Concordance of Science and Theology

[Derideo_Te]

Obviously you can't be a Christian since you bear false witness.

I provided the letter that Einstein wrote referencing faith.

I'm copacetic with the readers of both of our posts deciding from themselves.

The fact is, you will never be able to live down to your reputation!

I provided the link from 1954 where Einstein denounced your fabricated letter from 1936.

Yes, the readers will clearly see that you are bearing false witness.

He said no such thing, nor did he mention the letter I quoted.


To prove you aren't a lying sack of offal....quote where he did so.





Waiting.

Already did in post #21 above but here it is again for the slow learners like yourself.

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.​

-- Albert Einstein, 1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press

You imbecile....he merely referred to one view of God.

I covered that in the OP:
a. " According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deityor higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. "
Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project


"....some form of deity or higher power..."
That would be Einstein's view.


And never mentioned the letter to that little girl....so, we've proven that you are both a liar and a fool.

No news there.

Once again PoliticalSpice grinds her religion underfoot by bearing false witness.

Einstein clearly refuted everything that had been written previously about his religious convictions as a lie.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I provided the letter that Einstein wrote referencing faith.

I'm copacetic with the readers of both of our posts deciding from themselves.

The fact is, you will never be able to live down to your reputation!

I provided the link from 1954 where Einstein denounced your fabricated letter from 1936.

Yes, the readers will clearly see that you are bearing false witness.

He said no such thing, nor did he mention the letter I quoted.


To prove you aren't a lying sack of offal....quote where he did so.





Waiting.

Already did in post #21 above but here it is again for the slow learners like yourself.

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.​

-- Albert Einstein, 1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press

You imbecile....he merely referred to one view of God.

I covered that in the OP:
a. " According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deityor higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. "
Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project


"....some form of deity or higher power..."
That would be Einstein's view.


And never mentioned the letter to that little girl....so, we've proven that you are both a liar and a fool.

No news there.

Once again PoliticalSpice grinds her religion underfoot by bearing false witness.

Einstein clearly refuted everything that had been written previously about his religious convictions as a lie.

So you are a lying sack of offal!

 

[Derideo_Te]

So you are a lying sack of offal!

How ironic coming from the dullard who uttered these canards in post #22 above.

"I don't use the vulgarities that are your default....probably because I'm quite a bit smarter than you are....."

Obviously you are not in the least bit smart or you wouldn't set yourself up for face plants like that one.

[/QUOTE]

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you are a lying sack of offal!

How ironic coming from the dullard who uttered these canards in post #22 above.

"I don't use the vulgarities that are your default....probably because I'm quite a bit smarter than you are....."

Obviously you are not in the least bit smart or you wouldn't set yourself up for face plants like that one.

[/QUOTE]



Of course, I proved that Einstein was not the atheist you claimed....

...but the best part was how nervous I continue to make you anti-religion dolts.

Love it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So you are a lying sack of offal!

How ironic coming from the dullard who uttered these canards in post #22 above.

"I don't use the vulgarities that are your default....probably because I'm quite a bit smarter than you are....."

Obviously you are not in the least bit smart or you wouldn't set yourself up for face plants like that one.

Of course, I proved that Einstein was not the atheist you claimed....

...but the best part was how nervous I continue to make you anti-religion dolts.

Love it.

BZZZT Wrong again, false witness girl.

Nowhere have a I claimed that Einstein was an atheist.

If you had bothered to actually read the link that I provided earlier it goes on to quote Einstein as saying that he was agnostic and not atheist.

Agnosticism, deism, and atheism[edit]
Einstein was not an atheist, explaining at one point: "I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal god is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being."[1]​

Your petulant and puerile antics are seriously damaging what tatters of credibility you might have remaining.

Obviously you are incapable of even the most basic of research and instead rely upon disinformation and your own kneejerk responses that splatter you with your own feces when they blow right back in your face.

Don't you just "love it" when that happens to you time and time again?

 

[Abishai100]

Market Mouth


If we look at modern-era pedestrian anxieties related to urbanization paranoia (i.e., over-population, crime syndicates, street gangs, profiteering mayors, etc.) we can draw intriguing lines between pop culture avatars that re-present these anxieties.

For example, the fictional Batman (DC Comics) super-villain Mad Hatter is a maniacal trickster who likes to put people in odd traps, compelling them to confront their own urban vulnerabilities; likewise, the fictional Spider-Man (Marvel Comics) super-villain Kingpin is a ruthless power-fascist who uses wealth to build profiteer dominions and corruption labyrinths.

Connecting Mad Hatter (DC Comics) with Kingpin (Marvel Comics) helps sociologists build a social analysis of pedestrianism consciousness about modern civilization (i.e., urbanization dialogue).

In other words, understanding why the popular American breakfast cereal Lucky Charms features a colorful Irish folklore leprechaun avatar as its marketing mascot helps us better evaluate symbolic connections between traffic behavior and mythology.

Mythology may be the most empirical common denominator between science and theology.


Lucky Charms (Cereal)