View Single Post
Old 12-05-2008, 08:08 PM   #4
€uroMeinke
L'Hédoniste
 
€uroMeinke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A.S.C.O.T.
Posts: 8,671
€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool€uroMeinke is the epitome of cool
Send a message via Yahoo to €uroMeinke Send a message via Skype™ to €uroMeinke
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Dillon View Post
This couldn't be any further from the truth.

Science and scientific theory (e.g. evolution) have already DISPROVEN many religous stipulations, as argued within my various responses.

It is religion and religious belief that is the negative, not non-religion and its susbsequent belief (or absent thereof).

S.D.
Science may have proven that biblical metaphor is just that - metaphor. But I've seen not "scientific" proof of the existence or non-existence of God - and for this point lets define God as Omniscient and Omnipresent (we'll skip Benevolence for now and the problem of evil).

On the other hand many people have claimed to have "numinous" experiences, experiences of the presence of God - so if we accept our senses as legit, then they have a good a claim as those of us who have never had a personal experience of God. (I think scientific knowledge is still based on "observable" repeatable experiments).

If we only accept things as true that we have verified ourselves, we'll then I'm sorry there are a lot of things I'll have to no longer believe, like the existence of Lapland.
__________________
I would believe only in a God that knows how to Dance.
Friedrich Nietzsche

€uroMeinke is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote