Science is merely human discovery of pieces of Work done by the Creator.

Human beings are mortal busy little ants of the Earth, but with a conscience which strikingly seems to relate to a far superior Creator, resulting in faith or denial/rejection. That sets us apart from earth's other creatures.

Mortals who take science as a graduator of all things and think their work of discovery is prove of their personal brilliance are in fact to be pitied, and are certainly not enlightened in my book.

Scientists should only show gratitude for the Gift of Discovery. They didnt create anything !

Creation was done by a much greater Force then these ants can apparently perceive. In this regard a goatherd in a rural village somewhere in Mongolia or even Jemen can be more enlightened than the arrogant scientist who seeks personal glory.

Abraham wrote:

Fish wrote:

With greatest respect towards your opinions, I can't see single rational argument in those words, which counterargues what I said :88)

What I mean is, we fabricate opinions and arguments in our brains, but we don't know it means something in the universe. We are bound by our possibility's.

Religion, who cares?
 

Yep, our knowledge is limited, sometimes very limited. And therefor based on faith, conviction, whatever you want to call it. Very human indeed...

Re: Religion, who cares?
 

Well, I read it. Interesting. Not necessarily correct, but still interesting.



Now, for my personal opinion: I try not to think about it much. It is an area with much uncertainty, and as far as I can see no good way to get reliable answers. The plethora of religions that are at least in some ways opposed to each other illustrates the problem. Even if they were in agreement, that still would not mean they agreed on the right thing.

So what do I do? In the absence of good information, I postpone forming opinions on the subject. I don't claim there certainly is a God, and I don't claim there certainly is no God. I just accept that I don't know, until I get a good reason to start believing. Of course, standards of proof are subjective. Some "feel" there is a God. As a catholic by education, I certainly have had some special feelings at some moments, during church services. Some might think they have been touched by God or something. Personally, I do not know the cause of those feelings, and I do not want to ascribe them to God just because I do not really understand them (after all, that was what more primitive people did with all things they saw, lightning, the sun, a tree, all were gods). And I do know the mind can perform some strange tricks occasionally, in situations that definitely aren't religious.

I guess that if, at some point, God decides he really wants me to know about him, being omnipotent he'll have no problem to demonstrate his existence in a blatantly obvious way, without requiring me to interpret vague feelings or the conflicting writings of various religions.

I do not see any problem with the kind of God proposed by Hitman. It is not in conflict with anything we know, one just takes the aggregate of rules that govern our universe, both those already known and those yet to be discovered, and perhaps those that will never be discovered because they're too subtle or inaccessible, then defines the cause of those rules to be God. But that seems to add little to saying that those rules merely exist.


By the way, Sixpack, your view of scientists seems to be slightly exaggerated. It strongly resembles some Hollywood and comic book representations of scientists, and a few real ones, but most scientists I know are just very interested in discovering how things work. Of course, I'm doing research myself, so I may be biased here.

Most likely you are, Wim :)

Even if you'd one day find a cure against cancer, I just hope you will always remember it was because of the Gift of Discovery that was granted to you. Be thankful.

Some are destined to be great football players, others musicians, and some were born to become determined scientists. They are all 'gifted' in order to put it to good use.

Because we are created, the real glory has to go elsewhere. In this respect muslims stuck closer to the truth than a growing number of westerners who think they can do without.

(note: I havent been to church since early this year when my daughter was baptised, so I fit into the church-abandoning group. I feel I am too busy to go, and whatever excuses. Somehow I think I am doing the wrong thing)

Religion, who cares?
 

Straight and honest as always, Sixpack.
And probably right!

I am unbeliever. Not an atheist, just unbeliever. Why? Maybe because I grew up in USSR. Though, I'm bapthised in Russian Orthodox church. It was "in fashion" during a first post-soviet years - to revive religion. Mother brought icons and religios books to home. First, it was interesting - to read those books and to learn prayers. That time I was about 10-11 y.o. But later I was bored of it. Implicit faith just didn't come.
And now, I thing to myself that this is good - I haven't any veil on my eyes. I'm not belong to any religion, so I can respect all of them. And I don't have to call to kill either muslims or christians or buddhists or someone else...

Religion, who cares?
 

Religious people don't have to do that either!

Reading these threads has backed up what I have come to believe in the past 2 decades. Most people think that Their religion is the right one, and the rest are wrong. Even in Christianity, the different denominations argue that their's is right, and other denominations are wrong. I was raised in a strict Baptist home, and my Dad was a fire and brimstone minister. There were rules and commandments to be followed to the letter, or you would burn in Hell for all Eternity. In my late teens, I met a Muslim, who would be described as an extremist from the posts I've read on this board. We talked quite a bit about religion, but he had the common view his religion is the right one, and the rest, particularly Christianity, are wrong.

I've done a lot of reading since then on different religions and their histories. The Crusades convinced me that there are no Gods. A Christian God wouldn't have let the Crusades fail to retake His holy land. A Jewish God would have prevented the Holocaust, and all the persecutions the Jews have suffered over the centuries. An Islamic God, though it may have helped kick the Christians out during the Crusades, wouldn't have let a false religion spread over a large part of the planet.

I think religions were created when humans were a young race. People worked very hard just feed themselves, plus dealing with disease, famine, and rival humans who had no qualms about killing each other. They didn't have long life expectancies, and death was a constant companion with tribe and family members. Life was harsh in the extreme, so why live it. So they created Gods. When they had food, it must have been a gift from their God, not the fact that they found the fruit tree or planted the crops. And when they died, their God would take them to a paradise, where the harshness of life would be left behind, and they would be reunited with long dead family members and all would be happy and good.

So that is why early Man got up and toiled in the fields and endured the suffering of everyday life and made offerings to his God. Because when his life would end, he would be with his dead wife and sons who had succumbed to disease or animal attacks, and his God would provide all they needed. If early Man didn't have a glorious afterlife to look forward to, I think quite a few of them would have asked "What's the point, life is so hard" and tossed themselves off a cliff somewhere. So Gods were invented, because Man has to have something to believe in. He couldn't find anything, so he made sonething up himself. Over the centuries, these conjured up beliefs have grown into the Religions we have today.

I have no faith in a Diety, so unless I see some scientific evidence that there is a God, I'm not going to believe in it's existance. That's one of the reasons I haven't posted in these discussions. I believe what I believe, and someone telling me what they feel isn't going to change my mind. It's possible I'm wrong, and that's why, when discussing religions with my Sons, I tell them to do some research, and find the one that feels right to them. Make your own decision based on what you know. Don't believe something just because someone tells you it's true. Back it up with research. Or don't pick a religion at all, it's not mandatory, it's your choice.

Re: Religion, who cares?
 

And totally non-religious people sometimes have to.

Re: Religion, who cares?
 

Why? :o Unbelievers has no interest in doing that. They can call to kill some specific enemies. But killing millions of people only because they are praying to other god? No, only religious fanatics can do that.

Re: Religion, who cares?
 

Self defense.
I never said that. Again, I was referring to self defense.
And certain commnunist regimes. :lol:

Re: Religion, who cares?
 

Hmm. Interesting. :hmm: Defence means that someone wants to attack you. Who and why?

Sure! Communism (at least trying to build it :)) is a religion - with its gods, saints, churches, prayers and devotions :D

Religion, who cares?
 

@ XabbaRus:
I think the subject of your link is Off Topic, but it's scandalous anyway.
It seems to me a political decision by a military tribunal. The captain is a Druze, an old Arab/Palestinian sect, mostly living in Northern Israel, Southern Lebanon and Western Syria...
They are fierce fighters, loyal to Israel and punishing one could perhaps have consequences for the attitude of the group.
I would personally call it murder.

Wow! The lonney left rag called the Guradian strikes again! They just can't resist sinking their fangs into Israel at every which opportunity.

Abraham, you're talking nonsense. The only thing wrong this officer did was to shoot at her after she was dead.

A copy of the IDF Spokesman's press release can be found here.

You seem to talk from experience. When you man a position with an enemy that straps bombs to children and have to defend yourself and you fellow soldiers in your position, let us know.

:down:

Religion is obselet. (Word is wrong I believe). If the human race hasn't gone forward enough to realise what is right from wrong without reading it from a religious resource, maybe we are doomed, cause that means humans can't think individually and haven't grown mentally in thousands of years.

'Oh wait, I might be wrong, better go find some religious nonsence to put me straight!!!' :rotfl:

The always-victim-never-guilty-story again.

German TV news RTL 7th November this year. A German filmcrew made an announced visit in a Palestinian school, and interviewed the staff and filmed the location. The reporter only smiled and knowingly nodded his head when he was shown fragments from "gas grenades" and was told by the director that almost every day, at around the same time, an Israeli patrol would show up and start firing smoke grenades into the schoolyard and into the crowds of children (6-10 years). Nonsens, of course, Israel does not do such things. The usual kind of hate-filled Palestinian propaganda. The filming went on. At the end they filmed a wide panorama from a roof or a balcony, the whole school compound. School was over, groups of peaceful boys and girls age 6-10 left the building chatting and laughing and headed for the gate. Then by chance the camera showed an Israeli Jeep or Rover whoch approached slowly from the background - which stopped and then started to lob several rounds right into the crowds of children - which were not attacking, not throwing stones, did not do anything, just heading home. Smoke and tear gas all over the place. Panic broke out, everyone screaming and running around. NOT BEFORE THEN older juveniles ran to that place in help, and started to answer the Israeli friendliness by throwing stones at them. Later the reporter - who was not smiling anymore, but had swollen red eyes and obviously had some kind of trouble with his vision - walked over to that patrol and asked what the hell they were thinking. "no comment", they said, shrugged shoulders and turned away. Later the video was shown the Israeli police chief. He said that the patrol clearly was under attack and had the right to defend itself. Insisting that the video clearly showed there was no attack at all and the patrol moved in completely unharmed and then opened fire on little children who were about hopping and dancing home without even a hint of a provocation, the reporter again was told that it obviously was an attack by the Palestinians. There also were no hostilities reported in the vicinity of that school.

Let’s the director‘s initial statement on regular provocations appear in another light, eh?

It's by far not the first time that our medias were able to come up with evidence for such Israeli provocations. Sometimes it seems to be about crushing education of Palestinians, sometimes about triggering incidents which then are taken as an excuse to go in in force and acchieve whatver is to be acchieved – the real reason for such actions. The director of that school said that usually they come during lessons and shelling smoke grenades into the classrooms, to make education and lessons impossible that way.

Again: we are talking of boys and girls age 6-10 beeing intentionally fired upon with smoke and teargas when laughing and hpping around on a schoolyard and heading home. If I were a Palestinian and see such events happen throughout my youth, it would be my highest pleasure to bomb every Israelis cafe that can reach in return.

In that essay I wrote:
Back in 2003, military historian Martin van Crefeld made these remarks:

Dutch-Israeli Military Historian -
'We Are Destroying Ourselves'
From: Ingrid Rimland

1-31-3

The ZGram reader who sent me this interview prefaced it as follows:

"The following interview of the Jewish military historian Martin van Crefeld by the Dutch magazine Elsevier was discovered on Indymedia by one of our readers. The views and opinions revealed here expose Israeli policy with a frankness only possible for a Jew. (...) We recommend that our readers give careful study to this interview.

"The prominent Dutch magazine Elsevier has published a conversation with Dutch-Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld. The following has been translated from the Dutch [and then from the German]":

(START)

"We are destroying ourselves."

"In Israel a scenario of doom is taking shape."

Interview with the much reviled Dutch-Israeli Military Historian Martin van Creveld

Professor Martin van Creveld, an internationally known and controversial professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, foresees only extreme developments for the appreciable future. The methods by which Israel is currently combating the Intifada are doomed to failure. The chances for peace and the founding of a Palestinian state are visibly diminishing. A conversation with a pessimist, who, as he himself says, is reviled in his own country.

Interviewer: Your specialty is war. Is what's going on here war at all?

Creveld: Certainly, although the Palestinians have no government, no army, and no [nationality]. Everything is in chaos. That's why we won't win the war, either. If we could identify and eliminate every terrorist, we'd win this struggle within forty-eight hours. The Palestinian administration has the same difficulties. Even in Arafat decided to comply with our conditions and surrender tomorrow, it's virtually certain that the Intifada would continue.

Interviewer: Are there any similarities on the Israeli side?

Creveld: If the dispute lasts much longer, the Israeli government will lose control of its people. For people will say: "If government can't protect us, what on earth can they do for us? If the government can't guarantee that we'll be alive tomorrow, what good are they? We'll defend ourselves."

Interviewer: So Israel is beaten in advance?

Creveld: On that I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing." That certainly applies here. I regard a total Israeli defeat as unavoidable. That will mean the collapse of the Israeli state and society. We'll destroy ourselves.

Interviewer: Is there any point to the recent Israeli military offensive?

Creveld: This offensive is totally useless; it's only further enraging the Palestinians. Perhaps there will be a short-lived calm, but in the end there will even more suicide attackers.

Interviewer: Is there any hope?

Creveld: If I were Arafat, I wouldn't stop either. I'd only cease in exchange for a very far-reaching political accord. And it seems as if we have a government [under Sharon-tr.] that won't make Arafat such an offer. If elections were held today, the Left would be thoroughly beaten.

Interviewer: Some maintain that it is Israel's foreign enemies that keep the country unified.

Creveld: That's right. I only wish that there were foreign enemies, but that isn't the case. We've fought our external enemies for so many years. Each time there was a war, we took a mighty hammer to our foes, and after being defeated a few times, they left us alone. The problem with the Palestinian revolt is that it doesn't come from without, but rather from within. Therefore we can't avail ourselves of the hammer.

Interviewer: Is the solution, then, to keep the Palestinians outside the borders?

Creveld: Exactly, and right now there's nearly unanimous agreement on that. We ought to build a wall "so high, that not even a bird can fly over it." The only problem is: where to put the border? Since we can't decide whether the territories conquered in 1967 should be included, for the time being we improvise a little. We're building a series of little walls, which are much more difficult to defend. From a military standpoint this is very stupid. Every supermarket has gradually acquired its own living wall of security guards. Half the Israeli population is guarding the other half-unbelievable. Aside from the fantastic waste, it's almost totally useless.

Interviewer: Does that mean that the Palestinians stay within the borders?

Creveld: No, it means that they all get deported. The people who strive for this are waiting only for the right man and the right time. Two years ago only 7 or 8 percent of Israelis were of the opinion that this would be the best solution, two months ago it was 33 percent and now, according to a Gallup poll, the figure is 44 percent.

Interviewer: Will that ever be possible?

Creveld: Sure, since desperate times give rise to desperate measures. Today there's a fifty-fifty split on where the border should run. Two years ago 90 percent wanted the wall built along the old border. That has completely changed now, and if things continue, if the terror doesn't stop, in another two years perhaps 90 percent will want to build the wall along the Jordan. The Palestinians talk of "summutt," meaning hang tough, cling to the ground and the soil. I have enormous respect for the Palestinians. They fight heroically. But if we in fact want to strike across the Jordan, we would need only a few brigades. If the Syrians or the Egyptians were to try to stop us, we'd wipe them out. Ariel Sharon is leader. He never improvises: he always has a plan.

Interviewer: A plan to deport the Palestinians?

Creveld: I think it's quite possible that he wants to do that. He wants to escalate the conflict. He knows that nothing else we do will succeed.

Interviewer: Do you think that the world will allow that kind of ethnic cleansing?

Creveld: That depends on who does it and how quickly it happens. We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.

Interviewer: Wouldn't Israel then become a rogue state?

Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother." I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen, before Israel goes under.

Interviewer: This isn't your own position, is it?

Creveld: Of course not. You asked me what might happen and I've laid it out. The only question is whether it is already too late for the other solution, which I support, and whether Israeli public opinion can still be convinced. I think it's too late. With each passing day the expulsion of the Palestinians grows more probable. The alternative would be the total annihilation and disintegration of Israel. What do you expect from us?

This interview was conducted by Ferry Biedermann in Jerusalem.

Never? No. This case? Yes.
Announced visit? I'm already suspicious. Perfect to set up the situation in advance. Are you sure you didn't mean unannounced?
I'd love to see the film. I'd also be interested in seeing the full reports.

While there are goons in the IDF, too, just like most any other army, the response by Israel's chief of police is not his usual in such cases, unless he knew for sure that the incident is just what he said it was.

Again, you may be right but nothing surprises me.

(This would be a good time to mention having a view at Pierre rehov's "THE ROAD TO JENIN").

I do not recall the instance Germany's RTL mentions, and this is alway desired footage by the local leftist TV and press. And these incidents are always reported by the rest of the papers. Interested that it seems to be a total unknown here.

I'd love it to get publicized. Then we could get down to the truth and either toss away some bad apple soldiers or nod our heads again and say those Pallys can't be beat when it comes to being the biggest liars around. Goebels is turning in his grave.
Looking forward to the investigation. Don't let it rest, Skybird.
As an Israeli, with friends husband's in active reserves and friend and neighbors' children actively serving, I challenge you to substantiate such rubbish.
It would be my highest pleasure to toss away such soldiers in a dark and cold lockup for a long term without parole. But it has to be true first.
[quote]In that essay I wrote:
You've bought the left's propaganda hook, line and sinker.
Indymedia? :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

BTW, we have many self-hating nihilistic Jews here. "Frankness from a Jew" is a worthless assessment.
I agree and disagree. Big deal. Read on.
If only it were true!
There's a hint for you. Nudge! Nudge!
This is already nonsense. When fighting terrorism, one should not need to check every individual's ID card and documents.
Only because once Arafat started the party, the music could not stop. But he never tried anyway. So far this genius professor of ours is uite an amatuer.
This interview was from almost 3 years ago. A prophecy that hasn't come true.

What's your point, Skybird? So far, it's self-defeating.
There is defintely that certain fear but not for the reasons the old professor states.

EU and American aussaging of Arab demands are placing a major security risk on Israel at the moment. What was once talk of 67' lines (Heaven forfend) has turned to 48' or even 47' lines.

Israel has compromised and compromised and keeps redrawing its red lines lower and lower.
Typical leftist jackass. Look up the statistics yourself. Since the Netanya Park Hotel suicide homicide bombing on Passover 2002 and Israel's following offensives plus the construction of the security fence, the number of Israeli casualties has been dramatically reduced. And I should know as a volunteer for this organization.
Yes and no. Fact is less are successful. Fact also is that Israel has allowed the terrorists to rebuild their infrastructures almost everywhere.
Terrorism pays! Remember that when it hits Europe. You'll see.
Arafat was bankrolled by the EU. His and the other terrorist organizations were funded via Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and numerous others.
This is gibberish and is precisely the cause of Israel's failure. Isreal never did declare an outright war against the Palestinians and an all out assault with a demnd for uncondition surrender.

We lose.

Skybird, I'll stop here because this professor is typical of the moron intellectuals of the world who have been instructing governments and head of state around the world on how to appease their enemies.

Churchill knew better.