Does science make belief in God obsolete?

Re: Does science make belief in God obsolete?

J A wrote:

>
> "J666" <j666@nowhere,com > wrote in message
> news:0001HW.C441219A001E9125F0407530@news-server.rgv.rr,com ...
>> On Fri, 2 May 2008 20:43:26 -0500, J A wrote
>> (in message <Y_CdneLCK9SsKIbVnZ2dnUVZ_t2inZ2d@earthlink,com >):
>>
>>>
>>> "monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
>>>> snip
>>>
>>> As usual, you are clueless.
>>>
>>> By claiming some Babylonian god handed down the laws that the 10
>>> Commandments are derived from, you're tacitly claiming that the
>>> Babylonians
>>> had the real god, and the god of the jews is a phony.
>>>
>>> However, the Ency. Britannica piece that I posted, makes clear how
>>> detailed
>>> and case law oriented the code was, and how it was built up over
>>> Hammurabi's
>>> reign by his legal decisions.
>>>
>>> People through history have claimed to have "god(s)" informing them,
>>> much like Andrew Chung and his holy spirit.
>>>
>>> I didn't think anyone would be stupid enough to claim some Babylonian
>>> god as
>>> the real authority for the Ten commandments, as you have done.... ;-))
>>
>> Plesse do not feed a troll, especially in a thread which has been fairly
>> serious. Much more fun to watch a troll get desperate when getting no
>> responses - if a troil posts and no one responds, a troll makes no noise.
>
> This one was IRRESISTABLE.
>


Is that why you delete my questions
when you reply to me?
Too difficult to answer?

Are you still trying to believe that
Hammurabi didn't believe in gods?


--
monkfish * alt.atheism is removed from the header because atheists there
consider quoting the Bible proselytizing and as such it is prohibited by
their undebatable policy.
--
The best way to handle spams is to ignore them. But if you must reply to
them, you should at least set the followup-to header to something other
than your own newsgroup.

Re: Does science make belief in God obsolete?

J A wrote:

>
> "monkfish" <monkfish@nowhere> wrote in message
> news:---dnYku9PZ1NobVnZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@ptd,net ...
>>J A wrote:
>>>
>>> "Jerome Ranch" <ranchjp@mchsi,com > wrote in message
>>> news:pd8n14lj3cda07ugb23eiil81sbp1h2fod@4ax,com ...
>>> > On Fri, 2 May 2008 16:18:05 -0700, "J A" <ae@re,com > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>Wrong.
>>> >>
>>> >>The 10 commandments are a take off from the Hammurabic Code, which
>> is the
>>> >>first known law code and was written by Hammurabi, king of Babylonia
>>> >>(1792-1750 bc)
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Which, to my knowledge, was supposedly revealed to him by a god,
>>> > through divine intervention.
>>>
>>> Wrong. It's manmade.
>>> "The background of the code is a body of Sumerian law under which
>> civilized
>>> communities had lived for many centuries. "
>>>
>>> Ency. Britannica
>>
>>
>> You really should have read the Hammurabic Code.
>
> As usual, you are clueless.
>
> By claiming some Babylonian god handed down the laws that the 10
> Commandments are derived from, you're tacitly claiming that the
> Babylonians had the real god, and the god of the jews is a phony.
>
> However, the Ency. Britannica piece that I posted, makes clear how
> detailed and case law oriented the code was, and how it was built up over
> Hammurabi's reign by his legal decisions.
>
> People through history have claimed to have "god(s)" informing them, much
> like Andrew Chung and his holy spirit.
>
> I didn't think anyone would be stupid enough to claim some Babylonian god
> as
> the real authority for the Ten commandments, as you have done.... ;-))


You are confused.
It would help if you break up your mangled reasoning
into smaller pieces and ask simple questions.

Did Hammurabi and his people believe in gods?


--
monkfish * alt.atheism is removed from the header because atheists there
consider quoting the Bible proselytizing and as such it is prohibited by
their undebatable policy.
--
The best way to handle spams is to ignore them. But if you must reply to
them, you should at least set the followup-to header to something other
than your own newsgroup.

Re: Does science make belief in God obsolete?

J A wrote:
>
> If the 10 commandments were worth much, then why have all christian
> societies found the need to create legal codes of their own?
>
> Wasn't 'god" smart enought to create laws that would cover everything?


You really should read the book to the end
before jumping to conclusions.


> You don't have to believe in God to be moral and ethical people. But
>> if you behave in a moral and ethical fashion, you clearly are
>> conforming to principles of behavior that originated in a belief in a
>> god.
>
>
> Wrong.
>
> The 10 commandments are a take off from the Hammurabic Code, which is the
> first known law code and was written by Hammurabi, king of Babylonia
> (1792-1750 bc)


And he definitely believed in gods.

[quote]
A carving at the top of the stele portrays Hammurabi receiving the laws from
the god Shamash, and the preface states that Hammurabi was chosen by the
gods of his people to bring the laws to them.
http :// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammurabi
[/quote]


--
monkfish * alt.atheism is removed from the header because atheists there
consider quoting the Bible proselytizing and as such it is prohibited by
their undebatable policy.
--
The best way to handle spams is to ignore them. But if you must reply to
them, you should at least set the followup-to header to something other
than your own newsgroup.

Re: Does science make belief in God obsolete?


<jerry.ranch@pioneer,com > skrev i en meddelelse
news:h0sm145fl6qp8f9t2t9nkujvk5lmf2095s@4ax,com ...
> Interesting thoughts
>
> I will toss in Descartes. Most of western science uses the Scientific
> Method (Cartesian Reasoning).

Actually it does not.


snip