It changes everything. By your own admission you are a bigot so you are a liar. Bigots are liars. You lie, you're a liar. You cannot back up anything you write. Every time you open your mouth there are lies, wriggling like maggots, waiting to take wing. That is why you are sooo sad. Breeze, Hitler, Stalin, et al were not Christians. But they were experts in social culture. Hitler understood that because the Christian culture was so essential to German culture, then it could not be ignored - it had to be embraced and then manipulated. According to Hitler's biographer Thomas Fuchs, Hitler himself was a pagan and Nazism was build upon human sacrifice. "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein
First of all, I wasn't talking to you. Secondly, you missed the whole point of my comment. Thirdly, if you think that science is lame without religion, then think again.
Ya i mean each Christian ruler that had a number of people executed althou the numbers seem to be much smaller . Again the kings executed people for being guilty of crimes against secular law . To put it in some famous words "it's just business , not personal" . Nope none manage to reach multi million number in a very short amount of time . The 1st mass cleansing in history belong to the atheist Bolsheviks . Dear pothead we are talking about rulers . The Spanish Inquisition was a organization lead by the Vatican which in over 200 years of operation barely executed 3000 people . The executions cannot be pinned on the head of 1 ruler , they are a common guilt that the Vatican will bear forever . The Crusades where acts of war and counter attack to stop the Muslim invasions . The Crucifiers ??? To much bongwater ??? Science would have been dead without Religion . Look up history and the dark age .
Apox obviously has no idea what he is talking about, the above or the subject matter of religious persecution as quests of individuals being the benefactors for their respective institutions.
At least I am not an idiot like some of the religious people I am talking with here? All I admitted is that your humble persona can think of me as of a bigot, that's all. I am very welcoming to any opinion that has just a little bit of logic behind it, btw. Besides, I looked up several dictionaries and none of them indicated that bigots lie as a part of them being bigots. So you lied about that . You ARE a liar. Case closed. Tell your imaginary friend I said hi.
Science = knowledge. Religion is not needed in order to achieve knowledge. Religion is not needed in order to achieve science. Religion has only held back science from its amazing discoveries. Sure, I can say that science (knowledge) is fun to use to bust all the nonsense that religions try to spread. But without any religion we would still have achieved just as much knowledge.
It was expected that this thread would reach 6 pages but has anyone noticed that most of these superiority threads are created by atheists. I mean just think about it, i have always found threads from atheists how great their path is and how dumb we are. Btw, wulkanen can you tell me how science tells you that a human body is not worth a non living thing which can be burnt to get energy.
??? I guess logic is something Wulkanen is not burdened with. Especially if he thinks he's smarter than Einstein "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstein thesickearth, you are talking around the issues here, not about them. Bigots lie. Bigots choose to lie about the behavior of a group of people, and paint everyone in that group as inferior. That is called a lie. Claiming that all religious people are stupid is an attempt to paint them as inferior. That is a lie, and that is a bigot. The mark of a true bigot is insisting that the inferiority is true.
I never said I was smarter than Einstein. And just because someone smart says something does not make it the truth. Learn to think for yourself god dammit. I simply disagree that religion is needed to make science intereting. You know, everything about science is not related to disproving religious nonsense. There is much more to it. Don't bother me with your worthless responses if you don't know what you're talking about.
The most intelligent and thoughtful people are all Religious, as they seek power from their inside and they have strong faith in their religion and what ever they do.
Can someone please explain to me how a person can decide things between good and evil. Is good and evil hereditary ? Or is there a piece of the brain that instructs a person to choose evil from good or good from evil.
Everyones brain works differently. We develop the ability to decide if something is right or wrong as we get older. Here's a fun study about morality and the brain: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125304448 It is a first step to breaking down morality in to mechanical terms in the brain.
That's so nice to know. How do we develop it ? What is right or wrong ? Who gets to decide that ? My left cerebrum or right cerebrum. LOL ! I'm sorry my brain has no nuts and bolts. Morality ? How would you know when things are moral ? good or bad ?
How old are you? If you can't even understand simple sentences then why do you even bother responding? The majority in each society decides what is right and wrong. We base our morality life experiences/historical events/the future. It appears that you have no knowledge about the brain, nor do you want to learn about it. So why ever ask a question if you're not interested in an answer?
That is what you believe. Using the Acquired Knowledge of life's experiences a Spirit may reach the Outerworld of the Everlasting. ........... No Leaf nor blade of Grass in all the universe are the same nor any Creature nor anything that is Created the same nor will Science ever comprehend the dissimilarities that only Knowledge will have the answers too. Knowledge and Science are not the same.
Sicence means knowledge. Again you fail. And no, I don't believe in things of which there are no proof for.
It's not something I've given a great deal of thought to, but I don't think morality is entirely learned. The reason I say this is because I feel there is some connection between empathy and morality (though not the definition of morality), for example, many animals feel empathy, and in that case, seems more instinctual rather than learned behaviour. Parents try to teach their children empathy, and it does seem to be learned, but to some extent, it may be natural. Here's a study I found as well: "The programming for empathy is something that is "hard-wired" into the brains of normal children, and not entirely the product of parental guidance or other nurturing, said Decety. Understanding the brain's role in responding to pain can help researchers understand how brain impairments influence anti-social behavior, such as bullying, he explained." Source: Science Daily