Einstein called bible "pretty childish." Turns out he is pretty smart

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]To me they are. Science should be able to explain everything. I do not believe in ghosts.Crucifier

Science can only provide answers to the questions that are directed towards it: what, where, when, and how. Science can't answer the question of why. That's left to the faith, religion, and philosophy crowd.

why do people sweat?

because the evaporating water cools the body down.

proved u wrong LULZ

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Which goes back to his OPINION and his OPINION is not more informed since there is NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS for it.

LJS9502_basic

There is a scientific basis for arguing against the bible. Why do you think that for most of Christianity's history, they have tried to cover up and end scientific progress? Because it started to unravel the storys of the bible.

Then provide some scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. I'll wait. If you're going on about the way the story was told...that isn't intended to be a literal scientific work.

Again, it was meant to be taken literally when it was written, IMO. Now that science has made most of it unbelievable, people say "you are not supposed to take it literally..."

he did not say that. He said the Christian and Jewish god doesn't exist.Engrish_Major

he did not say that. He said the Christian and Jewish god doesn't exist.

Engrish_Major

I wasn't referring to Einstein in that sentence. But you could give us some proof to his statement nonetheless since you feel he was correct.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Which goes back to his OPINION and his OPINION is not more informed since there is NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS for it.

Engrish_Major

There is a scientific basis for arguing against the bible. Why do you think that for most of Christianity's history, they have tried to cover up and end scientific progress? Because it started to unravel the storys of the bible.

Then provide some scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. I'll wait. If you're going on about the way the story was told...that isn't intended to be a literal scientific work.

Again, it was meant to be taken literally when it was written, IMO. Now that science has made most of it unbelievable, people say "you are not supposed to take it literally..."

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

he did not say that. He said the Christian and Jewish god doesn't exist.

LJS9502_basic

I wasn't referring to Einstein in that sentence. But you could give us some proof to his statement nonetheless since you feel he was correct.

If I had proof I wouldn't need to regard his opinion.

And at points in the past, science has said that leeches are good for youxaos

Has something changed? :oops:

Again, it was meant to be taken literally when it was written, IMO. Now that science has made most of it unbelievable, people say "you are not supposed to take it literally..."

Engrish_Major

Your opinion is not fact however. If you knew about the ancient cultures then you'd know the symbolism they employed in their writing/speaking. The number 7 prominently used in Genesis for instance.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Which goes back to his OPINION and his OPINION is not more informed since there is NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS for it.

xaos

There is a scientific basis for arguing against the bible. Why do you think that for most of Christianity's history, they have tried to cover up and end scientific progress? Because it started to unravel the storys of the bible.

Then provide some scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. I'll wait. If you're going on about the way the story was told...that isn't intended to be a literal scientific work.

Again, it was meant to be taken literally when it was written, IMO. Now that science has made most of it unbelievable, people say "you are not supposed to take it literally..."

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

If I had proof I wouldn't need to regard his opinion.

Engrish_Major

Again....his opinion is no more valid than another's in this matter. I'd believe him in physics.

]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

Engrish_Major

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

[QUOTE="spark5050"]You do realise that Einstein believed in God.Engrish_Major

Yes, but not the traditional Christian or Jewish god.

actually if you read the article, it says later in life, that he did believe in God, having been quoted saying "Science without Religion is lame; Religion without Science is blind."

Is this really a significant letter though other than the fact that it was written by him and imo should be in a meuseum?

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.Engrish_Major

The human condition never changes and that's why Christianity continues to grow. It's a little deeper than science.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

LJS9502_basic

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

[QUOTE="spark5050"]You do realise that Einstein believed in God.princess1087

Yes, but not the traditional Christian or Jewish god.

actually if you read the article, it says later in life, that he did believe in God, having been quoted saying "Science without Religion is lame; Religion without Science is blind."

Is this really a significant letter though other than the fact that it was written by him and imo should be in a meuseum?

I've said before he believes in 'a' god, not the Christian or Jewish god.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

Engrish_Major

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

So very wrong. That WAS NOT/IS NOT the message. That was the culture of the day.:lol:

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

LJS9502_basic

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

So very wrong. That WAS NOT/IS NOT the message. That was the culture of the day.:lol:

Dude, it's in the bible.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

Engrish_Major

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

That was the message of the Bible? To have slaves and make wives obedient? Must of missed something.

Dude, it's in the bible.

Engrish_Major

Dude....I clearly said the MESSAGE. Do you not know the actual message?:?

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Which goes back to his OPINION and his OPINION is not more informed since there is NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS for it.

Engrish_Major

There is a scientific basis for arguing against the bible. Why do you think that for most of Christianity's history, they have tried to cover up and end scientific progress? Because it started to unravel the storys of the bible.

Then provide some scientific evidence that God doesn't exist. I'll wait. If you're going on about the way the story was told...that isn't intended to be a literal scientific work.

Again, it was meant to be taken literally when it was written, IMO. Now that science has made most of it unbelievable, people say "you are not supposed to take it literally..."

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

Religion has evolved as people have come to understand nature and how it works. If you ask Christians that AREN'T extremists, they will tell you that the bible's stories aren't litteral, but "parables" or examples. There is no REAL Scientific evidence to disprove the basis of Christianity however. The only REAL honest proof that there is, is proof that Jesus and his disciples DID exist. As the proof of whether or not the stories about them were true, there is nothing to either prove or disprove it. For all we know, Jesus could have been alive when they "burried" him and he "rose from the dead" after he started to heal up. It wasn't uncommon for people to burry the "Dead" prematurely. Thus the reason the phrase was coined "safe by the bell" and also where the legends of the "undead" rising from their graves came to be.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

Dude, it's in the bible.

LJS9502_basic

Dude....I clearly said the MESSAGE. Do you not know the actual message?:?

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)

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)

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)

And this one is especially funny:

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

Sounds like a message to me...

Sounds like a message to me...

Engrish_Major

You would be wrong. Again...that is the culture of the people at a time in history. The message of the Bible, nonetheless, is God's relationship with His people. No more no less. *sigh* If you want to argue effectively you first have to understand the topic.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

Engrish_Major

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

actually, if you've READ the bible through, the new testiment says otherwise on the slavery part. The Disciples taught that it was wrong other than having servants that were payed for their services. And in all honesty, in the newer old testiment, It does not encourage the woman to be the husband's subordinates. That's just because the women at the time were not expected to go out and manually plow the fields with their husband unless it was absolutely necessary because the husband wasn't present and so forth. Like today, although it isn't completely uncommon to see a woman mending a fence (i did it when i was younger) it isn't a common place simply because women are better suited for other jobs, since it is proven that women are better at multi tasking than most men.

Edit: if you know anything about Christianity, you would know that Old Testement verses do not apply since figuratively speaking, Jesus came so that we WOULDN'T have to sacrifice a lamb every time we sinned and we WOULDN'T have the right to run to a City of Refuge and be excused from murdering someone. The old testement is no longer relevant, save as a record of how things were, or a record of the Jewish history.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

princess1087

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

actually, if you've READ the bible through, the new testiment says otherwise on the slavery part. The Disciples taught that it was wrong other than having servants that were payed for their services. And in all honesty, in the newer old testiment, It does not encourage the woman to be the husband's subordinates. That's just because the women at the time were not expected to go out and manually plow the fields with their husband unless it was absolutely necessary because the husband wasn't present and so forth. Like today, although it isn't completely uncommon to see a woman mending a fence (i did it when i was younger) it isn't a common place simply because women are better suited for other jobs, since it is proven that women are better at multi tasking than most men.

We're talking about Judaism as well here. In fact, Einstein (the subject of this thread) was Jewish. He did not believe in their beliefs either.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

Sounds like a message to me...

LJS9502_basic

You would be wrong. Again...that is the culture of the people at a time in history. The message of the Bible, nonetheless, is God's relationship with His people. No more no less. *sigh* If you want to argue effectively you first have to understand the topic.

Enlighten me then. Which parts are we supposed to ignore, and which parts to heed?

You do realise that Einstein believed in God.spark5050

Enlighten me then. Which parts are we supposed to ignore, and which parts to heed?

Engrish_Major

I just told you the message dude. Read first....post second.:|

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

Enlighten me then. Which parts are we supposed to ignore, and which parts to heed?

LJS9502_basic

I just told you the message dude. Read first....post second.:|

It deals with how people treat each other too.

Sounds like a message to me... Engrish_Major

Sounds like guidlines for a different time to me. The principle is easily the same, it's the literal application that has changed. You don't sell your daughter as a slave in America. Instead, she just gets a job. Though, the same may not be true in certain 4th world countries. Different cultures, different applications.

And as LJ has said, those passages don't represent the overlying message of the Bible. Those are just minor snippets from a massive collection.

[QUOTE="princess1087"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"] ]

Science changes and evolves because people are discovering more and more of the world around them with new tools and intelligence. Religion evolves hesitantly and out of necessity in order to keep an audience.

Engrish_Major

The understanding of the world changed....the message has NOT.;)

Yeah it has. The bible says you can own slaves. It says that wives are the subordinates of their husbands. Those beliefs have changed in order to suit the times.

actually, if you've READ the bible through, the new testiment says otherwise on the slavery part. The Disciples taught that it was wrong other than having servants that were payed for their services. And in all honesty, in the newer old testiment, It does not encourage the woman to be the husband's subordinates. That's just because the women at the time were not expected to go out and manually plow the fields with their husband unless it was absolutely necessary because the husband wasn't present and so forth. Like today, although it isn't completely uncommon to see a woman mending a fence (i did it when i was younger) it isn't a common place simply because women are better suited for other jobs, since it is proven that women are better at multi tasking than most men.

We're talking about Judaism as well here. In fact, Einstein (the subject of this thread) was Jewish. He did not believe in their beliefs either.

Yeah Judaism is the origin of the Christian Religion. The old testiment is their history. you're quoting their history and saying that that is what the bible says is acceptible for both religions. that has nothing to do with what Einstein said in that letter, and in all honesty, that's how he felt in that time period. READ ALL of the link you posted. if you read the ending, you'll find your argument that he did not believe in religion at all to be completely baseless.

[QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

Sounds like a message to me... Eman5805

Sounds like guidlines for a different time to me. The principle is easily the same, it's the literal application that has changed. You don't sell your daughter as a slave in America. Instead, she just gets a job. Though, the same may not be true in certain 4th world countries. Different cultures, different applications.

And as LJ has said, those passages don't represent the overlying message of the Bible. Those are just minor snippets from a massive collection.

And since it is so outdated and archaic, we move on to more recent and relevant literature and ideas.

[QUOTE="spark5050"]You do realise that Einstein believed in God.JJ4545

you're right. he did not believe in organized religion. that he made clear. he believed in religion through a different prospective. although I think that point was already made clear some time after the first page.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Engrish_Major"]

Enlighten me then. Which parts are we supposed to ignore, and which parts to heed?

Engrish_Major

I just told you the message dude. Read first....post second.:|

It deals with how people treat each other too.

" ... Let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not the power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.

~1 Corinthians 7:2-4~

[QUOTE="JJ4545"][QUOTE="spark5050"]You do realise that Einstein believed in God.princess1087

you're right. he did not believe in organized religion. that he made clear. he believed in religion through a different prospective. although I think that point was already made clear some time after the first page.

And since it is so outdated and archaic, we move on to more recent and relevant literature and ideas.

Engrish_Major

that's what we've been saying. the New Testiment SAYS for us to move on from that time period. It actually supports a lot of our ideals today. Even Women's rights and freedom of religion and speech.

Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.xxDustmanxx

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

[QUOTE="xxDustmanxx"]Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.LJS9502_basic

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

The stories about ghosts and giant boats and such.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="xxDustmanxx"]Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.Engrish_Major

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

The stories about ghosts and giant boats and such.

I believe some time ago they felt they had found part of the giant boat....as for ghosts....while not spoken about in the Bible....can you provide proof that they don't exist?

Okay. What did you intend for us to discuss again?CptJSparrow

Einstein's opinion is worth more than other's is his statement.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="xxDustmanxx"]Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.Engrish_Major

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

The stories about ghosts and giant boats and such.

what does that have to do with the bible and how it applies to Christianity and even Judaism today?

ghosts are a common superstition and I believe what you're making refference to are parables or the old testament. The giant boat is also a part of the old testament which does however exist. The flood has actually been proven as probable considering the giant fissure at the bottom of the ocean that litterally runs around the entire world. Maybe not in the way it happened in the bible, but to them at that time period, how else could they have seen it, considering they were lacking the knowledge of our modern day world. They didn't even think the world was flat yet at the time.

[QUOTE="xxDustmanxx"]Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.LJS9502_basic

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"]Okay. What did you intend for us to discuss again?LJS9502_basic

Einstein's opinion is worth more than other's is his statement.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="xxDustmanxx"]Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.xaos

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

The distinction is that Spinoza's God is not a personal God, and does not intervene in individual's lives or in the course of history, other than kicking the whole thing off.xaos

But at the basis....it's a belief in something more out there. Different interpretations...which is why different religions exist...same basic idea. To me they tie together.......

I believe some time ago they felt they had found part of the giant boat....as for ghosts....while not spoken about in the Bible....can you provide proof that they don't exist?

LJS9502_basic

Even if they found parts, do you actually believe that Noah put 2 of every creature on it? That's part of what makes the bible laughable. As for the ghosts, well, there once was this man named Jesus, and then he died, well, you know the rest.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="xxDustmanxx"]Einstein believed in "Spinoza's god".Which is basically just another word for nature.Basically Spinoza's God and nature are the same thing.xaos

Considering the Jewish and Christian religions believe in a God that is tied to nature....where's the discrepancy?

according to Christianity, (not extremists) the Christian God does not interveve in individual's lives, or it would defete the purpose of granting free will and destroy the purpose of us learning from our mistakes all together by "saving us from suffering" the consequences of our actions. Most churches teach that now.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="CptJSparrow"]Okay. What did you intend for us to discuss again?CptJSparrow

Einstein's opinion is worth more than other's is his statement.

You don't have to participate.