| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"FireBirdBlue" |
| Date: |
14 Sep 2006 04:28:07 AM |
| Object: |
TOBS: Science and the Future |
R. Pierce Butler wrote:
You can believe what your want and so can everyone else. That still
doesn't prove that God exists.
Try again
Also, science cannot foresee the future. It cannot even foresee the
results of its own discoveries. When DDT was developed, for example, it
was hoped that this new weapon would forever solve the problem of
insect pests. It would provide protection for plants and keep in check
those insects that spread diseases such as malaria. However, the German
newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung said that this "blessing for
mankind . . . an undreamed-of achievement for chemistry" later
became "a rather questionable blessing. . . . DDT's victory march
through Germany is over." And not only in Germany but also in many
other countries where its use has been banned. Science failed to
foresee the negative effects it would have on other forms of life,
including man.
Remember, too, Alfred Nobel, after whom the Nobel peace prize is named.
He was a man of peace, yet he invented dynamite. Why? He wrote to a
friend: "I should like to invent a substance or machine with such
terrible power of mass destruction that war would thereby be made
impossible for ever." Two world wars since Nobel's death have
proved that his invention failed to have the effect he hoped for.
Albert Einstein also hoped that the development of the atom bomb, based
largely upon his theories, would eliminate forever the danger of war.
Yet bitter wars are still being fought, and civilization finds itself
sitting on a nuclear powder keg, terrified that someone will light the
fuse. Shortly before he died, Einstein is reported to have said: "If
I had only known, I would have been a locksmith."
It is sadly ironic that science, which has improved the lives of so
many millions, has also provided the means by which man can destroy
himself. If only scientists could foretell the future! They cannot, of
course, but the Bible does.
.
|
|
| User: "Jabriol-Basic" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
15 Sep 2006 07:57:52 PM |
|
|
Lucifer wrote:
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
"Science and religion [are] no longer seen as incompatible."-The Daily
Telegraph, London, May 26, 1999.
Wow, the Torygraph said it, guess it must be true.
I suppose the reason that you aren't showing the rest is because either
A) it doesn't fit with what you believe, even the Torygraph doesn't
believe creation *****, and chances are that the article was saying
that religion can accomodate science, not the other way round
B) A search of the Telegraph archives doesn't show anything with that
title, could it be that it didn't exist, or are you quoting a single
random line of body text?
Please elaborate.
just a random quote,science and religion, in their noblest forms,
involve the search for truth. Science discovers a world of magnificent
order, a universe that contains distinctive marks of intelligent design.
True religion makes these discoveries meaningful by teaching that the
mind of the Creator lies behind the design manifest in the physical world.
“I find my appreciation of science is greatly enriched by religion,”
says Francis Collins, a molecular biologist. He continues: “When I
discover something about the human genome, I experience a sense of awe
at the mystery of life, and say to myself, ‘Wow, only God knew before.’
It is a profoundly beautiful and moving sensation, which helps me
appreciate God and makes science even more rewarding for me.”
What will help one to reconcile science and religion?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark D J. Mark D" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
16 Sep 2006 06:12:38 AM |
|
|
"Jabriol-Basic" <basic@blubber.es> wrote in message news:k_
What will help one to reconcile science and religion?
Who cares? Why should science give a ***** about being 'reconciled' with a
bunch of someone's favourite fables? You might as well ask 'What will help
one to reconcile science and 'The Lord of the Rings'?'
Grow up, for *****'s sake.
M.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
16 Sep 2006 08:13:13 AM |
|
|
Mark D J. wrote:
"Jabriol-Basic" <basic@blubber.es> wrote in message news:k_
What will help one to reconcile science and religion?
Who cares? Why should science give a ***** about being 'reconciled' with a
bunch of someone's favourite fables? You might as well ask 'What will help
one to reconcile science and 'The Lord of the Rings'?'
People with religious convictions help elect Congressmen whose vote
funds some important scientific research.
Grow up, for *****'s sake.
Take your own advice. We live in a country where over half the people
believe angels are real and the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack May" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
16 Sep 2006 10:34:11 PM |
|
|
"Bob Kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4n2856F8cb5sU2@individual.net...
Mark D J. wrote:
"Jabriol-Basic" <basic@blubber.es> wrote in message news:k_
Take your own advice. We live in a country where over half the people
believe angels are real and the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
80% of people in the US can not read and comprehend the Science page of Time
Magazine according to one test. That is a scary thing in the voting booth.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henry Mankinna" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 10:52:41 PM |
|
|
"Jack May" <jack.may@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:R6GdnV2QiJauX5HYnZ2dnUVZ_v-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
80% of people in the US can not read and comprehend the Science page of
Time Magazine according to one test. That is a scary thing in the voting
booth.
What percentage of that 80% are illegal aliens who can barely speak, read or
write English? What percentage are the inner city kids of crack addicts and
single mothers who themselves can barely read?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark D J. Mark D" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 06:30:51 PM |
|
|
Take your own advice. We live in a country where over half the people
believe angels are real and the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
80% of people in the US can not read and comprehend the Science page of
Time Magazine according to one test. That is a scary thing in the voting
booth.
Don't worry: in Bush's Amerikkka *the votes aren't counted anyway*...
M.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack May" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 08:57:34 PM |
|
|
"Mark D J." <Mark D J.@home.com> wrote in message
news:LUkPg.20140$cx.314@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
Take your own advice. We live in a country where over half the people
believe angels are real and the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
80% of people in the US can not read and comprehend the Science page of
Time Magazine according to one test. That is a scary thing in the voting
booth.
Don't worry: in Bush's Amerikkka *the votes aren't counted anyway*...
The votes on the religious right that can't understand the Science page seem
to have their votes counted very well.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tekkamen" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 12:38:35 AM |
|
|
Jack May wrote:
"Bob Kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4n2856F8cb5sU2@individual.net...
Mark D J. wrote:
"Jabriol-Basic" <basic@blubber.es> wrote in message news:k_
Take your own advice. We live in a country where over half the people
believe angels are real and the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
80% of people in the US can not read and comprehend the Science page of Time
Magazine according to one test. That is a scary thing in the voting booth.
That explains Iraq
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 07:49:42 AM |
|
|
Tekkamen wrote:
That explains Iraq
No it doesn't.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jabriol-Basic" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 08:41:26 AM |
|
|
Bob Kolker wrote:
Tekkamen wrote:
That explains Iraq
No it doesn't.
Bob Kolker
Yes it does...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marvin" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 11:41:13 AM |
|
|
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
Bob Kolker wrote:
Tekkamen wrote:
That explains Iraq
No it doesn't.
Bob Kolker
Yes it does...
That was a highly intelligent and informative exchange!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henry Mankinna" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 10:53:53 PM |
|
|
"Marvin" <physchem@cloud9.net> wrote in message
news:12gqul3gbad9rf7@corp.supernews.com...
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
Bob Kolker wrote:
Tekkamen wrote:
That explains Iraq
No it doesn't.
Bob Kolker
Yes it does...
That was a highly intelligent and informative exchange!
It's from the creationist Jehovah's Witness Jabriol, so what do you expect?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
17 Sep 2006 02:00:01 PM |
|
|
Bob Kolker wrote:
Mark D J. wrote:
"Jabriol-Basic" <basic@blubber.es> wrote in message news:k_
What will help one to reconcile science and religion?
Who cares? Why should science give a ***** about being 'reconciled' with a
bunch of someone's favourite fables? You might as well ask 'What will help
one to reconcile science and 'The Lord of the Rings'?'
People with religious convictions help elect Congressmen whose vote
funds some important scientific research.
Grow up, for *****'s sake.
Take your own advice. We live in a country where over half the people
believe angels are real and the earth is less than 10,000 years old.
"Only 28 percent of Americans believe in evolution; 72 percent believe
in angels." ~ Sam Harris in The End of Faith
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
15 Sep 2006 10:08:07 PM |
|
|
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
just a random quote,science and religion, in their noblest forms,
involve the search for truth. Science discovers a world of magnificent
order, a universe that contains distinctive marks of intelligent design.
True religion makes these discoveries meaningful by teaching that the
mind of the Creator lies behind the design manifest in the physical world.
What creator. The apparent order of the cosmos does not imply the
existence of a creator.
If you mix sodium vapor and chlorine vapor together you get sodium
chloride crystals which are structured. No creator. Just chemical reactions.
Natural processes are sufficient to account for the appearence of design.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
16 Sep 2006 04:54:34 AM |
|
|
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
Lucifer wrote:
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
"Science and religion [are] no longer seen as incompatible."-The Daily
Telegraph, London, May 26, 1999.
Wow, the Torygraph said it, guess it must be true.
I suppose the reason that you aren't showing the rest is because either
A) it doesn't fit with what you believe, even the Torygraph doesn't
believe creation *****, and chances are that the article was saying
that religion can accomodate science, not the other way round
B) A search of the Telegraph archives doesn't show anything with that
title, could it be that it didn't exist, or are you quoting a single
random line of body text?
Please elaborate.
just a random quote,science and religion, in their noblest forms,
involve the search for truth. Science discovers a world of magnificent
order, a universe that contains distinctive marks of intelligent design.
There's only one problem there old chap.
It fundamentally doesn't.
Anyone with an ounce of understanding can understand how the eye etc
can evolve.
True religion makes these discoveries meaningful by teaching that the
mind of the Creator lies behind the design manifest in the physical world.
"I find my appreciation of science is greatly enriched by religion,"
says Francis Collins, a molecular biologist. He continues: "When I
discover something about the human genome, I experience a sense of awe
at the mystery of life, and say to myself, 'Wow, only God knew before.'
It is a profoundly beautiful and moving sensation, which helps me
appreciate God and makes science even more rewarding for me."
What will help one to reconcile science and religion?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
15 Sep 2006 08:05:48 PM |
|
|
Jabriol-Basic wrote:
“Science and religion [are] no longer seen as incompatible.”—The Daily
Telegraph, London, May 26, 1999.
They are orthogonal to each other. Zero overlap. Science tells you how
the heavens go. Religion tells you how to go to Heaven.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Opie" |
|
| Title: Re: Science and Religion |
15 Sep 2006 08:03:05 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 23:23:17 GMT, Jabriol-Basic <basic@blubber.es>
wrote:
“Science and religion [are] no longer seen as incompatible.”—The Daily
Telegraph, London, May 26, 1999.
If you're going to cut and paste, at least edit the doodles out of the
message.
Friedrich Nietzsche: "In heaven all
the interesting people are missing."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 02:01:02 PM |
|
|
WhiteDwarf wrote:
Bob Kolker wrote:
FireBirdBlue wrote:
The Bible gives us a record, either actual or prophetic,
Stop! Right there! Prophecy is insanity!
The Bible, taken literally also tells us the world is 6000 years old
(give or take a few hundred) and the Sun was created on the forth day.
This is anti-factual *****.
Not at all. The Bible understood in it original language would tell you
the world and life on it is a few millions years old. Please don't
parrot YEC.
OK, why don't you explain it then. You seem to be an OEC.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 03:14:38 PM |
|
|
cactus wrote:
OK, why don't you explain it then. You seem to be an OEC.
Maybe he can explain a world wide Flood with a depth equal to Mt.
Everest plus 15 cubits. And maybe he can further explain how millions of
insect and plant species could be carried aboard the Ark to escape
destruction by the flood.
As you can plainly see the Genesis and FLood stories cannot be taken
literally or factually.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 04:20:43 PM |
|
|
Bob Kolker wrote:
cactus wrote:
OK, why don't you explain it then. You seem to be an OEC.
Maybe he can explain a world wide Flood with a depth equal to Mt.
Everest plus 15 cubits. And maybe he can further explain how millions of
insect and plant species could be carried aboard the Ark to escape
destruction by the flood.
As you can plainly see the Genesis and FLood stories cannot be taken
literally or factually.
Bob Kolker
Yep.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "aversiveness" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 11:55:14 AM |
|
|
FireBirdBlue wrote:
Bob Kolker wrote:
The book of Daniel never mentioned Rome, not even once. It is only crazy
Protestants that read their delusions into the Book of Daniel which is
an Aramaic hodge podge. When Daniel was in Babylon there was no Rome.
The worst thing that ever happened to the TNKH (the Hebrew Scriptures)
was that the goyim got a hold of it.
Bob Kolker
The Bible gives us a record, either actual or prophetic, of seven world
powers during mankind's history. These are not small, insignificant
powers, but powers that had the greatest influence during their term of
existence. Each, during its time, was the Number One Power with which
the nations had to reckon. These were: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon,
Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome and the Anglo-American World Power. The
prophecy of the Bible book of Daniel accurately spoke of the powers of
Daniel's own day, namely, Babylon and Medo-Persia, then foretold the
three to follow. The prophecy called the Medo-Persian and the Grecian
World Powers by name and described the following two. What did
Daniel's prophecy have to say about them?
That's just proof that you can create arbitrary categorizations around
things that have fluid distinctions. You simply chose to group some
historically significant societies together or separate as needed to
achieve your silly number seven. And you subjectively prop up the
importance of some or ignore others (noticeably you have dropped the
significance of the Chinese dynasties and other Asian powers!). How
utterly weak.
In the vision that God gave him, Daniel saw four huge beasts,
representing or picturing "kings." (Dan. 7:17) These symbolic
beasts were a lion (Babylon), a bear (Medo-Persia) and a leopard
(Greece), followed by a fearsome beast with teeth of iron, different
from all the others, and having ten horns.
Did it really say teeth of "iron"? When was this piece written? Or is
that just someone's retroactive retranslation. Just curious.
Out of this beast another
"king," a small horn, grew to become prominent, speaking grandiose
words. This final horn faced judgment, not inflicted by another world
power, but a judgment directly administered by the Almighty God. The
terrible beast was the Roman World Power and the horn growing out of it
was the Seventh World Power, which would constitute the last one on
earth. That is the Anglo-American World Power.-Dan. 7:2-12; compare
Daniel 8:20-22.
Hee hee - Why do I get this mental image of a Maurice Sendak
illustration?
The whole idea that the bible is 'prophetic' is so silly. It is a huge
book, with tons of vague symbolism that can be interpreted in many,
many ways. Naturally, given enough time, some world events will fall
into patterns that can be matched to 'phrophecies' in the bible. Give
it a few more thousand years and every prophecy in the bible will have
'come true' - though not necessarily in order! Of course, so will
have every prophesy of Nostrademus! And every other sufficiently
vague crackpot collection of phrophecies!
This is really just a reverse instance of the monkey-and-typewriter
situation.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 12:26:09 PM |
|
|
FireBirdBlue wrote:
There are many reasons why we can believe that promise, not the least
being that, up to now, all the prophecies in the Bible have come true.
But just consider the implications. This means that God's kingdom
will soon provide just one government for the whole earth, replacing
the nationalistic, warring governments of today. What a difference this
will make!
Yodah says: Do not your breath hold, young FireBirdBlue, until God's
Kindom comes, else blue turn you will.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
14 Sep 2006 07:13:43 PM |
|
|
FireBirdBlue wrote:
cactus wrote:
The Bible does a great job of foretelling the mythic past. We are better
Let think about what you said, consider just a few examples from the
past where the Bible has accurately foretold what was going to happen.
In the book of Daniel, a part of the Bible written during the time of
the Babylonian Empire in the sixth century BCE, a prophecy was
recorded foretelling that Persia and then Greece would follow Babylon
as world powers. It then foretold that the great Greek Empire would be
divided into four smaller powers, and it convincingly described the
ironlike empire of Rome that would come next. (Daniel 7:1-8; 8:3-8,
20-22) Everything happened as prophesied.
Christian translations of Daniel are rife with mistranslations done for
polemical reasons.
An interesting foreview of the future had to do with the city of Tyre,
to the north of Israel. Ezekiel prophesied that Tyre would be destroyed
by Nebuchadnezzar and gave these details about its ultimate fate: "I
will scrape her dust away from her and make her a shining, bare surface
of a crag. . . . And your stones and your woodwork and your dust they
will place in the very midst of the water. . . . The vast waters will
have covered you." (Ezekiel 26:4, 12, 19) Did this happen?
Yes, it did. Sometime after he destroyed Jerusalem, King Nebuchadnezzar
came against Tyre and overpowered it. However, the city did not totally
disappear. Its inhabitants fled to an offshore island, which they
fortified. Then, almost three hundred years later, Alexander the Great
besieged what by then had become the island city of Tyre. So that his
army could attack the island, he took the ruins of the ancient mainland
city and threw them into the sea to make a causeway out to the island
city. Hence, in remarkably literal detail, the prophecy was fulfilled.
The dust of the ancient city of Tyre was scraped away, and the stones,
the woodwork and the very dust were thrown into the water.
This prophesy was easy because the book was completed after the siege.
As I said, scripture is terrific at predicting past events.
Even more remarkable are the prophecies relating to Jesus Christ. The
Bible foretold not only the time of his appearance as Messiah but also
the things he would do, and even the death he would die. Jesus' whole
life course was in fulfillment of prophecies written hundreds of years
in advance.-Daniel 9:24-27; Isaiah 53:3-9; 61:1, 2.
See above for my comment on Daniel. Every Christian claim of alleged
messianic prophesy in Tanach is based on mistranslations, misquotes,
quotes taken out of context, or post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies.
Even today, Bible students can see remarkable fulfillments of prophecy
in the present political developments. (See, for example, Matthew
24:7-15 and Luke 21:25-28.) And when they read Paul's words in Second
Timothy chapter three, verses one to five, they see a very accurate
description of this world's deteriorating moral climate. Moreover,
the Bible prophesies things for our future too.
I wouldn't know. I'm not a Christian, so I have not read, let alone
studied, your Greek Testament.
It foretells a startling solution to the world's present political
crisis. Speaking of today's competing world rulers, it says: "In
the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that
will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be
passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all
these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times
indefinite."-Daniel 2:44.
post hoc ergo propter hoc. It could apply to almost any time you care to
mention. There is no logical reason that it should apply to our time any
more than another time.
There are many reasons why we can believe that promise, not the least
being that, up to now, all the prophecies in the Bible have come true.
But just consider the implications. This means that God's kingdom
will soon provide just one government for the whole earth, replacing
the nationalistic, warring governments of today. What a difference this
will make!
I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, I'm not holding my breath.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Henry Mankinna" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 11:07:21 AM |
|
|
"cactus" <bm1@nonespam.com> wrote in message
news:XemOg.2497$7I1.1574@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
FireBirdBlue wrote: (FROM THE WTS MAGAZINE)
There are many reasons why we can believe that promise, not the least
being that, up to now, all the prophecies in the Bible have come true.
But just consider the implications. This means that God's kingdom
will soon provide just one government for the whole earth, replacing
the nationalistic, warring governments of today. What a difference this
will make!
I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, I'm not holding my breath.
I'm not holding mine either. Let the fundys live in lala land. They can't
cope with the real world nor do they have the wherewithal to change anything
so they live in a fantasy...........
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 03:56:50 AM |
|
|
cactus wrote:
I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, I'm not holding my breath.
Cactus, my good fellow. I sense that you are a sane person. Let us drink
to sanity. L'Chayim!
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: TOBS: Science and the Future |
15 Sep 2006 03:21:08 AM |
|
|
Bob Kolker wrote:
cactus wrote:
I'll believe it when I see it. In the meantime, I'm not holding my
breath.
Cactus, my good fellow. I sense that you are a sane person. Let us drink
to sanity. L'Chayim!
Bob Kolker
L'Chaim!
Or as we used to say in college, L'benot chaim!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|