Active back 2000 years ago and prior with making his divinty do present, vs now or in recent years?
    There just seems to be sooo many historical act's in the bible and after there just hasnt been any that I know of?
    Has the "Church" published any books of "stories" that they invested and approved as an act of god?
    I know a lot of accounts they may send someone from the Vatican out to investigate a phenomenon to verify if its legit and a lot of cases they'll disprove it.. Anything published that they did approve as an act of God in recent years?
    The first thing I wanted to post wasn't exactly what I think you were looking for. There is a book that talks about "Eucharistic Miracles". I first heard about the book in this podcast.

    Wikipedia has a good general article on Miracles.

    Many Fundamentalist Christian churches object to the notion that miracles still happen today. An article from "This Rock" (an online/print magazine) discusses this issue.

    Any person whose cause is raised to the Church for beatification (where they determine if they can be declared an official saint) must have two genuine miracles (in addition to the other requirements). To my knowledge, this is the reason that miracles are officially investigated. There are likely good books to read, but I'd want you to find balanced and objective material. I've not read any books in this area so I'm not sure I'm the best person to make recommendations.

    I found a discussion in the Catholic Answers Forums that gives lots of links. (The links there are better than what I could find on my own in a google query.)

    One last link (added without sending a PM)

    If I find more resources, I'll try and add them here (and then I'll send gsonspre a PM).
    Last edited by sudoer; 02/26/2010 at 09:15 PM.
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!
  17. #1017  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    Again , your selective beliefs are astounding.
    How funny! I was thinking the same thing about you!

    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    Of course you question it. They were not the same person they I am saying Jesus was copied from the Egyptian god Horus. Yes there is proof that he was worshiped in hieroglyphs the stuff is carved in stone and...geez never mind. You believe that there were Egyptian gods too? Wow, just wow.
    Wha? Where do I say I believe in Egyptian gods? Haven't all of my posts made it perfectly clear I believe in THE ONE TRUE GOD? Apparently you're not really paying attention to what I'm saying.

    Anyway, I was trying to illustrate your inference that Jesus was copied (or was the same person) as Horus doesn't make sense since I'm not aware of any historical documents or archaeological evidence that supports it. Jesus was a real person and that fact is very well documented in history...even among other religions.
  18. #1018  
    Quote Originally Posted by soccerbudd View Post
    Wha? Where do I say I believe in Egyptian gods? Haven't all of my posts made it perfectly clear I believe in THE ONE TRUE GOD? Apparently you're not really paying attention to what I'm saying.
    You said that god killed the Egyptian gods in the old testament - so you must believe they existed if god was able to kill them...I'm listening.
  19. #1019  
    Hello sudoer, Xerlot, and Karla,
    Does anyone here know how their Palm device works? I mean all of it the algorithms that allow the software to function, the pieces of hardware that allow the touch screen to work. Do you question your I-pod? How about the formulas used to get satellites into orbit so that we have GPS on the ground (BTW- GPS is not perfectly accurate but it will get you really, really close)? How about sonar technology that shows us where the oil is so that we don't have to just poke holes all over to find oil? We know where it is with some measure of accuracy.
    These things were all created because of science. You don't question these things. However, when someone says that we can tell how old the earth is with a relative degree of error you toss that out.
    If you broke a rock in half and gave it to two separate geologists on the opposite sides of the earth they would both come back with the same answer with a degree of error on that age as well. Are they right? Exactly? Probably not but they are using the best tools they have to determine that age with some level of error in that formula. Are they completely wrong and just making a guess? Nope. They do not say this rock is a million years old plus or minus a million - I could make that guess about anything and that is not how this works. That would not be science.
    If you went to two separate chemists and asked them to show you what would be produced if you combine a number if elements from the periodic table of the elements. They would produce the same answer and they would not even need the elements to do it.
    Is science perfect and right the first time? Nope, changes are made and corrections are done and formulas reworked and that is ok. I believe I read the other day that Einsteins 'Theory of Relativity' may have some errors - does that mean all science is now wrong, no. E=mc2 is still a good formula.
    Am I closed minded about religion and closed off to new ideas? I don't think so. I would hope by my posts I have shown that I have done a lot of reading on this; so does it look like I have had questions just like you at one time? I would think so.
    I have done a lot of soul searching in the past, taken a lot of science, studied engineering, done ridiculous amounts of math, had lots of life experiences like you all have, and my conclusion is there is probably no god.
    You may ask 'well how do you know any of that was right'? I guess maybe I don't but this is my perspective and perspective is our realities.
    Is my mind completely closed to the idea that there could be a god, this may surprise you (it may not though) but no. If it was why would i have clicked on this thread. I am listening to what you have to say but so far there is nothing new to be learned other than your perspectives on religion which that is what keeps us coming back here. I will not take a leap of faith or just believe as cannot do this. My mind will not allow me to do that.
    I am still here, I'll listen, and I will try and continue to come back until we run out of civilized methods to discuss this.

    joshaccount - i will continue to come back. I am glad you are getting something out of this and I am too.
  20.    #1020  
    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    Hello sudoer, Xerlot, and Karla,
    ...
    donovan34, I am in 100% agreement with everything you said.
    If religion and science cannot coexist, then one of the other is wrong. I'd be more inclined to toss out religion before science. I view religion as something that I don't want to destroy before I know what it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    I am still here, I'll listen, and I will try and continue to come back until we run out of civilized methods to discuss this.
    You and I are now on the same page. I agree there more that we in this thread don't know than we do. We each need to remain open and not proud. Mostly we are all trying to do that (and that's the part that will hopefully keep this fun). Please feel free to call me on this whenever I fail to live up to this agreement.

    Quote Originally Posted by donovan34 View Post
    joshaccount - i will continue to come back. I am glad you are getting something out of this and I am too.
    We're all going to learn quite a bit. Most of the things like "Horus" have been brought up elsewhere and discussed/debated already. We should be able to learn from those conversations, but we'll also need to consider that previous participants in those conversations may not have addressed/considered all the issues they needed to. It will be interesting to learn from you at the same time when you teach joshaccount!
    I'm both super! ... and a doer!

Posting Permissions