It's only a matter of time

[Guest]

Disagree all you wish. That's the scholarly consensus.

I don't consider the conclusions of a every credible archaeologist and historian and Egyptologist who has ever evaluated the issue a scholarly consensus.

Edited for accuracy.

[_Buffalo]

Your church teaches faith healing.

Not in the usual meaning of that term.

The LDS church recognizes the faith healing of other churches. It's own system isn't much different.

[_Buffalo]

Since when do astronomy, geology, linguistics and archeology fall outside the realm of science?

They don't but they are concerned with what we have now and then they make guesses about the past. Some of them are incredibly likely. Others less so.

God, are you really this ignorant? Have you ever stepped foot inside a science class?

[_Buffalo]

It proves that these experiences are physical, not indicative of anything spiritual at all. Remember Occam's razor.

Occam's razor can be a handy tool but the simple truth is it's not effective at discerning truth from error. Read up on it. I'm guessing even the wiki article knows more about that then you do.

When an event is fully explained by natural phenomena, heaping on a superfluous supernatural explanation is illogical and nonsensical. Please don't try to tell me what I know, ignoramus.

[_Buffalo]

Not necessary. They've demonstrated at every step of the way how no intelligent forces are necessary at any point.

Assuming that's true (and all my reading on the Big Bang suggests to me you are talking out of your ass) that all things are completely explained that is proof that there isn't a God now? Wow.....

It renders god irrelevant and unnecessary, therefore not worthy of serious consideration.

[Guest]

Non-sequitur. You didn't address this point.

You didn't have a point. All you suggested was that religion got the nature of the solar system wrong in some way. I can't refute your vague ideas without guesswork. Is that the secret to science beating religion? Making up vague strawmen and then smugly smashing them to pieces? When we try to defend it you say we're defending the wrong thing.

See below

[_Buffalo]

Yes, and where did they learn it? Not from the Hebrew prophets. They learned it from the Greeks, who figured it out through a primitive form of science.

Okay, then please demonstrate where religion got it wrong please.

[_Buffalo]

Typo. Divining rods. Joseph believed in them, and thought they had something to do with the priesthood. They don't work.

You mean they don't work without the priesthood. I agree completely. If they ever work they work by miraculous means. See below for testing miracles.

They don't work - they've been dubunked scientifically.

That's your private definition which you have constructed just now as an ad hoc means of hiding your faith from scrutiny.

b***s***. It's the common theological definition. You would know that if you so much as touched a book about them.

It's much easier to pontificate about things you know nothing about though isn't it?

I recommend C.S. Lewis's book on Miracles. While flawed in some respects he is clear on how miracles interact with nature and he is repeating the consensus of Christianity on what a miracle is over the last two millenia. Amazing that you seem to have debunked something you don't understand. Does this happen often with you?

Or do you really imagine that everyone thinks miracles are magic that you can make happen on demand so they can be subjected to scientific scrutiny?

I suppose that's valid if you don't believe in Jesus. Jesus said miracles are repeatable and testable.

I was referring to the section marked "superstition."

I deny that any of my faith fits in that section.

Deny all you like, as you shake the dust off your feet at me and wrestle with evil spirits. :)

[_The Nehor]

I'm not sure whether you're being intentionally stupid or not. Are you trying to discount the importance of evidence, or making a childish argument about "proof"?

Neither, read again.

Oh really? You can't dig up old bones and settlements and pottery and utensils and pollen deposits and analyze them? You can't run DNA testing? Really, Nehor?

Did I say any of that? No, I even acknowledged that those things are useful. I made it clear that they are not directly observable phenomena. They are indirect evidence. Often very convincing. However the events they indicate cannot be proven in ways studies and experiments in the "hard" sciences (physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, etc) are. Please pay attention.

Edited for accuracy.

Wrong again.

The LDS church recognizes the faith healing of other churches.

It does what now?

It's own system isn't much different.

Different from who? Catholicism? Anglicans? The Church of the Holy Fish-Cake? The Church of Suriving Snake Bites 2.0?

God, are you really this ignorant?

No God is pretty smart actually.

Have you ever stepped foot inside a science class?

Regularly and often throughout college. My main interests were astronomy and quantum physics. I still follow these fields in my spare time.

I love history too and read a book or two of it every week.

When an event is fully explained by natural phenomena, heaping on a superfluous supernatural explanation is illogical and nonsensical.

Which has nothing to do with the flaws in Occam's Razor. I advise reading up on it.

Please don't try to tell me what I know, ignoramus.

I'm not. I'm telling you what you clearly don't know. I'm pointing out your areas of ignorance in which you are proven to be an ignoramus. Quite a different proposition.

It renders god irrelevant and unnecessary, therefore not worthy of serious consideration.

No, it wouldn't.

I realize you're in rant mode but dividing up your responses into multiple posts just makes you look childish. Just so you know.

[_The Nehor]

Can you give me a source for the image? I know what the NCSE is so I suspect they are trying to make the ancient Hebrews appear more ignorant then they were.