Posted on 02/21/2005 9:44:35 AM PST by FNU LNU
I have yet gone to church that supports one. When I do I will let you know.
> So far this field of "science" has needed more faith to believe in it than Scientology.
Interesting. Then what do you make of posts such as this...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1347824/posts?page=76#56
... which purport to use the science of archaeology to support the Bible?
Can't have it both ways.
That's nice. But obviously a boatload of Christians *DO* support televangelists and similar fraudsters, otherwise they wouldn't be slopping over in cash and bling.
What exactly is the whole theory of humanity in Europe?
"...otherwise they wouldn't be slopping over in cash and bling."
Somewhat akin to "...Prof Protsch, 65, a flamboyant figure with a fondness for gold watches, Porsches and Cuban cigars, was unable to work his own carbon-dating machine."?
Hmmmmmmmmm?
I can't tell now if the opulent 'televangelists' are emulating the anthropologists, or the other way around. Funny isn't it?
Your LOGIC is overwhelming! Agreed!
Schadenfreude is one of my favorite words. :)
Bump for later reading.
> I can't tell now if the opulent 'televangelists' are emulating the anthropologists, or the other way around. Funny isn't it?
The equivalent of televangelists have been around forever. Churches didn't collect gold for the greater glory of God... God doesn't need gold. And they sure as hell didn't do it to materially improve the lives of those forced to tithe.
Now if I could only figure out how to make rocket engineering as lucrative as Oral Roberts scam...
Can't have it both ways.
See, this is where you are wrong. I very much support science and archeology. There has never been anything in Science to disprove the Bible, unlike the koran or several other "holy" books.
Fraud in the name of science I will never support. Science must be provable with facts, not conjecture like some pigs tooth we are told is "Nevada Man", or the dating practices that are a huge joke.
I like facts very much.....the theory takes a true believer willing to put his faith in man, that is the place I can not go.
> There has never been anything in Science to disprove the Bible
Nor has there ever been any science that supports the more relevant portions of the Bible. Finding a lost city? Not proof. Showing that the Red Sea was parted? Finding the Ark of the Covenant? Proving that not only Jesus existed, but he could walk on water, raise the dead, ressurect himself? Finding Noah's ark? Proving Creationism? Finding evidence of hundreds of thousands of Hebrew slaves suddenly bailing from Egypt and wandering lost for 40 years? None of this has happened. So far, the support for the Bible is interesting, but of no greater value than an episode of "Charmed." The show is set in a city called "San Francisco," but the fac thtat there really is a city called San Francisco does not prove the show is true.
> Science must be provable with facts, not ... the dating practices that are a huge joke.
Another EHarmony.com success story...
The difference between you and me....honesty and willingness to look for truth, not defend blindly.
Look!
Evidently you didn't go to ORU. Or maybe.... you did, and that's why!?! No, I know you're a Cyclone.
"...Churches didn't collect gold for the greater glory of God... ", and "...they sure as hell didn't do it to materially improve the lives of those forced to tithe."
Where do you think the first hospitals came from? Where do you read that the first Christians DIDN'T make all their possessions available to anyone in their community who was poor? Was it the Greeks or the Romans who gave Western civ it's propensity towards taking care of the poor, or saving the lives of babies born and previously left outside the city walls to die? Modern day anti-religious Caligulas (religion is the opiate of the people) have brought us the Pol Pots and the Maos, as much as the pseudo-Christian emperors, and 'religious' zealots brought us the Crusades, and the Inquisition.
If you're thinking about arguing from the past excesses of different groups, forget it. Your poster boy for the day is Prof. Patsch. And this precious Prof. Patsch is simply the latest evidence that frauds infect all ideologies, even the supposed 'truth' oriented ones.
> I do not know what they preach nor if it is based not the Bible or not
Doesn't matter if what they preach is Bible-based or not. They are preaching to grab money.
> looks like there is the same problem in the anthropology field
In all fields. Here's the difference, though: in the sciences, when one guy is a fraud... objective tests can determine that. A few carbon dating tests showed that this knucklehead was a fraud. There are no such tests for religious figures.
> The difference between you and me....honesty and willingness to look for truth, not defend blindly.
You of course realize that that can be taken *both* ways. You should be careful with your ad hominems, especially when they are vaguely worded.
Oh, and by the way, Prof. Patsch liked his boatloads of science cash and science bling.
> Where do you think the first hospitals came from?
Well, lessee:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital
"In ancient cultures religion and medicine were linked. The earliest known institutions aiming to provide cure were Egyptian temples. Greek temples dedicated to the healer-god Asclepius might admit the sick, who would wait for guidance from the god in a dream. The Romans adopted his worship. Under his Roman name Æsculapius, he was proved with a temple (291 B.C.) on a island in the Tiber in Rome, where similar rites were performed.
"The first institutions created specifically to care for the sick appeared in India. Brahmantic hospitals were established in Sri Lanka by 431 B.C., and King Ashoka founded 18 hospitals in Hindustan c.230 B.C. The latter were provided with physicians and nurses, and supported from royal funds.
"The first teaching hospital, however, where students were authorized to methodically practice on patients under the supervision of physicians as part of their education, was the Academy of Gundishapur in the Persian Empire."
> frauds infect all ideologies
Well, DUH.
Yeah, There's been several articles on this over the last four or five days.
I think the definition for primitive man, should be how gullible he is with "evidence" like this.
Or, say, a Christian and an atheist?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.