Subject: »NEWS AROUND THE WORLD

LOL I wonder what rubinho will answer to your claim. According to you, Flemish already have a country. Rubinho didn't even know that he can already get the passport he wants. :D

Nice try, but you failed. Flanders is de facto not an independent state, we only have only autonomy in some specific areas (like education, cultural affairs, ...). I never claimed Flanders to be a country. Belgium is (unfortunately) the country I live in. I want Flanders to become a country, yes. That doesn't mean I don't see Belgium as a country.

In your case: if UN would no longer recognize Poland, Poland would still have independence. So it would still be a country. Just like Kosovo (for me) is a country as it de facto has independence.
(edited)

He exists beyond this world and by our perception ability he is eternal and almighty .....

Complete nonsense :) But if you prefer magic above science and common sense it's fine by me. But don't try to make a joke of reality as you are the one believing in magic. Besides, read Hebrews 11:1 ... ;)

Huh? Tree recycling? Sun recycling?

Yes :) How long did you think about this comment I made? Give it another try. Everything is made from stardust.

Complete nonsense :) But if you prefer magic above science and common sense it's fine by me. But don't try to make a joke of reality as you are the one believing in magic.

:) It's a complete nonsense for people with weak imagination. If this is nonsense to you, that only means that you are not able to even imagine an idea of someone existing outside of this universe creating it. If you are not able to imagine this, then this discussion is really futile. If you insist that it is only possible that only this universe exists, there is a small chance you might move your thinking outside of your box.

Besides, read Hebrews 11:1 ... ;)

You're too lazy to quote so I will. Hebrews 11:1 "Faith is the confidence that what we hope for will actually happen; it gives us assurance about things we cannot see." Beautiful quote. Thanx for reminding me. :)

Yes :) How long did you think about this comment I made? Give it another try. Everything is made from stardust.

And let me guess: "In the beginning the Stardust created itself and then decided to start evolving." Right? :D

:) It's a complete nonsense for people with weak imagination. If this is nonsense to you, that only means that you are not able to even imagine an idea of someone existing outside of this universe creating it. If you are not able to imagine this, then this discussion is really futile. If you insist that it is only possible that only this universe exists, there is a small chance you might move your thinking outside of your box.

So religion is for people with vivid imagination, who believe in things...

It basically means, that religion is...just like magic :-)

Not that I agree with the fact that it's for people who can imagine, I think exactly the opposite thing - religion is mostly for people who don't ask questions, don't have imagination and just accept religion the way they accept their nationality.

You ask the wrong question. The right question is: "What is an objective standard used to determine if something is a country or not?" The answer to the latter question is if the region/country is de facto independent or not.

You're nitpicking. The point is that other countries actually influence the exact status of every country. They can easily influence their independence as well. Same principles apply for religions as well. Religions not accepted by other religions are simply not that relevant and don't need to be treated the same way.

But when science proves something, religion has to accept that imo, if it suits the religion or not. If it doesn't, the religion is being ignorant for the scientific truth.

You're persistently trying to prove that science is above religion and it's not. They are on the same level but have different functions. Science, religion and art form a symbiotic triangle and are complete only when in harmony with the other two. Albert Einstein: "Religion without science is blind. Science without religion is lame." So, they both definately need to accept and respect each other in order to realise their functions. But there is definately no obligation to unconditionally accept everything the other side claims.

religion is mostly for people who don't ask questions, don't have imagination and just accept religion the way they accept their nationality.

That's just meaningless generalization. That's the same as claiming that "science is for paranoid people who cannot form an opinion before getting answers to every single question".
(edited)

As said before: religion and science don't exclude each other... I find it funny to see how it's going in a science vs religion thing here :)

I know the quote Hebrews 11:1, 'Hope without prove' (aka absolutely nothing). I was wondering if you knew this quote as you have read the Bible ofcourse as a true believer. But it's great you like that ;)

And don't tell me about imagination and lazy as everything you believe in is written on less then 1600 pages ... :)

Is it really? How many people choose their religion and how many just accept the religion that is forced into them when they are young?

I don't accept the faith in God the way religious people do. Almost every person's religion depends solely on the fact where they were born and in what times.

You're nitpicking. The point is that other countries actually influence the exact status of every country. They can easily influence their independence as well. Same principles apply for religions as well. Religions not accepted by other religions are simply not that relevant and don't need to be treated the same way.

I'm not nitpicking. I don't want to make the mistake that could logically lead to your opinion. So because some religions (as FSM) are not accepted by others (which is intolerance by the way!), they are inferior? So christianity is superior to FSM? Isn't modesty a value that is taught in christianity too?

You're persistently trying to prove that science is above religion and it's not. They are on the same level but have different functions. Science, religion and art form a symbiotic triangle and are complete only when in harmony with the other two. Albert Einstein: "Religion without science is blind. Science without religion is lame." So, they both definately need to accept and respect each other in order to realise their functions. But there is definately no obligation to unconditionally accept everything the other side claims.

Science IS above religion. You say religion is imagination. I have no problem with that, but you'll have to accept the scientific facts. I can have the imagination that I don't live in Belgium, I live in the independent state Flanders, but that won't make it true. Imagination first has to accept the scientific facts. If they don't, the imagination is pointless, and more important, wrong for sure.

You're comparing apples with apes. Science is not above religion, it is just completely different and incomparable with religion.

Blind belief in religion and science do exclude each other.

You're comparing apples with apes. Science is not above religion, it is just completely different and incomparable with religion.

Science are facts, religion is imagination (Sasha said this). Ergo, science is above religion.

religion and science don't exclude each other

Unfortunately it does :) The moment scientific facts don't fit in a certain religion anymore it's rejected even if it are facts.

Bien sur :')

That's why great scientists like Einstein believed in god :')

You're seeing the picture to short. It would not exclude religion as a whole. You can still believe in God while practicing science.