Apr 10, 2012 -- 11:54AM, christine3 wrote:

Christine: There are two things that must be looked at:  Where and when did the religious claim come from.

MM:  That's irrelevant.

Christine:  No, for the reason I stated.  There are things in this world that today's science can't explain.  Past cultures showed a higher science than we have today in some specific areas that are being uncovered by today's archeologists.   

Christine:  What you call reality is perception.  What you call reality is perception here and now, but can change tomorrow as the viewer grows in perception.  There are some things that science can't touch because the scientific practitioners don't have the complete clarity or the necessary tools to unequivocally corner the transparent truth of a phenomenon as it actually presents itself.   Other people in other times and cultures had their perceptions too, and they weren't all wrong.  You have to bend a little and accommodate others' realities, not just your own, or be plastic and fragile.  You can say "it ain't true, it ain't true" until you are red in the face, and someday you will be proven wrong.  I'm just saying.

Christine, kindly give any reference to archeologists finding any ancient civilization with any specific higher science of technical ability than the current Western civilization.

Your multiple realities is an interesting concept does that mean if my reality says I can fly, that if I jump off my house I can circle above my neighborhood?  Or i that nasty real reality gonna pull me into the ground then the ER?

Christine, kindly give any reference to archeologists finding any ancient civilization with any specific higher science of technical ability than the current Western civilization.

Your multiple realities is an interesting concept does that mean if my reality says I can fly, that if I jump off my house I can circle above my neighborhood?  Or i that nasty real reality gonna pull me into the ground then the ER?

The ancient scientists had a more integrated approach to life  than  today's scientists.  They worked on developping  their souls at the same time than their knoweledge of the  outside world, because they knew they are intimately related. Science and religion were the same.

Today's scientists are soulless.  They see no difference between working on the development of new foods to feed the world or working on atomic weapons. They are not guided by moral understandings  and they are proud of this "objectivity",  which simply means being irresponsible with their knoweledge. An imbalanced development. It is accepted that a scientist can be a genius about the laws of the universe and a total jerk in his private life. 

That is why modern discoveries bring about as much good as they bring evil and certainly do not translate into a happy world.

The ancients came up with the the knoweledge of atoms, for instance, without any of the modern tools.  Just intuition based on their knowelege of how the mind functions.

Apr 10, 2012 -- 1:10PM, arielg wrote:

The ancient scientists had a more integrated approach to life  than  today's scientists.  They worked on developping  their souls at the same time than their knoweledge of the  outside world, because they knew they are intimately related. Science and religion were the same.

Today's scientists are soulless.  They see no difference between working on the development of new foods to feed the world or working on atomic weapons. They are not guided by moral understandings  and they are proud of this "objectivity",  which simply means being irresponsible with their knoweledge. An imbalanced development. It is accepted that a scientist can be a genius about the laws of the universe and a total jerk in his private life. 

That is why modern discoveries bring about as much good as they bring evil and certainly do not translate into a happy world.

The ancients came up with the the knoweledge of atoms, for instance, without any of the modern tools.  Just intuition based on their knowelege of how the mind functions.

Science has nothing to do with bringing happiness or evil. And although obliviously not obvious to you. A Scientist can be religious as well. The desire to be ignorant is an abuse of the god you hold so precious. If we can learn and we do not learn then why have a brain and the capability to learn? Rhetorical.

Science and religion are not and could never be the same. This need to be intentionally ignorant is unbelievable. With out science we would not so many healthy babies born every year. Without the knowledge of evolution we would not have the cure and prevention of so many diseases.

Christians (Not all Christians the anti science Christians) would have us back into the dark ages where the black death runs rampant. And there is not hope.

Science is fascinating and amazing. To pretend to honour a god and deny science (Real science not the non sense YEC or those who want to teach ID in public school like to push) is to deny the god, you pretend to honour.

Not all Theists are anti knowledge. But an awful lot in the USA seem to be. Keep your religion in your Church and home,(or private religious school) and stop trying to force it on everyone else. You don't want to learn real factual science don't. But stop trying to stop other people from knowing the facts.

This behaviour show's how unhealthy religion can be for society

Apr 10, 2012 -- 12:49PM, mountain_man wrote:

Apr 10, 2012 -- 11:54AM, christine3 wrote:

Christine:  No, for the reason I stated...

The reasons you gave were irrelevant. The claims were not based on anything that had to do with any kind of scientific process.

The rest, not worth the bother. You've proven to me that you cannot listen or learn.

I'm sorry to have interrupted the thread by trying to get through to you. I'll not try any more.

Correction, I cannot listen or learn from you. 

Apr 10, 2012 -- 2:36PM, christine3 wrote:

Correction, I cannot listen or learn from you.

Which is your problem and not one I should be taking up time with. It's not me you have the problem with, but the facts. I only present the facts.