Daily Gospel

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser

no one is arguing here. this thread is for people to state their beliefs and share good religious quotes. not some pointless missionary crusade to get people to convert.

has anyone noticed how so many people consider science a better thing to believe in than religion, even though science is proved wrong all the time; and religion cannot be disproved?
 

DeletedUser

no one is arguing here. this thread is for people to state their beliefs and share good religious quotes. not some pointless missionary crusade to get people to convert.

has anyone noticed how so many people consider science a better thing to believe in than religion, even though science is proved wrong all the time; and religion cannot be disproved?

That's the point of science. It can be disproved. That's a good thing.
Oh, and for if it wasn't clear. I liked the part which I liked because of the conversation before it. Not because of that I wanted to start a discussion.
:blink:
 

DeletedUser

and religion cannot be disproved

LOL. Oh, good cover.

The history of the world based on one fact: "Since I cannot disprove it, it must be true! Let's go kill and conquer in the name of this, this, whatever it is. I think we'll call it religion. At least this way, we don't have to make any more excuses for ourselves! Great stuff!"

And science is over there getting the bum wrap: "Crikey, mate; looks like our theories were disproven again. Look, I don't want to be the one to write all the apology cards for bombing their country this time around, get somebody else to do it".
 

DeletedUser

fyi Constantine was about 600 years after the date you give.

Also do you think skellingtons are a modern invention?

Some people!
 

DeletedUser

give what's for today..

16th OF DECEMBER, 2008

Gospel for today:
John 5:33-36 WITNESSES TO JESUS

Food for thought:
“No day is complete without worship.”
 

DeletedUser

Proved, disproved..things that relates to knowledge..

It is said that "Knowledge is dangerous, for it could kill..", and in addition, you need to find out something to "know" about it.. again it is said, though we are not from the feline family.."Curiosity killed the cat."

Still yet, I heard a wise lecturer say, and it was from the time this was heard by me, it was then when I started moving away from skepticism..

"Where reasons end. that's where Faith begins.."
 

DeletedUser

Okay. But why automatically assume that everyone is going to disagree with you? Do you need to take on such a tone so quickly to defend your beliefs? Isn't that the exact opposite of proudly declaring your choice, and instead fearing it might be wrong by what others would tell you?

Hey, I'm a nihilist, too, but you don't see me spouting off nonsense in an angry fashion and misspelling every other word. I thought that was supposed to be the Atheist's stereotype, anyway. This is just a fun thread for biblical quotes, why so serious?
heya!?!? yu mkeing fnu fo me/:laugh:
 

DeletedUser

I never said that because something cannot be disproved it must be true. I also never said that science will never find the truth.

I am just saying that with Religious, Philosophical thinking, we can find truths much quicker than we could with millenia of Chemistry, Physics and Biology.

And as a historian, I can safely say that religion has very rarely been the true cause for war. It was used as a cover for the Crusades, Inquisition and Aztec Sacrifical Wars (etc.), but all of these had true causes that people in power did not wish to reveal at the time.
 

DeletedUser

I never said that because something cannot be disproved it must be true. I also never said that science will never find the truth.

I am just saying that with Religious, Philosophical thinking, we can find truths much quicker than we could with millenia of Chemistry, Physics and Biology.

And as a historian, I can safely say that religion has very rarely been the true cause for war. It was used as a cover for the Crusades, Inquisition and Aztec Sacrifical Wars (etc.), but all of these had true causes that people in power did not wish to reveal at the time.
and what were these causes?
 

DeletedUser

I stand up so quickly because I'm made fun of it. I've always been on the defensive since 1st grade because of the crap I take. Peace
 

DeletedUser

And as a historian, I can safely say that religion has very rarely been the true cause for war.

Never said it had to be. It can still be used as an excuse, regardless.

I stand up so quickly because I'm made fun of it. I've always been on the defensive since 1st grade because of the crap I take. Peace

You could try being passive-aggressive and just ignore those who would not respect your beliefs. You don't need to defend yourself from close-minded people.

But, to each their own. Whatever you feel is best.
 

DeletedUser

and what were these causes?

The Crusades were instigated by the Pope, so they did have a religious cause. However, once the Crusaders had seen just how powerful and potentially devastating the Saracens were, that was when they started to really put a lot of effort into their attacks. If religion had remained the only cause, then the third crusade would most likely have been the last crusade, thanks to Saladin.

The Aztec Sacrificial Wars were also started religiously, but again, Aztec society could have suppoerted their sacrificial needs for centuries without a war. The Sacrificial Wars were primarily a way of expanding the empire with some kind of spiritual back-up so people would not oppose them.

And the Inquisition was truly backed by the superstition that Jews wish to conquer the financial world. While this could be viewed as religious, I certainly would not consider it as such.


And as for Science vs. Religion; I am in full support of Science. But when it comes right down to it I would much rather trust something which cannot be proved but will still be believed in 1,000 years; than something which can be "proved" but in less than a century will probably be treated as the stupidity of the past.
 

DeletedUser

The Crusades were instigated by the Pope, so they did have a religious cause. However, once the Crusaders had seen just how powerful and potentially devastating the Saracens were, that was when they started to really put a lot of effort into their attacks. If religion had remained the only cause, then the third crusade would most likely have been the last crusade, thanks to Saladin.

The Aztec Sacrificial Wars were also started religiously, but again, Aztec society could have suppoerted their sacrificial needs for centuries without a war. The Sacrificial Wars were primarily a way of expanding the empire with some kind of spiritual back-up so people would not oppose them.

And the Inquisition was truly backed by the superstition that Jews wish to conquer the financial world. While this could be viewed as religious, I certainly would not consider it as such.


And as for Science vs. Religion; I am in full support of Science. But when it comes right down to it I would much rather trust something which cannot be proved but will still be believed in 1,000 years; than something which can be "proved" but in less than a century will probably be treated as the stupidity of the past.

Actually, Aztecs really needed those wars. They even had "flower-wars" between each other just to get more sacrifices.
 

DeletedUser

Supposedly, but they often sacrificed Slaves or other members of their own community if their wars were not gaining enough sacrifices. Their own land and people could have fuelled the sacrifices for centuries without having any kind of impact on their society. And because people believed in that particular religion, there was never a shortage of volunteers to be sacrificed.

So while the wars did have a superficially spiritual side, they were not really caused by or sustained by any religious need.
 

DeletedUser

Supposedly, but they often sacrificed Slaves or other members of their own community if their wars were not gaining enough sacrifices. Their own land and people could have fuelled the sacrifices for centuries without having any kind of impact on their society. And because people believed in that particular religion, there was never a shortage of volunteers to be sacrificed.

So while the wars did have a superficially spiritual side, they were not really caused by or sustained by any religious need.

How do you think they got the slaves?
And also, I don't think there would been that many volunteers to be painfully slaughtered. But that's just my opinion.
And through war they got such a big society. But they used Aztecs too, as I said: Flower-wars.(I believe that is the right name, if it is not, I'm sorry)
 

DeletedUser

The slaves came from their various wars and conquered peoples, obviously. This goes to show that the wars did indeed do a lot more than just provide sacrifices, which I have been saying all along.

And nowadays no one would volunteer to be slaughtered, but you have to think a bit more carefully. Aztec people believed entirely in their religion. They believed that unless someone was sacrificed daily, the sun would not rise the following day.

So it was perfectly worth dieing quickly, and as far as anyone knew, painlessly to avoid freezing to death on a sunless world while the gods dealt out their wrath.

And the Flower Wars is one correct name. The Garland Wars is another translation, but literally translated it would be something like: The Battles of Flower-Garlands.
 

DeletedUser

I thank you all for the informative sharing..such is better than violent debates which lead to both parties stirring up negativity rather than interaction..


17th OF DECEMBER, 2008

Gospel for today:
Matthew 1:1-17 THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS

Food for thought:
“Count your many blessings and you’ll soon lose count.”


.:indian:
 

DeletedUser

The slaves came from their various wars and conquered peoples, obviously. This goes to show that the wars did indeed do a lot more than just provide sacrifices, which I have been saying all along.

And nowadays no one would volunteer to be slaughtered, but you have to think a bit more carefully. Aztec people believed entirely in their religion. They believed that unless someone was sacrificed daily, the sun would not rise the following day.

So it was perfectly worth dieing quickly, and as far as anyone knew, painlessly to avoid freezing to death on a sunless world while the gods dealt out their wrath.

And the Flower Wars is one correct name. The Garland Wars is another translation, but literally translated it would be something like: The Battles of Flower-Garlands.
It wasn't painless... It was a quite horrific experience. A priest would take out your hart while you're still alive. Also, your body would be further "damaged" after you died. Sometimes they even wore your skin afterwards.

But you're right that wars were for more things then just religion. But still, it played a very big part in it. They even had special soldiers to get slaves.
 

DeletedUser

Do NOT try to lecture me about Aztec society. I have studied it for years and spent months in Mexico as the on-site historian for an Archaeological excavation.

Religion was the cover for the wars, not the cause, and not the reason they continued them.

And dieing for the Gods would have been thought to be painless, as the Gods would relieve you of the pain. It wasn't as if anyone survived to tell them that it was actually very painful, now, was it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top