Cyprus-Forum.com

[Maximus]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

[Paphitis]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

Eye for an eye then?

[Maximus]

I don't demand unquestioning faith. I don't care what people believe. If people choose to or otherwise not believe in God that is there prerogative.

What has science told us? It has provided us with a reasonable estimation as to when the universe was created and that it started with a big bang. That is all.

Science has only ever told us two things? Are you serious? Well, science has also established that combustion is a chemical reaction between the carbon in solid matter and atmospheric oxygen, in rejection of the phlogiston theory. That makes three. You think the list stops there?

Of course it doesn't, we can talk about aerodynamics and the Bernoulli principle but what has that got to do with religion being the curse of humanity?

[Maximus]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

Eye for an eye then?

You have to read the story.

[Paphitis]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

Eye for an eye then?

You have to read the story.

No I don't! There is nothing compelling me to read it because all it offers me is a story!

I would rather read all about the Big Bang which i have not done enough of.

[Maximus]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

Eye for an eye then?

You have to read the story.

No I don't! There is nothing compelling me to read it because all it offers me is a story!

I would rather read all about the Big Bang which i have not done enough of.

Ok, but this thread is about religions being the curse of humanity and not about the creation of the universe.

[Tim Drayton]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

I am sorry, but if you impose this code of morality on humanity because it is the will of so-called God, then cosmology stands at the heart of the matter and you have to prove the existence of God to do so. If, on the other hand, you saying, just as with a book written by Carnegie, that this is just one man's opinion and everybody is free to agree or disagree with it as they wish, then it is another matter.

I am still waiting for an explanation about this moral code, though. Say I am walking along the street and some yob walking in the other direction pulls our a knife, stabs me in the eye and blinds me. Let us also say that I am carrying a knife. Do I a) pull out my knife and stab that yob in the eye with the intent to blind him ("An eye for an eye"), or b) pat him on the head and say 'It doesn't matter' ("Turn the other cheek")?

[Tim Drayton]

So when you talk about religion, you have to look at and talk about the teachings of said religion. How it teaches people to live their lives.

You don't judge a religion based on its explanation of the universe. That IS sciences domain.

So we have come to the conclusion that religions is the curse of humanity based on the bibles ability (or inability) to explain the creation of the universe?

Eye for an eye then?

You have to read the story.

No I don't! There is nothing compelling me to read it because all it offers me is a story!

I would rather read all about the Big Bang which i have not done enough of.

Ok, but this thread is about religions being the curse of humanity and not about the creation of the universe.

Because those defending the God delusion are premising this defence on the creation of the universe.

[Tim Drayton]

I don't demand unquestioning faith. I don't care what people believe. If people choose to or otherwise not believe in God that is there prerogative.

What has science told us? It has provided us with a reasonable estimation as to when the universe was created and that it started with a big bang. That is all.

Science has only ever told us two things? Are you serious? Well, science has also established that combustion is a chemical reaction between the carbon in solid matter and atmospheric oxygen, in rejection of the phlogiston theory. That makes three. You think the list stops there?

Of course it doesn't, we can talk about aerodynamics and the Bernoulli principle but what has that got to do with religion being the curse of humanity?

Nothing, but it has everything to do with you asking the question 'What has science told us?' and then saying 'only two things'.

[Maximus]

I don't demand unquestioning faith. I don't care what people believe. If people choose to or otherwise not believe in God that is there prerogative.

What has science told us? It has provided us with a reasonable estimation as to when the universe was created and that it started with a big bang. That is all.

Science has only ever told us two things? Are you serious? Well, science has also established that combustion is a chemical reaction between the carbon in solid matter and atmospheric oxygen, in rejection of the phlogiston theory. That makes three. You think the list stops there?

Of course it doesn't, we can talk about aerodynamics and the Bernoulli principle but what has that got to do with religion being the curse of humanity?

Nothing, but it has everything to do with you asking the question 'What has science told us?' and then saying 'only two things'.

I don't think anything else that science has told is relevant and when or how the universe was created is not relevant to this thread either.

WHY are (or not) religions the curse of humanity?