The particle-wave duality in physics seems like a contradiction too… until you understand it.
I never claimed that science is infallible! Man himself is a flawed creature therefore it stands to reason that everything created by man is imperfect.
Not even remotely. Math is demonstratively true without using the formulas.
Yes, but it is still circular logic to use it as proof that its contents are the truth.
Again, I agree. But no matter how vague the evidence is for a theory, that lack of proof does not prove that another theory is true.
To an extent, yes. But then belief in science evolves whenever better evidence is found, religious belief doesn’t. It was fewer than 100 years ago that we believed that our Galaxy was the entire Universe and it was barely 60 years ago that we believed that the continents did not drift. Virtually nobody believes either of those things today. That same standard, however, does not apply to religion … you for example, are professing to still believing everything written in a 400 year old translation of previous translations of much older writings, many of which are of unknown origin, is true in spite of the lack of independent verification of those writings, and the better information that has been accumulated and verified since. Faith in religion is simply nothing like faith in science.
1 Like
You should research that a bit.
I am an engineer … I have a minor in math. Is that research enough?
Buddhism!
Its inclusive and respectful to other religious beliefs that allows to have constructive dialogue. It doens’t expouse itself to being morally superior to other religious doctrines. How many wars do you know of was in the name of Buddhism?
I am not familiar with AJ Ayer, but thank you for the reference as I will definitely check him out. I have been doing research on the Post Modernism Philosophers for a better part of a Year and my findings have been pretty enlightening to say in the least. Nietzsche’s views on Christianity is pretty devastating, but he was life affirmative and suggested that Origin of Knowledge should always be questioned and that Christianity served a purpose but that it was in danger to becoming extinct due its stagnation and unwillingness to evolve. “Will to Power” and “Genealogy of Morals” best illustrates his points on this subject matter!
No, buddy. You know some rules that seem self consistent within your realm of experience. That’s all. No serious and honest mathematician would make the unequivocal statement that you did about math being true.
You are going to have to be more specific. I did not say that math was true, I said that is demonstratively true. Math has proven by physical applications to be very very reliable. For almost any math formula you can come up with, there is an analogical solution for the same, it just usually takes much longer to solve.
Yes … You are demonstrative. And that may be the problem.
Again … I suggest you research the validity of your statement about the truth of mathematics. A quick preview of this material may give you cause to rethink what you said.
Meh. It’s not really the point. Faith in math reliably gets you the desired result; religion, not so much.
2 Likes
Most of the context here is referring to modern Political extremism by secular Buddhism in such countries like Sri Lanka, Myamar, Thailand where there has already been a predisposition to violence due to political conflict something that was not started by Buddhists. However conceding, what is troubling is the current conflict in Myanmar against Muslims in the mountainous remote regions of the country. In the aggregate however, Buddhism hasn’t started major wars throughout human history!
Edit: Wikipedia is not considered a reliable credible source for substantiating facts all the time either. Its useful as a reference not for verifying the actual truth on the subject-matters it presents!
I see, you have nothing.
When Bible prophesy comes true, it is most certainly proof.
I just crushed your entire line of reasoning with the second verse of Genesis.
You simply can’t deal with proof.
-
You have no proof that God does not have a gender
-
You have no proof that there is no God. Any entity powerful enough to be called god, could easily blind you to himself.
-
The Bible contains parables, but also historical accounts with dates. Archeology has proven many of these facts.
-
You cannot prove that the Bible was written without direction from God
-
In fact, the consistency of the story in the Bible, which was even denied and certainly not understood by many who wrote, taught, and conserved it, commends the divine inspiration of the entirety of Scripture.
Your truths are simply athiest garbage. Atheism is not possible, you cannot be sure that no God exists.
I don’t need to, the premise in of itself is absurd to even take it seriously. Obviously you fail to see the irony of “God” or the meaning of “God” as being an a Omniscience entity then to double down on the argument that “God” needs to be a man and assume a human form. A very silly position to take coming from someone who regards themselves as being open minded and intelligent!
Now who is being narrow minded and judgemental? No they are not! I am simply stating the obvious and your mere defense is to label them as atheist garbage means you have no intelligent response to it, nor have done enough to engage mutually in this discussion!
I wouldn’t know, I am not a atheist! That is your argument, one is which can not be substantiated either!
Tell me something, why is it that Christians always love to put labels on things in order to prejudge something they know nothing about? Again, going back to the morally superior position that facts don’t matter!
Irrelevant! It was still written by man, regardless if it was inspired by God or not, you have no proof that it was! Try staying on point!
True! But a lot of the Bible is written in Parables and regardless whether there is some historical context this still remains as a fact!
Yeah, more blah blah speculative bullshit!
I see that you do not believe in discussion and reason.
May God richly bless you with the knowledge of His Son.
Yeah sure! Its a two way street, you along with others love to Cherry pick my statements! I suggest you go back to reread them to know what I am talking about! Practice intellectual honesty much?
I replied to every point in the post that I replied to, then I added one.
Pick one point and let’s debate. If you are capable.
And I responded to every one of yours, so what would be the point? You already established the point that my views are invalidedated! Its more or less a pissing contest with you! Its hard having a discussion when nothing is acknowledged and context and questions are ignored. You did not answer everything, but again I digress. What would be the point?