On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:08 AM, Samiya Illias <[email protected]>wrote:
> Proof is the domain of science. > Proof is the domain of mathematics, science can never prove that a idea is correct, it can only prove that something is wrong. > Scripture guides the way for those who believe. > Scripture, that is to say the silly myths of bronze age tribes, are either capable of guiding our way or they aren't, belief has nothing to do with it. What the faithful believe is that a conscious intelligent being created the universe and thinks that the ultimate virtue is believing in something when there is absolutely no reason for doing so, and the more ridiculous the belief the more virtuous it is. I frankly have great difficulty understanding why a omnipotent omniscient being would think that faith (that is to say stupidity) is a virtue let alone the most important one, but I find it extraordinarily easy to understand why a human prophet who wishes to gain control over his fellow human beings would push this idea, it turns the weakness and inconsistency of the mountebank's spiel into a strength. > For those who believe theology to be a valid area of study, > A understanding of theology is about as useful in understanding the universe as knowledge of Mother Goose is, and expeditions to find Noah's Ark are as intellectually deep as expeditions to find the giant shoe the old lady lived in who had so many children she didn't know what to do. Richard Dawkins recounts the time he was at a party and somebody asked an Oxford astronomer why there was something rather than nothing, the astronomer said " Ah, now we move beyond the realm of science. This is where I have to hand over to our good friend the chaplain". Dawkins said "I was not quick-witted enough to utter the response that I later wrote: 'But why the chaplain? Why not the gardener or the chef?' Why are scientists so cravenly respectful towards the ambitions of theologians, over questions that theologians are certainly no more qualified to answer than scientists themselves?" > > it is interesting to find that though the scriptures may be ancient, yet > they are still relevant to modern age / scientific knowledge, > Name one scientific fact in the Bible or the Koran that you wouldn't expect members of a Bronze Age tribe in 1500BC to know. And why do both books give so much moral advice that today we can only describe as evil? Why is the God of the Bible such a moral imbecile? > and thus should not be discarded, > So you think Jeremiah 19:9 should not be discarded: "And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend"; you think we should follow Yahweh's example and force people we don't like to eat their children and friends. Is that what you really want? If not then you too think that very very large parts of scripture should not only be discarded but spit upon. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
