-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why the divide between Science and Religion...
- Thread starter Ulver
- Start date
That's a bit hard Deut; not all of us theists see the bible as a tool to accept it in the light you portray when you say :"the ossified dogma of the KJV-only inerrantist clings to its maggot infested backwardness while it salivates at every error encountered by science".Deut. 32.8 said:
It sounds like you tar every Bible reader as "the pathetically ignorant God-of-the-Gloat."
I think that is exagerated, and highly judgemental.
michel, I am more than a little tired of your distortions. Learn how to read and then constrain your petty knee-jerk reactions long enough to exercise that skill. The quote explicitly targets "the ossified dogma of the KJV-only inerrantist". How dare you imply that I was referring to "all of us theists"! Please retract this crap.michel said:
More mindless drivel ...michel said:
- I was NOT referring to "every Bible reader", a category which I guarantee would include me far more than you.
- I was NOT calling anyone, any Bible reader, any Christian, a God of any description whatsoever.
And you are more than capable of thinking and saying this irrespective of what it says. Most people call this capability bigotry.michel said:
Colossians 1:17AV1611 said:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Hebrews 1:3Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Res ipsa loquitur!
Once more Deut, I find myself needing to apologise to you in public, since you have demanded that I do so. I retract my 'Crap', I will try to learn how to read, and I shall try to ensure that I do not come across as a bigot (which I honestly do not believe I am).Deut. 32.8 said:
I must admit that this is not the most pleasant of tasks, as any misunderstanding was not intended; however I know you will refuse to accept that in mitigation.
I therefore once again apologise unreservedly for any wrong I have caused you, and will just have to 'turn the other cheek', as usual. I hope you savour your victory.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
You must spread some Karma around before giving it to jonny again.jonny said:
Well said, jonny! :jam:
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Actually, Copernicus did not 'set the record straight'. Although he did improve cosmology by placing the Sun (rather than the Earth) at the center of the universe, he maintained that planets moved in perfect circular orbits (real orbits are elliptical). Later improvements--from Kepler's laws of planetary motion to Hubble's law--did not result from prayer or prophesy or some new insight into ancient writings, but from the methodology of science. It's rather curious that for more than a thousand years no one found the "correct" interpretation of scripture--one which implies that the Earth orbits the Sun--until Galileo made telescopic observations which demonstrated it. Amazing how apologists' interpretations of ancient religious texts change with the advancement of scientific knowledge.AV1611 said:
Sorry, just had to set the record straight.
Good, because you cannot even know who authored 2 Timothy. Oh, as a favor, if you insist on shouting, try to avoid shouting nonsense.AV1611 said:
Cynic
Well-Known Member
"Believe in Jesus so you can have eternal life"AV1611 said:
"Accept Jesus or go to hell"
I find such statement to be synonymous with briberies and threats in which acceptance is motivated only by self interest. This makes acceptance unreasonable.
Wherease my beliefs are warranted by credibility, certainty, and the objective evidense which supports the former two.
A belief without such warranty is illogical, and susceptible to false assumptions and fallacy.