Gravity and the Expanding Universe

[paarsurrey]

What parts of the Bible do you think are not man made?

And you cannot ask me questions about atheism until you answer my question that I have repeatedly asked of you.

Those parts of Bible that:

1. Jesus wrote himself
2. or dictate to somebody
3. and or that are not against Quran.

are truthful, I understand.
Right, please?

Regards

 

[shunyadragon]

My understanding is that they are non-believers as they failed to understand the truthful Religion, unreasonably, I understand. Right, please?

Regards

The problem with this is many diverse and conflicting religions, churches and sects accuse others of not understanding the truthful religion, witch the truthful religion is their own of course and no other. This not meaningful from the fallible human perspective.

 

[paarsurrey]

You started off very well, but then you screwed the pooch. Let me fix that for you:

My understanding is that they are unbelievers since they understand the truth about religion. Please?

Now, please let us have the answer to post #412 , please. Right, please?

Regards

 

[ppp]

My understanding is that they are non-believers as they failed to understand the truthful Religion, unreasonably, I understand. Right, please?

Regards

An atheist is someone who does not believe that gods exists. You are going to find atheists who are unaware of your religious claims, atheists who are aware but have only a partial understanding, and atheists who are far better versed in your religious beliefs that you are. It is a comforting temptation to think that because someone doesn't believe your claims that they do not understand them. But its a false comfort.

 

[paarsurrey]

The problem with this is many diverse and conflicting religions, churches and sects accuse others of not understanding the truthful religion, witch the truthful religion is their own of course and no other. This not meaningful from the fallible human perspective.

This can be easily sorted out, I understand, with the Religious methodology or the method of "claim" and "reason" or the Religious Method . Right, please?
Atheism have no methodology to find the truth, moreover, they differ among themselves also so it is just a pretext of Atheism, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[shunyadragon]

I would like to think that the reason a person belongs to a religion is because they believe it is the right one.

You would have to ask each individual person in the world to get your answer, but nonetheless the reality is that their peer culture they are raised in, and the sense of the need for belonging and identity determines what they believe, and not a genuine search for the 'true religion or belief.' It is roughly consistent that 95%+ of everyone believes in the belief of the their parents and/or peer group with considering any other choice.

As far as your choice of belief it does have an irrational element of rejecting the objective verifiable evidence of science concerning the nature of our physical existence.

If your parents were Jewish, Christian, Muslim or one of the other many possible choices it is a 95%+ certainty that you will believe in a version of religion that your parents or peer group believes.

Truth is far more illusive than any one of the conflicting beliefs that claim their 'way' is the only true 'way.'

The Pharisees disagreed with Jesus, but their being sincere in their beliefs did Not make them right according to Jesus - Matthew chapter 23.
Growing together since the end of the first century are both the genuine 'wheat ' Christians along with the fake ' weed/tares' Christians.
They both grow together until the Harvest. The Harvest Time or the soon coming Time of Separation ' to take place on Earth as per Matthew 25:31-33,37.
Jesus, as King of God's Kingdom - Daniel 2:44, is the one who will do the separating at this time between the genuine and the fake.......

Yes, you believe your interpretation of the above citation and it confirms your belief,

 

[shunyadragon]

This can be easily sorted out, I understand, with the Religious methodology or the method of "claim" and "reason" or the Religious Method . Right, please?
Atheism have no methodology to find the truth, moreover, they differ among themselves also so it is just a pretext of Atheism, please? Right, please?

Regards

Actually not true. The many diverse conflicting belief claims have no methodology beyond the subjective justification of what they believe. You do not have an 'objective methodology' that would justify your belief is more 'true' than say the Jew, Christian or atheist.

Religious methodology is a circular argument to justify only ones own belief.

On the other hand the atheist claims is based on Methodological Naturalism to justify their lack of belief in God(s), or the existence spiritual worlds beyond out physical existence, and make a philosophical choice of Ontological Naturalism is the basis of belief. It is true that nothing can be proved nor even objectively determined, but they do have a methodology for making their decision.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Those parts of Bible that:

1. Jesus wrote himself
2. or dictate to somebody
3. and or that are not against Quran.

are truthful, I understand.
Right, please?

Regards

Jesus did not write any of the Bible. Nor did he dictate them. And the Quran is as bad as the Bible. They are merely man written books. Why would anyone believe anything else?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Bible" A man made book would have no clue about the true nature of the world back then."

Not all of the Bible is man-made, there is light in it, to lead to the Truthful Religion, I understand, please.
Notwithstanding the above, what is one's method to know "the true nature", please? Right, please?
Also please tell us what did the Atheism* know about the true nature of the world back then, please? Right, please?

Regards
______________
* from (16c.)
-ism 1670s

Okay, when I said " the true nature of the world " I was referring to concepts that can be scientifically confirmed that oppose the Bible and Quran. It is understandable that the authors of those works would get quite a bit wrong since many facts had not been discovered or explained when those books were written.


The Bible and Quran do have some valid teachings but they both have quite a few false ones as well.

 

[paarsurrey]

This regards science only insofar as logic is part of science. If you do not understand basic logic, then I cannot explain anything to you.

All three "gods" cannot be the ONE TRUE GOD. What is so complicated?

Not right no matter how much you ask "right please". Asking "right please" does not make things right.

Science dismisses all things supernatural - that includes all gods.

Science does use logic (with all its fallacies), I understand, but it is from philosophy and science loans it from philosophy to understand things as science has no method of its is own to understand the things. It is the same as Science uses the natural language as it has no language of its own and has to loan words and uses them as terms in Science. So, I understand, one is wrong, please? Right, please?

Regards

 

[rrobs]

The Baha'i Faith has specific guidance on accepting the evolving knowledge of science as the accepted authority for description of the physical nature of our physical existence. The understanding of scripture concerning the physical existence must be understood in the light of science. The other religions lack this specific guidance, and yes everyone is on their own, but not entirely, because they have their scripture for guidance.

You seem to be saying that the scriptures are anti-science. It would be more accurate to say you just don't know how the scriptures accord with science. And you don't know how they accord with science because you have preconceived ideas that prevent you from seeing what's actually written.

You tend to take a few verses and build an entire doctrine on them while ignoring the overall scope and structure of the scriptures. Doing so can prove anything anybody wants to prove. Not good scholarship, but it's what many end up doing.

 

[paarsurrey]

Jesus did not write any of the Bible. Nor did he dictate them. And the Quran is as bad as the Bible. They are merely man written books. Why would anyone believe anything else?

Well, that is one's lack of understanding, I understand. Right, please?
Please have some good methodology to know things, Atheism doesn't help one, I understand. Right, please?

Regards

 

[rrobs]

Okay, when I said " the true nature of the world " I was referring to concepts that can be scientifically confirmed that oppose the Bible and Quran. It is understandable that the authors of those works would get quite a bit wrong since many facts had not been discovered or explained when those books were written.

The Bible and Quran do have some valid teachings but they both have quite a few false ones as well.

Apart from the scriptures, you can't possibly know the true nature of the world. All you can know is what science currently avers. There is little doubt that they will discover new facts in the future and thus what you think is the nature of the world today will change.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, that is one's lack of understanding, I understand. Right, please?
Please have some good methodology to know things, Atheism doesn't help one, I understand. Right, please?

Regards

You still do not seem to understand that atheism needs not methodology. And there is no religious methodology. If anything atheists rely on methodological naturalism as a methodology. That would include the scientific method. Atheism helps one because accepting reality is almost always helpful.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Apart from the scriptures, you can't possibly know the true nature of the world. All you can know is what science currently avers. There is little doubt that they will discover new facts in the future and thus what you think is the nature of the world today will change.

What makes you think that the scriptures are a pathway to the truth? How would you test the scriptures? And science does have a history of success, the scriptures, not so much.

 

[ecco]

False clergy on each side blessed their armies instead of obeying Jesus to put away the sword - Matthew 26:52 ; Revelation 13:10
Jesus and his followers were neutral in world affairs being No part of the world. They did Not even take sides in the issues of the day between the Jews and Romans.

False Clergy?!? Who are you to decide who are true believers and who aren't?

If America had followed your Put Away the Sword ideologies in 1941, du würdest jetzt deutsch sprechen.


You live in the real world, not some idealistic fantasy world.

You might also consider that your Father, Son, Holy Ghost God speaks out of both sides of his mouth. For every "Put Away the Sword" spoken by the Son version, the Father version mercilessly destroyed armies and their wives and children.

 

[ecco]

So, to me it is Not ' you guys ' (Christians) but false clergy trying to keep people in the dark

Once again you take it upon yourself to know God's will and decide who is and who is not "false Clergy".

What you are really saying is that all those who previously stated The End of Times are Upon Us must be False Clergy. Big Whoop. To me, they aren't false clergy, they are just a bunch of people who had their own agenda and found writings in the Good Book to support them.


All manner of Christians have studied chapter and verse and have come to many different conclusions.

Obviously, The Word of God is really, really vague. So vague that anyone can read anything into the words.

 

[ecco]

Those parts of Bible that:

1. Jesus wrote himself
2. or dictate to somebody
3. and or that are not against Quran.

are truthful, I understand.

What about those parts of the Bible that Jesus wrote himself that contradict the Quran?

What about those parts of the Bible that Jesus dictated to someone that contradict the Quran?

 

[ecco]

Atheism have no methodology to find the truth

What a silly comment. Atheists have found the truth about gods. They know that gods are the creations of man's imaginings. That's why they are atheists.

moreover, they differ among themselves also so it is just a pretext of Atheism

People who study the Quran differ among themselves also, so it is just a pretext of Islam.

 

[paarsurrey]

You still do not seem to understand that atheism needs not methodology. And there is no religious methodology. If anything atheists rely on methodological naturalism as a methodology. That would include the scientific method. Atheism helps one because accepting reality is almost always helpful.

Friend!
I do understand Atheism, I envision. Right, please?
Nature is a creation of G-d and is available to everybody a believer or no-believer, so there cannot be a true Naturalism, I understand, if one doesn't know its Creator. Right, please?
I deem "Naturalism" is based on conjecture as are Atheism, Agnosticism, Skepticism, Humanism etc all terminology of unreasonable Philosophy devoid of wisdom, please. Right, please?
There are non-believers here who have acknowledged, if I have correctly understood them, that Atheism has nothing to do with Science/Scientific Method, that is the reason that Science has never taken up Atheism belonging to Science or No-Science, please. Right, please?

Regards