The God Particle

[oldguystudent]

MeanGreenTexan, on 12 Apr 2013 - 09:21, said:

It's interesting that most people will pull from the old testament law in order to criticize the new covenant of grace in Christianity.

So you're all good with the whole gay marriage thing, then?

Or do you adhere to the whole

Quote

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

thing upholding the old testament? Or do you pick and choose?

I hear that the bible is absolute, yet not even Christians can universally agree on its meaning or message. I guess that's the limitation of sinful human reason as well?

Also,

Quote

I love when someone who professes to be a non-Christian becomes a theologian/biblical scholar when it's time to refute Christ.

Well, I was forced to memorize pretty much the whole thing six days a week for the first 18 years of my life, fed the interpretations I was supposed to take from it, sent to detention for questioning those interpretations.

So, scholar? Nah. But completely ignorant of it? Not a chance.

Finally, I'm with Ghandi. If I were to take just four books from the bible, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, throw out the angry, jealous, impossible to please god of Abraham, ignore the fun hating Paul, and discount the surely mushroom induced visions of Revelation, the bible and its message would be mostly groovy with me.

Just yesterday, I listened to Pato Banton's Words of Christ. In the context of those words alone, without the modern day political crap to go with them, it was honestly quite beautiful.

[GrayEagle]

Oh! I need to mention that I mean no offense to the religious. I'm just a bit tired of hearing that science somehow supports religious dogma. It doesn't. Science and religion address very different issues.

True, science and religion do address very different issues but a major difference is that religion does not ignore science but science ignores religion because it can't be proven in a lab. Then again, neither can many scientific theories. Apparently, according to science, no emotions exist.

[Quoner]

You'd think a school that has asked its fans to sit around believing good things are just a year or two away for so long would have more die hard fans comfortable with Christianity. What gives?

[GTWT]

True, science and religion do address very different issues but a major difference is that religion does not ignore science but science ignores religion because it can't be proven in a lab. Then again, neither can many scientific theories. Apparently, according to science, no emotions exist.

No. Science doesn't say emotions don't exist. For science to study emotion and reach a conclusion about whether any particular emotion exists, one would first have to define the terms so that the study could be conducted objectively.

Oh, and science can study religion - it's a productive field within anthropology. What science has a hard time with is the study of 'God'. He/She/It can't be seen, heard, touched, or smelled. That doesn't mean God doesn't exist, only that science works on data - not magic.

Edited April 16, 2013 by GTWT