.

Proactive-corp:



The pope was a man of faith, so we cannot trust him to be completely objective about issues of faith and reason
.
But when did pope john paul become a christian! i thought he was a catholic! Is christianity and catholicism the same! Many many christians distance themslves from catholicism.

The fact the catholic faith is at variance with evangelical faith speaks volumes about the inconsistency, the fluidity and the non-reliability of faith, compared to the universality of reason.

Ignorance. The catholics compiled the chritian bible. Catholic church is the oldest denomination to exist.

Catholicism is christianity. A painful truth that non-catholic christians dont want to hear.


lmao...sorry christians but you cant distance yourself from the catholic church.

mkmyers45: Normally religion is only a matter of faith and the logic of science doesn't apply. Other than the concept of Designed Humanism, are there other religions that can combine God with a belief in logic?

well our traditional beliefs(non european christian God etc) has both faith and in many ways the logic of science if carefully examined. It is sad that we allowed the white man to dictate to who we should worship and therefore end up shunning our own religion and roots our ancestors worshiped for ages and never had a problem, truly things have fallen apart especially when the centers no longer hold.

Delafruita:
how does this even sound?god chose you to be a christian.so the same god who created the freaking universe decided to create you a christian and deliberately create others as muslims,pagans,atheists etc.what kind of reasonning is that?

this is faith, my bible told me God knew me even b4 i was born, jesus also said, i know my sheep, and my sheep listen to my voice, therefore there are some other sheep that aint jesus's. Probably the muslims, pagans and other non christian religions. U get that?

bright007: think this is ťĥĕ reason why countries like nigeria seems to be backward.The most potent way of learning about nature is through logic.You cannot learn about nature by believing,u need to investigate,experiment and then draw deductions logically.Most of d developed countries in d world became successful through logical reasoning in science and not through faith.Simply put,when it comes to d physical world,logical reasoning wins it but when it comes to spiritual things,faith takes it all.

out of point

okeyxyz:
Faith/religion is a logic, it may not be your cup of tea but it is for somebody else and that's why he practices it. What is logic? Simply put: logic is a principle or manner of thought/action. Religion operates on the principle of morality, It has it's definitions of right/wrong, as long as it's consistent, then it's logical. Period. Just as there are principles of accountancy & finance, Principles of law, democracy, communism, etc. You cannot declare a discipline as illogical just because it's not your choice. You observe religious people and you expect them to behave in a certain way because of their faith, That proves the logic of their faith because you can predict their reactions to certain events, Does that not demonstrate a consistency in their manner of actions? Thus logical!!

You are right! Are you are saying is it's possible for you to find my logic ridiculous (or illogical) if you have set different parameters from mine? When used in the context of science and faith, there is absolutely no room for faith in science. If it's not testable/verifyable, it's not science. Simple. Anything faith based is never science. Science does not draw a conclusion without proof. Perhaps you haven't heard of the scientific method? If you haven't, read up on the basics here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

There is nothing empirically verifiable about 'faith'. If whatever you are attempting to ascertain was verifiable, it wouldn't be tagged faith, it would be promoted to 'observable fact' or something similar. This is simple, basic stuff, I wonder why I have to point this out.

Religion is another word though, it's usage varies. You could say science has a religion: the scientific method.

It looks to me, if this thread is about faith based religion (and I'm careful to ask, in my post), that this is some attempt to merge science and faith. Don't go there. Do not waste the time of the good people of science who are trying to save, enrichen lives using observable facts with fairy tales, wishful thinking etc. Actually, that would be remarkably selfish. Faith has it's uses, but certainly not in scientific method(for instance certain scientists feel better having a faith based religious system in their lives, that's great for them, but that has nothing to do with how they draw their conclusions in their professional work).

O.D.B.:
NO.

I believe in a creator, a grand architect because our universe conforms to laws and definitions but religion is b.s. It assumes a personnel description based on "faith" and as always will end up being superstitious.

Care to make full definition of your creator?

Hey pple. It's hard to keep up with the grandiose intellectualism (or highly confusing big words - take your pick) on this thread, but I'll try to drop in my two cents, in the simplest way I can. I'll be discussing from the Biblically christian stance.

First note, my Lord Jesus made mention once that it the kingdom of God has to be received as a little child. And that has really helped as a guide for me when discussing spiritual issues. A quick test run with my Sunday school kids on any supposedly christian doctrine - and once they begin to scratch their heads I start suspecting it. The ways of God, as mysterious as they are, are simple and straightforward once it becomes a desire for you to find out more about him.

To the issue of existence of a God, a Creator, a Person with infinite power over the universe, its pretty simple. If you walked past a house, you won't ask what made it exist, you'd ask WHO built it. If you see a beautiful painting you won't ask what painted it, you'd ask WHO painted it. Created things always point to the existence of a Creator. Even science, with all its vast hypothetical calculations, cannot come up with a sure-fire way of bringing systems into existence without external help outside the system. That remains the big question mark of evolution.

On the veracity of historical accounts, characters, stories that form the doctrine of the christian faith, none of them can be verified scientifically. And that's because they are not supposed to be verified that way! Asking for a scientific proof of the miracles of Jesus, etc is like asking for a scientific proof that George Washington was the first president of the US! You can't verify historical data with the scientific method - which depends on things that are measurable, observable and repeatable. There's a way historical data is verified: its the same way evidence in a court case is verified - by corroboration, reliability and internal consistency. And the events in the Bible fulfil all of that. For more details look for a message on Youtube by Min Voddie Baucham on 'why the bible is true' or do your own private google/public library research. There is enough logical basis for the christian faith.

Hope this is helpful.

mimifonwon:



well our traditional beliefs(non european christian God etc) has both faith and in many ways the logic of science if carefully examined. It is sad that we allowed the white man to dictate to who we should worship and therefore end up shunning our own religion and roots our ancestors worshiped for ages and never had a problem, truly things have fallen apart especially when the centers no longer hold.

Care to draw comparism to show logic in african animsm?

deandavid: this is faith, my bible told me God knew me even b4 i was born, jesus also said, i know my sheep, and my sheep listen to my voice, therefore there are some other sheep that aint jesus's. Probably the muslims, pagans and other non christian religions. U get that?

Ok so some people are created by god to be born,live,die and go to hell?

mollie12: Hey pple. It's hard to keep up with the grandiose intellectualism (or highly confusing big words - take your pick) on this thread, but I'll try to drop in my two cents, in the simplest way I can. I'll be discussing from the Biblically christian stance.

First note, my Lord Jesus made mention once that it the kingdom of God has to be received as a little child. And that has really helped as a guide for me when discussing spiritual issues. A quick test run with my Sunday school kids on any supposedly christian doctrine - and once they begin to scratch their heads I start suspecting it. The ways of God, as mysterious as they are, are simple and straightforward once it becomes a desire for you to find out more about him.

To the issue of existence of a God, a Creator, a Person with infinite power over the universe, its pretty simple. If you walked past a house, you won't ask what made it exist, you'd ask WHO built it. If you see a beautiful painting you won't ask what painted it, you'd ask WHO painted it. Created things always point to the existence of a Creator. Even science, with all its vast hypothetical calculations, cannot come up with a sure-fire way of bringing systems into existence without external help outside the system. That remains the big question mark of evolution.

On the veracity of historical accounts, characters, stories that form the doctrine of the christian faith, none of them can be verified scientifically. And that's because they are not supposed to be verified that way! Asking for a scientific proof of the miracles of Jesus, etc is like asking for a scientific proof that George Washington was the first president of the US! You can't verify historical data with the scientific method - which depends on things that are measurable, observable and repeatable. There's a way historical data is verified: its the same way evidence in a court case is verified - by corroboration, reliability and internal consistency. And the events in the Bible fulfil all of that. For more details look for a message on Youtube by Min Voddie Baucham on 'why the bible is true' or do your own private google/public library research. There is enough logical basis for the christian faith.

Hope this is helpful.

Are you saying that the reasonable truth (logic) about god is that someone must have created everything? What if that someone/god/creator is the universe itself manifesting and evolving through energy? The bible is reliable and consistent?

mollie12: Hey pple. It's hard to keep up with the grandiose intellectualism (or highly confusing big words - take your pick) on this thread, but I'll try to drop in my two cents, in the simplest way I can. I'll be discussing from the Biblically christian stance.

First note, my Lord Jesus made mention once that it the kingdom of God has to be received as a little child. And that has really helped as a guide for me when discussing spiritual issues. A quick test run with my Sunday school kids on any supposedly christian doctrine - and once they begin to scratch their heads I start suspecting it. The ways of God, as mysterious as they are, are simple and straightforward once it becomes a desire for you to find out more about him.

To the issue of existence of a God, a Creator, a Person with infinite power over the universe, its pretty simple. If you walked past a house, you won't ask what made it exist, you'd ask WHO built it. If you see a beautiful painting you won't ask what painted it, you'd ask WHO painted it. Created things always point to the existence of a Creator. Even science, with all its vast hypothetical calculations, cannot come up with a sure-fire way of bringing systems into existence without external help outside the system. That remains the big question mark of evolution.

On the veracity of historical accounts, characters, stories that form the doctrine of the christian faith, none of them can be verified scientifically. And that's because they are not supposed to be verified that way! Asking for a scientific proof of the miracles of Jesus, etc is like asking for a scientific proof that George Washington was the first president of the US! You can't verify historical data with the scientific method - which depends on things that are measurable, observable and repeatable. There's a way historical data is verified: its the same way evidence in a court case is verified - by corroboration, reliability and internal consistency. And the events in the Bible fulfil all of that. For more details look for a message on Youtube by Min Voddie Baucham on 'why the bible is true' or do your own private google/public library research. There is enough logical basis for the christian faith.

Hope this is helpful.

No. Not useful at all.

Correction. George Washington is a verifiable historical figure. We have his writings and signatures on real documents. There are portraits of him,there are records that he lived and played key roles in the development of his nation. No miracles has been credited him. He is not a myth or legend.
Every primary school child knows all this.

Jesus, on the other hand, left no record of existence. No writings.Even his trial by the Romans would have been documented by the Romans and the Jewish scribes. None. Zero . So believing in Jesus is an act of faith. Believing in Gorge washington is not an act of faith.

Also, by your analogy, since you believe in the existence of god, you must also have to accept that someone else must have created him into being, abi!
If you fail to do so, then you clearly demonstrating the distinction between faith and reason.

Here logic and reason tells you that a house must of necessity have a designer and builder, right!
But when it comes to god, you abandon the same logic and reason and embrace your faith that your god is self created or self-existence.
Right!

deandavid: out of point

explain how it is out of point.Don't throw the baby away with the bath water.

deandavid: out of point

explain how it is out of point.Don't throw the baby away with the bath water.

MacDaddy01:


Ignorance. The catholics compiled the chritian bible. Catholic church is the oldest denomination to exist.

Catholicism is christianity. A painful truth that non-catholic christians dont want to hear.


lmao...sorry christians but you cant distance yourself from the catholic church.

what does compling hav to do with the real truth/foundation? Lets take an example that isaac newton died just after his work, and another scientist named macdaddy compiled his works. Does that make it macdaddy's invention?
You think u are wise and no all becos u dnt believe in God, sorry but wisdom is far from rebellion!

deandavid: this is faith, my bible told me God knew me even b4 i was born, jesus also said, i know my sheep, and my sheep listen to my voice, therefore there are some other sheep that aint jesus's. Probably the muslims, pagans and other non christian religions. U get that?

are you okay?

plaetton:

No. Not useful at all.

Correction. George Washington is a verifiable historical figure. We have his writings and signatures on real documents. There are portraits of him,there are records that he lived and played key roles in the development of his nation. No miracles has been credited him. He is not a myth or legend.
Every primary school child knows all this.

Jesus, on the other hand, left no record of existence. No writings.Even his trial by the Romans would have been documented by the Romans and the Jewish scribes. None. Zero . So believing in Jesus is an act of faith. Believing in Gorge washington is not an act of faith.

Also, by your analogy, since you believe in the existence of god, you must also have to accept that someone else must have created him into being, abi!
If you fail to do so, then you clearly demonstrating the distinction between faith and reason.

Here logic and reason tells you that a house must of necessity have a designer and builder, right!
But when it comes to god, you abandon the same logic and reason and embrace your faith that your god is self created or self-existence.
Right!

No extrabiblical writings on Jesus you say? Ever heard of Josephius Flavius?

And on the issue of God having a Creator, won't you have to first define him properly - know exactly what he is/who he is - before you start looking for a creator for Him?

Guy, the truths are out there. Critical google searches will get you the information you badly need. You can also refer to that youtube video I earlier mentioned for a head start.

mkmyers45: Are you saying that the reasonable truth (logic) about god is that someone must have created everything? What if that someone/god/creator is the universe itself manifesting and evolving through energy? The bible is reliable and consistent?

*Deep sigh*

The universe cannot just manifest itself - all by itself! That was the first point I addressed on the topic matter - that's still evolution's biggest question.

So what's your beef with the reliability and consistency of the Bible? People everyday are finding in the Bible assurance, stability, explanation for the times they are in, and much more. I'm not sure if you have some areas you need clarification with.

mollie12:

*Deep sigh*

The universe cannot just manifest itself - all by itself! That was the first point I addressed on the topic matter - that's still evolution's biggest question.

So what's your beef with the reliability and consistency of the Bible? People everyday are finding in the Bible assurance, stability, explanation for the times they are in, and much more. I'm not sure if you have some areas you need clarification with.

The universe shares so many characters of defined gods so we can say that the complexity of the universe makes it a god...You can't just dismiss the possibility..the Cosmos is an all encompassing unity. If you still disagree then i want you to describe your god and how he manifested.

mollie12:

*Deep sigh*

The universe cannot just manifest itself - all by itself! That was the first point I addressed on the topic matter - that's still evolution's biggest question.

So what's your beef with the reliability and consistency of the Bible? People everyday are finding in the Bible assurance, stability, explanation for the times they are in, and much more. I'm not sure if you have some areas you need clarification with.

*louder deep sigh*
Science does not have a problem with that, you do. Even if it did, science wouldn't turn to unverifiable claims, else anything goes. If that gives you some existential issues, turn to philosophy, religion, spirituality etc like you've indicated you do. Science is only corncerned with the objective.

You think the historicity of the Bible is accurate? You think the world was created 6,000 years ago?

It was helpful as far as getting into the mind or a religionist is, thank you. Well, not really. Most atheists already know what's there due to indoctrination as kids, but I appreciate the effort. Don't let 'grandiose intellectualism' fault your style also, and try it out sometime.

mollie12:

No extrabiblical writings on Jesus you say? Ever heard of Josephius Flavius?

And on the issue of God having a Creator, won't you have to first define him properly - know exactly what he is/who he is - before you start looking for a creator for Him?

Guy, the truths are out there. Critical google searches will get you the information you badly need. You can also refer to that youtube video I earlier mentioned for a head start.

Flavious jesephus was not a contemporary of Jesus. In his book, Josephus made a rather brief mention of a set of people called christians who were said to be followers of a man named Jesus. That was all he said. He never mentioned jesus birth, teachings, trail, crucifiction and resurrection(things that would have been a great deal and worhty of mention at such a time).

It is believed by many historians that the brief mention of jesus in the book of Josephus may have been fraudulently inserted in subsequent centuries to give jesus a the badly needed historicity.

Secondly, if we have to scramble and struggle just to define what god is, then I my point is already proven that god is just an abstract notion, an idea, a mental creation.

Do we struggle to define gravity or gravitational constants? no.
Even the elusive higgs-Bosson had a concensu definition and theoretically defined qualities before we started searching for it.

If we cannot even define god, then god exists as an idea,perhaps a good and cosy idea, but nevertheless, an idea.

In a way it is logical, it depends on how people perceive it.

mkmyers45:
Yes, we have evidence that are currently supporting the theory

Were u there? Did you see it? How did it happen? Is there any video evidence to that effect?Kindly provide visible proofs,no big grammars and theories. . .
Moreover, there's a monkey in my grandma's compound, yet 2 change to a human. . .so i'll also love to know-with visible proofs- how u changed 4rm a monkey to human.
Thank you

philip0906:
Where u there? Did you see it? How did it happen? Is there any video evidence to that effect?Kindly provide visible proofs,no big grammars and theories. . .
Moreover, there's a monkey in my grandma's compound, yet 2 change to a human. . .so i'll also love to know-with visible proofs- how u changed 4rm a monkey to human.
Thank you

you've hit the nail right on the head. The gorilla in the games reserve i visited is stil a gorilla!
Btw they evolved from apes, dats why there is very big resemblance espcialy in the thinking faculty and face!

philip0906:
Were u there? Did you see it? How did it happen? Is there any video evidence to that effect?Kindly provide visible proofs,no big grammars and theories. . .

You know, you could say the same of the Bible...

musKeeto:
You know, you could say the same of the Bible...

Good point. . .
Now,do these points I raised now make science illogical? So therefore, picking out some things from the Bible which we feel "defies" logic, is not enough to term Christianity and the Bible illogical. There are loads of "Logical" concepts in the Bible and on which the Christian belief is founded on e.g The law of "sowing and reaping" which is a part and parcel of the christian belief is a very logical concept.

philip0906:
Good point. . .
Now,do these points I raised now make science illogical? So therefore, picking out some things from the Bible which we feel "defies" logic, is not enough to term Christianity and the Bible illogical. There are loads of "Logical" concepts in the Bible and on which the Christian belief is founded on e.g The law of "sowing and reaping" which is a part and parcel of the christian belief is a very logical concept.

They don't make science illogical, that's why science calls them theories.

The Bible doesn't term its fables as theories, does it?

musKeeto:
They don't make science illogical, that's why science calls them theories.

The Bible doesn't term its fables as theories, does it?

Stop dribbling urself. . .There are many "established" concepts which can also be termed as fables in science like the one i cited above, that defies logic(u urself can't prove it), call it whatever.
Faith which u guys term as illogical and on which u guys define the entirety of the christian belief, is just a subset of Christianity. There are loads of "subsets" on which the Christian belief is hinged upon and which transcends Religious boundaries e.g The law of sowing and reaping

philip0906:
Were u there? Did you see it? How did it happen? Is there any video evidence to that effect?Kindly provide visible proofs,no big grammars and theories. . .
Moreover, there's a monkey in my grandma's compound, yet 2 change to a human. . .so i'll also love to know-with visible proofs- how u changed 4rm a monkey to human.
Thank you

this statement shows that you know little to nothing of the scientific fact of evolution.

visit these links to broaden your knowledge on these topics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_genetics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent

cyrexx:

this statement shows that you little to nothing of the scientific fact of evolution.

visit these links to broaden your knowledge on these topics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_genetics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_evolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent

oh dear Mr cyrexx. . .those links are full of 2 much grammars, theories and no proofs(tangible/visible facts).It doesn't prove anything. AS simple as that.
I could bring my graandma's monkey over and those theories and the likes exerted on it, I could be proven otherwise,else. . .

philip0906:
Stop dribbling urself. . .There are many "established" concepts which can also be termed as fables in science like the one i cited above, that defies logic(u urself can't prove it), call it whatever.
Faith which u guys term as illogical and on which u guys define the entirety of the christian belief, is just a subset of Christianity. There are loads of "subsets" on which the Christian belief is hinged upon and which transcends Religious boundaries e.g The law of sowing and reaping

Keep deluding yourself that the law of 'sowing and reaping' is a Christian tenet. It isn't. It is a natural law. You don't need to be a Christian to observe that law.
FAITH, as defined by the Bible is illogical... the evidence of things not seen, substance of that which we hope for...

musKeeto:
Keep deluding yourself that the law of 'sowing and reaping' is a Christian tenet. It isn't. It is a natural law. You don't need to be a Christian to observe that law.
FAITH, as defined by the Bible is illogical... the evidence of things not seen, substance of that which we hope for...

ur running faster than urself. . .kindly show me where in my post I said, its not a natural law or that it is Bible specific? Now answer. . .Is the law of sowing and reaping found in the Bible? yes or no?
Good definition of Faith, but it is only a part and not the Whole of Christianity? True or false?