Solace of the Solitary

Sure, some studies may have faulty methodologies, but the vast majority are solid. The scientists career and reputation is based on solid research. If they apply some bad methods, they will list them in the discussion section of the paper. In addition, future research will test their findings and they will either be supported or not.

updated by @kelly3: 07/22/15 02:13:15PM

Correct. That's because there's money involved. There are Right Wing Christian LOBBYISTS in Washington who make sure all their 'friends' are taken care of. Lobbying is one of the greatest evils this country has ever allowed.

Baba Fats said:

Of course they have no credibility. So that wasn't the best example. But what I said a while ago about studies in America, claiming that Marijuana doesn't help Cancer and AIDS patients, and Studies in Europe stating the opposite, is an example of it. The studies in the US were funded by the government, and they refuse to accept independent research. That is a good example of how some scientific studies can be flawed.

But they're not supposed to follow the Archbishops. They're supposed to follow the Pope. He's the one with the mandate from God. So all those who are following the Archbishops who believe teachings which the Pope clearly does not are heretics by their own definition. They've diverged from the path of their Church but aren't willing to admit it to themselves yet because they don't want to be damned. So they console themselves saying, "But Archbishop so-and-so say's it's alright to believe in this!"
ToTheAnkles! said:

There are archbishops that accept the theory of evolution as a credible explaination for the diversity of life, that goes to show you how silly the creationist view is.

"Supposed to follow the Pope".Says who? I'll admit I know jack all about the Bible, but where does it state that the Pope has a mandate from God in the Bible?If the Bible does not state any such thing then it is quite easy for any nutjob to say "I have a mandate from God!".Furthermore, heresy is an invention of states and the church. Did Jesus say: "If you find any Jews, torture them until they convert because they are heretics"?

Of course religious texts are easy to twist. They're written in metaphor. That's their purpose. But when you have literalist interpreters trying to control the masses for their own pleasure and perversion then that's where the problems come in.

Papal primacy is the key here.

The Roman Catholic Church attributes to the primacy of the Pope "full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered." A power that it attributes also to the entire body of the bishops united with the pope.(And not all united with the Pope. Some are in it for their own reasons(political) and others change their religious views after being in the Church so long.)

Meaning: anyone else is a heretic. The Pope's word is law, and when he is later proven to be a jackass he doesn't apologize, he just moves on business as usual. Priests, bishops, and archbishops get bitch slapped by him all the time. It's nothing new. Just politics of power. And WHY did the Crusades and Inquisitions happen? Because they were heathens who refused to be controlled. Oh, and the Church wanted all the riches of the Holy Land. Why do you think that the Church is the richest institution in the world? But I digress.

When we follow it back the gospel accounts of Matthew (16:1719), Luke (22:32) and John (21:1517) and then look at history then we see that they are all that they use to claim the Pope is the Head Cheese. Peter was supposedly the founder of the Church and so anyone who was ordained by him began the apostolic succession which is still going strong today.

You said: "Did Jesus say: "If you find any Jews, torture them until they convert because they are heretics"?

Damn skippy. He didn't. Supposedly. But Yahweh sure did like murdering people because they weren't believers. The Old Testament is repugnant like that. But when the Old Testament is brought out for investigation by those who want to argue with those who believe in the literal version then they say, "Oh but the Crucifixion and Ascension negated God's past decisions. It's a new plan now." -- like that'll make a megalomaniac any nicer and fluffier to those worried about the state of their souls. God changed his mind. That's that.

Dogma is inherent in religion and it harms. Open spirituality frees.

There's some very quirky stuff going on in science the past few decades, ToTheAnkles. Now scientists looking at 'dark matter' and the supposed laws which govern all matter in our universe are finding that other galaxies are not bound by the same laws. Look it up. Gravitational redshift in relation to dark matter and the like. 'Natural law' and 'the scientific method' don't always sinc up when we look beyond our own little blue marble in the stars. Then again, neither do common sense and the way-things-are. Humans can be stupid like that.

i know Jesus haad to be laughing inside as he spoke in paraboles

So he is the founder, big effing deal. Doesn't give him the ability to twist whatever the frigging SON of God said into something more convenient. Who was a Jew. How can you ever state that the religion the son of God followed and stated was still applicable in addition to his teachings, is heretical?If the THEORY of general relativity doesn't apply to the entire universe then that does not mean scientific method has failed. Scientific consensus was once that the sun revolved around the earth, same with the earth being flat. That doesn't mean science failed, scientists are not immune to making mistakes. The difference is that science modifies it's views to fit the facts, whereas religion and spirituality modify the facts to fit it's views.And I think you're overreacting and confusing words. All galaxies in the observable universe follow all the scientific theories. Perhaps you meant that other universes don't follow the same rules, which is entirely possible but not proven. The same with dark matter changing the rules, it's most likely just another variable to be considered.Instances in which the theory of general relativity possibly does not apply is things such as the singularity of a black hole. Scientific method is still applicable even there, the current theories simply don't apply there. New theories will be thought of that take these things into account and these theories themselves might one day be replaced with new theories, ad infinitum.

Hey Adam.

In response to your thoughts I ought to point out that I am in no way shape or form trying to push any kind of argument so the fact that "that argument makes no sence" to you is in your eyes only, because I'm not arguing or pushing anything, simply sharing my thoughts, feelings and beliefs openly.

There is nothing to argue Like I said (I believe) every one is right. I'm not sugesting you are wrong, I'm simply saying my truth from my view, from my understanding of my world.May I ask what your definition of reality is?

I have free will. Ialone am responsible for my deeds and Idon't feel the need to find an external source to blame if I doharm or good.

xx
Adam Kelly said:

That argument makes no sense to me. Reality is about what is real. Many children believe in Santa, but it doesn't affect to reality of the situation. You might say that he is real to them, but it doesn't mean anything.

Edit: Lennie, have you heard the argument that free will is an illusion. It's pretty convincing.

Isn't it great Baba Fats to be in a place where you can both share that time together, yet also be in your own worlds. Two worlds colliding in a beautiful way!

xx

It really is. She loves the fact that I don't feel like I have to hover around her and make he feel rushed. And I like not feeling like I have to hover around her.

We both love to be out in nature, for very similar reasons. We just experience it differently.