Mme. Chaucer Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Why does everybody tout science all day, saying that everything is materialistic and can be explained through science, yet the second I try to apply this SAME reasoning to the miraculous events in the Bible, it's suddenly non-physical or symbolic? Try is the operative word. You are trying, but you are not succeeding. Link to post Share on other sites
serial muse Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 (edited) I'm not a Scientilogist, for the main reason that they deny Christ was God in human flesh. However, if both my view and that of Scientology agree that there are scientific explanations for all things (even spiritual), then so be it. Why does everybody tout science all day, saying that everything is materialistic and can be explained through science, yet the second I try to apply this SAME reasoning to the miraculous events in the Bible, it's suddenly non-physical or symbolic? Because you're not actually using scientific reasoning to explain these events. As has been said before, you tend to cherry-pick data to fit your preformed hypotheses, which is by definition unscientific. And when called on it, you won't cop to it - possibly because you really think you're talking about things scientifically somehow. Which is odd, but not really unique to you - that's how this whole Intelligent Design business works, too. On a side note, it's funny that people think you're a Scientologist, though. I find Scientology as scary and cult-like as the next person, but I guess I don't get that particular vibe from you. I'm not sure I would have said your views have much to do with Xenu and thetans and whatever, aside from the superficial alien link. I'd be curious if I'm wrong though...you just strike me as a garden-variety Christian who is interpreting the bible in his own unique way and enjoying musing about angels... no different philosophically really from any other "heresies" that branched off from the then-orthodoxies of the church at different points in time... Catharism or Gnosticism or Manichaeism or more popularly Protestantism...or, frankly, Christianity in the first place and on and on throughout human history. Everybody always seems to think they have a premium on the truth and that it has been uniquely revealed to them and that those who don't get it or want to argue with you on points of logic are sheeple and in hock to the Man or Satan or whatever. I'm sure it feels good. Scientists, I might add, aren't perfect, but at least true science is inherently not subjective. (People are fallible, yes.) But if you want to do things scientifically, then that means no cherry-picking. Edited November 29, 2012 by serial muse 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Author M30USA Posted November 29, 2012 Author Share Posted November 29, 2012 Serial muse, Get realistic. Scientific discussions, in the true sense, don't occur in these forums. They occur in laboratories. All of us peons merely get trickle-down data. Don't kid yourself. And the scary thing is that human beings are always behind the data. My own sister, a researcher at ____* University, told me firsthand that she has seen her colleagues fudge data. These are supposed to be the places from which us commoners get our all holy science. *omitted for privacy reasons Link to post Share on other sites
skydiveaddict Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 However, if both my view and that of Scientology agree that there are scientific explanations for all things (even spiritual), then so be it. Hmm, the truth is slowly being forced out, like a stubborn intestinal malady blocked by a giant hemorrhoid. On a side note, it's funny that people think you're a Scientologist, though. I find Scientology as scary and cult-like as the next person, but I guess I don't get that particular vibe from you. Don't fool yourself. The vast majority of Scientologists come from Christian religions and mix the two into a weird theology of science-fiction and Christian tradition. The only "pure" disciples of Scientology are those with enough cash to do so; (Tom Cruise for example). It costs plenty to be an authentic L. Ron. Hubbard fan. Link to post Share on other sites
skydiveaddict Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 (edited) I'm not a Scientilogist, for the main reason that they deny Christ was God in human flesh. No, the great majority of them, just like you, will never deny that, (however dishonest that may be), and you very well know it. But, as I have asked you many times before, which religion do you consider to be the "true" one? I bet I won't get an answer this time either, but what the hell. Edited November 30, 2012 by skydiveaddict Link to post Share on other sites
serial muse Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Serial muse, Get realistic. Scientific discussions, in the true sense, don't occur in these forums. They occur in laboratories. All of us peons merely get trickle-down data. Don't kid yourself. And the scary thing is that human beings are always behind the data. My own sister, a researcher at ____* University, told me firsthand that she has seen her colleagues fudge data. These are supposed to be the places from which us commoners get our all holy science. *omitted for privacy reasons What's amusing about this is that you were the one who was complaining that people aren't taking your "scientific reasoning" seriously. I was responding specifically to your lament. And then you say the above, in bold. I also notice that you didn't really respond to my point, as per usual. Oh, my. Perhaps it's time you got realistic. Link to post Share on other sites
serial muse Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Hmm, the truth is slowly being forced out, like a stubborn intestinal malady blocked by a giant hemorrhoid. Don't fool yourself. The vast majority of Scientologists come from Christian religions and mix the two into a weird theology of science-fiction and Christian tradition. The only "pure" disciples of Scientology are those with enough cash to do so; (Tom Cruise for example). It costs plenty to be an authentic L. Ron. Hubbard fan. Oh, I don't think I'm fooling myself. I've read a great deal about Scientology, actually - I find it to be a very scary cult, particularly the Sea Org bits; there is a series of award-winning articles from the St Pete Times over the last decade that really helped bust the door wide open on this group. It's fascinating and weird and frightening. But none of that dogma has anything to do with M30USA's own unique viewpoint, from what I can see. Just because they both believe in "aliens" doesn't mean they're the same thing. Honestly, I have to admit that you seem to really have a bee in your bonnet about this. And anyway, who really cares if he is a Scientologist, in the end? He's still allowed to post his views here, and I don't think the label would cause him to change them. If nothing else, M30USA is consistent. Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 I'm definitely certain that the OP is NOT an undercover Scientologist. Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted December 1, 2012 Share Posted December 1, 2012 I've been doing some "scientific research" on YouTube and I've learned that in the event of an attempted alien abduction, we need to say "Jesus Christ" and the aliens will run away. Because they are demons. Link to post Share on other sites
Author M30USA Posted December 2, 2012 Author Share Posted December 2, 2012 He might be a Raelian though. I encourage you to read up on Raelianism. A few things are interesting to note: 1) The similary of the name Rael to Israel. 2) Their founder claims he was visited by--what else--a flying saucer. 3) He claims the beings were--what else--human in appearance. 4) He claims the beings discussed--what else--the Bible and creation accounts in Genesis. 5) He claims these beings will return in the future. 6) He claims they want the Raelians to build an embassy for their return in--where else--Jerusalem. What you start to realize is that many world religions and cults actually teach the same thigns regarding prophecy and future events. HOWEVER, THE SIGNIFICANT THING IS NOT WHAT WILL HAPPEN, BUT WHO IS WHO AND WHAT SIDE IS WHAT. For example, did you know that the coming 12th Imam in Islam is identical to the Antichrist of Scripture. Research it. Both religions are in agreement on this individual!!! Islam believes he is the messiah. Christians believe he is the antichrist. It's highly interesting. Link to post Share on other sites
Author M30USA Posted December 2, 2012 Author Share Posted December 2, 2012 So I take it that's a yes to Raelianism. He shoots! HE SCORES! Your reading comprehension is poor. Either that or you don't read at all. Or I'm just a bad writer (unlikely since I scored well on all Verbal/English standardized tests). I am not a Raelian. Link to post Share on other sites
Author M30USA Posted December 3, 2012 Author Share Posted December 3, 2012 Okay, skydiveaddict must have been right. You're a Scientologist afterall. Nope, I'm a Hindu. Couldn't you guess? Link to post Share on other sites
pie2 Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 "No John, you are the demons." And then John was a zombie. You have way too much random information in your head! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts