Religion, mammoths and dinosaurs,

[Bigga]

You do know the Earth isn't a circle don't you?

I was using the quote to underline the understanding of it's spherical basis in BC times.

Circle does not mean spherical so nothing is underlined.

Right. But this is early Hebrew translation when there are not more definitions of what shapes can be. 'Round' is also used as a description and 'round' is sphere-like or a circle.

So what else do you want to be specific about...??

 

[Skashion]

Nothing you have highlighted has shown us we should believe that the Hebrews of the 8th Century BC knew the Earth was spherical but even if that was shown, I don't see why we would find it to be of great importance.

Getting back onto the general point, you have not demonstrated at all that religious beliefs lead to investigation of the natural world which leads to scientific advancement. You have shown examples of scientists being religious or flourishing in religious areas (although as pointed out earlier science did not flourish under Christianity in the Middle Ages) but that in no way means there is a connection between the two. I think my issue with you Bigga is that you only ever see religion as a positive. I never see you acknowledging that religion causes wars but you seem to believe that it causes scientific advancement. SWP's Back is on the other side of the same fence. Personally, I hang in the middle. Religion is too often praised or blamed when there is no clear causal link between religion and whatever it is linked to, positive or negative. Religion is pervasive but that doesn't mean something would or wouldn't had it not been there.

 

[Bigga]

Nothing you have highlighted has shown us we should believe that the Hebrews of the 8th Century BC knew the Earth was spherical but even if that was shown, I don't see why we would find it to be of great importance.

Getting back onto the general point, you have not demonstrated at all that religious beliefs lead to investigation of the natural world which leads to scientific advancement. You have shown examples of scientists being religious or flourishing in religious areas (although as pointed out earlier science did not flourish under Christianity in the Middle Ages) but that in no way means there is a connection between the two. I think my issue with you Bigga is that you only ever see religion as a positive. I never see you acknowledging that religion causes wars but you seem to believe that it causes scientific advancement. SWP's Back is on the other side of the same fence. Personally, I hang in the middle. Religion is too often praised or blamed when there is no clear causal link between religion and whatever it is linked to, positive or negative. Religion is pervasive but that doesn't mean something would or wouldn't had it not been there.

But that IS where you are wrong about me.

I hate all problems where religion is the basis. But I cannot and will not condemn religion as the source, but the interpretations of the people that skew certain aspects of religion for their own power hungry gains. At the centre of all these problems are someone wanting power over a group/ mass/ country/ world/ whatever. If that person has the power of argument then they able to sway a group etc., and then we have problems.

For me, there a spine of truth that cross talk through the majority of religious belief around the time of the Book. There are lots of parallels in certain Books. As I have said before people take what they want and do their own thing.

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

People have this stupid misconception that the two cannot exist in the same space.

 

[The Flash]

Serious question for you Skashion, are you a Muslim or someone related to a Muslim, or in fact are you yourself from the middle east or Asia ?

I don't mean anything nasty by asking that I'm just curious.

I have been pondering on the significance of this question for some time now, and am still none the wiser as to it's relevance to the thread.
Some of the most interesting, enlightening and rewarding conversations I have ever had regarding religion have been with Muslims, whereas some of the most ignorant bigots I have ever had the misfortune to converse with have been indigenous protestants, catholics and atheists.

The question was about understanding someone else perspective in general.

I know the concept of empathy is probably alien to a judgmental prick in a trance like yourself. I try to better myself though and see all the other sides point of view.

****

Not that he needs me to fight his corner, but if you knew what NF did for a living, and the people he has encountered by performing that role, you would understand that he has more empathy for others than you or I could muster in a hundred lifetimes.

 

[goalmole]

Heard one last week "If we evolved from apes, how come chimps in the zoo dont turn into humans?".... They said this and looked at me like a smug ****, like they had really stumped me

Why don't you answer the question then?

 

[Skashion]

But that IS where you are wrong about me.

I hate all problems where religion is the basis. But I cannot and will not condemn religion as the source, but the interpretations of the people that skew certain aspects of religion for their own power hungry gains. At the centre of all these problems are someone wanting power over a group/ mass/ country/ world/ whatever. If that person has the power of argument then they able to sway a group etc., and then we have problems.

For me, there a spine of truth that cross talk through the majority of religious belief around the time of the Book. There are lots of parallels in certain Books. As I have said before people take what they want and do their own thing.

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

People have this stupid misconception that the two cannot exist in the same space.

Not sure I am wrong yet. You say you will not condemn religion as the source, so why are you so eager to credit religion as the source of science?

 

[Bigga]

But that IS where you are wrong about me.

I hate all problems where religion is the basis. But I cannot and will not condemn religion as the source, but the interpretations of the people that skew certain aspects of religion for their own power hungry gains. At the centre of all these problems are someone wanting power over a group/ mass/ country/ world/ whatever. If that person has the power of argument then they able to sway a group etc., and then we have problems.

For me, there a spine of truth that cross talk through the majority of religious belief around the time of the Book. There are lots of parallels in certain Books. As I have said before people take what they want and do their own thing.

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

People have this stupid misconception that the two cannot exist in the same space.

Not sure I am wrong yet. You say you will not condemn religion as the source, so why are you so eager to credit religion as the source of science?

Not bothered if you have to decide you need to judge me. I don't judge you. Do or think whatever you want. I don't condemn religion as the source of war. People are violent anyway. People pick what they want and fight over that.

In the beginning religion and science worked side by side. There was no one-upmanship like in modern times. The modern state of biology can be traced back to ancient Islam, no problem for example.

Religious and learned people were often one and the same. Having a Faith and learning about your world were not exclusive.

I cannot fathom how this is not a basic fact.

You can pick apart all you wish, but there is little or no evidence I am wrong on my thoughts within my research.

 

[tonea2003]

But that IS where you are wrong about me.

I hate all problems where religion is the basis. But I cannot and will not condemn religion as the source, but the interpretations of the people that skew certain aspects of religion for their own power hungry gains. At the centre of all these problems are someone wanting power over a group/ mass/ country/ world/ whatever. If that person has the power of argument then they able to sway a group etc., and then we have problems.

For me, there a spine of truth that cross talk through the majority of religious belief around the time of the Book. There are lots of parallels in certain Books. As I have said before people take what they want and do their own thing.

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

People have this stupid misconception that the two cannot exist in the same space.

Not sure I am wrong yet. You say you will not condemn religion as the source, so why are you so eager to credit religion as the source of science?

Not bothered if you have to decide you need to judge me. I don't judge you. Do or think whatever you want. I don't condemn religion as the source of war. People are violent anyway. People pick what they want and fight over that.

In the beginning religion and science worked side by side. There was no one-upmanship like in modern times. The modern state of biology can be traced back to ancient Islam, no problem for example.

Religious and learned people were often one and the same. Having a Faith and learning about your world were not exclusive.

I cannot fathom how this is not a basic fact.

You can pick apart all you wish, but there is little or no evidence I am wrong on my thoughts within my research.

interested in your line

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

dont think science has ever gone out to do that but i would say in in producing a piece of science that was in conradiction to i assume we are talking religious belief(correct me if i'm wrong) then so be it

religion dispelling science, i would interested in some of that if there is some

 

[Bigga]

Not sure I am wrong yet. You say you will not condemn religion as the source, so why are you so eager to credit religion as the source of science?

Not bothered if you have to decide you need to judge me. I don't judge you. Do or think whatever you want. I don't condemn religion as the source of war. People are violent anyway. People pick what they want and fight over that.

In the beginning religion and science worked side by side. There was no one-upmanship like in modern times. The modern state of biology can be traced back to ancient Islam, no problem for example.

Religious and learned people were often one and the same. Having a Faith and learning about your world were not exclusive.

I cannot fathom how this is not a basic fact.

You can pick apart all you wish, but there is little or no evidence I am wrong on my thoughts within my research.

interested in your line

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

dont think science has ever gone out to do that but i would say in in producing a piece of science that was in conradiction to i assume we are talking religious belief(correct me if i'm wrong) then so be it

religion dispelling science, i would interested in some of that if there is some

Much as religion doesn't set out to start war, but individuals will use aspects of either create a divide or a fight with the other.

 

[tonea2003]

Not bothered if you have to decide you need to judge me. I don't judge you. Do or think whatever you want. I don't condemn religion as the source of war. People are violent anyway. People pick what they want and fight over that.

In the beginning religion and science worked side by side. There was no one-upmanship like in modern times. The modern state of biology can be traced back to ancient Islam, no problem for example.

Religious and learned people were often one and the same. Having a Faith and learning about your world were not exclusive.

I cannot fathom how this is not a basic fact.

You can pick apart all you wish, but there is little or no evidence I am wrong on my thoughts within my research.

interested in your line

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

dont think science has ever gone out to do that but i would say in in producing a piece of science that was in conradiction to i assume we are talking religious belief(correct me if i'm wrong) then so be it

religion dispelling science, i would interested in some of that if there is some

Much as religion doesn't set out to start war, but individuals will use aspects of either create a divide or a fight with the other.

what's that got to do with dispelling religion or vice versa?<br /><br />-- Sat Apr 19, 2014 2:52 pm --<br /><br />

Not bothered if you have to decide you need to judge me. I don't judge you. Do or think whatever you want. I don't condemn religion as the source of war. People are violent anyway. People pick what they want and fight over that.

In the beginning religion and science worked side by side. There was no one-upmanship like in modern times. The modern state of biology can be traced back to ancient Islam, no problem for example.

Religious and learned people were often one and the same. Having a Faith and learning about your world were not exclusive.

I cannot fathom how this is not a basic fact.

You can pick apart all you wish, but there is little or no evidence I am wrong on my thoughts within my research.

interested in your line

Science hasn't dispelled religion nor religion dispelled science.

dont think science has ever gone out to do that but i would say in in producing a piece of science that was in conradiction to i assume we are talking religious belief(correct me if i'm wrong) then so be it

religion dispelling science, i would interested in some of that if there is some

Much as religion doesn't set out to start war, but individuals will use aspects of either create a divide or a fight with the other.

what's that got to do with dispelling religion or vice versa?