There are so many differents models, theories and explanations behind any phenomena .. it's hard to see how evidence constitute a science of something. .
It would be more "scientific" to actually quote theorems, experimental protocol, publication etc than claiming stuff about "science" .
Especially in area such as cosmos creation, or evolution where there is no certainty, if there is even anything at all science can actually pretend to explain with absolute certitude, without approximation, or only isolating one aspect of things in a lab.
There is no physics model who can explain everything from big bang to mozart, not even close.
Theory about big bang are just theory at the same title than it's a magic unicorn who farted in the cosmos.
Between standard model, particule physics, quantum theories, the "4 main forces" of classic physics who are not even working well together, classic mechanics, chemistry, etc ..
It's more patchwork than anything, cant hardly be told to be really coherent as a whole.
Pretending otherwise is being delusional about science and idealizing it.
The origin of life indicates the existence of a life force. An outside variable is necessary to account for the scientific model of abiogenesis. The Improbability of Abiogenesis: https://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/abiogenesis.htmlMore information at the Origin of Life Prize website. Yeah, actually this stuff of life force is studied a bit on 19th science, through psychology etc, I think Freud somewhere talks about this sort of vital elan, that is also implied in darwin as "survival instinct" or so. But the veda and budhism study this for very long time, as the prana, and integrate this as the center of science, instead of focusing on building machines for economic purpose as mean and end of science. Andy pross also study this sort of question http://wasdarwinwrong.com/korthof99.htmBut it's far to be really conclusive theory about this. The primordial soup start to be more and more questioned today. |
|
|
|
Ho noes a retarded troll on the internet expressed a retarded opinion about who i look like  He must be right, like the rest of his retarded bullshit. He cant even tell one user from another on a forum, his opinion sure should matter a lot about what earth looks like from a picture showing curvature that he will deduce is flat. It's unlikely anyone could tell the difference with your brain having any blood circulating in it or not. Maybe you can try to hang yourself just to see if anything smarter come out of your posts. It's not like it could loose much intelligence at this point. |
|
|
|
Technically the earth is round and speherical and so we may be able to reach its vastness and far wide. If then so, what are these theories that rumbled the equity of another theory which has been proven? They're just making assumptions and makes people think out of the box and make them believe.
OK so lets not make any assumptions, If I want to make an accurate measurement of the ocean's curvature what's the best way to do this?  It's a bit visible on this one, take a square, and put it against the border of the pic starting at the horizon line on the left, you will see some curve getting over it in the middle  |
|
|
|
|
There are so many differents models, theories and explanations behind any phenomena .. it's hard to see how evidence constitute a science of something. .
It would be more "scientific" to actually quote theorems, experimental protocol, publication etc than claiming stuff about "science" .
Especially in area such as cosmos creation, or evolution where there is no certainty, if there is even anything at all science can actually pretend to explain with absolute certitude, without approximation, or only isolating one aspect of things in a lab.
There is no physics model who can explain everything from big bang to mozart, not even close.
Theory about big bang are just theory at the same title than it's a magic unicorn who farted in the cosmos.
Between standard model, particule physics, quantum theories, the "4 main forces" of classic physics who are not even working well together, classic mechanics, chemistry, etc ..
It's more patchwork than anything, cant hardly be told to be really coherent as a whole.
Pretending otherwise is being delusional about science and idealizing it.
|
|
|
|
^^^ See, people such as Dylan Roof are a tiny majority within the Christian community, and people like him seldom get more than 0.01% from the Christians. Now compare this to the situation among the European Muslims, where more than 30% support suicide bombings.
This is called islamist maths: 0.01% = 35% No its called reading a statstics properly and being connected to reality otherwise than through faux news and youtube, spreading usa war propaganda. |
|
|
|
^^^ See, people such as Dylan Roof are a tiny majority within the Christian community, and people like him seldom get more than 0.01% from the Christians. Now compare this to the situation among the European Muslims, where more than 30% support suicide bombings.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_attitudes_toward_terrorism
A 2007 Pew Research Center study of several nations throughout the Muslim world showed that opposition to suicide bombing in the Muslim world is increasing, with a majority of Muslims surveyed in 10 out of the 16 of the countries responding that suicide bombings and other violence against civilians is "never" justified, though an average of 38% believe it is justified at least rarely. Opposition to Hamas was the majority opinion in only 4 out of the 16 countries surveyed, as was opposition to Hezbollah.[5] The Pew Research Study did not include Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Libya, and Algeria in the survey, although densely populated Muslim countries such as Pakistan, Egypt, Indonesia, and Bangladesh were included.According to the statistic i assume you are quoting, 30% support suicide bombing against Hamas or hezbollah. Very few against civilian or innocent. Saying otherwise is propaganda based on truncating statstics. If 30% Muslim in france would support suicide bombing, it would mean 1 millions suicide bomber. And the one who does , the connection with Islam is very loose, they dont go to mosquee, are not part of Muslim communities. Blaming Islam for this is even more loose than blaming christianism for the action of Dylan Roof, or for klux klux klan. Islam radicalism is copy cat from stay behind operation, psychological warfare, made cia & NATO such as gladio, Grey wolves, except they target people in muslim countries, even if they are not even muslim themselves. And then the media call them islamists. Those indoctrination are not spiritual contents, it's stay behind operation manual. |
|
|
|
I don't believe anything. I've seen evidence pointing towards a big bang but I never claimed I know it happened 100% I also don't know if something else caused the big bang but then again, it's religious people that claim that god did with literally no evidence what bothers me.
Kabbalists knew about big bang and universe expansion since 12th century. Maybe you are too confused to pee if you dont have evidence from a computer that you really want to pee. Most science was discovered through logic and mathematics rather than with "evidences". Then all science bother you, all religions bother you, you seem actually very bothered by everything lol. You should trust more you imagination and not being so weary of thinking something might be true even if there is no evidence for it lol |
|
|
|
Science cannot explain alone how God intervene within us, this is the fact that experimentation cannot prove the existence of God Himself. Although the bible says it and if we all have our deeper understanding and appreciation to all things - there is God. I always ended up asking the following and same question out of curiosity: 1. What if God is the energy in ATP which gives us life and maintain it? 2. What if God is the light that drives the photosynthesis so human could eat? 3. What if God is the air the surrounds us and help us breathe? 4. What if God is your every single cell in which you do not see by your bare eyes yet you beleieve that you have cells? In all forms of explanation, there is God'ss intervention. In all hopes and despairs God is within us. Let us praise God in all matter. I found the article very great, I would scan it on my spare time probably  God is energy  |
|
|
|
I agree that today her Christians are very much eager to fight and are fighting even in foreign countries. But nonetheless Muslims do very bad things, and in these acts of terrorism there are a lot of peaceful people.
Islamic terrorism is something unique to that religion. No other religion has equivalents. If you study the holy books belonging to all the major world religions, you will understand why there are so many terrorists who are Muslims. Islam is an ideology which encourages violent acts and genocide against the infidels (or the non-believers). In hispanic world there are actually many equivalent from dictators supported by catholic church. . But stuff are not put on faux news all days blaming christianism. Christian are perfectly capable of this sort of stuff when they are dominant force in the country. Pre sovietic russia is also good example of this. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3134689/Dylann-Roof-devout-Christian-baptized-Lutheran-faith-went-church-camp-regularly-attended-Mass-reveals-pastor-family-attend-church-services-pray-massacre-victims.html
EXCLUSIVE: Dylann Roof was a devout Christian who was baptized in the Lutheran faith, went to church camp and worshiped regularly, reveals pastor as family attend church services and pray for massacre victims.
Devout: Roof, 21, has now been charged with nine counts of murder in the massacre at Emanuel AME Church on Wednesday night but he was a devout Christian who attended church services regularly https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism#Ku_Klux_KlanVehemently anti-Catholic, the 1915 Klan had an explicitly Protestant Christian terrorist ideology, basing their beliefs in part on a "religious foundation" in Protestant Christianity and targeting Jews, Catholics, and other social or ethnic minorities,[13] as well as "immoral" practices such as adultery, bad debtors, gambling, and drinking alcohol. The goals of the KKK included, from an early time onward, an intent to "reestablish Protestant Christian values in America by any means possible", and they believed that "Jesus was the first Klansman".[14] Although members of the KKK swear to uphold Christian morality, virtually every Christian denomination has officially denounced the KKK.[15]Etc. .. |
|
|
|
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_PrimackJoel R. Primack (born July 14, 1945) is a professor of physics and astrophysics at the University of California, Santa Cruz and is a member of the Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics.http://www.nancyellenabrams.com/The God that Nancy explores -- one that's consistent with science -- unites all of humanity and provides the wisdom and larger sense of meaning that we need to face our future, as well as the future of our damaged planet, together.
This is a God with no smoke and mirrors."A God That Could Be Real is full of sparkling prose, memorable quotes, and strikingly original insights that have never been brought to the page before, despite the long-running culture wars between organized religion and modern science over God and cosmic knowledge. My family and I spent a long dinner and all of breakfast the next day debating the meaning of this book. Give this book to the other questing minds in your family, and brace yourself for heated discussions."
-- Sandra Moore Faber, National
Medal of Science recipient and
University Professor of Astronomy
and Astrophysics, UCSChttp://physics.ucsc.edu/cosmo/primack_abrams/htmlformat/inabeginning.html"In A Beginning..." Quantum Cosmology and Kabbalah Joel R. Primack and Nancy Ellen Abrams Modern cosmology--the scientific study of the universe
as a whole--no longer sees the universe as an infinite,
changeless arena in which events take place, the way Isaac
Newton did. The universe is an evolving, expanding being,
and its origin is the oldest mystery. For the first time in
possibly a million years of human wondering, we are not
simply imagining the beginning: We are observing it, in
radiation that has been traveling to us since the Big Bang,
possibly bearing information generated even earlier.
Theorists are piecing the data together into humanity's
first verifiable creation story.
Most educated people today have an essentially Newtonian
picture of the universe as a place, devoid of all human
meaning, in which we happen to find ourselves. If people
come to understand the emerging scientific cosmology,
however, they may see from what we know of the early
universe that we actually are part of an extraordinary
adventure. With its mind-expanding imagery, this emerging
cosmology gives us a new cosmic perspective, a powerful
source of awe, and a potential source of meaning in our
everyday lives.The great miracle of our universe
is that something is happening. Galaxies are evolving. Life
is evolving. We are not just eternal potential--we are a
story.
If you play a drum, the skin vibrates in waves. If you
could get very close to it and slow things down
considerably, you would see the skin forming troughs and
crests, not just one at a time but different waves in
different directions across it, the troughs and crests
adding to each other. The sum of all the waves makes the
"sound." The wrinkles of inflation were the primal, cosmic
sound whose meaning the universe is still expanding to
express. This gives a physical picture of the origin akin to
the phrase at the opening of the Gospel of John: "In the
Beginning was the Word."
The idea that God followed a blueprint which existed
before the universe was created is also found in Jewish
Midrashic literature. Genesis Rabbah 1:1 says: "A ruler
building a palace consults an architect's plans. The
Blessed Holy One, in creating the universe, also worked from
a plan--the Torah."
Hokhmah and Kabbalah
Kabbalah, medieval Jewish mysticism, is the only
traditional cosmology we know of in which the universe was
understood to have begun in a point and expanded. We are not
kabbalists, nor are we trying to promote Kabbalah. We are
not arguing that Kabbalah was prescient or somehow knew
mystically what science is now discovering.
We are
interested in Kabbalah because it developed a set of ideas
describing the origin of an expanding universe and
integrated these ideas into its religious worldview. Can
Kabbalah help us to integrate the scientific concepts we
have been describing into our own culture?
"Kabbalah" means "secret tradition," and its origins are
uncertain. Though its earliest preserved writings date from
the twelfth century, from Provence and later Spain, its
adherents believed it derived from the secret Torah given to
Moses and handed down orally through the most religious Jews
ever since.
The early kabbalists were Jews living at the time when
Moslem culture was transmitting the philosophy and science
of Plato and Aristotle to Europe. Utterly committed to the
reality of the infinite and singular God, Jews began
applying Greek reasoning to long-standing problems of their
religion, especially the question of the nature of God. The
kabbalists used every resource they had--not only reason and
logic but poetry, meditation, and mystical experiences--to
try to understand the nature of God. They believed that they
could learn about God through contemplation of God's
relationship to creation. For this reason, they strove to
grasp the hidden reality behind the opening words of
Genesis.Kabbalah was a cultural outgrowth of medieval European
Jewish experience. By the time of the European
Enlightenment, Jews who read Descartes and Newton considered
the idea of Sephirot as absurd as angels dancing on the head
of a pin. But Kabbalah is a metaphorical description of a
set of fundamental universal relationships which in light of
modern astrophysics appears closer to reality than the
infinite rectangular space of the Newtonian worldview.Cosmology and Human Meaning in the Twenty-First Century
In a speech given in Philadelphia on July 4, 1994, on
the state of the world and its prospects, Vaclav Havel said
that the planet is in transition: as vastly different value
systems collide, all consistent value systems are
collapsing. We cannot foresee the results. Science, which
has been the bedrock of industrial civilization for so long,
he said, "fails to connect with the most intrinsic nature of
reality, and with natural human experience. It is now more
a source of disintegration and doubt than a source of
integration and meaning... We may know immeasurably more
about the universe than our ancestors did, and yet it
increasingly seems they knew something more essential about
it than we do, something that escapes us...Paradoxically,
inspiration for the renewal of this lost integrity can once
again be found in science...a science producing ideas that
in a certain sense allow it to transcend its own limits...
Transcendence is the only real alternative to extinction."
The search for scientific truth can be a form of
guidance. It is as divine as any other. The foundation-
building revolution that modern cosmology is undergoing
today, as it seeks a verifiable description of the origin of
the universe, requires that we transcend previous notions of
space, time, and reality. This is the kind of science Havel
is hoping for--a science whose metaphors may allow us to
comprehend terrestrial problems from a cosmic perspective.http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/Creation-A-Convergence-of-Torah-and-Science.htmlOnly the big bang theory can account for all these observations, and therefore this theory is now accepted by all mainstrea cosmologists.
The most surprising assertion of the big bang theory is that the universe was literally created from nothing. It is instructive here to quote the world’s leading authorities:
“It seems certain that there was a definite time of creation.”2 Professor Paul Dirac, Nobel laureate from the University of Cambridge
“The instant of creation remains unexplained.”3 Professor Alan Guth, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
“The creation lies outside the scope of the known laws of physics.”4 Professor Stephen Hawking, University of Cambridge
“The big bang is the modern version of creation.”5 Professor Joseph Silk, University of California
Today, it is not possible to carry on a meaningful discussion of cosmology without the creation of the universe assuming a central role. Professor Brian Greene, a theoretical physicist at Columbia University, wrote in 1999: “The modern theory of cosmic origins asserts that the universe erupted from an enormously energetic event, which spewed forth all space and all matter.”6
When cosmologists use the term “creation,” to what are they referring? Precisely what object was created? Scientists have discovered that the universe began with the sudden appearance of an enormous ball of light, commonly called the “primeval light-ball.” This “explosion of light” was dubbed the “big bang” by British astrophysicist Fred Hoyle. The remnant of the initial ball of light was detected in 1965 by two American physicists, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, who were awarded the Nobel Prize for their discovery.Etc etc Only brainwashed drones or ignorant "agnostics" are unable to see the connection. . None of them are "scientist", and are either delusional about religion and/or science, ignorants, or intectually dishonest only defending their bias against religion or science.
|
|
|
|
What I don't get is, if segwit is such a flaw, how come all these programmers are saying it's perfectly fine, risking their reputation for life? I mean everyone in Core is wrong? Andreas A is wrong?, why are they gambling with their reputation? because I don't believe no one of these guys has realized the supposed flaws that have been commented about segwit for a while.
I am asking myself exactly the same question. I'Ve googled for Segwit and stealing transaction and didn' find a lot of matches. Why is there not more discussion about it? The idea is that the transactions made under the segwit format would become an eventual prize pot for hackers to steal (well, in this case it would be miners), so we would be under a DAO-type disaster but instead of ETH stuck in some exploitable smart contract, it would be the BTC in all the segwit addresses (that is what I understand as a non-coder) My question is: If Peter Wuille, Gmaxwell, Luke Dash Jr, Adam Back, Eric Lombrozo, TheBlueMatt, and the list goes on and on, of people that have either contributed or publicly supported segwit, either don't know that this can happen or know that it will happen and ignore it, it seems like they are all a bunch of kamikazes ready to ruin their reputation pretty much for life. The question is obviously: Why? And I don't believe for a second none of them are aware of the potential disaster described by anonymint, so why are they ignoring it? Maybe they consider it only a theoretical risk that can never happen in practice? It just seems strange to me, that all of them are willing to gamble with their reputation, hoping that nothing goes wrong. Im not sure they would consider the opinion of bitcoin scene is all that matter for their reputation . |
|
|
|
Damn you responded to 1 thing in 1 link. What about all the contradictions in the bible? What about all the other mistakes? Your bible is a pile of trash, don't be delusional.
To me contradiction in the bible only comes from taking things out the historical context , and switch of reference for what is meant by it. It's the same problem than wahabites current in Islam trying to litteralize everything leading to non sensical interpretation because of trying to discard the "platonic" dimension of the words. It's not so much about accurate objective description of reality as in natural science. Most of the dynamics it describe is a process that can only be observed subjectively. Ignoring the subjective dimension of interpretation of words is what lead to wahabisme and non sensical appearence of the words. I fully embrace the illusion of reality What cannot be called a pile trash ?.. your super realistic and all knowing version of reality that you want to push on everyone using mostly insult and scorning ?. . |
|
|
|
The thing is more like, do you believe the words of jesus because it's wrote so in the bible, or because the words make sense to you ?
In first case it become more like idolatry of a man.
In the second case it's more like recognition of truth through your own spirit.
It's very important distinction emphasized by plato or socrates.
The second ofcourse. I know that without the plato. You know how they say - Even the clock that does not work, shows the time correctly at the given moment a day. The more important is to recognize the good time of the day, regardless of what the clock says  The spirit can recognize truth or God's word on its own, and it's the thing that mater. This goodness in words can appear in other words than the ones of jesus. It's even rather impossible to asserts that's it's physical jesus as the "corpus christi" who said what is wrote in the bible. Plato and Socrates are among the firsts known to emphasis this concept of understanding through active "interpretation" of interaction between two characters, in the sense the actual truth or enlightment doesnt come from learning of the word themselves, but understanding of the dynamics that is being described through the interaction, and the change being triggered by the effect of the words in the dialog. And there is still a rather continuous string of scholars from egypt/babylon who lead to the concept of christianism, of the logos, trinity, holy spirit, and all those concept were already discussed before the time of jesus. The problem is there is not a very clear track of this, because babylonian tablets and egyptian hieroglyph and knowledge is still not very well understood, and there is not clear reccord of this outside of old testament, or what is left of greek/hellenistic scholarship, but these concept of the bible, in the sense of what really matter as the active principle of understanding and recognition of truth through the spirit, were already known and studied before, even if very little was left of it in the politics and doctrine of kings and rulers at the time of jesus. |
|
|
|
|
The thing is more like, do you believe the words of jesus because it's wrote so in the bible, or because the words make sense to you ?
In first case it become more like idolatry of a man.
In the second case it's more like recognition of truth through your own spirit.
It's very important distinction emphasized by plato or socrates.
|
|
|
|
Then why give them free will if you are going to kill them when they do something wrong? Do you not see the problem in that? You are taking away the freedom from them so you could have just programmed them to be good in the first place if you are going to end up stealing their freedom anyways.
Freedom is not reached by ignoring law and rules. The truth will set you free he said. Faith is not about avoiding death and suffering in the flesh. Everyone can reach full command of their spirit. If you are so afraid of suffering in the flesh or death, you should take few teaching from the stoics "Don't behave as if you are destined to live forever. What's fated hangs over you. As long as you live and while you can, become good now." — Marcus Aurelius Tyranny and threats are powerless against Christian believers, he declares, because of the hope they have. “You can kill us, but you cannot hurt us.” “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” |
|
|
|
I believe so no proof is needed.
Good! Continue on with your faith. But make sure that you are on God's side, because even demons believe, and are fearful of the wrath of God. Consider Jesus salvation. Hopefully scientific proof will help some who won't believe without it. But if they won't believe even after the scientific proof, they are only making their self destruct more dynamic.  Normally even those who only believe in what they see should end believing, if they really are into what they see |
|
|
|
Since many others have proven that the Bible does not have mistakes, perhaps it is YOU who are mistaken. Youtube search on "Uri Harel." He was a recent Jewish rabbi who investigated the Old Testament Ancient Hebrew thoroughly. He found that there were only 12 "cosmetic unknowns" in the whole O.T. These unknowns take absolutely nothing away from any theme of the O.T. There are no mistakes in the Bible that are worse than cosmetic... "typos." At the same time, the things of science that seem to contradict the Bible, do so because of the interpretations that scientists and others place on them. Science has to place these interpretations there, because there is no proof for any of these contradictions at all. To say it another way... Bible religion is not religion; it is fact and truth. Science is the religion. To me it seem logical to think jew knew about this principle of non contradiction, that was coined after as the logos. As their first concern was with deuteronomy , it imply this principle of coherent set of laws and axioms to define the good and bad behavior. The principle of legal matter imply this concept of non contradiction and global coherence between all statement. It's very likely it's this anti sollipism stance that is at the root of monotheism and deuteronomy. And also of science as in logical development of axioms leading to principle of logos, one truth, one god mind, logos etc. |
|
|
|
|
Because religions are the one who deal with this topic. And they all speak of similar concept. Just like science also evolve with time. Science of antiquity is not same than science of renaissances, or the science of enlightment century , or modern science. Not all scientist agree on everything .. all discoveries from archeology or facts are also a request for interpretation. Not a single law of physics explain all facts.
|
|
|
|
If religions are bad, then all things of people are bad. Why? Because some people simply focus on one thing, while others focus on other things. Tesla's religion of math and electronics was bad? Jesus didn't say much after His crucifixion. But He said a lot before it. The things He said before don't entirely match the things He said after. Why not? There was a change made in the relationship between man and God at the crucifixion time. Even so, Paul's sayings are not going to match the things Jesus said before the crucifixion. The Bible needs to be understood according to the whole theme of the relationship between God and man during the time that any of it was written... if one wants to understand it properly. Christians who apply O.T. stuff to themselves, often apply those things incorrectly, because they are not of O.T. times. Yes ! Need to see the reaction of characters in the context. In this sometime it looks written like platonic dialog. More like story with meaning to be understood through the interaction of two characters rather than mere accurate recollection of historical facts. I don't agree with that. That makes you platonist before paulist before christian. Christ said clearly to follow him and await his return. I don't say that Paul was not inspired by God. Cyrus was inspired by God as well. God uses the followers of christ and non followers alike to further his plans. Plans of Paul as a Pharisee was to divide and weaken the Pharisee, to confuse them and to spread the "light" version of christianity that I would call paulianism, so that the message would not die. The method was to presserve the message not to further it. God only knows if not the Paul the message of christ would not be forgotten. The role of a Paul was to make as much babilonian like people to know about it and be interested in it, so that even the worst pagan would know about Jesus. It was to presserve the word of God. Its a clear message not to confuse the message of philosophy and the Bible in the Bible words. Catholics the apostate does that. Why do they do it? Because they are graven image worship Paulians, not christians. You have to born again christian, leave all dogmas and love Jesus. Thats my opinion. Saying that god helped tesla is meaningless when you haven't even proved his existence. Well... Its not meaningless for Tesla. lol. You just demand impossible, for you to be able to justify your hiding in your atheist closet. Ok. Im fine with it. Be closed in your atheist closet if thats your free will. As I had already told you. Atheism is not a default possition. Atheism is a point of view that requires YOU to have a proof that god does not exist. You claim there is no god. Where is your proof? If you have none you are an agnostic. A movie about atheism as belief system https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwMIe_AU02cPlato is not a dogma. Philosophy in the platonic sense of dialog is not dogmatic. It's more a litterature style rather than anything. More a method of reflection and gain wisdom through interaction between two characters. When they speak of philosophy in the bible they speaks of sophists , not about plato or Pythagoras. God was existing before the new testament was written. It's clear Judaism inspired plato, and platonists and stoics influenced Christianism. For me the new testament make much more sense in the view of platonic teaching. The old testament still seem to pick up certain elements of previous culture like egyptian and babylonian, while rejecting only the corruption of knowledge by kings and corrupted priesthood orders. To me it looks a lot like what Jews did with the old testament is similar to what budhist did on hinduism. A sort of purification or synthèses of mesh of various cult to re extract the essential from them. Pharisee are not all Jews culture, and it's same with babylonian and philosophy, need to be careful about the term used in detail. Born again is only through water and spirit. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
