CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: General Religious Discussion...

[JeepHammer]

I always thought the religion threads belong, and were going to be created, as a separate forum under the General Interest. Forum » General Interest » Religion. That way, all of these thread title prefixes "CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION" could be dispensed with.

What could I discuss about religion generally?…

How about the position some religionists take that without religion (specificly their religion) there can be no true morality, that morality requires an absolute standard to be useful, otherwise no one's moral compass can possibly point to "true north".

In response to that proposition, I always question why should we use your religion's moral laws, as opposed to some other religion's moral laws?

Second, I reject the whole premise that only religious morality can carry the imprimatur of absolute right and wrong. Raw, unadulterated human reason is entirely capable of crafting a set of moral laws with every bit the authority of religiously based moral laws, and in fact look very much the same as large swaths of various religious moral laws, all while having a rational basis to back them up, which is, in my humble opinion, a basis superior to "Because our god said so."

I'd be truly interested to hear some of the "rational" basis for a morality system without a religious foundation. (I use quotes because a religious basis for morality is surely not irrational.) Anyone care to present the argument(s) for my education and interest?

There isn't any way to discuss/debate religion with a 'Believer' simply because deity based religion doesn't make provable, scientific sense.
It's a belief in something that can't be seen, can't be proven, leaves no visible signs or effects, no way to positively prove any part of the religion.

The biggest issue I had with comparative religion classes was I never was able to have a conversation with a 'Believer' simply because they can't separate ego & emotion from religious beliefs or dogma and always got upset/mad/raving when asked about the factual information in their dogma.
Didn't matter what sect of Christian, or Muslim, or Jewish or whatever.
Since I was trying to figure out the what/why as a student, maybe I wasn't asking the questions correctly/tactfully enough, but it turned out with the 'Believer' being upset/enraged.
I'm not the most tactful person, but I'm always curious about what I don't understand.

What science has proven is the 'Religious' have more connections between the amygdala & temporal lobe in the brain.
Some people call this the 'God Spot', when severed by brain injury or illness, people loose 'Faith'.
These people become hyper rational.
This is admittedly flawed since it involves brain injuries, but it does support the connection bypassing ration & reason.

Now, keep in mind, injuries this deep in the brain normally kill the person it happens to, so the sample is very small, and survivors are brain damaged by definition.
Another interesting aspect is they often loose much of their ego, ego being what makes for a LOT of bad decisions.
They often also loose unsupported/irrational fears.

ANY particular 'Belief' means nothing to me, how people spend their time isn't my business.
When they try to push their 'Belief' on me, or support laws based on their 'Belief' (religion or ideology) on me/others is when it directly affects me and I respond.
YOUR RIGHT to practice YOUR chosen religion is a Constitutional guarantee.
No where in that Constitution does it give anyone the 'Right' to force that religion/opinion on me or others, and 'Believers' need to figure that out.

The US is predominantly 'Christian', so with that in mind...
I would never support the 'Bible' simply because I don't enjoy killing people.
If I 'Lived The Bible', I would be required to kill people for wearing mixed fabrics, for trimming the four corners of their beards, having pre-marital sex, etc.
I would never condone any religion that tells me who I can take for slaves, or when/how to torture slaves.
(Leviticus in particular is brutal)

Religion has exactly ZERO to do with 'Morals', morality agreements (socialist contracts) existed before humans.
Primates, elephants, dolphins & whales have social contracts, a morality code and they aren't human.
Since 'Morals' evolve & refine, and 'Religion' doesn't (written dogma), the social contracts known as 'Morals' continue to evolve as civilizations progress.

Keep in mind that in the 'Bible' (depending on version) basic morality code is imparted in parables, simply (and usually simple) stories passed along to emphasize the morality code that existed long before written language, or before Christianity existed.

Now, before the flames begin, I use christians because it's the predominant religion in the US.
I could point out the discrepancies in the major religions, but since the others are minorities in this country, there isn't any point, this isn't a discussion in comparative religion...
It wouldn't make any sense to quote the Quran since virtually no one in the US has read it, and even fewer have studied it so they understand what it's trying to convey.

I hate bumper sticker quotes, but this is the most simple I can put it,
Keep your religion out of my government, and I'll keep my boot out of your colon.
We'll call that a morality lesson, a social contract.
With 3,000 (+/-) currently practiced 'Religions' it's hard to keep up on what you all are saying, and that's the reason we have the rule of law to put everyone on solid, common ground.
When you want to change the law in your favor then everyone else will have issues with that idea/dogma/law.
This is the reason for the Constitution, and the Supreme Court, and when you want to pack the Supreme Court then expect all laws to break down...
It's a viscous cycle, and I don't recommend doing it.

 

[Dead Duck]

 

[T.Lex]

...
The biggest issue I had with comparative religion classes was I never was able to have a conversation with a 'Believer' simply because they can't separate ego & emotion from religious beliefs or dogma and always got upset/mad/raving when asked about the factual information in their dogma.

I'm going to accept it as an article of faith that you read at least some of the earlier posts in this thread.

 

[JeepHammer]

I'm going to accept it as an article of faith that you read at least some of the earlier posts in this thread.

I did read some, the first 10 pages or so.
I noticed you were the 'Hall Monitor' of sorts...

I spent 16 years in the Marines.
I saw the shift from ideology (Communism vs. Democracy) to religious and wanted to study the mindset of religious opponents.
Is there a way to come to terms or is a bullet the only way to deal with them?
What days/times of day do these new religions pray, what are their 'Holy Days', what dogma do they follow, what motivated them?

And to that end, what weaknesses will the opponents use against my unit?

Admittedly, it had to do more with dealing with an 'Enemy' than to do with 'Faith', but it was still interesting.
Most wars in history were about religion while my generation had to deal with the relatively new Communists ideology.
Now we are fighting a religious war while Communists take full advantage of the distraction...

A professor put it quite well about 40 years ago, he said, and I quote,
"Religion wars are about spears & swords, it's checkers. When they don't have outsiders to kill, they kill each other.Communism is a chess game for thinking men. At least Communists place value on life."

He pointed to Russia/USSR spending over a billion 1960s/70s dollars on anti Viet Nam war groups in the US, and they won that particular war in Viet Nam by using the human instinct for division against US citizens.
Since I'm a student of history, every time I see the 'Far Right' & 'Far Left' go off the rails, religions hack on each other, I wonder if history is repeating itself.
The guy with the money shouts the loudest, but with internet memes they are getting the message out at fire sale prices...

 

[JettaKnight]

There isn't any way to discuss/debate religion with a 'Believer' simply because deity based religion doesn't make provable, scientific sense.
It's a belief in something that can't be seen, can't be proven, leaves no visible signs or effects, no way to positively prove any part of the religion.

Ah, the old, "I'm more scientifically enlightened than you" argument.

What, the existence of this universe isn't a big enough visible sign for you?

The US is predominantly 'Christian', so with that in mind...
I would never support the 'Bible' simply because I don't enjoy killing people.
If I 'Lived The Bible', I would be required to kill people for wearing mixed fabrics, for trimming the four corners of their beards, having pre-marital sex, etc.
I would never condone any religion that tells me who I can take for slaves, or when/how to torture slaves.
(Leviticus in particular is brutal)

This leads me to believe that you really don't understand Christianity and the arc of redemption.

But this solidifies that belief:

Keep in mind that in the 'Bible' (depending on version) basic morality code is imparted in parables, simply (and usually simple) stories passed along to emphasize the morality code that existed long before written language, or before Christianity existed.

The Bible isn't merely a book telling people how to live right. That's why there's "atheist bibles" that hack up the Bible to get just those parts.

The Bible describes the God's creation of man, man's fall and separation from God's, then God's love and sacrifice redeeming man.


To say it's a prescription for right living puts it on par with every other religion where man has to earn his salvation. In Christianity, salvation can never be earned, you can never be good enough, you can never do enough good works; only the blood of Christ can wash away sin.

To my knowledge, Christianity is the only religion to make this claim. (Perhaps you can tell be otherwise as you "compared" religions in school, whereas my courses were both in church history)


As far as morality is concerned, I doubt you'll be able to point out where things have significantly changed in Christianity. There was a huge shift when the ceremonial and "hygiene" laws fell after Christ tore the curtain, but what's morally wrong, e.g. lying, adultery, murder, remains wrong.

I will admit that certain groups have gone and added laws - e.g. drinking, attire, dancing; Baptist are infamous for this legalism!

Christianity should never be about imposing morality on others; it should be about reflecting God's love and righteousness such that others are drawn to it.

 

[T.Lex]

I did read some, the first 10 pages or so.
I noticed you were the 'Hall Monitor' of sorts...

This is me ignoring that little jibe.

I spent 16 years in the Marines.

Thank you for your service!

A professor put it quite well about 40 years ago, he said, and I quote,
"Religion wars are about spears & swords, it's checkers. When they don't have outsiders to kill, they kill each other.Communism is a chess game for thinking men. At least Communists place value on life."

He pointed to Russia/USSR spending over a billion 1960s/70s dollars on anti Viet Nam war groups in the US, and they won that particular war in Viet Nam by using the human instinct for division against US citizens.
Since I'm a student of history, every time I see the 'Far Right' & 'Far Left' go off the rails, religions hack on each other, I wonder if history is repeating itself.
The guy with the money shouts the loudest, but with internet memes they are getting the message out at fire sale prices...

History does tend to be a bit cyclic. Not precisely the same events, but some of the same decisions.

I find the comparison of religion to communism interesting. I studied in depth both the history and politics of the USSR, including the role of the Orthodox church. And Judaism, for that matter.

In the modern era, I don't really see "religious wars" per se. The islamofascism of AQ and Daesh are - IMHO - less about religion and more about control.

One thing I've notice you fail to mention is whether you follow a certain religious tradition, or consider yourself atheist or agnostic. No problem if you don't feel like sharing that explicitly, I totally understand. It just helps those of us who participate in this thread understand the context for certain kinds of posts. (That can be good, or bad.)

 

[JettaKnight]

...
A professor put it quite well about 40 years ago, he said, and I quote,
"Religion wars are about spears & swords, it's checkers. When they don't have outsiders to kill, they kill each other.Communism is a chess game for thinking men. At least Communists place value on life."
...

I think we battle against different foes.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

 

[T.Lex]

Quick sidenote: the "Communist" systems typically valued life in direct correlation to utility for the party. If the life could be used to further the goals of the party, that life had value. If it could not be used thusly, it had little value.

"You should rejoice that you are in prison. Here you have time to think about your soul." Solzhenitsyn, A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.

 

[JettaKnight]

Quick sidenote: the "Communist" systems typically valued life in direct correlation to utility for the party. If the life could be used to further the goals of the party, that life had value. If it could not be used thusly, it had little value.

"You should rejoice that you are in prison. Here you have time to think about your soul." Solzhenitsyn, A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.

I've run my hand over the bullet holes in the wall of a KGB office - hardly what I'd call valuing life.

 

[JeepHammer]

I wasn't insulting you when I wrote 'Hall Monitor', you were making cogent points and didn't break off on some bad tangent.

Quick sidenote: the "Communist" systems typically valued life in direct correlation to utility for the party. If the life could be used to further the goals of the party, that life had value. If it could not be used thusly, it had little value.

This is a valid point.
It's been spoken about religion also, "Recruit them young, get them for life" or some such, this is a paraphrase I've heard over & over.

"You should rejoice that you are in prison. Here you have time to think about your soul." Solzhenitsyn, A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.

You got it...
"An unexamined life is not worth living".
I think there is a big difference between the wrong fully convicted and hardened criminals, or criminals that exercised bad judgment.
Clarity of thought, removing the filters, is the only way to determine if what you did was 'Right' or not, but more important to clarify your intent.
Many have committed atrocities thinking they were 'Right'...

My personal experience is military service through the Reagan/Bush 1 years could quite well be summed up as places we shouldn't have been, doing things we shouldn't have been doing.

What I *Thought/Was Told* was for "God & Country" was actually because one old man couldn't tell the difference between communist, socialists and a military dictator, and another old man that wanted oil rights.

------------

As for declaring I'm "THIS!" Or "THAT!", Don't hold your breath simply because I don't know and I won't lie about what I am...
Even if I had things figured out, I wouldn't jump up & down preaching I'm dead right simply because I'm human and ALL humans are flawed.

My 'Religion' is work, I do stuff even if it's just manual labor.
It allows me time to think things through... Without hurting anyone else.

---------------

Ah, the old, "I'm more scientifically enlightened than you" argument.

What, the existence of this universe isn't a big enough visible sign for you?[/Quote]

That's correct.
It's the same argument I have for space alien believers... Where is ANY proof of anything you say?

And this is exactly what happens when you attempt to question a 'Believer' to understand.
They all scream "Look at this 'Evidence' or that 'Evidence', all the while pointing at things naturally occurring or easily explainable.

At this point, I'm left baffled as to why I'm not seeing what they see, and baffled why they are so excited/mad/ranting.

As to the origin of the universe...
How would an old book tell me how the universe was created when religious dogma says Earth is the center of the solar system and the sun/planets revolve around it?
They didn't have a concept of our third rate Galaxy, and weren't aware of other galaxies...
I think it was 1996 before the Catholic church finally admitted that Galileo was right, the Earth orbits the sun, and around 2006 for the church to pardon Galileo for 'Crimes' against the church.

As for creation of the earth, man finally has the ability to actually see how planets are formed...
Exactly zero mystery there.
Now, if you want to debate the start of life on the planet, that's still up for debate.
Evolution isn't up for debate, it's conclusively proven fact.

Show me an alien spacecraft that's stamped "Made In Alpha Centauri" and I will consider space traveling aliens...

One thing about comparative religion, you learn where all the books of the bible were co-opted from, what the actual source was.
This pretty conclusively proves it's not what the bible claims it is.
From the birth of Jesus, Mary & Joseph (nice European names) were on their way to register in the Roman census.
Roman census was during the "Ides Of March", simply meaning the middle of March.
It also states "The shepards where in the fields", the only time shepards stay in the field was during birthing season, usually the first two weeks in March or a little longer.

So why did the deity get his most holy day of birth moved to December? (Co-opted 'Pegan' holiday)
Why was the 'Resurrection' moved to spring? (Co-opting of Ester, another Pegan holiday)
The 'Resurrection' is the basis of the entire religion, why would the church move the date?

Why was the council of divinity formed in the first place, and why 300+ years after the resurrection to determine *IF* Jesus was divine, or just a man/myth?
Why did it take 300 years for the council to decide their deity was 'divine' or not? (because they would loose power & wealth if declared just a man/myth).

This is history, not legend, written about extensively AT THE TIME, while there isn't a single reference of 'Jesus' from his own time.
If Jesus was the Osama BinLaden of his time, why isn't there a single reference to him from that time?

These are questions a lot of people have and exactly zero have been answered, and I've only met religious historians that won't melt down at the mention of these questions...

 

[T.Lex]

As for declaring I'm "THIS!" Or "THAT!", Don't hold your breath simply because I don't know and I won't lie about what I am...
Even if I had things figured out, I wouldn't jump up & down preaching I'm dead right simply because I'm human and ALL humans are flawed.

My 'Religion' is work, I do stuff even if it's just manual labor.
It allows me time to think things through... Without hurting anyone else.

Fair enough.

If I may, do you believe: 1) there is a higher power; 2) there is not a higher power; 3) no opinion; or 4) sometimes yes, sometimes no?

(I think that covers all the options, but if you have a different answer, treat it like a fill-in-the-blank rather than multiple choice.)

 

[JeepHammer]

How about #5, I just plain don't know.
No lying, no BS, no chest beating... I just don't know.

How about this...
Something more intelligent than humans? It's a pretty good bet since we are naked apes.
The question then becomes where, and even when since the universe is at least 14.5 billion years old.
Even further, do/did they know our little backwater solar system existed?

How about the psychics point of view,
Energy can be diverted, converted or disguised, but it's never created and never lost.
We can convert solid fuel to heat, light, vibration, motion, manipulate it, but we can't create it and it always goes somewhere in a different form.
Where did our energy come from in the first place?, (we know where it goes)... What sparked life in the first place?

I certainly don't believe in an invisible old man that lives in the clouds, or eternal damnation below...

 

[T.Lex]

How about #5, I just plain don't know.
No lying, no BS, no chest beating... I just don't know.

How about this...
Something more intelligent than humans? It's a pretty good bet since we are naked apes.
The question then becomes where, and even when since the universe is at least 14.5 billion years old.
Even further, do/did they know our little backwater solar system existed?

How about the psychics point of view,
Energy can be diverted, converted or disguised, but it's never created and never lost.
We can convert solid fuel to heat, light, vibration, motion, manipulate it, but we can't create it and it always goes somewhere in a different form.
Where did our energy come from in the first place?, (we know where it goes)... What sparked life in the first place?

I certainly don't believe in an invisible old man that lives in the clouds, or eternal damnation below...

Ok. Fair enough.

And of course, in this thread, please don't take any of my posts as confrontational. (At least not yet.)

The idea of "intelligent life" isn't quite what I was asking (that's a different thread).

A truly higher power. Something that operates on a level that we can only glimpse.

As you note, energy is never created nor lost. Yet, there is evidence that our universe has not been around for an eternity. Rather, the best scientific minds believe there was a staring point (temporally speaking).

Does that not suggest that something did something to something to start it? Maybe not even intentionally, but some natural event could have done it?

 

[JettaKnight]

At this point, I'm left baffled as to why I'm not seeing what they see, and baffled why they are so excited/mad/ranting.

Excited? Mad? Ranting?

Hardly.

As to the origin of the universe...
How would an old book tell me how the universe was created when religious dogma says Earth is the center of the solar system and the sun/planets revolve around it?
They didn't have a concept of our third rate Galaxy, and weren't aware of other galaxies...
I think it was 1996 before the Catholic church finally admitted that Galileo was right, the Earth orbits the sun, and around 2006 for the church to pardon Galileo for 'Crimes' against the church.

There was certainly a period when Scripture was misapplied to things it speaks not of. (Still the case with young earth creation).

As for creation of the earth, man finally has the ability to actually see how planets are formed..
Exactly zero mystery there.
Now, if you want to debate the start of life on the planet, that's still up for debate.
Evolution isn't up for debate, it's conclusively proven fact..

Perhaps it's been exacerbated by the age of enlightenment, but hasn't man in his hubris always had "it all figured out?" Now we have scientific theories that explain it all with perfect certitude. Like Newtonian physics - that explains it all, until it doesn't.

One thing about comparative religion, you learn where all the books of the bible were co-opted from, what the actual source was.
This pretty conclusively proves it's not what the bible claims it is.
From the birth of Jesus, Mary & Joseph (nice European names) were on their way to register in the Roman census.
Roman census was during the "Ides Of March", simply meaning the middle of March.
It also states "The shepards where in the fields", the only time shepards stay in the field was during birthing season, usually the first two weeks in March or a little longer.

So why did the deity get his most holy day of birth moved to December? (Co-opted 'Pegan' holiday)
Why was the 'Resurrection' moved to spring? (Co-opting of Ester, another Pegan holiday)
The 'Resurrection' is the basis of the entire religion, why would the church move the date?

Why was the council of divinity formed in the first place, and why 300+ years after the resurrection to determine *IF* Jesus was divine, or just a man/myth?
Why did it take 300 years for the council to decide their deity was 'divine' or not? (because they would loose power & wealth if declared just a man/myth).

This is history, not legend, written about extensively AT THE TIME, while there isn't a single reference of 'Jesus' from his own time.
If Jesus was the Osama BinLaden of his time, why isn't there a single reference to him from that time?

These are questions a lot of people have and exactly zero have been answered, and I've only met religious historians that won't melt down at the mention of these questions...

I'm not sure if you really want explanations and discussions, or if you're just regurgitating as many basic misconceptions as possible. I mean really, these are all super basic things widely refuted. I could go through the manifold things here and write a Foszoe-esqe uber-post, but I'm not entirely sure you'd value it.

Have you considered even exploring these on your own rather than accusing Christians of "melting down" when confronted with your questions (or accusations depending on your true motive). Maybe read "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist", or some other book? Indiucky might have a recommendation, especially related to creation.


Please don't think we here are incapable of dialog with non-Christians; I think PaulF would say that we're all civil and understanding here.

 

[rvb]

There isn't any way to discuss/debate religion with a 'Believer' simply because deity based religion doesn't make provable, scientific sense.
It's a belief in something that can't be seen, can't be proven, leaves no visible signs or effects, no way to positively prove any part of the religion.

OK, please explain the big bang theory... actually pre-big-bang. How'd all that matter and energy get into one point. Why do we ignore laws of entropy when we use various convergence theories to explain it?

Can you explain how life is created from proteins and amino acids and water and minerals? Positively prove life came from nothing? I'd like to re-create the experiment for my daughter's science fair.

The point is even atheism requires belief in the un-proven, imo. In a day when science has become the new religion, people treat theories like laws.

The biggest issue I had with comparative religion classes was I never was able to have a conversation with a 'Believer' simply because they can't separate ego & emotion from religious beliefs or dogma and always got upset/mad/raving when asked about the factual information in their dogma.
Didn't matter what sect of Christian, or Muslim, or Jewish or whatever.

1200 posts in just this thread, plus similar other threads in this sub-forum. All with civil discussion from folks of various faiths or no faith. Were you really having a conversation or lecturing down to them? Honestly, your tone in your posts in this thread feel like you're trying to pick a fight...

What science has proven is the 'Religious' have more connections between the amygdala & temporal lobe in the brain.

Ahhh.... brain damage. THAT explains it!

ANY particular 'Belief' means nothing to me, how people spend their time isn't my business.
When they try to push their 'Belief' on me, or support laws based on their 'Belief' (religion or ideology) on me/others is when it directly affects me and I respond.

Which one of us pushed you into this thread???????

I would never support the 'Bible' simply because I don't enjoy killing people.
If I 'Lived The Bible', I would be required to kill people for wearing mixed fabrics, for trimming the four corners of their beards, having pre-marital sex, etc.
I would never condone any religion that tells me who I can take for slaves, or when/how to torture slaves.
(Leviticus in particular is brutal)

You have not gotten the "big picture" of the Bible. Jesus paid the price of death for all those old laws for all of us. Old vs new covenant, Old Testament vs New. Love your neighbor. That's it, friend. That's "living the Bible." That's what Jesus commanded. We can still learn what is considered right and wrong from the Old Testament, but we no longer gain salvation or spiritual cleanliness based on the purity of the animal we sacrifice or where in the temple its blood gets sprinkled (Leviticus IS bloody... most of it animal sacrifice), etc...

Religion has exactly ZERO to do with 'Morals', morality agreements (socialist contracts) existed before humans.
...
Keep in mind that in the 'Bible' (depending on version) basic morality code is imparted in parables, simply (and usually simple) stories passed along to emphasize the morality code that existed long before written language, or before Christianity existed.

Yes, morality does pre-date Christianity ( the past 2k years). It does not predate God. The "social construct" idea that we are moral because it benefits us all to not kill each other is very thin. If I were in a job interview against another candidate, wouldn't it benefit me more to run that person over in the parking lot? That would be especially true in a "prehistoric" time of no education, limited resources, etc? In the idea that I have morality because socially it's evolved into what's best for me, then that's all we've reduced morality to... "what's best for ME" when really it's about sometimes putting others first (their life over my hunger or their life over that job)

How about the psychics point of view,
Energy can be diverted, converted or disguised, but it's never created and never lost.
We can convert solid fuel to heat, light, vibration, motion, manipulate it, but we can't create it and it always goes somewhere in a different form.
Where did our energy come from in the first place?, (we know where it goes)... What sparked life in the first place?

All good questions that may lead you to a belief in a Creator if you are really willing to pull that thread.
How/why did all the mass of the universe converge on a single point at the moment of the big bang? Where did that mass and energy come from in the first place?
You can point to our failed understanding that the Earth was the center of the universe, but that's just a failed scientific understanding.. just like today we don't totally understand the science of the universe.... the question is what is your belief in how the universe came into existence? Something from nothing?

My goal in typing all this isn't to argue with you. It's to plant a seed. 1. To live biblically is to love your neighbor. 2. How much more "proof" does modern science have of the origin of the universe and of life than is found in the Bible?

We aren't all brain damaged or idiots. There are a lot of smart folks participating in this tread. Did you come here to listen to answers to your questions? Or tell us how dumb we are?

-rvb

 

[rvb]

Maybe read "I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist"

I second this recommendation !
-rvb

 

[JettaKnight]

I second this recommendation !
-rvb

Oh, good. It's been a long time since I've read any basic apologetics book.

Right now, I'm working through The Galileo Connection, which discusses the Bible and science and how they interrelate, but also how they should "stay in their lanes".

 

[rvb]

Oh, good. It's been a long time since I've read any basic apologetics book.

Right now, I'm working through The Galileo Connection, which discusses the Bible and science and how they interrelate, but also how they should "stay in their lanes".

I'll add that to my growing list....
never have time to read everything I want.

I agree with that premise. JeepHammer referenced this... when science and religion get too intertwined, you end up with religion getting stuck on ideas like the sun revolving around the earth. That distracts from God and the simple fact that he created the universe, and to JH it becomes "proof" there is no God. Similarly, science shouldn't become a religion (Darwinism, global warming). Science should be allowed to explore and learn (hey, I like taking my telescope out!).

-rvb

 

[Dead Duck]

Did someone ask for proof?

How about a Resurrection!

[video=youtube_share;G4V5ABtTX2U]https://youtu.be/G4V5ABtTX2U[/video]

https://www.foxnews.com/world/south-african-pastor-facing-lawsuits-over-alleged-resurrection

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-47370398

 

[NKBJ]

System implementation...

Listened today to reporting from the mobile phone industry conference in Barcelona.
The industry execs are planning on everyone being literally part of the IOT and everything being being done by IOT. Buy lunch, open your front door, clock in at work...
And they rolled out the implementation demonstration by chipping someone on stage before the cheering crowd to appreciated how simple and easy it will be. And just to get the point across the conference had The Sunday Assembly as presenters for the chipping.