John 3:16 is really a foundation, perhaps the cornerstone of faith. It's something that some believe with a passion and others fail to find anything in it other than a base story line. Reminds me, in more ways than on, of e space, the other preachers son of course, who, like many preachers children had to put up with the overbearing proselytizing by parental rule. However, I do believe that at some point in the future there will be an area where science and religion mesh for those who still have a desire for religious faith but need to have valid concepts to believe in so as not to be perceived as superstitious. There will be those who will believe no matter what on one end of the spectrum, the empiricists who don't believe on the other end and those in the middle who find scientific solutions to believing.
On Aug 18, 6:04 pm, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > As the son of a preacher man, I was constantly saturated with > religious insignificance during my youth. I could never understand > John 3:16. I remember my father asking me how I felt about the verse. > I said that I believed there was a guy called Jesus, but to claim that > he, and only he, was the son of "God", and that I had to "believe in > him" to get to "heaven" seemed a bit far fetched, if not downright > ludicrous. I don't think he liked my answer much. Ah well, so be it. > > I later experienced MUCH more spiritual joy from a few moments with > eyes closed by myself, than from all the hours in church listening to > stuff that didn't make much sense. Although a lot of people get good > stuff out of religion, I consider it more of a crutch for most of > them, but to each their own. All I can say is viva la spirit! > > On Aug 18, 5:34 pm, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > ... waiting for Molly to explain us the difference between a Christian > > scientist and scientology while dwelling on the power of spirituality. > > Thanks for the impulse, depri. > > > On 18 Aug., 13:02, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > IMO, science and religion can never get along because religion is a > > > man-made belief system that is not based on anything other than a > > > bunch of stories that have been translated a hundred times over. Many > > > of the "miracles" in the Bible have already been debunked, and > > > religions are really just preachings about a code of ethics combined > > > with some trivial "historical" events. > > > > Proving religion is impossible because it is a fictional story with > > > some factual stuff thrown in for good measure. "God" and religion > > > should not be talked about in the same sentence as they separate > > > issues. A religious scientist seems like an oxymoron. Now a spiritual > > > scientist, thats another story! > > > > On Aug 17, 9:49 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Will it ever be possible to meld science and religion? Religion is so > > > > unscientific and science is so unreligious. > > > > > BETHESDA, Md. — Newly sworn-in National Institutes of Health chief > > > > Francis Collins, who founded an institute in May aimed at nurturing > > > > the coexistence of science and religion, announced Monday he had > > > > resigned from his foundation to focus on his research chief duties. > > > > > "I want to reassure everyone I am here to lead the NIH as best I can, > > > > as a scientist," Collins said, noting Internet and editorial page > > > > concerns about Collins, as an evangelical Christian, leading a science > > > > organization. > > > > >http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-08-17-nih-collins_N.htm?csp=34 > > > > > What say ye fish heads?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
