They do, some just refuse to see it. You're just a part of the problem and thus perpetuate the divide.
No Problemo.Just quit with the insistence that Science is some cure-all.Fauna/flora don't know from science and they have managed quite well. It's you ballsy Atheist and yer dreaded Science that does more harm to the nature of man than anything else.
Really? Foolardi in all your time here you really don't know me. Where have I ever stated a pro-atheistic stance nor denied God? I don't put stock into science anymore than I do organized religions. I put my stock into my faith in God, Christ, and a glorious hereafter once this life in the material world has ended.
No, they are parallel to one another. Science deals with the natural world. Religion with the supernatural world.
What on Earth are you talking about.Mother Teresa didn't for one nanosecond concern herself with any such supernatual. She lived to help the Poorest of the Poor. What kinda rotgut have been drinkin'. I realize that kinda talk is what you types have been lauded for using.As if it sounds so intelligent. Actually it's really stupid talk.Like Obama's feelgood message of " Yes We Can " plus " Hope & Change ". Kid talk.
How did I assume? I posted a piece from another man, specifically pointing out (by bolding) a certain belief. I am a man of God, but I believe God didn't want me to be some simple minded robot to be enslaved by the words of false men. I believe an enlightened mind is a mind for God. Don't confuse me with the progressives sick use of "scientific" as it is just as wretched as those who use God's name in vain and for unholy acts.
Again it illustrates the problem or whatever it is with the question. One can define these terms in any way. If I were to answer the question in terms of forces, I would have to say that "Either God came before Science (natural forces) or not at all", which is inconclusive. By referring to them as concepts for answering questions, I could give an unambiguous answer. Science as a method is a relatively new concept. The question would be harder if it were God or the more general "empirical observation." I would guess that empirical observation came first and belief in God was a reaction to this... but I'm not confident about that.
This has digressed into episodes of dopeyness. God can't be defined in terms like " Science ".Science is merely the way in which things and phenomena on Earth can be explained A rational way to gain knowledge and then formulate solutions or answers. God IS.God always was.There is no timetable to ascertain when God arrived and before what other observations,whether scientific or not. Religion is the vehicle in which a practice of Faith will hopefully make one a better more good person.No such thing as " more good " but you get the gist. One can eventually learn and understand almost the entirety of some Sciences.However God will always have association with Mysteries of Faith that Mankind hasn't the mental acuity to comprehend. Like ... Infinity.
Of course Mother Teresa concerned herself with the supernatural. That is what prayer is. From Merriam-Webster.com
Using your definitions (only fair since you posed the question), God either came before science because He always existed OR science came first because God never existed. Neither statement is falsifiable or can really be subject to scientific inquiry. (When Stephen Hawking gave his opinion on why God does not exist, the actual thing he proved was that there was no need for God to exist to explain the universe... these are actually two different things, with all due respect to Dr. Hawkings).
Mother Teresa did not Proselytize.Did not try to convert anyone. Prayer is used to motivate one's life toward goodness and the Truth.Away from sin and temptation.It is a way of communication to God for help and guidance.A form of petition.I petition the Lord with prayer. Supernatural is beyond natural.If I pray and ask for bread for my family,that is natural.Man cannot live by good intentions alone. If I pray for help in getting better if Ill,that is supernatural. But one can both Pray to get better and still go to a doctor. You are trying to make pray out as some form of hokus pocus exercise that involves luck,as if throwing dice. Prayer could also be asking a Divine creator to intervene on the one praying whether for a loaf of bread or to get better. Not every aspect of our life is directly in our hands. Providence is also present.History does not teach us that Mankinds fate is soley in his own hands.In fact,quite the opposite. Therefore prayer.
I'm not so sure.Mother Teresa was focused on her Missionaries of Charity. In short ... charitable concerns and going where a helping hand will be felt.Like I've stated Mother Teresa did not convert in public. Like those French Jesuits who used the fur trade in the 1600's as a way to indoctrinate their purpose { Catholicism } and convert many an Indian. Mother Teresa used simple TLC { tender loving care } with her Sisters of Charity.No alcohol like the Jesuits and the Fur Trade whereby the Indians quickly developed a dependency. Fast forwarding to Today where Liberals and the ACLU use Godlessness to trade favor and indoctrinate.
You dare question the Divine Comedy. Have you No scrupples.No sense of inner circle. I think someone needs to have their ashes hauled,I do. Maybe a nice Italian Madame who won't take no for an answer. Like ... No ... Mr.Old Timer you're not finished yet.I'll tell you when yer spaghetti is fully cooked Darlin'.
Why shouldn't people question it? If it is so great why has the church not accepted it as a book to be included with the Bible?
Because there is no Comedy within the pages of a Bible {rhetorical} ? And yes ... " Test everything.Hold on to the Good. " - 1st Thessalonians " I believe the promises of God enough to venture an eternity on them. " - Issac Watts
Because he lived in a time when people believed in a lot of nonsense. American fundamentalists only pretend to, for business reasons.
Actually you jest.Just watch any TV show today.Sitcoms are pure silliness.Even serious TV is just Peer Pressure like those - Real Housewives - segments.I say those of Dante's era were rather serious about most aspects in their life. Something as simple and staple as Bread,was taken very seriously. Today it's taken for granted.Even though Dante predates the Renaissance and all the great thinkers,writers,artists,The Middle Ages was no slouch.
I never said it was - much of their civilization was hugely superior to the current obscenity. They were lacking in a good deal of information however, and believed a great deal of nonsense
