HEAVEN & HELL or REINCARNATION? what is your belief

[Breakeven]

---

@bears
careful lang in your search labi na in scientific world coz u know if misguided the more you gain knowledge about the created universe the more you might think of yourself to be god....motaas sad imong pride ana. Always try to keep a balance to faith and reason coz even if knowledgeable nata on this things, we still remain a mortal man...anytime we die when God requires our soul. Masayang ang tanan if what the bible says is true.

Mas effective ta if we will use our skill and knowledge for his glory.

a friendly advise... peace.

[geo25]

Wala... but I'd like to think naa reincarnation.

[Bears Grill]

^^ @noy, once again, you misunderstood the word "theory". Read that statement from the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The Phenomenon of Evolution is a FACT. The Theory EXPLAINS it.

Secondly, Proof belongs to mathematics. Evidence to substantiate a THEORY belongs to science.

The Pope knew all the implications of Darwin's theories and gave it his endorsement. As far as human ancestry is concerned, homo sapiens (humans) and the great apes share a common ancestor in the distant past. The evidence have been piling up since the complete sequencing of the human and chimp genomes. The Pope knew about this. Darwin's theory of evolution does not exempt humans from its explanation of common ancestry. Far from it. The study of human origins has been the one of focal points of evolutionary biology.

I'll stop right here. @noy, if you don't know about the subject, it would be nice if you can say you don't know...or if you really have made up your mind on the subject, just say so and don't pretend you have anything to falsify Darwin's theory. If you can really falsify Darwin's theory and come up with your own, you'll send shockwaves throughout the scientific community.

[Bears Grill]

@noy, if you truly respect Pope John Paul II, you wouldn't go as far as putting words into his mouth, quoting things he did not say. Read his statements carefully:

Address of Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (October 22, 1996)

---

Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.

---

@noy, kasabot na gyud?

I'm tempted to say "SUSMARYOSEP!!!"

[Breakeven]

It only proves Pope's infallibility. Why not listen and know what's in the bible instead?

OT:
Debunking the theory of Darwinian Evolution!

Debunking Evolution - problems between the theory and reality; the false science of evolution

Bisan unsaon pa nato ug explain to justify this claim it would still remain a theory, NOT A FACT....daghang missing link ani nga theory. We only ask for proof of transitional species kung tinuod man jud kaha.

[Breakeven]

Updated list of Scientists who are skeptics against Darwinism:

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/vie...ownload&id=660

[Bears Grill]

Why should we treat the opinions from creationist websites as science? This is like treating the opinions of Deepak Chopra as science...or any one of those pseudo-scientific crackpots. If people talk about the cream of the crop amongst scientists, they turn to the National Academy of Sciences. This is the scientific community with the most Nobel prize-winning scientists in its ranks. Read what they say about evolution.

FROM THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (Click on the link):

Is Evolution a Theory or a Fact?


Science and Creationism - A View from the National Academy of Sciences

* Science and Creationism has a chapter on Human Evolution.

If you want to check if a subject or theory is a science, the buck stops with the Nation Academy of Sciences. If they say Evolution is a fact and Darwin's theory is a scientific theory (more than "just a theory"), it is.

[noy]

@noy, if you truly respect Pope John Paul II, you wouldn't go as far as putting words into his mouth, quoting things he did not say. Read his statements carefully:

Address of Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (October 22, 1996)

---

Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.

---

@noy, kasabot na gyud?

I'm tempted to say "SUSMARYOSEP!!!"

can you please elaborate which part of the definition of theory i miss?
let us compare the difference between my own understanding and what the dictionary says..
my POV- it is something that has not been proven.can be used as a reference.can even be used as basis and accepted to be correct BUT
not necessarily a FACT and most certainly TRUE.
according to online dictionaries...
1.a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena
2.a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. Antonyms: practice, verification, corroboration, substantiation.
source:Theory | Define Theory at Dictionary.com

another set perhaps
1.Abstract reasoning; speculation
2.A belief or principle that guides action or assists comprehension or judgment
3.An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture
source:theory - definition of theory by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

does my understanding about theory differs to how it is widely defined?
if science refers to a theory to be a fact, then how do they differ scientifically? and why use such terms
when it only attributes confusion...when a lay person say theory means one thing and if a scientific person says theory it means another? why not use the word FACT instead to be as clear as crystal.
unless one is trying to play safe..

evolution on its generic form perhaps would be a fact but
regarding evolution of man...if it is a stated FACT, then why in the world is it still CALLED THEORY?

regarding the POPE's statement..

"Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory."

did it somehow or in any way specifically say that the theory of evolution is the TRUTH and we ought to disregard what the Bible says about God making Humans..instead we should revise it to God made the First organism which eventually turned into HUMANS,however until now NO ONE knows what it was..?
all i see is an appreciation regarding Darwin's study.(i did see a link regarding POPE talking about the hostiliy of the early church against darwinians and that it was not right...or maybe it wasnt legit..oh well)

anyway the theory might probably be more than just a hypothesis otherwise it wouldn't be used and accepted widely in the science community until a certain discovery alters that certain theory
but STILL it doesn't make it a FACT.

the intention of this argument is NOT to redicule Darwin or anyone who does not believe in the story of creation..with all the scientific terms and methods,what match does a guitar player have?
and most importantly NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT to do so...
and even if i intend to i would in no way succeed...'cause you're right i am no genius..all i know about darwin is that He is the guy who thought that we came from apes or at least the like...bottom line was whatever the origin was, we did not originally came out as humans..

i love science but perhaps not of the same level to where you're at..i see science as the process
can show the greatness of God and His creation.
but i certainly know the difference between THEORY and FACT.

and what's with the Sarcasm?can you not talk without it?
you often say that you respect other POVs, does sarcasm comes along with respect?i'm pretty sure they are under opposite categories.

these are the only questions i need you to answer:i hope you will answer them accordingly
(please do not give me links full of scientific stuff that would just make my nose bleed,'cause after all..i'm a bit slow in comprehension and vocabulary right?so i'd prefer if you answer them in your own words)

*If the Theory in Evolution of man is TRUE,then why are we STILL calling it a THEORY?

*Evolution itself is a broad study and might be considered as a Scientific fact, but the theory in the evolution of man which is under the study of EVOLUTION, is it considered to be a scientific Fact as well?or has it(evolution of man) been PROVEN to be a FACT?

*it(evolution of man) might be used as a basis of many sciences, it might even be accepted but does it necessarily follow to be the ACTUAL TRUTH?

[KlaytoN]

mao jud, pero usa ra jud ang pangutana bro nga dili na angay i-explain pa. Yes or No ra ang answer ani dapat.
Kung nasulat ba sa Bible ang Purgatory? Yes or No?

For the Roman Catholics, they believe the Bible is NOT COMPLETE or IS NOT THE SOLE AUTHORITY as far as church doctrines is concerned. So they (Vatican) can invent, cancel, or modify church doctrines even if it contradicts the Holy Scriptures. Because they believe the Vatican itself is equal in authority with the Bible.. In the eyes of a True Catholic, the Pope is the Vicar of the Son of God. He is the representation of Jesus Christ in our present time. So whatever pronouncements they make especially the magisterium, it is considered as continuation sa Bible.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

PROVEN, tangible, existing? @Spring, you're putting yourself on the spot here. You can back that up, can you?

If what you are trying to imply here is that I was there , both HEAVEN and HELL then the answer would be NO.

But being TANGIBLE in a way where SOMEONE who was there to experience it PHYSICALLY, then YES.

Does it need a SYSTEMATIC STUDY/ RESEARCH to come up with a CONCLUSION ?NO and definitely will never be realized . Why ? Because it is beyond the capacity of our UNDERSTANDING here on earth. I have already put that foundation and position also in the ATHEIST and THEIST THREAD to where topics wil be directed to somewhere " worth " discussing because the proponent is SCIENCE .