Divine Inconsistencies

You can always answer them yourself.

Oh well, if your talking about my personal view.
1) Don't know. Nor do I have any satisfactory definition of soul to conduct any sort of investigation.
2) Don't know. But will point out if we don't know our purpose how are we supposed to know any other form of lifes purpose. Besides, why do we need a purpose?

It's only too clear. According to religion, Earth is located at the center of the universe, whereas moden science proves that it's just an insignificant planet.

According to Islam at least Earth is an insignificant little planet too. I'll also point out that size doesn't matter.

Originally posted by Feanor Originally posted by me Why do you think religion is supposed to answer ever question? Because it claims to understand god and pretty much everything, right?

Wrong... where did you get that idea from?

And it makes demands about my personal life too. It should prove that it's not a league of charlatans and delusional fools.

People spend most of their lifes following charlatans and delusional fools. Thats not an argument not to follow a religion. Besides, my religion does do a pretty good job proving just that.

Originally posted by Feanor Originally posted by me Why do you ask irrelevant questions? Irrelevant to what?

Well pretty well everything actually, what is it relavent to?

As far as I know, Buddhism is nontheistic and does not claim to know about god.

In China, Buddhism is theorically monothestic, but certainly appears high polytheistic. However the questions you asked don't have much to do with Theism, and I'm fairly sure they are contemplated by Buddhists.

By the way, you never answered my last (and most important) question:
Why does loading affect the behaviour of logic circuits?

Originally posted by Anton This kind of hope is baseless. You believe in Science like many others believe in God. There is no difference between you and them.

That is so true. Let no one speak of science again unless they have at least done science at some sort of university level

Originally posted by Feanor I am dialectical materialist

I am sorry, but I read this as "Dialectric Material" the first time

but I'm not manipulating any facts to hjack science

No, but you are inventing a new meaning for the word.

Originally posted by Feanor but science and philosophy are very different as well.

Well some philosophers distinguish it from a science, but even they consider  philosophy as a precussor of any science. Philosophy determines science's methodology.

Originally posted by Anton I didn't get the idea. Could you please finish the statement?

No, you will have to use your imagination.

Originally posted by Feanor Example: Mathematics, physics and history, respectively.

Heard a bit.  Why? How is related to the question?

Edited by Anton - 11-Aug-2007 at 14:48

Originally posted by Mortaza I dont think anyone need slavery of human being..

Spare me of your demagogy, will you? Humans being slaves of god is the most basic Islamic fact along with Islam meaning 'submission'.

Originally posted by Mortaza By the way, treating good to your mother has no relation with slavery to god..

You don't have to believe in a metaphysical concept to treat your mother well.

Originally posted by Mortaza Related to human. He can be worse than animal and better than angels.

I'm not talking about morality. According to Islam; animals, plants, environment and pretty much everything else exist to serve human needs.

Can you tell me how Antares, the red giant star in the initial post which would include the orbit of Mars if it was in the place of Sun, is serving humans?

Originally posted by Mortaza which science say this? Until now, human being is most complicated creature we know.

Yes, because humans evolved into what they are now. If you value science, that is the case.

Still, what you say is irrelevant. I am pointing out the fact that religions are undeniably human - centric about existence.

Originally posted by Mortaza Because they are bigger?

No, because they lived on this planet eight hundred times longer than we did until today.

Originally posted by Anton It is a matter of interpretation.

No, otherwise I wouldn't use 'the most basic Islamic fact' expression. 'Muslim' literally means one who submits to god.

Being a metaphysical concept, god cannot be observed / experimented on. That's why science simply ignores it.

But wouldnt that be there to negate the concept? Generally, when there is no evidence in something that defies the basic laws of out understanding of the universe and evidence cannot be collected, people then dismiss it.

Outside of "because God says so", how exactly does science and religion work together?

Well in slavonic languages there is also expression "rab bozhi" (God's slave) which does not necessarily mean word for word. This is I repeate, matter of interpretation. And absolutely does not affect human freedom.