well, say, the modern medical reserchs conduct medicines that can cure "depression". you see, the scientists, in this case doctors, believe that depression is something to be cured, and with scientific reserch's help, they can come up with medicine that can magically take away depression from a "patient".

the "patient" comes back to work in a zombie like state due to the repression effect. the chemical drug forcefully replaces a natural process that a person has to go through, which I believe it is in some way religious because of the spiritual transformation.

surely it is using science in a wrong way, nevertheless it is science. I cannot really compare science to religion, because religion is such a broad topic and my knowledge is humble and insufficient, so I can only relate to the limitations of science.

honestly telling you, I dont think science and religion are the same at their cores. one works to advance human understanding, and another humbles us and reminds us our place in the grand theme of God or Goddess.

and Hugh, say, you are a religious scientist, then tell me how you be christian while being a scientist at the same time?

scientific studies require evidence, proof, numbers, an accurate calculation etc. forgive me, but how much does God weigh? is it possible to answer in scientific terms? of course, this question is the manifestion of the intelligence of my intellect-self, and it cannot beat the wit of soul. I am sure you can answer this in a soulful way. then again, it proves that religion is not entirely competible with science.

[ 06-20-2002, 01:53 AM: Message edited by: 250 ]

Leo, we are multi facetted beings. Faced with problems that require differing solutions we are able to change our modus operandi.

A Christian scientist applys scientific gathering of evidence for information of/from the physical realm, and applys faith to matters of God that require it.

If, as a Christian theologian I want to understand the context of an aspect of Christs ministry, I may take the scientific approach and go to Israel, look at the land, the ruins and the people. I may consult various source materials - the bible and supporting texts, and gather the information physically.

If I want to make my relationship with God stronger, then I need to spend time praying and listening. Viewing aspects of creation, having fellowship with other christians, hanging out with God. THe same as I would if I wanted any relationship to grow. Spend time with the person involved.

This is what I mean when I say Christianity is a relationship, but Theology a science. Differing ways to increase understanding of the same source.

cerek you say god transends laws of pyhsical science?how do you create something outta nothing?does coal turn into a diamond over time cause god willed it? no its scientific fact that over many years carbonization causes coal to turn into diamonds. men back in 3000 years ago were of average hieght of 4 feet tall man was tiny. why after so many years the average height of man raise up to almost 6 feet? evolution. i do believe we evolved from an ape-like state, maybe not actual apes but similar.

yes i do believe that religion and the right to thought brings chaos to order.we feel we are above everything else and because we were "givin" the right to thought that we are superior. do you see the common animal trying to wipe its own species out of existance? no they dont have the thought that they are superior but of the same. sure males fight for dominance to an "area" but they dont kill each other over it. i.e. rams will fight each other for territory. when one realizes that he is weaker and less dominate he leaves or moves on. doesnt come back later and bust a cap in his azz.


and sports now that we are on that subject. i seem to recall kobe and shaq to be very ill tempered with each other and couldnt seem to play ball well with each other. each wanted the spotlight. could win a championship for 2 years straight. then god (jackson) stepped in taught kobe how to share the ball and the limelight with shaq, and taught shaq to work in his weak areas to improve his game. next thing you know you got 2 star players and three championships later.why couldnt they do that before?didnt god grant them the Incredible "ability" to play basketball? no it took one man who knew how to play the game and hone their abilities and to work on them.

and as far as ww2 is considered it was based on religion. hitler and the rest of the non jewish germans where in poverty and the jews werent. why was that? they had an answer they might not be rich but they can take it from them cause they are superior in fighting sense and there was nothing the jews could do about it.the american civil war was about slavery and its morality issues and what god feels is morally correct about the issue.men should be treated equally. but anyways not talking about each and every war lets talk about war intails. war is caused because of to conflicting sides of interest or "beliefs". a belief that goes against religion. "though shalt not kill" "honor thy neighbor". its also a sin to start a war. most wars are based on greed. is that not a cardinal sin? if we are so in tune with religion why would we allow wars to happen. dont we know its morally wrong to kill fellow man? but we have people of all religions more than willing to fight to protect "their land". i will not join in the military to fight in a war cause i believe it is morally wrong to kill a man. but when it comes to war both sides feel they are each morally wrong for their belief as to why they are fighting that war.

one more note on war, desert storm was that religiously motivated? sure all of you would say no. that it was in U.S. interest to keep oil in the right hands, no. we didnt want the oil to be under control of terrorist extremist groups such as suddam hussien. it is religions way to control the power.the united states would not want to have to buy oil from a terrorist state like that because the U.S. knows what iraqis stand for. granted kuwait doesnt much like the U.S. for other reasons as well . but they arent trying to kill americans either.


do you disagree with hitlers views? why or why not? he felt that what he was doing was an answer to his peoples suffering. is he dumb for "thinking" like that?i would say that that man was pretty hell bent on destruction and genoside based on a belief. can you name one none beleiver of god that is or was anywhere near as hellbent as he was or any other person like him?and serial killers have no remorse for their actions? i dont buy that. why does a man rape a woman or child? cause he "knows" he has power over them and takes advantage over them. and lets not forget the people who claim god tells them to kill people cause they dont follow his rules. are they morally sound? and fighting a war. is a soldier morally sound for killing another man? it is immoral to kill a man no matter what the cause or reason is. so is a soldier not of sound mind. they are just adherering to their own code of conduct their country has instilled in them.

and finally about changing faiths. why are there so many different forms of christianity? buddism and jewdism both have one set of rules or conduct to follow. why is it that man has the right to change and warp christianity around to his own personal liking. if they had a methodist style jewish religion would you then decide to switch because it has or is more adhered to what YOU want to believe? why dont you believe in original christianity? but a parsect of it, an offshoot. would it not be to your total belief system by following christianities main beliefs?

Yep.

Saying the Creator Awareness that created everything cannot possibly create from nothing because a human cannot create ex-nihlo is akin to a Van Gough painting deciding Van Gough himself mustn't be able to walk because it can't.

Think about what you're saying. How can human limitations apply to whatever it is that created everything? It's a miracle he or it even bothers communicating with, let alone loving or dying for us.

He/it is so beyond human comprehension, the only things even Christians can know about God are what he chooses to reveal.

Eh?

Branches of Judaism include Rabinic, Sephardim, Ashkenazim, Kabbala, Hasidism, Haskala, Orthodix, Reform, Conserative, Zionism, Sephardim, Orthodox, Messianic.

Branches of Buddhism include Mahayana, Theravada and Vajrayana. PLUS Buddhism has incorporated Taoism and Confucianism to form the Chinese religion.

Speaking about a "Methodist Jewish sect" is simply bizzarre. If they were Methodist Jews they would be Christian.... (Messianic Jews accept the messiah)

As far as Christianity goes, the new denominations are vital. Just as a relationship starts to have problems when we "go through the motions" and make a ritual out of that which should be spontaneous, so it is with the [i]relationship with Christ. [i]

I see, Yorick, in that case, I agree with you.

I see science and religion as symbiotic. If there's a god, he created science. We need both science and faith. Here's a quote that I think says it very well:

"Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism."

If I remember correctly; theres a reference in the bible somewhere that goes something like this... 'may speak out agaisnt the son of man, even the father, but let no one speak out against the holy spirit, for that is unforgivable' it went SOMETHING like that, I know that isnt the corret wording, but thats the gist of it...</font>[/QUOTE]I beleive the Bible says blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, is not forgivable. Exactly what blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is I don't know for sure.

Numbers and formulers is Phyics and such only one arm of science. Science does appreciate the mysteries of life but choose to seek an explaintion. Religion is matter to be taught for without it teaching all regilion will die. It also tries to explain mysterys but does so too often by ruling them acts of god then seeking real answers.</font>[/QUOTE]Ah, yes Yorrick but I did not state there was not christian scientists or Seik, arab, jew, mulisum, buddist, tao, hindu, shinto, etc for that matter either. But did suggest that people studding tend pass off act of god as an answer instead of finding another one (perhaps correct one). A ideal that your comment that some people believe that god driected evolution has backed up.

One a side not the creatures on the sea floor do not eixst be eating sulpher, but by eating creatures that use in chimosynthesis, a process not unlike the photosynthesis of surface algea. Also these life forms mostly exist near the black smokers which are volonic vents (they look like min-voloancs) but a ecosystem not unlike it has been found in caves in....one of the old soviet countries (Can't remember the name.)

[ 06-20-2002, 09:52 PM: Message edited by: Gabriel ]

I beleive it is posible for a Christian to 'fall', if it wasn't what would be the purpose of Paul admonising(sp?) so many of the early churches to be sure to "walk in a manner worthy of their calling"
or Paul's statment about how can we who have died to sin continue to walk in it, may it never be! Or shall we continue to sin that grace may abound! (paraphised by me) Or the statment about Satan being a roaring Lion roaming around seeking to devour anyone He can. (again parphrased by me) A statment made to Christians, the Saved, if they could not fall then why should they be warry of Satan. Doing something you reget until the end of your days doen't mean it's unforgiveable. It means you have a conscience, and have remorse for your actions, or else you wouldn't regret the action.
You're right sin is always there.

[ 06-20-2002, 10:12 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

yorick coal wasnt formed from nothing like you proclaim. so a diamond itself came from coal it didnt come from nothing. it didnt appear out of thin air. millions of years from now another island will eventually surface of the coast of the big island hawaii. it is said from scientists that it will actually be larger thn the big island itself. it is happening not because god willed it but because the earth of its many millions of years has changed or "evolved" into what it is now. and how is it science can prove that an island is coming before god has willed it? if this planet had no water to it could life still exist if god willed it?

I didnt think anyone outside of Hawaii knew of molokini [img]smile.gif[/img]

You're attempting to limit the unlimitable. If he could create life reliant on water, he could create life reliant on something other than water.

If he could will light into existance from nothing, then willing coal that can turn into diamonds under pressure (what a great concept to apply to human character BTW) is no sweat.

It seems that you're not grasping the concept of an omnipotent creator. Trying to disprove a creator by claiming that the act of creating itself is beyond it's power is kind of futile ;) The greater the achievement, the greater the power of an omnipotent creator awareness. Whatever path it took, creationists believe the creator was behind it.

I'm just not sure you're understanding the concept.

Thiefprowess, do you know what's preventing the universe from flying apart?

Atoms are held together by an energy. What is causing that energy?

[ 06-21-2002, 04:40 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

<font color="plum">This is a subject that I have given a LOT of thought. I've read the Bible, prayed, and discussed the issue with other Christians.

The best example I can give of the "unpardonable sin" is not just blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. After all, a certain word popular in American culture fits that category.

Rather, it is the complete rejection of God and His Holy Grace. It is unforgivable because the person has NO DESIRE to seek forgiveness. They have totally rejected the very idea of God's existence or authority and have "cut off all future communications" with Him.

In a situation like that, God will not offer forgiveness - because no forgiveness will be sought.

BTW, <font color="orange">thiefprowess</font>, it will be a little time before I can answer your Reply. My keyboard at home fritzed on me last night and I have only a limited amount of time available at work. I will address your points as soon as I have a chance.

Until then, be well.</font>

"My keyboard at home fritzed on me last night"

I feel your pain. Do you have to copy paste blank spaces because your spacebar is broke also [img]graemlins/question.gif[/img] [img]smile.gif[/img]

Let's not overlook the Zoroastrians of Persia, which are THE OLDEST Monotheists in the world. The religion has a God, and his brother is the 'Devil.' It was started in ancient Persia by Zarathustra before the time of Abraham. So I say, what if the Zoroastrians are right, and Yorrick, you're wrong? Will you go to their hell? This talk of God being too 'profound' or too 'incomprehensible' to the human mind is ridiculous... We can understand his teachings, yet we can't comprehend him? The invariable logic loop to that is ridiculous, and makes no sense to me... It's proof as to why Christianity doesn't qualify as a science, it can't be proven or disproven, as it makes statements that are beyond theories, it doesn't refute the possibility that God does or does not exist, and gives no evidence, it states things that cannot in a worldly manner be argued, thus it rests secure. To say he is incomprehensible makes him incomprehensible, which is therefore incorrect, as you create hypothetical existence in a realm that cannot be proven to exist, much less contain 'God.' Science can only call something fact if it can assure it, Religion can say it's fact, not substantiate it, and make it accepted by people abroad, and all due to the fact that science has no stand against it.

Do you fully know and understand me? Do you know all I can and cannot do in my life? All I have or have not done?

No.

Can you still read the words I choose to type?

There we go. We only know what God chooses to reveal about himself. No logic loop at all.

On the matter of Christianity, were you not reading the thread? No-one claimed Christianity was a science. Christianity is a relationship.

Theology is a science.

[ 06-21-2002, 10:03 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Hi! I'm back. :D
I brought up this topic at a party I was at last night and got some interesting answers. One of my friends pointed out an intriguing distinction. He said that while the practice of science may have very little to do with religion, the way science is treated by the general masses bears some resemblence to religion. Your basic Average Joe or Jane out on the street doesn't understand the complexities of a hypothesis (not that I fully understand this either... But then again I'm still in school) or the tenuous standing of a theorem. So when a scientist comes out and says we have a theory and this is how it works John and Jane Doe say "Oh okay! Now I know something." And accept the theory as fact. In essence, they have faith in the theory. Similarly worshippers have faith in a God of some sort.
So... There are two major differences between science and religion. First off the people in the higher echelons of science (the scientists, obviously) shouldn't/don't have anymore faith in their theories than their last batch of experiments tells them they should. In religion the higher echelons should/must have faith in the God that they preach about. Secondly science is an exploration outward. Knowledge beyond the self. Religion is just the opposite.

I think the whole problem comes down to focus and definition. Where do we put the focus when we talk about science, the scientists or the science-ees? Then you have to ask, what definition of science and religion are you using? I say that from now on we should preface these big question discussions with a debate about semantics. :D [img]tongue.gif[/img]

DeSoya

i want god to reply to this post, please reply:

which came first the chicken or the egg?

end our suffering and wanton need to know this question.please one litle miracle to answer this question.

I'm sorry, Bhaal is unavalible at the moment, in fact hes dead, and since I chose to remain a mortal, you seem to be outa luck ;) [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]

<font color=pink>Now, most of this is way over my head. I agree with theifprowess to a degree, but i don't want to debate about it, because i suck at debating [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Now my memory is a bit rusty on this, because i dont know if Gallileo(sp)was the one who proclaimed that the earth was round, that it revolved around the sun, or both. If it was the former, was it not the church who condemed him for stating such? If it was the latter then i'll just drop the subject entirley [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font>

Yup , it was Galileo, And look what they did to him for it!! Proof to my earlier statement that religon stands in the way of science.

thank you lady blue i need a litle positive reinforcement.

i still want that answer from god though. give me this little miracle.

Yup , it was Galileo, And look what they did to him for it!! Proof to my earlier statement that religon stands in the way of science.</font>[/QUOTE]Umm. Not exactly. It was common knowledge that the earth was round at the time (and had been since biblical times). Galileo's findings supported Copernicanism - which was that all objects in our system revolved around the sun, not 1) the earth or 2) some earth, some sun.

He was forced to recant as stated above and confined to house arrest (at his villa) for life.

<font color=pink>NP prowess. I was not brought into a religous family, so i had no reason to believe in god from that standpoint(and thres a mormon church next to me and a 7th day adventist acroos [img]tongue.gif[/img] ). Of course i love everything about science, that may be another factor, but i dont want to get into that either because it could get me in trouble :D . I also have yet to witness the miracle [img]tongue.gif[/img] </font>

Yup , it was Galileo, And look what they did to him for it!! Proof to my earlier statement that religon stands in the way of science.</font>[/QUOTE]Umm. Not exactly. It was common knowledge that the earth was round at the time (and had been since biblical times). Galileo's findings supported Copernicanism - which was that all objects in our system revolved around the sun, not 1) the earth or 2) some earth, some sun.

He was forced to recant as stated above and confined to house arrest (at his villa) for life.</font>[/QUOTE]<font color=pink>I knew i would get proved wrong, just had to be sure. Subject Galileo dropped :D </font>

Hey, it was pretty close! The Church leaders should have read their Bibles more closely in this case unfortunately... If they did they wouldn't have needed poor Galileo to prove them wrong.

This is a good example of what happens when human pride gets in the way of Divinity. God had spelled it out in black and white but they refused to see it. Happens far too often I'm afraid...

[ 06-24-2002, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Leonis ]

Since About the sixth century B.C., some astronomical observations indicated the earth to be a sphere and by the time of the Middle Ages, the scholarly opinion was for the spherical earth.
The Bible seems to say that the earth is basically a sphere in shape; that there are pillars which undergird the world and which one could conclude to be the crystalline rock corresponding to what we commonly call the mantle; that there are an unspecified number of foundations which range in size all the way from the foundations of the hills and mountains to the core of the earth and to the very foundation which is (supposedly) the Jesus.

Actually the Greeks calculated the circumfrence of the earth with about a ten percent degree of accuracy. So they knew that the earth was round well before "Biblical" times. There is some evidence that the aztecs and the sumerians may have had a notion that earth was round.
The real problem here the that the institution of the church decided to ignore most of the wisdom of the ancient greeks, relying only on what fit the doctrine of the time.

I think Magellan's unintended point is a good one. The blind faith that we sometimes put in institutions (Science, The Church, The Government, etc.) can often lead us astray. There are those who have faith in God like Yorick and Cerek [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] and those who have faith in ourselves or in what we percive to be facts [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] . Like Magellan we see the divine in the world at large instead of seeing it in a building or a cultural edifice. If too much faith is put into these institutions then you could easily make a case for science being a religion or even government being a religion.

Lady Blue: While Galileo didn't prove the earth was round his publication was what got the theory widely accepted.... You were almost right. And that's pretty darn good. Even in science. :D

DeSoya

I think Magellan's unintended point is a good one. The blind faith that we sometimes put in institutions (Science, The Church, The Government, etc.) can often lead us astray. There are those who have faith in God like Yorick and Cerek [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] and those who have faith in ourselves or in what we percive to be facts [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] . Like Magellan we see the divine in the world at large instead of seeing it in a building or a cultural edifice. If too much faith is put into these institutions then you could easily make a case for science being a religion or even government being a religion.

Lady Blue: While Galileo didn't prove the earth was round his publication was what got the theory widely accepted.... You were almost right. And that's pretty darn good. Even in science. :D

DeSoya</font>[/QUOTE]DeSoya, if you believe the Bible, as I do, it's timeline extends back to the begining of creation. If you don't, but do believe in science, then we are talking around the period the dead sea scrolls are believed to have been written(the oldest verifiable), which still makes it an exceptionally old text.
My point being that nowhere in the Bible are any statements made that the earth is flat, or that the solar system/universe revolves around the earth.
The 'earth is flat' people ignored not only science but the very doctrine they claimed to defend. A common fault of humans, not only in all religions but in all codes/creeds/morals/ethics/societies etc...
Hypocrasy, Lying and Self Interest extend to all walks of life.
How many politicians or scientists have stated contradictory beliefs due to payolla? (sp?)
How many times have we compromised our own beliefs for personal gain? Or even to protect others?

I agree with you in that too many people exercise blind faith, in religion, politics, science, relationships etc...

Geez, Leonis! I'm a bonehead! :D

I totally agree with you. Look at me <---- mr. Hypocrite. I don't believe in the bible but I have read the old testament which all comes, as you obviously know, BCE. What a silly mistake. Thanks for catching my gaffe.

What I think of as biblical era is new testament stuff. Or I guess after the founding of the church. As I said above. I didn't think at all of the old stuff. No mention of a flat earth from what I recall.

DeSoya

Just thought I'd add my thoughts...

To go back to the original question of this thread, is science a religion?

I say it depends on how you define religion -- and for that matter how you define science as well. The Hierophant (on page 1 of this thread) said as much.

Perchance one may venture a definition of religion as a body of beliefs and convictions regarding the world and human life, which serves as a guide for thought and conduct. If we go by this definition of religion, then it would seem to me that contemporary Western science is a religion indeed, because it clearly subscribes to certain fundamental beliefs and convictions regarding the universe, one of which is that there is order and regularity in the universe, that all things in the universe follow definite laws of nature. After all, isn't science all about finding out what these laws are? And would you devote so much of your energy and resources (look at all the funding for scientific research) to finding out about something you don't believe in?

Perhaps some may object that my definition of religion leaves out an important point, namely that the beliefs and convictions that constitute a religion are supposed to be unprovable. They can't be proven either in a stepwise, logical manner (as in proving Pythagoras' Theorem) or by hard, empirical data (as when I put a live dinosaur in front of people to show them that dinosaurs actually exist -- if I can find a live dinosaur, that is). Well, even if we allow for that, science still looks like a religion to me. Just tell me how you're going to prove to me that there is order and regularity in the universe, that all things in the universe follow definite laws of nature. Through logical argumentation? Impossible. Via empirical observation? Not possible, either. It comes down to faith. This in fact also holds true for all the 'proofs' and 'evidence' which science prides itself on: they all ultimately rest on certain propositions for which there is no proof -- propositions such as 'all things in the universe follow definite laws of nature'. The Hierophant could not have said it better. You just have to accept those propositions on the basis of faith -- or, if you prefer (as I do), intuition.

Face it -- science is a religion. As are capitalism and communism for that matter.

[ 06-25-2002, 05:26 AM: Message edited by: K T Ong ]

Where to start?? Good posts with lots of quality points made.

Firstly, Id like to say that instead of joining the religious debate I will state my opinion that this topic was basicly (to me) a yes or no question.

No, I do not believe science is a religion. There are many different types of sciences. Theology is just as much of a science as biology is. I dont feel an overpowering need to elaborate on that since its been discussed for 5 pages now.

Now to be like everyone else and spew forth for a few paragraphs [img]smile.gif[/img]

"Many scientists BECOME scientists simply to find out how God made things the way he did." Thats a quote said to me by many doctors and physicists. They chose to become involved in science to see how GOD made all this "neat stuff".

Not having the benefit of a college education,I have to take the word of people more educated than myself. Luckily, my mom worked at a medical school where I got to know quite a few people who DID have college educations [img]smile.gif[/img] Doctors are neat people to have a debate with [img]smile.gif[/img]
It's amazing to me that so many people who have based their lives as adults on SCIENCE still have great religious faith.

I have a couple things to say and I dont want any misunderstandings as to my religious faith or belief in God or whatever yall choose to view it as.

First I am a Christian. I was raised in the Church of Christ. Not a Catholic or Baptist or anything else. I find it disgusting that SO MANY wars have been fought in the name of religion. There might have been underlying motivations like greed ect., but the wars were fought in the name of religion.

"More people have died in the name of religion than from any other cause." This may or may not be true but again I have to take the word of people who have more time and inclinations to study the so-called facts. Of course it is also true that there are more people alive today than have ever died in the history of the world.

The Spanish Inquisition=holy war. The spaniards succeeded in one thing: wipe out the prosperous middle class. Spain destroyed its own economy in the name of religious conversion. It took years to recover from, and well, I dont think they ever really did.

Have yall heard of the Crusades??? Who was the First "Crusader"??? Ill tell ya. The LAST EMPORER OF ROME. Even though he didnt actually become "saved" until he was mortally wounded and on his deathbed he was the first Roman leader to see the error of the crucifixion of Christ. Pity that I cant remember his name. Regardless, He was the first person to say "Believe in Christ or die by my sword heathen swine!!!!" Sad but true.

Being a Christian I still believe (like many) that God caused the Big Bang and all evolution.

Contrary to the Bible I dont buy the stuff that says the earth is only 6,000 years old. Science has proven that the earth is BILLIONS of years old.

One thing i cant stand is that so many religions say "Mine is right and yours is wrong. You are going to burn in hell" For example I knew a Catholic woman who told me she liked this one guy and he did good work but it was too bad he was going to burn in hell forever. "How do you figure??"

"Well hes jewish. Hee doesnt believe in Jesus Christ and accept him as his saviour. Hes gonna burn in hell."

The man believes in GOD. How can that be wrong??? Slam dunk on the point there.

As for the "god given ability" to do anything, particularly play a sport: I dont buy that either. As someone said before "its a talent he was BORN with. Thats called GENETICS. It is in a persons DNA not his religious faith to be successful at sports (or anything else for that matter.) Are Shaq and Kobi Christains??? Would it matter if they were muslims or buddhists??

God didnt give the individual the ability to catch the ball and score the game winning touchdown. Thats called physical coordination, strength determination ect. Years of training to teach their bodies to do that is what put them in the spotlight.

One guy scores the game (and championchip) winning touchdown and says "Id like to thank God for giving me the ability to catch the ball and score and win the game. [img]smile.gif[/img] "

The guys on the other team say "We were in the game till JESUS made me fumble :( "

Sorry but thats one thing I just cant agree with even if I AM a Christian.

Hitler. Before Hitler even started WW2 he had plans to wipe out the Jews. He simply didnt implement the plan until the invasions of certain countries. His pathlogical hatred for ALL Jews was an underlying cause to the war. Odd that he was Austian by birth but he dreampt of a "perfect German society" Jews were never involved in this vision of perfection. They were the scourge of the earth in his eyes.

Too bad he wasnt accepted to the Vienna School of Art. The world might have been a much better place.

That has to be one of the most affable responses to what amounted to a correction I've ever seen here! [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
No worries DeSoya, I frequently dip into the silly mistake bin and pull out some corkers. For years I pronounced 'excrement' as 'excretement'...(well, excrete...you know...)

...and just had to edit 'cause I spelt your name wrong... [img]graemlins/1dizzy.gif[/img]

[ 06-26-2002, 11:32 AM: Message edited by: Leonis ]

Actually, there are less than 7 billion people here now, there have been FAR more than that throughout history, if the world population was ever over 1 billion, which it was, for more than a thousand years, which it has been, that statement is incorrect.

I take it you mean this?
Would you mind quoting or at least addressing such replies as it can be confusing when you're talking about one line in a long post not immediately above yours.
Cheers! [img]graemlins/cheers.gif[/img]

[/qb][/QUOTE]Would you mind quoting or at least addressing such replies as it can be confusing when you're talking about one line in a long post not immediately above yours.
Cheers! [img]graemlins/cheers.gif[/img] [/QB][/QUOTE]

I dont think I understand what you mean. What I said pretty much looks to me (in hindsight) like a stand alone comment.

[img]graemlins/cheers.gif[/img]

I think he was talking to Oblivion, who hadn't quoted what or who he was replying to.

Yes I was, sorry. Guilty of not being clear myself...