It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What do you call a believer who doesn't love God ?

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: SKMDC1

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: SKMDC1

The BIG difference between my trust in science and your faith in religion, is when something changes in how we understand the universe, science is really quick to admit it was wrong and adjust course in it's pursuit of truth. Religion tries to adjust reality to fit what it's ancient philosophical texts say.


Interesting, what has changed in Christianity recently, where should we change our theology, what new revelation have we missed.
What reality do we need to adjust

Got Joe Canada telling me that Damascus hasn't been destroyed, well yeah, it's true, it hasn't...yet

What do we have to change, love to know


From my point of view, you need to change the way you read ancient philosophical texts. Things that were written 2000 years ago as parables and explanations for things people didn't understand should not be taken literally and applied to actual reality. There is no difference between the bible and the stories of Homer. Do they have value for their wisdom and storytelling? Sure! Are they historically accurate and predictive of events in reality? Absolutely not.


So your comment has nothing to do with science and it's ability to recognize fault, it's just a rant at believers
Sais the guy who believes that the Big Bang is science and humanity evolved from dirt and water.
Actual reality hey, mirror, meet mirror




posted on May, 20 2016 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Well you could start with events that never occurred like the exodus. Noahs ark should specifically state the story is nothing more than a metaphor. Jesus walking on water and raising the dead and ressurecting. King Solomon's temple. Samson slaughtering a thousand people with the jawbone of a donkey ! On and on and on.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: SKMDC1

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: SKMDC1

The BIG difference between my trust in science and your faith in religion, is when something changes in how we understand the universe, science is really quick to admit it was wrong and adjust course in it's pursuit of truth. Religion tries to adjust reality to fit what it's ancient philosophical texts say.


Interesting, what has changed in Christianity recently, where should we change our theology, what new revelation have we missed.
What reality do we need to adjust

Got Joe Canada telling me that Damascus hasn't been destroyed, well yeah, it's true, it hasn't...yet

What do we have to change, love to know


From my point of view, you need to change the way you read ancient philosophical texts. Things that were written 2000 years ago as parables and explanations for things people didn't understand should not be taken literally and applied to actual reality. There is no difference between the bible and the stories of Homer. Do they have value for their wisdom and storytelling? Sure! Are they historically accurate and predictive of events in reality? Absolutely not.


So your comment has nothing to do with science and it's ability to recognize fault....


That is exactly what I'm saying. It has EVERYTHING to do with it. Science changes as our understanding increases, and recognizes when current ideas are wrong and replaces them with new ideas. Religion depends on people from 2000 years ago explaining reality. You keep trying to build a straw man to argue the point that my belief in science is equal to someone's belief in religion... It's not, and that's not what I'm saying, I'm saying my belief in science is based on evidence and fact, not faith in 2000 year old philosophers.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: SKMDC1

I love how believers equate science with religion. It shows how little they know about science and what it truly is.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: SKMDC1

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: SKMDC1

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: SKMDC1

The BIG difference between my trust in science and your faith in religion, is when something changes in how we understand the universe, science is really quick to admit it was wrong and adjust course in it's pursuit of truth. Religion tries to adjust reality to fit what it's ancient philosophical texts say.


Interesting, what has changed in Christianity recently, where should we change our theology, what new revelation have we missed.
What reality do we need to adjust

Got Joe Canada telling me that Damascus hasn't been destroyed, well yeah, it's true, it hasn't...yet

What do we have to change, love to know


From my point of view, you need to change the way you read ancient philosophical texts. Things that were written 2000 years ago as parables and explanations for things people didn't understand should not be taken literally and applied to actual reality. There is no difference between the bible and the stories of Homer. Do they have value for their wisdom and storytelling? Sure! Are they historically accurate and predictive of events in reality? Absolutely not.


So your comment has nothing to do with science and it's ability to recognize fault....


That is exactly what I'm saying. It has EVERYTHING to do with it. Science changes as our understanding increases, and recognizes when current ideas are wrong and replaces them with new ideas. Religion depends on people from 2000 years ago explaining reality. You keep trying to build a straw man to argue the point that my belief in science is equal to someone's belief in religion... It's not, and that's not what I'm saying, I'm saying my belief in science is based on evidence and fact, not faith in 2000 year old philosophers.


Great, bring the evidence to the discussion
That will finish everything off quite nicely

Now it can't be circumstantial, it must be empirical.

Short of that, science you are claiming as valid is a religion, by faith

Try keep up.



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 06:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: SKMDC1

I love how believers equate science with religion. It shows how little they know about science and what it truly is.


I love how non believers equate science with scientists not empirical evidence

It shows that they have their own religios system as well



posted on May, 23 2016 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

You be been shown evidence in a multitude of threads by many members. Just because you choose to not believe it doesn't make it less true.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join