[QUOTE=kebotDiNaMute]Hagoy! kabalu ka unsay ako denomination? brad i wasn't selling my idea. but i cannot allow you people to just leave you with your skewed idea of what we believe in.[quote]hahaha... look who's talking?
So? When you came you make it even worst!Originally Posted by kebotDiNaMute
pfffttt... yeah right! Now, why would I listen to your views? Your points are amongst the worst. You can't even talk sensible and 99.9% of time you have borderline intelligence.
HUH?
Makes us both? Uh ah... not me! I only see one douche here and certainly not me...btw, cross the line? What are you going to do? Blow yourself up?
Results 131 to 140 of 415
-
08-22-2009, 01:34 PM #131C.I.A.
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Posts
- 3,639
-
08-22-2009, 01:39 PM #132C.I.A.
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Posts
- 3,639
korek ka bro! sometimes these kind of people needs compassionate ears [sarcastically speaking]... Originally Posted by Ramini
-
08-22-2009, 04:22 PM #133Banned User
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 2,569
hmmm, ingon bya ka imo lubaon... hmmm. kinsa may ni boom nato rn... hmmm. Originally Posted by Sinyalan
btw, cross the line? What are you going to do? Blow yourself up?
-
08-22-2009, 04:27 PM #134
dont point to much to the other party. it takes two to tango on idiocy. Originally Posted by Sinyalan
korek ka bro! sometimes these kind of people needs compassionate ears [sarcastically speaking]...
-
08-22-2009, 08:14 PM #135Banned User
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Posts
- 2,569
Ay sauce... walay soko-ay ha bsta ma supo... hambog pod... murag c who... Originally Posted by The_Child
"it takes two to tango on idiocy."
--- takes 2? kinsa maestra nimo ani brad? hahaha, bsin sa unsa kaka ni na hospital gi tudlo... ok nalang ko...
-
08-22-2009, 08:44 PM #136
Originally Posted by Sinyalan
The point dodong is that you started these whole thing about having issues with different beliefs. Now, you are TRYING to stir things up that your religious faith is better than anyone. That's your point. The problem with you and your cohorts is that you're too hypocritical and ignoramus.
sakto jud ka sir.
-
08-22-2009, 11:08 PM #137C.I.A.
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Posts
- 6,470
so it is more on a "perspective" stand point rather than the "belongingness" factor. Originally Posted by josephdc
I believe we can really harmonize Science and Religion or Faith.
As John Lennox noted, the conflict we have today is not between science and religion for we have men of science from both sides of the camp. Rather, it's a conflict between worldviews: atheism, theism, and post-modernism.
-
08-22-2009, 11:17 PM #138C.I.A.
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Posts
- 2,108
^ Yeah, I guess that's how it is. It's all about worldviews. Scientists who are atheists see the physical universe as the only reality there is while those who are theists see the material universe as only one aspect of reality; they believe that there are truths that transcend the physical universe.
-
08-25-2009, 04:24 PM #139Senior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Posts
- 838
As long as religion tries to rationalize God’s existence, conflict with science can be expected. Although it is not the concern of science to disprove God’s existence, old religious beliefs which are justified by loose rationalization on natural phenomena will surely be run-over by new scientific discovery verified systematically thru experimentation or if not via mathematical precise representation.
It seems to me that religion and science can never be compatible with each other. No matter where we put it really, unless one turns a blind eye and simply ignore the issues (as in most cases). But one thing I’m sure of is that the individual belief in a God and science can still coexist in the mind in which religion and its doctrines can not. This is because no matter how far or how deep can science advance its knowledge there will be always be room beyond science for God to dwell on reasonably- a ‘gap’ for a god concept to step into.
Antagonisms in regards to immutable scientific evidence by suppose religiously correct people seem to me is nothing more than a form of pride (look what religious pride did to Christ). Could it be that God is showing us what He is not through what has been discovered by science? Didn’t Rom. 1:20 give us a hint where to look for Him? Only that scientist is no position to even hypothesize such concept as God, since he is bound to look at things in the world with his empirical ‘eyes’, but we who are not bound by such strict regiments are free to look at those things with the spiritual ‘eyes’ of our understanding Eph. 1:18. For instance the apparent instances (chances after chances) of ‘coincidence’ one may find in the study of how certain things or how the world came into existence can lead us to think from mere appearance into the eternal.
Maybe someday people will cease to be religious (herd-like manner) but I doubt whether science (not that this is the ultimate objective of science) can knock out the spiritual nature of man out of existence. For science to do that it has to give man something more than knowledge about the world- we need a meaning to our existence not just mere description.Last edited by Existanz; 08-25-2009 at 04:27 PM. Reason: as always spiling...
-
08-25-2009, 05:01 PM #140Banned User
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Posts
- 6,786
i do not believe in believing. my approach is to know, and knowing is a totally different dimension. it starts from doubt, it does not start from believing. the moment you believe in something, you have stopped inquiring. belief is one of the most poisonous things to destroy human intelligence.
all the religions are based on belief; only science is based on doubt. and i would like the religious inquiry also to be scientific, based on doubt, so that we need not believe but we can come to know someday the truth of our being, and the truth of the whole universe.
Similar Threads |
|
Posting Permissions
|