How Do Science and Religion Overlap? NOMA Imagines Not at All.

How Do Science and Religion Overlap? NOMA Imagines Not at All. April 14, 2015

Stephen J. GouldCan science say anything about religious claims? Does religion have anything to say in the domain of science?

Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002) a paleontologist, biologist, and popularize of science wrote of many things, and one was this clash between religion and science (Rocks of Ages, 1999).

Like Rodney “Can’t we all get along?” King, Gould tried to get everyone to play nice. Science and Religion, he said, are two magesteria—that is, areas of authority—that don’t overlap. He described the different domains of these two Non-Overlapping Magesteria (NOMA) this way:

Science gets the age of rocks, and religion the rock of ages; science studies how the heavens go, and religion how to go to heaven.

No one steps on anyone’s toes, and everyone’s happy.

I heard a variation of this in a lecture by Oxford mathematics professor John Lennox (“John Lennox Responds to Stephen Hawking”). Lennox argues that the two domains overlap but overlap contentedly. For example, Isaac Newton had no problem accepted both gravity and God. Gravity could both be studied scientifically and also be the product of God’s hand.

Yet another reaction is by Richard Dawkins. About Gould’s make-nice accommodation, he says in The God Delusion, “Gould carried the art of bending over backwards to positively supine lengths.” About Gould’s quote above, Dawkins wrote:

This sounds terrific—right up until you give it a moment’s thought. What are these ultimate questions in whose presence religion is an honoured guest and science must respectfully slink away?

Lampooning NOMA further, Dawkins imagines that scientists discover DNA evidence that Jesus really did lack a biological father. Would Christian apologists who favor NOMA say that the magesteria still don’t overlap and that scientific evidence is irrelevant to the study of theology? Would they dismiss the scientists with their useless evidence?

Of course not. Within certain circles of Christianity, this would be the discovery of the century. Given the choice of NOMA or evidence, they’ll take the evidence.

Or take the Templeton prayer study. If it had provided evidence of the effectiveness of prayers, you can bet that Christian apologists would telling everyone who would listen. Faith is nice as far as it goes, but it’s second best when the alternative is hard science that supports the Christian position.

Most Christians have learned from the Galileo fiasco and have no problem with evolution, though Dawkins sides with the other Christians. He agrees that they are rightly concerned that evolution and Christianity are incompatible.

NOMA is a nice idea, but given the continued clash between science and science deniers with a religious agenda, it has had little impact.

The Holy Spirit intended to teach us in the Bible 
how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.

— Galileo

(This is an update of a post that originally appeared 9/8/12.)

"The countdown for the goalpost rockets has commenced."

Atheism Fails Because There Is No ..."
"How do you know all this stuff. You said it isn't within your, nor Greg ..."

Atheism Fails Because There Is No ..."
"well hopefully North American English "also north of the Mason-Dixon line" not that funny ancient ..."

Who Has the Burden of Proof? ..."
"I do not know that I could have.I don't know if you could have either ..."

Atheism Fails Because There Is No ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Ann Kah

    I think Gould’s concept of NOMA was an honest attempt to say “I’m talking about science, and don’t care to muddy the waters with a discussion of religion at this time, so let’s just set it to one side and get back to the science”. But he was right, in that science can’t tell us anything about faith. Now if we could only persuade the fringe Christians that faith CAN NOT tell us anything at all about science…..

    • Well … science can tell us quite a lot about the process of faith, even if it can’t say for sure if the target of that faith (the supernatural) really exists. It can analyze ecstatic experiences, decide of glossalalia is plausibly a real language, critique the probability of miracles vs. coincidences, evaluate prayer’s success, and so on.

      • Kodie

        Science doesn’t directly, but indirectly answers the question, “no,” and that conflicts with the answer they want, “yes,” which allows them this back door of “stuff science can’t even look at to research might exist.” When you compare prayers to god with prayers to a jug of milk and get the same success rate, they will allow statistical probabilities are a factor, and it’s impossible for a jug of milk to answer your prayer, but the same rate of answered prayers to god “could be” god. I think I remember one of our regular Christian posters saying that in fact statistical probabilities were all driven by god – god decides x% of people die in car crashes, y% of people survive this form of cancer. Safety measures like seat belt laws and speed limits, or medical advances and early health screenings do happen to affect those probabilities in ways that science can actually test, so I don’t know why statistics could be designed, or why god would determine a deadly form of cancer, for example, even exists, much less, kill 95% of patients having the disease just for 5% to feel blessed. Medical breakthroughs bump that survival rate up to 15%, and that’s god too…. ?????

        So anyway, they will also attribute statistical eventualities to miracles, That would be where religion and science cross over. Everything that happens for “a reason” is just god moving the pieces of opportunity around so we get in place for the outcomes that science has already figured are statistically probable in any amount from close to zero to fairly common. But science can never discover these supernatural causes – they can find out what causes a tsunami, but they can’t find god’s hand at the other end, but it’s there. “Miracles” like a flying pig or a winning lottery ticket materializing in your empty hand are the “crazy” ideas that they believe atheists believe about theists – they think they have their feet on the ground, while we’re making up strawmen lunatics who think they believe something ridiculous like a woman got pregnant without any sperm near her anywhere, and later on, a dead guy disappeared bodily from a grave because he rose up to heaven all alive again. God isn’t a vending machine, stupid! Everything he does works just like it looks like it works, as science reveals “how” he does everything we experience, but cannot directly discover god’s existence, because that’s not what science does.

        • Greg G.

          a winning lottery ticket materializing in your empty hand

          That would be a miracle. I only get losing lottery tickets materializing in my hand.

        • Kodie

          I doubt it.

        • Greg G.

          I just say the magic words, “I’d like the Five Dollar Megamillions Retirement Plan, please.” Ten seconds later, there it is.

    • MNb

      Yes, I always have understood it that way.

  • 90Lew90

    I loaned my copy of Rocks of Ages to a Christian I was sharing a house with in Belfast a few years ago. Never got it back. Why do people never give back books or music? Even god-fearing Christians who you’ve explicitly told: “I want this back.” Lend CDs, vinyl or books and consider them gone. Hope everyone’s well. L.

    • My approach is to make a note in my calendar when I want it back and then bug them at that time. That is, take on the burden of getting it back home on myself.

      • Greg G.

        Hey, buddy. When are you going to pay me that $100 I owe you?

      • Greg G.

        Can I borrow your calendar?

    • Greg G.

      Can I borrow your screwdriver? I don’t want to ruin mine.

      • Kodie

        I’m just curious what kind of device you’re planning to McGyver with a screwdriver, a calendar and $100.

        • Greg G.

          The way it was explained to me is that I’m to fold a $100 bill in half length-wise, stick it behind my ear, go into Whiskey Dick’s Saloon, and offer Big Mabel a date, so I figure I’ll need a calendar for that. I don’t understand what I get next but it sounds like I might need a screwdriver.

        • Kodie

          Makes sense you wouldn’t want to use your own screwdriver then.

  • Greg G.

      “If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain
    claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of
    science and abandon those claims.” ― Dalai Lama XIV, The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality

    Why can’t all religions see it that way?

    • XTheist

      That’s great but a better version would be “unless scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain
      claims in Buddhism to be true, then we must accept the findings of
      science and refrain from accepting those claims until we are given proper justification for doing so.”

      It’s a step in the right direction, but it’s still the type of thinking that leads Christians to reject the flood and accept the ressurection because the former has been disproven while the latter is essentially unfalsifiable.

      • Greg G.

        Yes, it is like they are saying, “OK, you’ve disproved everything about my religion except that God is an impenetrable notion of ground state.”

  • Without Malice

    Well, of course science and religion don’t overlap. Science tells us how the world works while religion handles the same vexing questions as astrology, palm reading, and paranormal TV shows. Science asks us to believe nothing without evidence to back it up, while religion asks us to believe a whole bunch of astounding propositions without a bit of evidence. Not only do they not overlap, they never get within a mile of each other.

    • 90Lew90

      I’m watching Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and through hot tears of laughter remembering how easy it is to believe without evidence… I can’t believe I haven’t seen this before. The trick is not to panic. Laugh at the absurdity. It’ll stay with you your whole life.

  • James Chapman

    Does anybody seriously advocate NOMA these days? Methinks this is a dead horse.

    • MNb

      I do, in the form of an armistice: if they don’t use science to “back up” for their belief system I won’t interfere with that belief system. That’s a sincere advise for believers, because belief prescribing what science should conclude or not conclude always goes wrong for them. Such sensible believers do exist, but obviously they don’t show up on blogs like this one. They have learned their lesson.
      The ones who do show up generally haven’t learned it.

    • They seem to take the form of believers making accusations of scientism against anyone who tries to analyse religious claims using scientific methods.

    • Compuholic

      Well, religious people generally seem to like the concept of resurrection. It is probably impossible to kill an idea so thoroughly that a religious apologist is unable to exhume it.

      • TheNuszAbides

        note to parallel-universe advertising professional self:

        Absolut Resurrection.

  • Scott_In_OH

    Science gets the age of rocks, and religion the rock of ages; science studies how the heavens go, and religion how to go to heaven.

    I really hate language tricks like this. It makes it sound like parallel phenomena, but the only parallel is in the words. It’s an attempt to cloud the listener’s mind.

    • And next you’ll say that “if you fail to plan, you plan to fail” isn’t wisdom gold!?

      It’s chiasmus, my friend–it’s got to be true! It’s like rhyming: you know “if it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” is true because it rhymes.

  • MNb

    “No one steps on anyone’s toes, and everyone’s happy.”
    This is actually OK with me. Unfortunately religious folks tend to step on scientific toes over and over again.

    “NOMA is a nice idea, but ….. it has had little impact.”
    Because of those stubborn religious folks, not because of me.

    • Kodie

      Religion feeds off anything it can get, distorts it, and twists its intention. Whereas science might say something like discrediting religion by omission, say, we don’t have any comment on this (ridiculously fictional) subject or any of its (fantastical) claims. And religion spins that as a bonus for them – science is inept at discovering immaterial realms and spirits! We found a weak spot!

      Meanwhile, theology just steals heavily from science to support itself, dishonestly. It will look into a microscope and observe and show illustrations describing some horseshit they believe conflicts with science, and it’s totally scientific because it uses the right terms, or newly-coined terms that sound official, and illustrates them with the science pictures. Gullible people who aren’t educated in science can’t be counted on to know what’s not scientific at all about their process. They claim to be curious how “god” does all this wonderful world stuff, but what they really mean is that they know they can’t compete if people had to choose between a studious academic subject that delivers, and a mythological story taking place thousands of years ago. Their mythological story has to keep up with the times and offer something that people think is science.

      • MNb

        Yes, but I prefer to live in a free world.

        • TheNuszAbides

          tie up this radical, behold how he foams at the mouth!

      • TheNuszAbides

        this is how i became wary of theists who use the term ‘absorb’: the Israelites absorbed the Canaanites, Catholic thought leaders absorbed evolution, etc.

        not entirely unlike most media preferring ‘abuse scandal’ to ‘rape culture’.

        They claim to be curious how “god” does all this wonderful world stuff,

        when i saw it pointed out (by Bill Bryson in At Home) that various advances in newer specialties of the 19th century (geology, astronomy-rather-than-astrology, etc.) were powered by data collected by British vicars (who genuinely didn’t have much else to do, and essentially were paid by the Crown to be optimally inquisitive and collect Nature’s (i.e. Bog’s) Data), i figured it couldn’t be entirely coincidence that Anglicanism is characteristically just secular enough to [e.g.] allow some more-productive use of intellect, while still being an overarching social control mechanism, fertile ground for snobbery, etc.

  • Cognissive Disco Dance
    • Dang! There are more paths to the truth than I thought.

      • Greg G.

        You may rely on it. –The Magic Eight Ball

        Do you need more proof than that?

        • Apologists think they’re clever when they point out that we can’t prove that science works within science.

          The Magic 8 Ball makes mincemeat of that argument!

        • TheNuszAbides

          until the Schism over whether They really meant ‘may’ [are permitted to] or ‘might’ [it’s possible!] …

  • It seems to me that the scientific community as a whole is hamstrung by NOMA due to methodolical naturalism, which essentially says the same thing, that only natural events are examined. However, much that’s called “supernatural” is fully capable of being scientifically investigated as well. Even religions have done so, such as the Catholic Church’s scientific investigation of alleged miracles. Of course the real problem is confusion (perhaps deliberate) on what “supernatural” means…

    • Agreed. A supernatural cause that has a natural effect is, in principle, measurable by science.

      If all supernatural causes/events remain in the supernatural realm, I’ll agree that science has nothing to say, but in that case, who cares? Some parallel supernatural universe that doesn’t affect our world at all is in the “angels dancing on the head of a pin” category.

      • Richard Carrier gave the only definition of “supernatural” that even made sense to me here (http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com/2007/01/defining-supernatural.html) but it still doesn’t quite do it for me. I think what many people don’t seem to understand is that “nature” is simply whatever exists. They might say that God exists above or beyond it (thus “super nature”) but if he intervenes (as with miracles) that would seem to be a part of nature too. So I’m not sure if the concept even has a coherent meaning. To limit the confusion, “natural law” would be best discarded I’d say, as they simply describe what exists in science. Gravity isn’t a law like a 50 mph speed limit-it can’t be broken, so far as we know.

        • Greg G.

          I used to debate with a Christian friend a lot. He made that argument that if God exists, he is natural and not supernatural. I argued that it was a semantics to make the hard questions harder to ask to avoid having to answer them. We would still need words to make a distinction between the concepts.

        • Most Christians seem to feel God is outside the universe, and therefore nature. On the other hand, there are now Christian materialists who argue that souls are made of matter. While that could be the case, all of this is just speculation. Natural, supernatural, material, spiritual-the words get tossed out by people with any real thought it seems to me. “The world is made only of matter, thus no souls exist” or vice versa is a non sequitur. What souls or gods are made of, if they exist, is not the question. It’s whether they exist at all.

        • TheNuszAbides

          well put. could be occasionally useful to trip up apologists who think they can get away with asserting the NOMA and boasting that Bog transcends anything our puny mortal minds can perceive or define.

        • Yep. Choose-God is outside science? Fine, then don’t use scientific claims for evidence.

      • MNb

        “in that case, who cares?”
        Good question and it took me a day to find an answer. But it is remarkably simple: believers. Like my female counterpart, who happens not to care about science. She never has gone against Gould’s advise.

        • TheNuszAbides

          that’s in admirable contrast to the benighted parrots who pretend that ‘science informs their faith’ and don’t even proceed from there to synthesize but just keep humming ‘goddidit’ in the background…

  • Playonwords

    The big problem is that NOMA cannot match reality because it is only the “God of the Gaps” argument – god is wherever science cannot look.

    At one time God existed in a firmament which had doors (for water) and windows (for starlight). When this became untenable God and heaven evolved into an invisible realm that could not be detected; this has even lead many Christians to deny the idea of bodily resurrection all together – which means they are not Christian.

    The religious are equally happy for science to examine miracles – as long as those miracles are false miracles proclaimed by another faith or sect. Such examination is definitely within the province and capabilities of science to examine these if only to see if false claims are being made. Funnily enough whenever science can look closely at such things they have found fraud and misunderstanding – consider the examples of Benny Hinn or Lourdes.

    • Oh, and I suppose Edgar Cayce spouted nonsense as well?!

      Wait … he did. Never mind.

      • Playonwords

        Edgar Cayce? – that’s a blast from the past. Most people have forgotten all about him, bet he didn’t prophecy that

  • Otto

    If one claims god interacts in our shared reality that interaction overlaps with what can be scientifically examined. If one claims god doesn’t interact with our shared reality they have no basis for saying anything regarding god including its existence.

  • The_Wretched

    Since the god believers are constantly trying to change science curricula, they’ve given up the NOMA. If they didn’t think science negatively impacted religion, they wouldn’t bother.

    • MNb

      I’d rather say they never accepted it. But I fail to see how that means we should give it up. I’m uncomfortable with the idea of believers deciding for me what to do and what not.

      • The_Wretched

        I’m decidedly against NOMA. It’s a compatibilist approach. The ‘magisteria’ overlap and whenever they do, the religion is wrong. I think you’ll come to the same conclusion if you walk through specific examples of where religions make fact claims that are testable.

        • Kodie

          They want it both ways – they want to cherry-pick and distort science when they can, and they want to tell science that it’s unable to research their supernatural phenomena and beliefs etc. Theology takes from science (and every other academic subject that it can use and abuse), but science does not take from or go into theology. They will even go so far as to act like it’s something they decided science cannot do and telling science to step off, for their findings in there will be bogus attempts to disprove the existence of god, which they all learned on day 1, is impossible to do.

        • MNb

          To my delight – internet would be a lot less fun for me if they stopped behaving inconsistently.

        • MNb

          “It’s a compatibilist approach”
          Yes, so what? You don’t like it hence it’s wrong?

          “The ‘magisteria’ overlap”
          Not necessarily. If you claim so I demand deductive proof.

          “and whenever they do, the religion is wrong.”
          Which is so poorly formulated that you contradict the previous quote. This implies that the magisteria not always overlap, that hence they do not necessarily overlap and that hence “the magisteria overlap” as a deductive statement is wrong.
          You probably mean “wherever”, not “whenever”. I grant you that, but then it’s imaginable to cut off all the overlapping parts and keep everything that’s left. Imo that’s exactly what Gould meant. What that non-overlapping part that’s left contains is irrelevant for NOMA. Maybe it’s empty; that’s not my problem.

          “I think you’ll come to the same conclusion if you walk through specific examples of where religions make fact claims that are testable.”
          Done so since I entered internet almost 15 years ago. You’re making a grave error, the same one folks like PZ and Coyne are guilty of: you present an inductional conclusion (ie a collection of specific examples, no matter how large) as a deductional conclusion (every single possible religion has to make claims that infere with science by definition). To rule out compatibilism you have to do the latter; a collection of examples is not enough. One example of a religion that doesn’t make this mistake (and pastafarianism might very well be one) refutes the deductional conclusion and hence makes compatibilism possible.
          The only thing you can say is that many believers make religious claims that belong to the domain of science. Well, I never contradicted that. I simply notice that it’s their problem, not mine. NOMA is an advise to religious folks to avoid that problem by not making claims that belong to science. It’s developed exactly because all attempts to do so by believers have utterly failed.
          Hey, exactly what I wrote elsewhere on this page.

        • The_Wretched

          I don’t understand why you’re throwing a fit. Please also not that if god just resides in the ‘left over spaces’, that’s a god of the gaps.

        • MNb

          “I don’t understand why you’re throwing a fit.”
          That’s your problem, not mine. I simply maintain that you can’t reject compatibilism just because you don’t like it and just because you have collected a lot of examples that violate it. I value clear thinking about atheism as high as clear thinking about christianity.

          “also not that if god just resides in the ‘left over spaces’, that’s a god of the gaps.”
          No, it isn’t. The gaps you’re talking about all belong to the domain of science and NOMA advises religious folks exactly to leave them to science. The question is – and I already wrote it – if there are meaningful claims left when religions avoid any overlap. I don’t think so, but that’s not the problem of NOMA.
          For instance the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a god of the gaps. Pastafarianism only makes claims that are not testable by science. Hence it suggests compatibilism is possible. NOMA advises religious folks to look in that direction and don’t get in the way of science. The compensation is that science doesn’t say anything about the validity of pastafarianism.

        • The_Wretched

          Are you a religionist?

        • MNb

          BWAHAHAHAHA!
          Thanks for confirming that you are not interested in logic and reason (of which deduction is an integral part – and all deduction is top-down), but only advocate what you like. You are as prejudiced as every apologist showing up on this blog.
          This is too funny – I’m going to let you find out yourself if I’m a religionist (wow, sounds as good as evilusionist and darwinist!) or not. Let me make you feel good and confirm – I’m an religionist marxist hitlerist materialist athiest evilutionist communist darwinist scientismist immoralist greenleftist Godwinist Poeist. Feel free to add more labels.

          First and Second Commandment of The Wretched:
          1a. Thou shall not be a compatibilist;
          1b; Though shall not question why compatibilism must be rejected;
          2: Thou shall not use deduction.

          Would you care to tell me what the punishment of breaking these two Commandments is?

        • The_Wretched

          I find your unhinged response unsettling and will now back away slowly.

        • MNb

          That was rather quickly.

        • The_Wretched

          See my other reply for why I reject compatabilistic arguments. (hint, reality exists, supernatural doesn’t). I also see the characterization of me thinking in terms of “likes” as a slur. Be more charitable.

        • MNb

          “why I reject compatabilistic arguments”
          Nonononono – “why” implies deduction and that is risible.

          “I also see the characterization of me thinking in terms of “likes” as a slur.”
          It is. And your rejection of deduction confirms that I was right to do so.

          “Be more charitable.”
          I’m never charitable to nonsense (and rejecting deduction is nonsense indeed), whether coming from religious folks or from atheists.

        • The_Wretched

          FWIW, I’m into abductive proof and find deductive top-down stuff generally risible. I also fail to see where relying on proven facts (inductive reasoning) is a bad thing.

          “To rule out compatibilism you have to do the latter”
          I deny your conclusion or assertion. To do otherwise is to have your brain fall out your head. I don’t need to test every number from here to infinity to know which are divisible by two. At some point, you can stop testing and figure out rather consistent rules or do a mathematical proof. Also, to just get through life and to better manipulate the world, having heuristics based on valid models of reality is essential. The best (for any purpose) models omit supernaturalisms.

          How the religious use NOMA (a concept not some sort of real object) is up to them or anyone else. Me, I’m underwhelmed by it and all other compatabilist views. I’m an atheist and trained in science; there is an objective reality and it follows non-supernatural rules. So far as religions are all based on supernaturalisms, they are wrong. They are stories and metaphors taken as fact. They don’t do the job of representing reality and as such, this NOMA business is entirely beside the point. It’s a failed idea and should be discarded.

        • MNb

          “and find deductive top-down stuff generally risible.”
          I suppose you don’t accept any math then either – it is totally deductive top-down stuff. Plus Theoretical Physics – what folks like Einstein en Hawking did was pure deduction.

          “or do a mathematical proof.”
          A mathematical proof by definition is top-down deduction, silly. If you’re a scientist then creacrappers like Ken Ham are as well. What have you studied? Numerology or something?

          “I don’t need to test every number from here to infinity to know which are divisible by two.”
          And how do you know that? Thanks to top-down deduction. So you’re risible because you use what you think risible. Good job.
          Of course it’s also a good job rejecting what Richard Feynman said:

          “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”
          Hence one, just one counterexample of a religion that is compatible with science is sufficient to show you’re wrong. Guess what? I provided one underneath. Pastafarianism. Which you conveniently neglect. A tactic very popular among religionists as well.

          “I deny your conclusion or assertion.”
          [that] “to rule out compatibilism you have to do the latter”
          Well, that settles it then. The Wretched declares deduction risible, denies my conclusion (which is not a conclusion, but an explanation of method, but whatever) and that’s it. I bow my head in awe.

          “To do otherwise is to have your brain fall out your head.”
          Don’t worry. What you call your brain never has been in your head – it’s in your underbelly.

          “It’s a failed idea and should be discarded.”
          The Wretched has spoken. Amen. Because of course this is not a conclusion arrived at by means of deduction. That would be risible.

        • The_Wretched

          I don’t see how your claim a philosopher / guru title and use scorn laced fisking as a mode of communication. The juxtaposition is giving me whiplash. You might also want to pat yourself on the back a little less vigorously.

      • Kodie

        They are hypocrites. They don’t want science getting into the business of theology, and this builds into paranoia of public schools “indoctrinating” innocent schoolchildren in the “religion of Darwinism” and conspiracies of scientists in lab coats which we all listen to without questioning them, which goes against what they teach at home. I mean, they are also uncomfortable with scientists telling them what to do and not do, or even lawmakers, so they get a waiver and homeschool.

        But when it suits them, science can of course be useful if it doesn’t conflict with anything they are teaching, or if it can be woven into their stories to illustrate them as more coherent and timely than their myths, something they portray as history or science. For example, they love DNA an awful lot. They can use DNA to support a lot of their own beliefs, and discard other things we know about DNA if they don’t fit their agenda. Scientists are not allowed to use things we know about DNA that do not fit their agenda to argue against god’s existence, because it is impossible to do. They know the line where science isn’t allowed to cross.

        They want to overlap but they do not wish to be overlapped. Taking the prayer, taking god out of schools, is what has, in their opinion, led to dozens of crises – women’s liberation, sexual revolution, birth control, teen pregnancies (that aren’t conveniently erased the “religious” way), abortions (the convenient form of birth control for lazy godless loose women), the lack of personal responsibility, divorce, homosexuality, equal rights for gay people, single parenting, destruction of the home, paternal abandonment, forced paternal responsibility, latchkey kids, emasculation of the head of household, men sharing housework, househusbands, little boys wearing nail polish, gun control, school shootings, natural disasters, addiction, etc.

        Without forcing their religious values on everyone in America via the public school system, the world is changing and they don’t like it. They see the end times because science is the devil trying to trick people into “progressive” values that destroy religion’s hold over people. They think atheists shriek and our eyes burn out at the sight of a cross, like we are vampires, and this is their revolutionary tactic to their fantastical world where they are inside of a battle between god and satan, and they don’t want satan winning. That’s kind of different from you or I don’t want this religious delusion steering children’s education and society in such a stupid and wrong direction.

  • OverlappingMagisteria

    I think my choice of screen-name requires that I agree with this post.

  • busterggi

    “For example, Isaac Newton had no problem accepted both gravity and God. Gravity could both be studied scientifically and also be the product of God’s hand.”

    Then again, there has been a ton of accumulated knowlege since Newton lived so in comparison to the information available now he was comparatively ignorant.

    • Otto

      And as I have explained to many believers who like to cite Newton because of his belief…Newton is only interesting and relevant because of his science, without his science nobody would know his name. Even Christians don’t care one wit about his theology.

      • Sophia Sadek

        He was definitely a bit on the puritanical side when it came to religion.

        One of the aspects of Newton that fascinates me is how people today ridicule him for dabbling in alchemy. Even Lavoisier did that. Otherwise, modern chemistry would not have been established.

        • A biography that I read says that alchemy helped Newton consider possibilities that are common sensically ridiculous. Two balls attract each other? Indeed everything attracts every other thing in the universe? It’s like magic.

        • Sophia Sadek

          Much of chemistry seems like magic until a rational explanation has been discovered.

        • TheNuszAbides

          it wasn’t until i read Stephenson’s Baroque Cycle (… out loud … for the second time) that i noticed that merely labeling Newton a theist or Christian betrays a huge lack of context considering the England and events he lived in and through:

          – born when the Anglican church had been independent of papal authority for about a century (more or less depending on whether you date it from Henry’s tantrums or Bess’s codification)

          – aged 6-17 for the fucking Interregnum! if being raised through that isn’t the most fertile possible soil for his Arianism, i don’t know what.
          (as in: how stupid do you have to be to believe in the ultimate authority or reverence or worship of anyone in earthly form, when you see diametrically-opposed factions topple each other in such a short sequence? no wonder he didn’t take up politics… that said, he was supposedly a biblical literalist!)

          As well as being antitrinitarian, Newton allegedly rejected the orthodox doctrines of the immortal soul, a personal devil and literal demons.

          (wikip.)

          also, he refused the deathbed Eucharist. in 1727 Spain was still besieging Granada and the Amish were just beginning to settle in North America. and Gulliver’s Travels came out.
          sorry, too much fun on a wiki cruise.

        • Sophia Sadek

          He did some research on the Trinity and found that it was bogus. He never published his findings for fear of retaliation.

      • busterggi

        They don’t give a fig.

    • And one wonders whether Newton would be a Christian if he were alive today. All clues suggest no.

      • busterggi

        Or perhaps he never would have done any science & become another religious nutter like Ken Ham.

      • avalon

        “In a manuscript he wrote in 1704 in which he describes his attempts to
        extract scientific information from the Bible, Newton estimated…”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton%27s_occult_studies

        So much for Newton’s NOMA.

  • Sophia Sadek

    Unlike other religions, fundamentalist religions are basically adverse to wisdom. This is an anti-intellectual position that ignores the original intent of religious texts and ascribes bogus meaning. For example, biblical stories that are obviously metaphorical are taken as not metaphorical at all. Even more egregious misrepresentations are made when a story that is obviously about a gang rape scenario is used to foster hostility toward same-sex love.

    This kind of thinking deserves to be the object of scientific inquiry.

    • TheNuszAbides

      at the bare minimum it should be rigorously tested for category errors.

      • Sophia Sadek

        I’d settle for a simple hypocrisy screening.

  • RichardSRussell

    Before there was serious science, religion explained everything.

    Once there was serious science, it started nibbling away at religion’s explanations.

    Every time the 2 disagreed about anything, science proved to be right.

    Religion would probably be OK if it would just stick to things that can’t be measured or tested against reality: anything that truly didn’t overlap with science. But religionists can’t seem to resist, which is why they are perpetually doomed to disappointment and the rest of us are perpetually doomed to having to deal with their meddling with school curricula.

    • Christians can see science and technology deliver nine times but still doubt it the tenth time, and they can see religion fail nine times but still expect it to succeed the tenth time.

      • MNb

        To our delight, because it provides us with a lot of fun on your very blog!

        • TheNuszAbides

          “Well – it’s a hobby.”
          –Baldrick, dogsbody/Executioner

      • wtfwjtd

        Wow, thanks Bob, for providing us a practical, real-world definition for how Christians define and use the word “faith”!

    • Elizabeth Rosas D

      What is science of today tomorrow Will be gone. Science is not eternal nor perfect and is limited. yes Lord Jésus blood Was found with thé Ark of Covenant. This Was hidden below Jésus cross. As thé Old testament states no body impure can approach thé Ark and live. This was leff at thé same place and thé blood examinéd by Israël autorités. Thérè was only 23 chromosomes. Humans have 46.

      • Scientists have a sample of the blood of Jesus? I find that unlikely. Do you have a journal reference to the findings of the study?

        • adam

          You can see cases of it at any Catholic Church…

          But I bet she is referring to that SCAMMER Ron Wyatt

          “Ron Wyatt found the Ark of the Covenant in 1982.”

          Yeah and he found Jesus’s blood there, right?
          http://tentmaker.org/WAR/

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Ron Wyatt made amazing biblical discoveries as the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah:
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7uHKn2ijKw.

          He also FOUND the ARK of Noah in Turkey.The cars of Pharaon and lately the ARK of Covenant.

          But do not even dream of watching it. The simply act would kill you. The time will come all of this will be revealed.

          Anyway…what change will do to you knowing the blood of JESUS exists?
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfaxig8EiKE

          will you make it change of beliefs?

          Full Documentation and Biblical discoveries of Ron Wyatt
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc0QilF74c8

        • How do you sift valid evidence from bogus evidence?

        • adam

          She doesnt

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          http://biblehub.com/nlt/psalms/14.htm

          1Only fools say in their hearts,
          “There is no God.”
          They are corrupt, and their actions are evil;
          not one of them does good!
          2The LORD looks down from heaven
          on the entire human race;
          he looks to see if anyone is truly wise,
          if anyone seeks God.
          3But no, all have turned away;
          all have become corrupt.a
          No one does good,
          not a single one!
          4Will those who do evil never learn?
          They eat up my people like bread
          and wouldn’t think of praying to the LORD.

          Written 3500 years ago.

        • adam

          Matthew 5:22
          and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

        • adam

          Written 3500 years ago too.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          You have no idea of which population, this verse was intended to.

          Do you? or you are just the kind of people picking verses ad make a whole lie out of it? Is amazing how atheists LOVE to repeat the same over and over..I have met many atheists and by “coincidence” YOU ALL repeat the same..You do not think by yourself. You think you do, but at the end, you have been brain washed by deceived people.

        • Kodie

          Do you? or you are just the kind of people picking verses ad make a whole lie out of it?

          You mean Christians?

        • adam

          Of course I know which population this verse was intended for.

          Show us the LIE in this quote.

          And you are the idiot DECEIVED by Ron Wyatt

          You have no room to talk about people who dont think for themselves.

        • And as an atheist, I’m supposed to do what with those Bible verses?

        • Greg G.

          You were supposed to read them and weep.
          Why are you laughing at them?

        • Dang! I always misread social cues like that.

          Good thing MNb hasn’t given his derisive and maniacal laugh.

        • Greg G.

          Written 3500 years ago.

          How could that have been written by David over 500 years before David is supposed to have lived?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          ok my error is between 3000 and 2900 years ago. Since this time, atheists existed.

        • Greg G.

          I find it interesting that there are 18 verses in the Bible that have been translated with the four word phrase “there is no god.” Maybe the Bible is trying to tell you something that you are not listening to.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          WEll, You rather listen it what it says

          Psalm 10:4
          In his pride the wicked man does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God.

          “Psalm 74:22
          Rise up, O God, and defend your cause; remember how fools mock you all day long.”

          Believe me..mocking the Lord of Universe and denying HIM is very very foolish foolish thing at high degree. And you do that because you BELIEVE as a person that God does not Exists. But..because you cannot prove GOD DOES NOT Exists (in fact nobody can)

          What about IF GOD Exists and at the end you will have to FACE HIM?

          Pay attention to Hebrews 10:39 It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

        • Pofarmer

          You realize you are talking to Atheists, right? Would you like me to quote some Harry Potter at you?

        • I’m starting to really empathise with what God’s going through in Psalm 74:22.

        • Kodie

          Believe you, why? Because you believe you? You’re superstitious. When will anyone provide evidence? Why all this threatening and bullshit. The bible was written by people, everything you’ve ever heard or experienced about “god” was told to you or suggested by people. You want to be afraid of the monster under the bed like a child, go ahead, but why do you threaten us with the wrath of your imaginary friends? Does this not seem silly to you? If you could see it from our perspective – and you can, by looking at someone else with a different but equally firmly held belief in a supernatural deity – you would think it seems ridiculous. Because it is.

          How old are you?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          How am I going to threat someone of SOMEONE they do not believe? Because I don ot believe in the entity of the ISLAM I do not care of his supposedly punishment, nor I bother. That would be silly.

          do you feel threatened? then you must believe of God existence.

          And no I am not afraid. I do not serve GOD because of FEAR. I serve God because I Love HIM Freely. Happily. By my own free will.

        • Kodie

          I don’t feel threatened by your intellect, certainly. It’s just that you’re using threats as an argument, and you can see why that’s silly. God is your imaginary friend. I’m glad your relationship is solid – so, why are you here expecting us to give a shit?

        • I’m gonna see if I can save you some time.

          You are not going to convince us. We’ve all heard this stuff before. Sometimes it was even written grammatically. It still sounded kind of stupid. What you are trying to do here is a shitter version of that.

          I’ve come to terms with the fact that if there’s anything sensible in what you’re saying, then I will never know it. I’m just never going to be able to engage with the intellectual level of your comments here, because I’m not willing to get that drunk. I think the same applies to the other readers here.

          We all know how this is going to go. You’re going to do your preachy thing and we’re going to reject it and doom ourselves to Hell, and you’ll think it’s because we all hate God or something. I think it would save a lot of time and effort if we just skipped to that point in the argument and then moved on.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          AS I SAID BEFORE: I am not here to convince you. Nor I am here to “preach” anything.

          Christians never convince anyone about GOD. To make a disbeliever to believe in GOD, is not a human task. Is the job of GOD who can transform the hearth of people. And GOD cannot force anyone to love HIM or Obey HIM.

          NOW. When you write an article about something religious, you can expect some religions comments. Does the author of this article believes JESUS Existed?

          Why to write something that can bring Christians in an atheist forum? To mock them? to make fun of them? is this your tolerance towards other people?

        • Cognissive Disco Dance

          Is the job of GOD who can transform the hearth of people. And GOD cannot force anyone to love HIM or Obey HIM.

          Seems slightly contradictory but it’s actually standard Christian theology. (Therefore it makes sense. Here’s how it works: If it’s Christian theology, therefore it makes sense.) I look at GOD’s strategy as a “days on/days off” or an “except when it isn’t” strategy. Free will on Monday Wednesday Friday. Transforming hearts and intervening with miracles on Sunday Tuesday Thursday with Saturdays off. Or, free will except when it isn’t.

        • What’s the point of the Great Commission if it won’t convince anyone? Why doesn’t God just go and do the convincing himself? Why does it always seem like people are doing everything, with zero evidence of God?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          The Great commission is to announce the GOSPEL and to make Disciples to those who listen the GOSPEL.

          But You have heard the GOSPEL already. Do not you?

          Do you know what the Gospel is?
          If yes…
          Have you paid attention to the Gospel?

          AS I mentioned before: Is GOD who convince the people. HE knows to whom HE calls and those HE rejects.

          http://biblehub.com/romans/9-16.htm
          15For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.”16So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

        • The Lord is capricious; praise the Lord.

          Kinda sucks to be on the wrong end of the stick, though. Spare a thought of me roasting in hell while you’re at the endless cocktail party that is heaven.

          I was raised Christian. Like most atheists, I know the Bible better than the average Christian. Your mistake is imagining that there’s two options, Christianity and not. There are thousands of religions to choose from. Why imagine that yours is the right one?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          This is one of the many reasons. Keep an *honest mind while watching this video. Only the CREATOR could reveal this to men. https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=86&v=9XzYpJMAiBE

          No I will not have a though for you while you are in hell. I hope you can be in the other side.

        • Why won’t you think about me when you’re in heaven? Because you don’t care? Because you won’t care? Because to think of that would make God seem like a capricious bully and that would rain on your parade?

        • Dys

          Nah…God mindwipes all the people who get to heaven so they don’t have any choice but to be blissed out automatons singing about how super awesome God is. Because he’s perfect and definitely doesn’t have a fragile ego at all.

        • So a complete knowledge of God’s fabulous plan, especially by the enlightened beings who live in heaven, would be such a hideous buzz-kill that God has to erase all of that. OK, I get it.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I rather think NOW that you will be in heavens. That in the last moment you were saved, that in the last minute of your life, your heart was transformed to accept Jesus as your savior. That in the last minute you repented of your sins and TRUSTED and BELIEVED in GOD.

          I do not know if GOD has a plan for you.

        • Kodie

          You sound like a fortune-teller.

        • adam

          Kill Fortunetellers

          A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

        • You think that I will be saved in the last moment of my life? Uh, thanks, I guess. But why do you think that? Just because it would make this conversation more pleasant?

          I have a different opinion, I’m afraid. I see no chance that I will accept Jesus as my lord and savior. I simply know too much about how nonsensical the Christian belief claims are to accept them. I know of no well educated atheists who converted for intellectual reasons.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Lol, No I do not know ifyou will be saved. honestly I wish you good, not bad things and I do not wish hell to anyone.
          What I know is that when GOD comes, (if you did not convert) you will believe and you will tremble in terror and fear before HIM.
          Then you will think…”I spoke with a Christian who told me about this and I did not listen. What a fool I was!”

          And Then I will be saying to the LORD.
          “Lord, I obeyed you, and I proclaimed your holy NAME to everyone who crossed in my way, but they just refused to believe”

          Look Bob I have to go now. I am a mentor for people who looks the Lord with all their might in my own maternal language.
          http://powertochange.com/organization/

          So nice talking to you, I wish you well and remember that GOD is there to listen, if you ever invoke his Holy Name: JESUS.

          Take care bye now

        • MNb

          If you genuinely wish me good you wish that there is no god, because I have no desire at all to spend eternity in Heaven. I rather decline eternal boredom; it’s not any better than Hell. Nothingness is vastly to prefer.

        • Why don’t you wish hell on anyone? God apparently will impose it on billions of people. Remember, narrow is the road that leads to salvation. Sounds like you are not on board with God’s plan.

          Why wait until I’m dead for me to know that God exists? Why wouldn’t he make that clear when I’m alive so I can do something about it?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          “Why wouldn’t he make that clear when I’m alive so I can do something about it?”

          Is very CLEAR for almost 4 billion of people.

        • Kodie

          If you call 42,000 denominations a “clear” message. + how clear to billions of other people that your god is nonexistent because theirs is the real god. You’d think he’d have some better system than primitive storytelling filtered down through idiots like you. Your credibility is damaged by your credulousness, illiteracy, and poor use of logic. You know it sounds stupid when you say it, that’s why you lay the responsibility on god to turn hearts at his own choosing – god doesn’t do anything, because he doesn’t exist. It’s just really clear to people who aren’t insecure and aren’t preyed on for their insecurities like you are that a perfect god and this imperfect system contradict one another. If only you knew what you were talking about some of the time, you might be able to see it too.

        • Greg G.

          But those seem to be some of the most gullible people on Earth. Some of them even fall for Ron Wyatt videos.

        • If you’re referring to the number of Christians in the world, that’s a lot more than I’ve heard. What’s your source?

          But this does nothing to solve the problem. Remember the parable of the shepherd leaving the 99 sheep to find the one? I guess that doesn’t apply anymore. God has his 2 billion or so Christians so he doesn’t care about me.

          Do I have that right?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I refered to the number of people who believes in GOD.
          God cares for the whole world. And is offering eternal life. But you just refuse, so you have no right to complain.
          By the way, I am still waiting for your answer. How sure, are you, of your beliefs, to die for?

        • So you lump all the Muslims and Hindus and Mormons into the same bin? That’s a pretty eclectic mix.

          I’m not 100% certain of anything–who is? (I mean, besides you.) All I can do is evaluate the evidence and follow it as best as I can. Show me a more honest way to live my life.

        • adam

          “God cares for the whole world”

          BULLSHIT

        • Kodie

          What would dying for atheism prove, exactly? I’m willing to lie to stay alive! You’re the idiot who will die for no good reason.

        • MNb

          God cares for the whole world, you say? Then he’s a nasty character as he allows

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VECtHHQjCqg

          The more you talk about your god the less I like him.
          As for your question: these people were also ready to die for their belief.

          http://www.kriegsberichter-archive.com/index.php?/category/35

          As I’m blond and have grey blue eyes they died for me – to give me more Lebensraum in Europe (I’m Dutch). They were as sure as you are. What do you think, should I be grateful? Is their belief true because of their willingness to die? If no this answer applies to Jesus and his martyrs as well.

        • adam

          ;;;

        • Greg G.

          Is very CLEAR for almost 4 billion of people.

          I refered to the number of people who believes in GOD.

          In that case, theists have incompatible contradictory beliefs about God, so you can’t say that it is “clear”. There are over 42,000 Christian denominations alone.

          The only thing that is clear is that most people are wrong about God.

        • adam

          Funny, Jesus says people like Bob have no chance at all:

          “I promise you that any of the sinful things you say or do can be forgiven, no matter how terrible those things are. But if you speak against the Holy Spirit, you can never be forgiven. That sin will be held against you forever.” — Mark 3:28-29 (CEV)

        • Kodie

          If you’re in heaven not thinking of anyone but yourself, you don’t deserve to be there.

        • Kodie

          I would call that the Great Power of Suggestion. You have been “called” to belong to a herd of human beings who all believe there is some spiritual guide who call them to him and ignore others. It makes you feel like something is happening, like you belong. Those of us who don’t believe not because we haven’t been called but because we do not attribute desires and emotions to something that isn’t there. How much money have you paid so far?

        • adam

          Death to Followers of Other Religions

          Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord
          alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

          Kill Nonbelievers

          They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

        • You sound like a robot. Or a zombie.

        • adam

          We KNOW what you ‘love’ about the bible god…..

          Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

          Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the
          judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

          Kill Witches

          You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

          Kill Homosexuals

          “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”
          (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

          Kill Fortunetellers

          A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

          Death for Hitting Dad

          Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to
          death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

          Death for Cursing Parents

          1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

          2) All who curse their father or mother must be put
          to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

          Death for Adultery

          If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife,
          both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

          Death for Fornication

          A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by
          committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to
          death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

          Death to Followers of Other Religions

          Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord
          alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

          Kill Nonbelievers

          They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the
          God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not
          seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or
          great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

          Kill False
          Prophets

          If a man still prophesies,
          his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because
          you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his
          parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through.
          (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

          Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God

          Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your
          God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow
          citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you
          must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that
          such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the
          entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his
          fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your
          God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

        • Greg G.

          Is it mocking God to point out what the Bible says? Would a God who wanted people to think he existed inspire a series of writings that say “there is no god” repeatedly?

          Deuteronomy 32:39 NIV
          See now that I myself am He! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand.

          1 Kings 8:23 NIV
          and said: “O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth below–you who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way.

          2 Kings 1:3 NKJV
          But the angel of the LORD said to Elijah the Tishbite, “Arise, go up to meet the messengers of the king of Samaria, and say to them, “Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are going to inquire of Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron?’

          2 Kings 1:6 NIV
          “A man came to meet us,” they replied. “And he said to us, `Go back to the king who sent you and tell him, “This is what the LORD says: Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are sending men to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron? Therefore you will not leave the bed you are lying on. You will certainly die!”‘”

          2 Kings 1:16 NIV
          He told the king, “This is what the LORD says: Is it because there is no God in Israel for you to consult that you have sent messengers to consult Baal-Zebub, the god of Ekron? Because you have done this, you will never leave the bed you are lying on. You will certainly die!”

          2 Kings 5:15 NIV
          Then Naaman and all his attendants went back to the man of God. He stood before him and said, “Now I know that there is no God in all the world except in Israel. Please accept now a gift from your servant.”

          1 Chronicles 17:20 NIV
          “There is no one like you, O LORD, and there is no God but you, as we have heard with our own ears.

          2 Chronicles 6:14 NIV
          He said: “O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven or on earth–you who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way

          Psalms 10:4 NASB
          The wicked, in the haughtiness of his countenance, does not seek Him. All his thoughts are, “There is no God.”

          Psalms 14:1 NIV
          The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.

          Psalms 53:1 NIV
          The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good.

          Isaiah 44:6 NIV
          This is what the LORD says– Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.

          Isaiah 44:8 KJV
          Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

          Isaiah 45:5 NIV
          I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God. I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me,

          Isaiah 45:14 KJV
          Thus saith the LORD, The labour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia and of the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thine: they shall come after thee; in chains they shall come over, and they shall fall down unto thee, they shall make supplication unto thee, saying, Surely God is in thee; and there is none else, there is no God.

          Isaiah 45:21 KJV
          Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.

          1 Corinthians 8:4 NIV
          So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          This interpretation of the these biblical verses, shows that atheist are not only blinded, but they d o not really know HOW to READ nor how TO understand your own language.

          Where did you copy? I doubt you had the time to search it by yourself. So..who is thinking or reasoning for you?

          Is rare that I say a bad word, but in this case, this is the dumbest interpretation I have EVER READ of the Holy Scriptures from an atheist.

          Congratulations the guy who wrote it, just WONT it!

        • Greg G.

          There are seven more such verses in the Catholic Bible.

          I think you are the one who is reading the Bible incorrectly. You are blinded by gullibility. It was written by superstitious people who didn’t know the earth was a spheroid. They thought magic was real. Read it with that in mind.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D
        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          http://bibliaparalela.com/erv/isaiah/40.htm

          English Revised Version
          It is he that sitteth upon the **circle of the earth**, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

          26Lift up your eyes on high, and see who hath created these, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by name; by the greatness of his might, and for that he is strong in power, not one is lacking.

        • Greg G.

          You have proven my point by showing that the most educated Hebrews of the time thought the world was flat. Circles are two dimensional. Circles are flat.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          The hebrew word for “circle ” is ח֣וּג http://bibliaparalela.com/interlinear/isaiah/40-22.htm

          If you translate it , using google translation you will read the different meanings for this word ,and one of them is SPHERE.

          https://translate.google.ca/?hl=fr#iw/en/%D7%97%D6%A3%D7%95%D6%BC%D7%92

          So the text can be translated as :

          “It is he that sitteth upon the ** ח֣וּג (sphere) of the earth**”

          Sphere is 2 dimensions as well? http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sphere

        • Greg G.

          Do you have an example of the word being used as “sphere” before it was understood that the earth was not a circle? It sounds like someone is trying to make the verse correct retroactively by introducing a definition that was never used. The other two times the word was used in the Bible do not mean “sphere”.

          Isaiah 40:22 (NRSV)
          It is he who sits above the circle of the earth,
            and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers;
          who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
            and spreads them like a tent to live in;

          The imagery of spreading the heavens like a tent doesn’t make sense if the earth is a sphere.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          The Old testament was written in Hebrew language.The ancient word for circle is the same for sphere today.

          If you read carefully the definition in the site about CIRCLE, it also state:

          “sphere: great circle – Any circle on the surface of a sphere that lies on a plane through its center, or a circle that divides into two equal parts—as the Equator.

          The Cambridge dictionary says about circle: a continuous curved line, the points of which are always the same distance away from a fixed central point, or the area inside such a line:”

          Finally this was the message GOD transmitted to human being 3500 years ago.. He is upon the earth which has a continuous curved line. And GOD is expanding the HEAVENS (plural, hebrew word שָׁמַ֔יִם = heavens).

          http://www.thefreedictionary.com/heavens
          1. often heavens The sky or universe as seen from the earth; the firmament.

          Because we only have one “heaven” on earth, this verse does not refer to the SKy. This is about the many heavens that exists in the Whole Universe.

          Now the big question you refuse to believe..
          How
          HOW
          HOW?
          the author got the information about the earth being a “continuous curved line ” and about GOD stretching/ expanding the Universe.?

          http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stretch

          These scientific data is known today. But It was already written down in the BIBLE more than 3 millenniums ago.

          But because you consider the BIBLE as “fairy tales” is beyond your mind, impossible for you, that the BIBLE can refers to Scientific facts.

          Wen you ACCEPT that the BIBLE is describing Scientific facts, of the Universe then you will have to accept that the BIBLE is trustful and that A living GOD exists, and that God is revealing details, in the most simple terms.

          The message was intended to wise and ignorant people, poor and rich. The message was addressed to billions of people, to hundreds of cultures and to 2500 different languages.

          Think…How will you transmit a Scientific message for people who will live 3500 years from now? HOW?

        • Greg G.

          All of your definitions of a circle refer to a figure in a plane, not a three dimensions.

          Think…How will you transmit a Scientific message for people who will live 3500 years from now? HOW?

          Why do you keep using “3500 years”?

          Since people today are born with the same knowledge that people were born with 3500 years ago, why not just teach those people this information the same way we learn it? What is so hard about that? How about using the teaching methods yet to be invented and teach the science yet to be discovered? Genesis tells about a tree that transferred knowledge of Good and Evil just by eating its fruit. Why not create the Tree of Scientific Knowledge?

          If I was going to relate knowledge, it would be in plain terms that wouldn’t be misinterpreted a hundred different ways over the centuries. If I meant the world was a sphere, I would use a word that distinguished between a circle and a sphere so they would not keep thinking the world was flat.They would understand that there are many galaxies, the earth revolves around the sun, the earth rotates on its axis, and more.

          But at this point, many Christians say, “But the Bible is not supposed to be a science book.” That is right, so stop pretending it relates scientific knowledge. It is so vague on these points, it could be interpreted to mean anything.

        • Pofarmer

          Mackelmore fan?

          “America the brave still fears what we don’t know
          And “God loves all his children” is somehow forgotten
          But we paraphrase a book written thirty-five-hundred years ago
          I don’t know”

        • Greg G.

          After seeing one of Kodie’s replies, where I typed “misinterpreted a hundred different ways”, I think it should have been “misinterpreted 42,000 different ways”.

        • Kodie

          Why did god used to transmit messages and doesn’t anymore. Why would god pick the most illiterate people with no writing materials to tell these stories for centuries before someone could get a pen? Why would they need to be written down once upon a time, if he could just as easily transmit these messages personally to all of us? Your god is such a dumbfuck.

        • If the equivalent pathetic claim were made from another religion, you’d find it ridiculous. Only because you’re obliged to defend it would you bother with an argument this weak.

          A circle is flat; a sphere is 3-dimensional. The Hebrews had both terms. The earth is a sphere, but the Bible calls it a circle. Wrong.

          Drop this argument, admit your error, and don’t use it again.

        • Ron

          The Hebrews already had a word for spherical circle:

          duwr

          “He will roll you up tightly like a ball and throw you into a large country.” Isaiah 22:18 (NIV)

          So why would the author choose the word “circle” instead of “ball” in chapter 40?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          This is a good question.

          The hebrew word for SPhere is the same for circle.

          So why the author choose CIRCLE instead of BALL? This is a question for a Jewish scholar sorry I cannot answer you.

        • Greg G.

          Where is the word for “circle” used to mean “sphere” except by retroactively applying the “sphere” translation from modern knowledge? It sounds like circular reasoning (pun intended).

        • One word for sphere/ball, and another word for circle. Just like in English.

          No, there is no evidence that the ancient Hebrews knew the earth was a sphere.

          You know Jesus cries when you lie, right?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          So why the Jews do not use the word “ball” for sphere (which will be more logical), well I do not know.

          What I know if that the hebrew word for Circle is the same for Sphere. That is a fact.

          Ask a Jewish scholar, if you doubt of what I am saying, seems you enjoy accussing others of lying..well investigate yourself. http://www.askmoses.com

        • When your own holy book says “circle,” why do you think you know enough to correct it? If the Bible says circle, then it’s circle.

          I’m pretty sure God is smart enough to make sure his book is written correctly.

        • Dys

          What I know if that the hebrew word for Circle is the same for Sphere. That is a fact.

          No, it’s not – what happened is that in order to ensure the bible sorta/kinda stayed accurate with modern scientific knowledge, the sphere definition was retroactively added to the lexicon. The hebrew word means a circle as if drawn by a compass – in fact, the verb form of the word means precisely that. It doesn’t mean sphere.

          But the truth of the matter is that this is the world described by the bible:

          http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/308/OTcosmos.jpg

          As for your scholars…there are plenty of Christian biblical scholars who debunk your nonsense.

          http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2001/PSCF9-01Schneider.html

          http://www.crivoice.org/circle.html

          You’re trying to impart modern information on ancient scriptures through hindsight, and looking for excuses to make it work. Except it doesn’t.

        • Rudy R

          No Jewish, Hebrew, or Biblical scholar holds the position that a sphere and circle are the same word. The word ח֣וּג has a geometrical meaning, that is, “a circle.”
          Your last link doesn’t prove your point and in fact, refutes your point. The definition of a sphere is a three-dimensional surface, all points of which are equidistant from a fixed point. You keyed in on definition 7, which is an “imaginary” sphere which has an apparent two-dimensional surface. How ironic that you used this definition, because that’s how the Bronze Age people perceived the Earth to be.

        • Well, yeah. She has a Bronze Age mind, so not too ironic after all.

        • adam

          After BELIEVING in Ron Wyatt’s SCAM and LIES, she will probably believe just about anything…

        • Ron

          How does an omnipresent, non-material, spirit being sit upon anything?

        • Dys

          Yep…the bible describes a flat, disc-shaped earth. Thanks for pointing out yet another way the bible is wrong.

        • Kodie

          Wow you are dumb. Illiterate. What it says right in front of you, you don’t believe, because you WANT SO MUCH FOR SOMETHING ELSE TO BE TRUE THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO IGNORE REALITY. Congratulations for being so dumb.

        • Rudy R

          And from what Bible source did you interpret? Certainly not the original Bible. It doesn’t exist. Maybe a copy? Nope, doesn’t exist either. Maybe a copy of a copy. Maybe. How do you know you are reading the original intent of the authors? You don’t know. Do you know who the authors were? Nope, they are unknown as well.

        • Dys

          Here’s the thing – we both know your statements concerning God-belief and the supposed repercussions are completely faith based. You can’t actually demonstrate that anything actually happens. All you can do is quote scripture, which doesn’t mean anything for the exact same reason – no verifiability.

          And really, dump Pascal’s Wager – it’s an idiotic argument based on fear mongering.

        • adam

          Why should WE listen to what it says, when YOU DONT?

          Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

          Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the
          judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

          Kill Witches

          You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

          Kill Homosexuals

          “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

          Kill Fortunetellers

          A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

          Death for Hitting Dad

          Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

          Death
          for Cursing Parents

          1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

          2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

          Death for Adultery

          If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

          Death for Fornication

          A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

          Death to Followers of Other Religions

          Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

          Kill Nonbelievers

          They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the
          God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

          Kill False
          Prophets

          If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

          Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God

          Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your
          God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

        • Atheists who reject the idea of Yahweh, perhaps. But there are other religions besides Yahweh worship.

        • Kodie

          Doesn’t it just make you feel like you’re part of something to think we’re the fools, not you? You’ve hitched your beliefs to a fraud scammer out of pure wishful thinking and bible verses meant to sway your emotions out of insecurity of seeming like the fool. But you’ve admitted you are the fool. That line you quote is called “marketing”. Watch some ads and see if they don’t try to get you to buy stuff using the same emotional pressures.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          This is how GOD sees your arrogant hearth. Is not me. Is GOd judgement to those who denied HIM. You have all turned away from God.. I ASKED you proofs that expose Ron Wyatt fraud. Until now, none of you are able to provide them. You like to accuse without evidence.

        • Kodie

          No, lady, it’s your job to bring us the accredited scientific journals where your fake archaeologist published his findings. You want to believe a load of baloney, go ahead, but you’re not convincing anyone by making us “prove” you’re wrong. You’re simply stupidly foolishly wrong.

        • Rudy R

          Do you really believe Atheists are fools, corrupt, evil, and do no good? Is that the best message you have for us? You’re not going to win over any Atheists with that attitude.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          This is how GOD sees your arrogant hearth. Is not me. Is GOd judgement to those who denied HIM. You have all turned away from God

        • Kodie

          You think an invisible fairy in the sky cares about you, and you pretend to speak for it. No god told you so, only humans. Your faith is in the stories invented and told and sold by humans. How much money have you paid?

        • I assume you mean “arrogant heart.”

          There are 42,000 denominations of Christianity. Let’s not pretend that the Bible is unambiguous. You think you understand God’s will? I’m sure there are millions of Christians who reject your view on any number of points.

        • Rudy R

          I can’t turn away from something that doesn’t exist.

        • adam

          You mean like you have ‘turned away’ from Ganesh, Shiva and Zeus?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Do you really believe we are “fucking misguided” Aggression is intolerance. If you really do not believe in God..why such effort to deny what others have found?

          By the way. I am not here to “WIN” you. You really believe that? who told you I am here to win over you?

        • Kodie

          Yes, you’re fucking misguided – you’re lost. This is an atheist blog, and we don’t believe in fairy tales you have brought. If you have anything like strong evidence, that’s totally different. And just because you’re convinced doesn’t make the evidence you did bring anywhere near credible. And because PEOPLE WHO ARE CHRISTIAN seek to limit the rights and freedoms of a democratic nation through bullying. That is why. You keep your beliefs to yourself and not interfere with reality here, ok? As it is, you’re one of the fruitiest loops we’ve had lately. Not even Christians think that guy found Jesus’s blood. You’re a moron.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Ad-Hominen. Turning to personal insults only shows your lack of arguments. You are enraged, and from what I know, enraged people do not think nor reason. Guess what? I am GLAD to demonstrate, how easy is to show up that atheists are INTOLERANT.

          Do you know why I am here? because the AUTHOR of this article commented about Lord Jesus blood. I added some information and instead of investigating (like any intelligent people) you start denying, basing your denial in what other says and finally in your case..Insulting. Freedom of SPEECH is a RIGHT dear “KOdie”
          How desperate you are to get my attention. I might agree with the LORD.

          “1 Only fools say in their hearts,
          “There is no God.”

        • Kodie

          It’s not ad hominem unless it has nothing to do with the point. The point is you bought a scam, and now you are trying to sell it to us.

          Wow, you don’t even understand the 1st amendment wrt freedom of speech, so please listen so you learn another new thing. First of all, this is a private blog, not the government. The blogger can restrict speech. Secondly, freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from criticism – you open your mouth to say something, I also have the freedom to counter your remarks. How do you like to be treated? You called atheists corrupt and evil because you believe the bible and what everyone tells you about the meanings of the bible before your own senses. You’re the intolerant one, asshole.

          Plus you are gullible! Don’t demand that we cater to dumbasses just because you’re a Christian. You’re also really stupid to expect your declaration of proof to stand in for credible evidence.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I keep asking.., who are the scholars who said, that what Ron Whyatt findings are a SCAM? Anyone here can bring the evidence?

          Until now all his findings are being proven to be accurate.

          btw Could you refrain the wickedness of your mouth please?
          Other wise I will stop talking to you.

          Learn what is an ADhominen attack: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Ad+hominen

        • Kodie

          I thought someone did, you just didn’t look at it. Common Christian tactic to ignore things that don’t agree with your beliefs. Could you learn to spell and put together a sentence coherently?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Who? the only evidence brought to this forum, were the sayings of someone from a church. IS that your evidence?

          Yes I could improve the grammar of my third language. Until now, seems that you all get the point. Too much debate for someone who writes “incoherently”

        • Kodie

          I asked you if English was your first language and you didn’t answer me yet. Slow down so we can understand you.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          English is my third language. I have to go now. Look, is ok if you do not believe Ron Wyatt findings. I am not here to convince you. Personally, I believe Ron Wyatt, not because what he said 20 years ago, but because his findings are being proven to be accurate lately. I have seen some of his findings being shown in TV documentaries and magazines. . But they do not give him credits and is ok. He was not a man looking fame.So watching his findings being confirmed recently, makes me wonder. “Is possible that he found the Ark of Covenant?”

        • Kodie

          How are they being proved to be accurate lately? Reviving some old scammer on the History Channel is entertainment, not history or science.

          I don’t know where you saw it, but you don’t back up your assertions with any evidence. You see this stuff again and you believe it’s a documentary, they have to know what they’re talking about? They have to tell the truth? Or magazines, journalism? You believe whatever because it’s packaged and you already believe it. They saw you coming a mile away. How old are you?

        • Your argument will go a lot easier if you argue using the consensus view of, in this case, Bible scholars. When you point to someone who is rejected even by fellow Christian scholars, you have an uphill battle.

        • Kodie

          I didn’t look at yours or his, I just know that you brought something and someone else responded with something, and now you think you can just dismiss it – like I said, because it disagrees with your beliefs. You want to throw around insults at us without regard, using the bible to throw your ad hominem, I guess you’d call it, why do you think that makes you sound literate or credible or intelligent or respectful, all while typing with no respect to English grammar, if it is something within your power to do? If you’re an idiot, that’s the accurate word I’m going to use. If you think using insults because they’re in the bible makes you a better person for being a Christian, you’re so not. You’re the hypocrite.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          You are sick Kodie. Sick of hate and wickedness. I am done with you.

        • Kodie

          What did I say that was wrong? You think people are intolerant because they disagree with you. You think you’re not intolerant because you have a belief? You’re intolerant BECAUSE OF YOUR BELIEFS.

        • We’re trying to help you here: when you point to a maverick in his own field, you have the burden of proof of showing that this guy is right.

          Don’t ask us to prove him wrong.

        • adam

          See your boy Ron doesnt have any evidence to turn over to scholars…

          And NONE of his finding have been proven to be accurate, quite the opposite

          Even from his own people:
          http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/

          But obviously YOU understand that there can be no wickedness greater than deception and LYING…

        • I’d like everyone to sit back for a minute and remember the fact that this person is allowed to vote.

        • Kodie

          Mmmm.. maybe she’s in jail.

        • Do they have this much internet access in jail?

          I’m just hoping she doesn’t live in the U.S. Because then she’s allowed to own a gun as well.

        • Kodie

          Maybe she’s 13.

        • Let’s hope younger. I don’t think 5 years is going to be enough to sort out the mess that is going on in that mind.

        • Kodie

          Spelling and typos look like home school.

        • I assumed it was due to good old-fashioned stupidity. You’re obviously an optimist.

        • Kodie

          Eh, a home school education lasts forever. Just giving it a little thought, someone with a hobby horse like Ron Wyatt’s “proof” maybe watched a video at school that day. Has to be old enough for a parent to let them use the internet. Possibly this person is over 60. I’m not that optimistic at all! You scare people reminding them this person can vote, and I am just grasping at reasons why they might not. Anything!

        • Well she seems to be American, so at least she’s not fucking up my country.

        • Kodie

          Oh by the way, you’re also hard of reading comprehension. You don’t get to have a private definition of ad hominem, just because I said something you don’t like or agree with. You didn’t even address what I wrote, you just blathered on with your brainless talking points like the parrot pawn you are.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Calm down Kodie. At this rhythm you will end with a hearth attack or with cancer in the bones.
          I am not bullying anyone. To you? you are taking this personal. Not me.
          =And yes I am addressing your points. You said I do not have evidences. I brought you the videos.
          = You said that are a fraud. I said “bring the scholar you said is a fraud”
          = You said to keep my beliefs to myself. I said “we live in a democratic country where FREEDOM of Speech is a RIGHT”

          Maybe you think we Christians should be silenced. Well you are dreaming and need to wake up.

          Do I insult you? of course not. I am not angry at you. Why should I ? because you disagree?

          I am happy person who is unaffected of what others think or say about me. But you must be very embittered to get enraged only because I quote what the BIBLE says. Is good, you are having a reaction because it bothers you.

        • Kodie

          Can I just ask you, is English your first language?

        • But no chance that you’ll change your mind, right? Your brain is closed to new ideas since you’ve already gotten it all figured out.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          No my friend there is no chance of changing my mind. I will give up my life for my beliefs. I believe in GOD because He is REAL. Because when I have asked something according to His Will, HE hears my prayers. This is something you do not know. Coincidence does not exist.

          How to ask, and then to receive in the right time?

          what about you…will you give up your life for your beliefs? How sure you are, for your beliefs?

          From my side I am 10000% convinced God exists. And has nothing to do with superstition, imaginary friends as you said. IT has to do with REAL HELP from GOD, hard times where God came to rescue me with amazing miracles.

          I will put you an example I witnessed: A dying man from cancer, unbeliever, was resigned to die. Then Christians came and said that only GOD could save Him from death and they offered to pray.
          Then he was healed. Physicians could not believe it. He was dying and then suddenly he is cured 100%. When your li fe is in danger and you are rescued from a sure death, you start believing. IS in the human nature. Yes HE is Christian now. From unbelief to a fervent Christian faith believer.

          If this would have happened to you, or to your children, or to someone who love, you would have believed. Because that is the moment, where atheism nor science can offer an explanation.

          And I bet my life for it. AS many others did.

          http://www.bosnewslife.com/35141-african-man-turns-to-christ-moments-before-beheading

        • adam

          “No my friend there is no chance of changing my mind”

          Like I posted

        • What fun! The members of the KKK were also certain that they were right. I kinda envy that confidence …

          Kidding!

          It is odd that you are confident that God exists but can’t point to anything convincing for someone else. If the evidence is so compelling, shouldn’t there be something we can see?

        • Kodie

          No, that’s why they think god has to tap you. They know they’re not making any sense.

        • wtfwjtd

          How do you know it wasn’t Allah who “healed” your dying man? Or maybe Vishnu? Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Or maybe he wasn’t really that sick? Or maybe he experienced spontaneous remission? What criteria did you use to determine that Christianity was true, and all other religions are false?

        • Greg G.

          What is wrong with you people? You found a way to end cancer by prayer and you only did it for one person? Why not pray for everybody? Why not pray so that everybody who is prayed for is healed?

          As it stands, there is no distinction between the survival rate of Christians and non-Christians. Apparently, by praying for one man to survive, a person who would have lived had to die to make the numbers stay balanced, just to impress you.

          Of course you will hear a lot about the successes but you never hear about the prayers for those who still died. The congregation never gets to see those people. It is worse that some people will hear that and believe faith is imperative and the medicine that would have saved them will be rejected in favor of faith.

        • Kodie

          If god can make cancer go away, why doesn’t he just do it? Why do people have to gather around and beg? Do Christians just love to beg god for favors?

        • Greg G.

          Apologists have proposed that God created the best possible world. Humans have practically eliminated smallpox and polio. Does that make the world less than the best possible? Why couldn’t God or Jesus do that from the beginning?

        • Kodie

          God gave the man cancer to give the opportunity for the praying Christians to bring him closer to Jesus by suddenly taking away his cancer at the last possible second.

          Did Elizabeth actually witness this man recover from cancer, or did she just hear about it from yet another human source. Too many cases I’ve heard about, the person was actually there, and then they didn’t take pictures or get his medical charts to show us. And doctors just never know what the fuck they’re trying to do. I mean, they work really hard with the patient, and then there’s some magical cure that makes them obsolete. Why do we even need doctors?

        • Greg G.

          Many years ago, I read of an test where the theists were challenged to provide their best documented case of a healing. They presented the case of a boy who had headaches so the doctors took X-rays. The doctors wanted to take more X-rays the following week so his grandmother asked her church to pray for the boy. The new X-rays showed nothing abnormal and they counted that as a miracle.

          When the case was investigated, the doctors said that the X-ray for one area didn’t come out clear enough to read so they wanted a better look. The new X-rays showed nothing wrong.

          The boy still had headaches though so he wasn’t even healed.

        • Ron

          The boy still had headaches though so he wasn’t even healed.

          Dollars to donuts those “headaches” were all church-related.

          Grandmother: Wake up and get dressed. It’s time for Sunday school.

          Boy: Aw, grandma, do I really have to?!? My head hurts so bad.

        • Kodie

          Are these people still at large?

        • Greg G.

          I recall reading about that before I got my job with my current employer and that was 25 years ago last week. They have probably all died off from praying for miracles by now.

        • It’s 50 Shades of Purple. People apparently love to humiliate themselves before Jesus.

          I’d rather stand on my own two feet. Isn’t that kind of the American thing to do?

        • Rudy R

          Because science does not have an answer, doesn’t mean the default answer is god. The default answer is we don’t know. There has been many times that science came to explain things that had previously been attributed to a god. There is a lot about the human body we do not understand, but we know everyone has cancer in their body and the reason many don’t die is because their immune system is doing its job. Obviously, your friend’s immune system fought back the cancer. For believers in god, he was cured by god. For atheists, it was due to his immune system.

        • MNb

          “there is no chance of changing my mind”
          Thanks for admitting that you reject the scientific method. Kodie used harsher words, but after reading this I can’t take you any more seriously than Kodie does. One question. Why should anyone pay attention to what someone write who will not change her mind no matter what?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I never said I reject Scientific method. I meant to say: nothing can make me change my beliefs about GOD. You are twisting my words. and for Kodie, well as a woman I would never ever use such profanity. She is jus a lost soul.

        • Kodie

          Double-standard, judgmental? Nobody cares about your opinion of me personally. Where am I lost from? According to the dumbass Elizabeth Rosas D? We’ve established that you talk from your wrong end.

        • Greg G.

          When you say you are “10000% convinced”, your credibility suffers.

        • MNb

          “I meant to say: ”
          And that implies that you reject the scientific method. I’m not twisting anything. Moreover you confirmed it with your video above, where science is supposed to “prove” the Bible. You just don’t want to admit it.

          “for Kodie, well as a woman I would never ever use such profanity.”
          So you’re also guilty of discrimination.

          “She is jus a lost soul.”
          Kodie is an atheist so doesn’t have a soul, let alone that she’s a lost one. You’re condescending.

        • Kodie

          She’s afraid of words, but Elizabeth is nasty enough and ignorant enough of a Christian to wield “god’s” words to tell us atheists we’re evil and corrupt. What’s the big diff between “evil and corrupt” and “fucking misguided idiot asshole” or whatever other accurate words I used to describe her, truly?

          The difference is I’m listening to her and judging her character on her alone, not because she’s a Christian but because she’s actually an asshole. She’s burying herself in the bible to judge people she doesn’t know and isn’t interested in knowing anyway.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I do not réject the scientific méthod. STOP Lying. Everyone has a soul

        • Kodie

          Where is it? Where did you find anything called a soul? You’re rejecting science, attributing your emotional projection onto an spirit that you can’t prove. Go ahead and believe as much baloney as you want, you said you weren’t here to convince anyone, only god can, so what do you have to offer besides childish wishful thinking nonsense?

        • adam

          Demonstrate what a ‘soul’ is.

          Otherwise it is YOU that is lying.

        • Guest

          You ask them!

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xeh001ptDgo
          “A pair of world-renowned quantum scientists says they can prove the existence of the soul. American Dr Stuart Hameroff and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose developed a quantum theory of consciousness asserting that our souls are contained inside structures called microtubules which live within our brain cells. ”

          More:
          http://consciouslifenews.com/scientist-photographs-soul-leaving-body/

        • And this is the scientific consensus? Or just an out-there hypothesis?

        • adam

          So when these microtubules DIE and DECAY, there is no consciousness and therefore no soul.

          Still no evidence of any soul outside the material body of the flesh.

          http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329762.700-consciousness-onoff-switch-discovered-deep-in-brain.html#.VT52XJPzk8A

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          You better ask them if they are lying!!

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xeh001ptDgo

          “A pair of world-renowned quantum scientists says they can prove the existence of the soul. American Dr Stuart Hameroff and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose developed a quantum theory of consciousness asserting that our souls are contained inside structures called microtubules which live within our brain cells. ”

          More:
          http://consciouslifenews.com/scientist-photographs-soul-leaving-body/

        • Kodie

          As long as we’re talking about LYING, Susana Gonzalez, or whatever sock puppet pretend alter-egos you want to post under to support your lame ideas, if your ideas weren’t so stupid and were supported by evidence, why would anyone have to lie and pretend to be more than one person weighing in on the subject with the exact same information? Please don’t try to justify it, you obvious troll.

          Do you think we are as gullible as you?

        • adam

          Well they havent proven it yet, so one of you is LYING…

        • Pofarmer

          Why do I doubt you witnessed this?

          As for your link, torture and death porn? Is that what Christians yearn for, righteous death?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I have to go now. I am not interested arguing. I really hope that eventually in your life, you can feel the call of GOD, because when you grow OLD, SICK and with much sufferings, you start thinking with another perspective and your hearth opens to hear what you have rejected for many years. I wish you good to all of you.

        • I’m pretty sure you’re the one who brought up the blood of Jesus.

          Your claims are intriguing, and some of us immediately asked you to back them up. That’s actually a nice thing, because it leaves open the possibility that your incredible claims are actually true.

          Freedom of speech is indeed a right, but note that it’s provided by the Constitution. Not only are rights not guaranteed by the Bible, God, or Christianity, but freedom of speech is not at all the kind of thing God much cared about your having.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          “but freedom of speech is not at all the kind of thing God much cared about your having.”

          Not sure why you said this. Freedom of speech comes with responsibilities. You really have to care of what you say / or what we Christians say.

          http://biblehub.com/matthew/12-37.htm

          36″But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. 37″For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

        • adam

          Yeah, yeah, we can quote the bible too

          “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract
          with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her
          food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.” (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Jews follow Old testament. Can you show me a JEW “selling ” his daughters as slaves? Then you will make a point!

        • adam

          Jews dont follow the Old testment, they have their own books, you do realize that the Jewish Messiah was to be FULLY human with no god powers, that is why Jesus isnt the Messiah.

          But speaking of the OT

          You do remember what Jesus SAID:

          King James Bible
          For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          If Jews and Christians do not “sell” their daughters then is obvious that you have a problem interpreting the Torah.

        • Greg G.

          The Greeks and Romans tempered the practices of the OT for Jews and Christians. The OT doesn’t require them to sell their daughters.

          Jews are very good at finding ways around the OT laws. In order to not do work on the sabbath, which includes completing and electric circuit, they turn lights on before the sabbath begins and don’t turn them off until after. Even stoves have a sabbath function so they will turn themselves on at a certain time. They cannot carry something outside a structure except for short distances, so they put up strings on telephone poles to encompass their neighborhood and count it as a structure.

          Christians used to kill Jews because they thought the red wine used to represent blood in Jewish rituals was made from the blood of kidnapped Christian children, they didn’t have to use red wine for the rituals.

          Sharia Law used in Muslim countries is mostly based on OT law.

        • adam

          Christians dont follow the Torah.

          And most christians dont even follow the bible.

          Are you CLAIMING that YOUR ‘god’ opposes slavery?

          Please demonstrate with evidence.

        • Kodie

          Plenty of Christians actively condone slavery. Who do you think makes all that cheap crap you buy, when you complain about prices going up, minimum wages in the US, unionizing, and immigrants taking up all the low-paying jobs that pay illegally low wages so no American would even stoop to take those jobs? Where do you think your fruit comes from? Not even to mention the 3 meals of yummy yummy murder that Christians seem awfully defensive against. And as I said just a few days ago – Christians who deny global warming are pro-abortion. Billions will be aborted, murdered, die because of plain ignorance of reality. Thanks, Christians, for bringing bibles to countries without any clean running water or antibiotics, because bibles are much more refreshing and able to fight off infections.

          Don’t fill up your cart with plastic junk you’re just going to throw away when it breaks and tell me you don’t condone slavery.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Please write the word GOD with Uppercase or I will stop
          responding you.
          Old testament:
          http://biblehub.com/exodus/21-16.htm
          “Kidnappers must be put to death, whether they are caught in possession of their victims or have already sold them as slaves.

          New Testament
          1 Timothy 1:10
          9For the law was not intended for people who do what is right. It is for people who are lawless and rebellious, who are ungodly and sinful, who consider nothing sacred and defile what is holy, who kill their father or mother or commit other murders. 10The law is for people who are sexually immoral, or who practice **homosexuality, or are **slave traders**

        • adam

          Please demonstrate that YOUR ‘god’ is anything but IMAGINARY.

          You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would
          have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New
          Testament, as the following passages show.

          Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect
          and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5
          NLT)

          Christians who are slaves should give their masters
          full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your
          efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

          In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of beating slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong.

          The servant will be severely punished, for though he
          knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

        • Seriously? You seriously want to defend the Bible’s stand on slavery?

          Your religious leaders have trained you poorly if they’ve told you that biblical slavery was very different from slavery in America. It wasn’t.

        • Wrong again. Modern Jews and Christians know that slavery is wrong, even if the Old Testament authors didn’t.

          Have you heard about the pastor who, a few weeks ago, demanded that gays be stoned to death? He’s trying to be consistent with the Bible. Do you agree with him?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          Stealing/kidnaping a person for selling, deserves the DEath Penalty. Can you understand that? is in Old testament and New testament. what is your problem understanding this?
          EXODUS 21:16
          “He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.

          1 Timothy 1:10
          for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for **slave traders and liars and perjurers–and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine

          If you still insist in slavery, my friend you are a lost case. Most probably you are incapable to UNDERSTAND 2 simple VERSES.
          And for the pastor..you said previously that many Christians do not follow tge Bible. This is an example.

        • The pastor is clearly following the Bible. Lev. 18 makes clear the punishment for homosexuality. That’s in the Bible–perhaps you’ve read it?

          God is A-OK with slavery. Read and respond to the link in my other comment that goes into more detail.

        • adam

          The following passage shows that slaves are clearly
          property to be bought and sold like livestock.

          However, you may purchase male or female slaves from
          among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You
          may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)

          The following passage describes how the Hebrew slaves
          are to be treated.

          If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married
          before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still
          belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door
          and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)

        • The point has already been made, and you lose: your holy book has your God declaring the rules for how slavery should work.

          That should be incredible enough, but now we have good people like you apologizing for this insane imaginary god. Do you not see what this belief has done to you? You’re supporting slavery!

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          I did not know I was in a contest and answering to WIN! lol that was funny! and childish. I though I was speaking with mature people and now you come with the concept of “winning”..so winning what exactly? God gave me, eternal salvation. Do you really think I care for “winning debates”?
          Do you realize you are more than 10 people versus myself? I feel overwhelmed I never though to catch such attention. lol…But the reason you do is because YOU HATE so much the BIBLE and its moral codes, that you guys want to JUSTIFY yourselves, that you are in the right path.. to silence your hidden conscience and to feel a false freedom.
          This is the reason you write to me. what a better way to feel yourselves “superior” to a “stupid” Christian. You need that. Is all about arrogance and foolishness. Because you are not even scholars of anything.

        • When you fail to make your point, you lose the argument. New concept?

          Do you really think I care for “winning debates”?

          I thought you cared about winning the argument–that is, convincing us that what you say is true. If that’s not your goal, I suggest you stop wasting your time doing whatever it is you’re doing.

          But the reason you do is because YOU HATE so much the BIBLE and its moral codes

          Aren’t you clairvoyant! Kidding–no, you’re wrong again. The Bible is the blog of an ancient desert people. It is important as history; that’s it. It has no supernatural wisdom. If it does, you’ve done nothing to advance that argument.

        • adam

          “But the reason you do is because YOU HATE so much the BIBLE and its moral codes,”

          And apparently YOU have no trouble with the bibles ‘moral codes’

          Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

          Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the
          judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

          Kill Witches

          You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

          Kill Homosexuals

          “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

          Kill Fortunetellers

          A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

          Death for Hitting Dad

          Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

          Death for Cursing Parents

          1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

          2) All who curse their father or mother must be put
          to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

          Death for Adultery

          If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

          Death for Fornication

          A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

          Death to Followers of Other Religions

          Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

          Kill Nonbelievers

          They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the
          God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

          Kill False
          Prophets

          If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

          Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God

          Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your
          God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that
          such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the
          entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his
          fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your
          God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

        • Kodie

          HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE THEY GOTTEN FROM YOU SO FAR??? I ask and get no answer. People gave you a story, you believe that story, we don’t believe that story, now if you’re not trying to win a debate, why do you keep posting garbage? Why do you not realize they have not only lied to you about “god”, they have fed you lies to make you intolerant and hostile toward atheists. Do you not wonder why you’re treated like the fucking idiot fool that you are? Because you come here quoting a fictional fairy tale that you take so seriously that you’re unwilling to open up to other information that might defeat you. How is that having “no interest in winning”? Then leave if you’re not interested in winning, or interested in open up to new information that may change your mind if you would shut the fuck up with your horseshit and listen. Quit whining, you asshole. Nobody asked you for any of this, and you persist in hanging out, so take the abuse, you illiterate turd.

        • MNb

          BobS is using “winning” and “losing” as metaphors. Funny that a seasoned christian like you doesn’t recognize a metaphor unless it’s spelled out.

        • Puh-raise the Lord-uh!

        • I’ll try again: we have the Constitution to thank for our freedom of speech, not the Bible.

        • Ron

          “Only simpletons believe everything they’re told!” (Proverbs 14:15, NLT)

        • Greg G.

          Good verse! I’ll have to remember that one. Here are other versions:

          http://biblehub.com/proverbs/14-15.htm

        • Why do you reject what others have found about other religions? Why not become a Muslim or Mormon or Hindu, for example?

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          They are wrong. Specially ISLAM. You do not need to be expert to see what ISIS, Al queda, Boko haram are inspired in a false god. This is EVIL.

        • So it’s just cuz you said? Just cuz you really feel that you’re right, you must be right? I bet the Nazis were double-darn sure they were right, too.

          You really need to learn how to make a coherent, convincing argument before you step out again.

        • Kodie

          Christianity spread in pretty much the same way.

        • Rudy R

          Oh, you’re one of those Christians.

        • adam

          Yes, I agree that you ‘fucking misquided’ what does that have to do with intolerance.

          Because other people delusions are DANGEROUS…

        • Greg G.

          Ron Wyatt, the “Indiana Jones” of the SDA Church

          The only amazing things Ron Wyatt discovered were all the gullible people who gave him money.

        • 90Lew90

          I thought you said not to watch it. “The simply act would kill you.”

        • Rudy R

          You realize his work has been rejected by the archaeological community? BTW, there is no evidence of a global flood, so the hunt for the Biblical Ark is like hunting for Capt Nemo’s submarine.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          REally? can you show me, evidences of what Ron W, discovered is FALSE?, who are the scholars who denied his findings and why? Thank you!

        • The burden of proof is yours. Since he hasn’t convinced biblical scholars (for starters), we have no choice but to consider him a maverick.

        • Elizabeth Rosas D

          The videos are public and they are the proof. Now…what are your proofs that disqualify them? any scholar by any chance? Who exactly debunked Ron wyatt. Who? you? really?

        • Can I point to a video about evolution and declare that it’s proof? Will you accept evolution then? And climate change?

          This guy is a maverick. If the scholars in his field reject him, what possible reason (I mean, besides satisfying your agenda) could you have for accepting his conclusions?

        • Dys

          Ron Wyatt was, at best, an extremely amateur archeologist, with little to no actual training in the field. There’s a reason why real archaeologists didn’t pay much attention to him – he simply wasn’t qualified, and made unsupported claims. Even other creationists realized Ron was a crank.

          All the videos “prove” is that people desperate for evidence of their religion will go running to frauds for support, as long as they’re being told what they want to hear.

        • adam

          Ok here is the SAME kind of ‘proof’ that Spiderman is real

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfV-0Yv5vNY

          So of course, BECAUSE it is a video it is ‘proof’ in YOUR mind.

        • Greg G.

          Mainly because he produced no evidence, only claims that he found things and excuses for the lack of evidence. Te instruments he used do not do what he claimed they did. Some of the things he said he found would be impossible to find thousands of years later at the bottom of the sea.

        • Rudy R

          For the claim of finding Jesus’ blood, Ron W. allegedly had the blood tested, but hasn’t released the results other than stating that the blood had only 24 chromosomes instead of having 46 chromosomes of a normal human. Most of the time, having the wrong number of chromosomes means you don’t stay alive long enough to be born and the zygote won’t survive if it has anthing less than 2 chromosomes. So if you still insist that Ron W. is still correct in his test results (which haven’t been released) than Jesus couldn’t possibly have been human.

          For the claim of finding Noah’s Ark, he had no evidence of a boat. He identifes a rock formation that looks like a boat, but there are multiple boat-shaped formations near the one he identified, so either these are natural formations or Noah had an armada of arks, which the Bible never mentions. The boat-shaped formation that he identified as the ark is consistent with a natural geological formation known as a syncline.

          His evidence for the Ark of the Covenant is scant, to say the least, and his biggest piece of evidence is a blurry photo of gold, but the photo could be just about anything your heart desires.

          I could go on and on and on, but quite frankly, the guy is clearly a fraud and charlatan. Don’t you find it a little bit suspicious that he alone has found all the great Judeo-Christian artifacts? With unsubstantiated evidence?

        • 23 chromosomes? I’m sold.

        • Greg G.

          A person can survive if they have a bad gene on one chromosome if the redundant one is good. So if there were 23 perfect chromosomes maybe he could survive but one would have to be an X chromosome and not a Y, so Jesus would have to be female. But if Rudy R. is correct, the 24th could be a Y chromosome.

        • adam

          I have already given you the evidence from HIS OWN PEOPLE…

          http://tentmaker.org/WAR/

          The REAL problem is that Ron HAS NO EVIDENCE, only his CON for the gullilble like YOU.

        • adam

          So where is Ron’s evidence?

          I have already demonstrated to YOU that Wyatt is a LIAR and a SCAMMER.

        • Kodie

          Bob, the blog owner wrote a question to you personally, and you have ignored it.

          How do you sift valid evidence from bogus evidence?

        • Greg G.

          Remember that guy who did nothing but quote Bible verses with little interaction? Is he back with a new name and new gender?

        • Kodie

          Erwin’s source was completely the bible, no tv documentaries or magazines or videos of fake archaeologists.

        • Rudy R

          Elizabeth is not here to point out the errors in our logic, as commented to me:

          By the way. I am not here to “WIN” you. You really believe that? who told you I am here to win over you

      • RichardSRussell

        Earth to Elizabeth. Come in, Elizabeth. Please come in. Elizabeth?

        Dang, she’s too far out in space to even hear us.

  • Michael Reid

    “What are these ultimate questions in whose presence religion is an honoured guest and science must respectfully slink away?”

    ‘Why do bad things happen? Why do we die? How do I tell right from wrong?’ Those are the types of questions Gould used as an example of the magisterium of religion. Rather than simply saying that religion and science should just get along, he pointed out that people asked questions that science simply is not equipped to answer, questions in the realm of philosophy and ethics, and invent religion to fill the void.

    • Bradley Allan Samuels

      All of those questions can be addressed by scientific inquiry, because they deal with the terrestrial realm. Human consciousness is part of the observable universe, and therefore everything that it entails is in the domain of science.

      But if theists want a God of the gaps, they can be my guest. Science is actively trying to eliminate those gaps (and therefore kill that particular version of God) 24/7. If they choose instead a God that does not influence the terrestrial realm in any way, and is therefore outside of the realm of science, then for all intents and purposes it does not exist, or at the very least there is no good reason to believe that it does.

      • MNb

        Science does not answer why-questions. It answers how come questions. The first are religious ones and typically childlike: why this, why that, why the answer? They ask for a purpose. How come questions are about causes and probabilities.
        Now indeed “why” is often used as “how comes”, by scientists as well. “Why do things fall downward and not upward? Because gravity attracts and not repels.” It’s a typical trick of believers to mix the two meanings. They need ambiguity to give their beliefs more credibility.

        Science doesn’t tell if fracking gas is a good idea or not.

        • Bricabrac

          Actually, it kinda does, by informing us as to what results and consequences fracking will have. When we have that information, it sure as shootin’ isn’t religion that tells us whether it’s a good idea.

          The chief domain of religion is, as you pointed out, questions of purpose; “Why are we here?”, and “Why was the universe created?”.
          Trouble is, these questions are essentially meaningless unless you’ve already made the assumption of an intelligent creator, without whom there can be no intended purpose.

          Until you’ve established the existence of the creator in the first place (and we’re still waiting), what meaning is there of trying to determine its intentions?

        • Kodie

          Your parents can have intentions over you. Pretty much almost always* seems that people don’t intentionally have children for the children’s benefit of being born. When people have children, it’s because of their own agenda, and/or, Christ, their respective parents’ agendas. For some reason, our society doesn’t consider you complete unless you’ve had children, and many people are raised with the notion that they must, and usually they do, complete with pressure from family and friends to “achieve” this milestone before they’re old or wise enough to think about it, to look around at others, and see parenthood for what is actually entailed rather than envious for the highlights.

          Why are we here? I mean, why instead of some other sperm winning the race? Why do people have children, really? I also kind of think people like the idea of having a project of their own human being to shape. Some parents are rather severe in their intentions toward their projects and how they ought to take shape. You don’t need an intelligent creator to determine intentions for your life. What you’re going to be is to a great degree due to into what family you’re born.

          *This may or may not be an exaggeration.

        • MNb

          “by informing us as to what results and consequences fracking will have.”
          Nope. Science tells us how to arrive to what results and consequences, not if those results and consequences are desirable or not. If religion is reliable to answer the latter question is not NOMA’s concern.

          “Trouble is, …..”
          That’s not of NOMA’s concern either.

          “Until ….. intentions?”
          You’re moving the goalposts.

    • Yes, religion does claim to be able to answer those big questions. But they usually disagree with each other on the answers. The answer to “Why are we here?” changes depending on which culture you ask it in.

      • MNb

        That’s correct, but not of NOMA’s concern.

      • Michael Reid

        As MNb pointed out, that’s irrelevant. Gould wasn’t saying that religion is the best way to answer these questions; he was saying that science isn’t. Religion and science are different toolkits, to explore different questions in different fields. Your column, and Dawkins’ sneer quoted in it, betray – in my opinion, of course – a misunderstanding of what Gould was arguing. And to imply that he was just pandering to religious bigotry is insulting to a man who was a staunch advocate of scientific education and a tireless foe of creationism.

        • So instead of nonoverlapping magesteria, we have just the one magesterium that we know does anything–science–and that’s it? I’m sure that’s not what Gould was saying either.

          I may indeed misunderstand Gould’s position, but I don’t think I’m any more on track now.

        • Michael Reid

          As it happens, this evening I was at a benefit for the Georgia Innocence Project, and listening to the story told by a man who had served 17 years in prison for a crime for which he was exonerated. He talked about what happened when he simply gave up, and resigned himself to the fact that he was going to spend the rest of his life in prison. He was, however, terrified of dying there.

          He began to receive letters and visits from a woman who was “witnessing” to him, sending him Bible passages. She also got him in touch with the Innocence Project people, and took a third job to pay for a lawyer for him. The whole process of his exoneration took seven years, and he said that in that time he became a Christian, because it gave him something to cling to, a source of hope.

          We can argue that his faith was misplaced, that he might better have put it into the woman of faith who worked so hard to get him out (and who’s now his wife); the point is, religion was the tool he used to grapple with despair and depression. He wasn’t approaching the question of God from an intellectual perspective; he was using the story to cope with pain. *That’s* the magisterium of religion.

        • Makes sense to me. Let’s just not say that religion is a route to knowledge or that it has intellectual arguments behind it.

        • Michael Reid

          Exactly. And that’s what Gould was saying with his NOMA concept.

        • adam

          Which simply sounds again like appeasement to the deluded, rather than having a useful toolkit that excludes science.

        • Michael Reid

          Ah. So the last time a girlfriend or boyfriend dumped you, or you had to put your cat down, or you got in a fight with a coworker, you consoled yourself with Maxwell’s equations? You use Fourier analysis to explain why “Star Wars: The Phantom Menace” sucked?
          If we were trying to analyze the origins of emotions, science offers tools. But trying to handle them as human experiences? Not so good.

        • Kodie

          It’s like lies we tell ourselves, like “she’s just jealous” and “I have lots of time.” Whatever makes the owie go away and we can function productively.

        • Kodie

          Psychology actually tells us things that religions do not.

        • Michael Reid

          Yes. Religion is a form of story-telling, rather than a tool of analysis. It’s not necessarily a good one, but that’s not what’s being argued. Gould was saying that it does not deal with the same category of experience as science.

        • Kodie

          How and why we process emotions can be and is studied, and yes, people do rationalize their way through pain by reminding themselves it’s just chemicals, and overpower their own emotions.. some especially the religious call that robotic or clinical (you even alluded to it), while they prefer to drug themselves with lies. Anyway, people go to see psychologists and take medicines that can help their emotional coping skills, because emotional coping skills can be broken or debilitating. Emotions can stunt our growth. I can’t say to your false convict there, because that really sucks, but he basically found a trigger to place in the slot and his brain recovered using an available tool. That would be the scientific analysis. If you can scientifically analyze something, it is within the realm of science, and knowledge about what’s going on in your brain can even help you cope with it, if it’s painful. A delusion works, self-medicating works, counseling may work. These are actually all within the realm of science because they work on the brain.

        • adam

          It is the POWER of that story-telling that relies on ‘faith’ instead of FACTS that makes story-telling dangerous.

          Religion doesnt really deal with experience, it deals in false hopes and promises that it is unable to demonstrate or deliver. Delusion.

        • adam

          Pretty much.

          I analyze the situations.
          Why was I dumped, why do cats get sick, why did I get in a fight.
          Understanding the situation is productive and helps me deal with REALITY.

          Trying to handle emotions with other emotions is counter productive, science AGAIN offers the best tools for dealing with emotions.

          Pasting them over with religious delusions is NOT an answer or a solution.

        • MNb

          “So the last time a girlfriend or boyfriend dumped you, or you had to put your cat down, or you got in a fight with a coworker”
          psychology is a better toolkit than religion. And psychology is science. You should think up a better example, because you’re going against Gould’s advise here.

        • adam

          “He wasn’t approaching the question of God from an intellectual perspective; he was using the story to cope with pain.”

          So scientifically he was using the STORY to cope with pain, much like a placebo. This can/has been studied scientifically.

          So what good is the toolkit of religion and what does it operate on that is not science?

        • Michael Reid

          That’s not the question I was answering. Seidensticker quoted Richard Dawkins wondering what questions can science not answer; “Why is ‘Huckleberry Finn’ a better book than ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’?” is one. As is “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Science is a tool for analysis; religion a mode of experience. I’ll say it again – I’m not defending religion; I’m defending Stephen Jay Gould.

        • adam

          Science can certainly determine why Huckleberry Finn is a better book, if it is.

          Polls and analysis can certainly be used to determine what qualities of a book make it better than another.

          Science is MUCH MUCH MUCH better at analyzing experience that the inconsistency of religion.

          It doesnt matter to me who or what you are defending, I just fail to see how religeous delusionment is good at anything except for political power.

        • MNb

          Sure. It’s just that Gould never claimed that religion is a toolkit for answering such questions either.

        • MNb

          “Religion and science are different toolkits”
          That’s actually not what Gould said – he never claimed that religion was a toolkit for anything.

    • Warren

      ‘Why do bad things happen? Why do we die? How do I tell right from wrong?’

      I’ll give you that third one, since ethics is all about defining right from wrong (though a psychologist could talk your ear off about the evolutionary benefits of empathy and altruism, if you’re wondering why we care about “right and wrong”). Those other two, however, are decidedly scientific. Medical researchers all over the world spend their time figuring out why we die and how to put it off as long as possible. And natural selection answers that first question far more neatly than any religion: Bad things happen because we are just another species struggling to survive. The earth was not made for us, so why should we expect it to always work for our benefit?

      • Michael Reid

        Okay, how about this question: “How do light sabers work?” Can physics or chemistry answer that? No, because light sabers are not physical phenomena – they are fictional constructs, part of a story. Yet “Star Wars” is certainly real, as are “Hamlet”, “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn”, and “There once was a man from Nantucket…” Science can not measure or parse a story any more than I can change a tire with a teaspoon. And for the same reason: it’s not the right tool for the job.
        Gould wasn’t arguing that religion was a valid an approach as science, or even for a let’s-just-all-play-nicely-together détente – he was pointing out that religion and science are simply different toolkits for very different problems in very different fields. In fact, he was saying that religion and science come into conflict when scientists or theologians attempt to fix that flat with a teaspoon. And while trying to use scientific tools to answer the question “Is Hamlet a better play than Macbeth” just results in incomprehension, using religious tools to answer the question “How did humans come to be” can result in very unfortunate laws and policies.
        The sneering tone I sometimes encounter in references to Gould’s NOMA idea, and the implication that he was just pandering to prejudice and ignorance is insulting to a man who was one of the most staunch advocates of scientific education and fearless opponents of creationism and anti-scientific woo.

        • Warren

          True, science cannot answer questions about philosophic, aesthetic, or artistic values (though it can investigate why we may find such things valuable), nor can it answer questions about a works of fiction. Is that all religion is to you? A collection of philosophical conceits, reflective only of human constructs and not of any concrete facts? If so, then you must understand that you’re a very atypical theist; most theists expect God to have some tangible impact on their lives.

        • Michael Reid

          I would indeed be an atypical theist, if I was a theist at all. I’m not; I’m a secular humanist and atheist. Nor was I defending religion; I was defending Stephen Jay Gould. As I said in my last comment, attacks like Seidensticker’s and Dawkins’ on NOMA are not uncommon among rationalist writers, and, I think, betray an misunderstanding of exactly what Gould was arguing.

          Edited to add: Also, how were you able to italicize words in your post? I hate having to emphasize words with asterisks.

        • Rikki

          Discus recognizes html tags. Just be sure to close your tags with a /. (see the first line under Matching Tags at the link below)

          https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466253-what-html-tags-are-allowed-within-comments-

        • Michael Reid

          Ah! Much appreciated!

        • Greg G.

          Thank you for providing the link.

          The anchor link, “a”, seems incomplete. Using the “a” by itself will make the text the color of the links for the blog’s color scheme. To make it an active link it should be something like:

          <a href=”http://yourURLhere.com”>Page Title</a>

          You can use “&nbsp;” as a space character. If it replaces a space between words, the words will not be separated by a line break. It can be used at the beginning of a line for an indentation. I start with that and alternate with regular spaces for bigger indentations.

          To make the &, use “&amp;” For < and >, use “&lt;” and “&gt;”. They give an alternate way to do it but it is easier to remember this way.

          ™ = &trade;

  • hisxmark

    It is true that science cannot study God. However, science has made significant progress in the study of religion and religious thinking. Imagine if science could finally find a cure for religion!

    • Greg G.

      It’s not that science is inherently incapable of studying gods. Religions have proposed testable gods but science made them untenable, essentially curing those religions. Science can’t test imaginary things, especially when those things are contrived to be scientifically untestable. Those are the only gods left.

      If science could cure religion, it would be impossible to get the afflicted to take their medicine.

      • hisxmark

        Well, of course they should be given the choice: Cure or quarantine.

  • Elizabeth Rosas D

    Science proves the BIBLE is TRUE

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=86&v=9XzYpJMAiBE

    • Dys

      Only if you use hindsight and unreasonably generous interpretations of the bible. But then again, I don’t think you’re going in for an honest appraisal of the bible at all, but rather a mindless devotional one instead,

      But you know what else science has demonstrated? The order of creation in Genesis is wrong. Oops.

    • Rudy R

      Job preached a geocentric model, so he most certainly did not claim the
      Earth revolved around the Sun, which coincidentally, was the same general belief during the Bronze Age. Isn’t it ironic that the video promotes Copernicus as a genius and believer in god, but in the 16th Century, he debunked the Bible model with the Heliocentric model. The “is transformed below as by fire” in Job 28:5 is a reference to a mining technique and not some scientific claim about the inner core of the Earth.

      You want to discuss where the science proves the Bible WRONG?

      – In 1 Kings, value of pi is wrong.
      – In Genesis, God made a firmament that is a vast, solid plate/dome/sphere upon which God affixed the stars, or in other words, the roof of the Earth
      – In Genesis, the moon is referred to as a light
      – In Genesis, the Earth was created before the sun
      – In 1 Chronicles, Psalm and Isaiah, the earth is fixed and immovable and lies at the center of all things, which is a Geocentric model.
      – In Job, and for the entire Bible for that matter, Earth is not identified as being circular or a sphere.

      Now, think twice about explaining away the Bible claims I just listed as poetic or allegorical, because then you’ll have to admit the Bible claims in this video are poetic and allegorical as well.

    • Superstitious claptrap. Show me one bit of new science we got from the Bible. Or one discovery made by following clues in the Bible.

      I wonder why we don’t see a recipe for soap in the Bible. It was easy to make.

      And if these vague ideas can be imagined to be science, what happens when there’s nonscientific nonsense in the Bible? Does that disprove the Bible? Or are you just cherry picking?

    • MNb

      Science doesn’t prove anything. Science only disproves. Again you reject science.

      Biblical biology: bats are birds.
      Lev. 11:13-19 “These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle ….. and the bat.”

      Biblical math: pi equals 3.
      1 Kings 7:2f3 “And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.”

      As nothing can change your mind – you wrote it yourself – I predict you will bring up all kind of interpretations why I dumb atheist read this verses the wrong way. They will exactly be that though – interpretations used as special pleading. Science proves the Bible when it suits you; when it doesn’t suit you you explain the errors away and don’t care how.

    • adam

      All the video proves is that there are LIARS for Christ.