Quote from piezoe:
"Profound" has meaning only in the human context of course. There is no scientific view of the concepts of forgiveness or the Christian commandment "thou shalt not kill."
The "Thou shalt not kill" commandment was actually from the Jews, or at least that is where the known record began. Christ is the one who made forgiveness a commandment.
While you may not have a scientific view of either concept, I have no doubt there is at least one geek out there who has hypothesized the origins and reasoning for the commandments' existence. He/she/it may even have some mathematical equations to support their work.
I was just curious as to whether or not you saw any validity in such notions.
Quote from piezoe:
{The latter is of special interest to me, not because it is ignored by the vast majority of Christians, but because the breaking of this commandment is celebrated and lauded by mainstream Christian denominations.
I hope you are able to give at least one or two examples where main stream Christianity celebrates and lauds the killing of others. I'm surprised to hear of this.
As for me, I find forgiveness to be far more interesting than the other commandment. We are all killers, thieves, liars and cheaters, are we not? We have all been eaten away at some point by our own hatred and jealousy for others, have we not?
Just look at the way Obama's legacy has twisted and tormented pspr's very soul.
I have found that the act of forgiving to be maybe even paramount- far surpassing any other concept of chemical reaction or gravitational pull.
Quote from piezoe:
The Baptists have an entertaining way out. They contend that the commandment applies only to the taking of "innocent" life, so naturally anyone they kill is, therefore, by definition, not innocent. 
}
While I agree that some within the baptists may think similarly to what you have described, I will also point out that you are stereotyping all members of a group, based on what was likely an isolated and short lived study on your part.
My buddy, Tom, is a baptist(claims to be at least) and he says you're "full of bs"(his words).
Quote from piezoe:
These are not just religious concepts, but humanist as well. The humanists, however, seem to be somewhat better at following them.
The humanist just prefer to remain low-key and rarely run their mouths about anything. God only knows what is going through their minds half the time.
Quote from piezoe:
One must separate the viewpoints of scientists from science itself. In my opinion, Karl Popper had what was science, and what was not, correct, at least for the most part. Any assertion held to be scientific must, at the minimum, be testable, falsifiable.
Popper had his moments, that is for sure.
I find it interesting though, that you seem to classify any science that comes from a group of Christians as "mumbo jumbo", as their theories can't be tested and/or falsified.
Yet I wonder how you view many of today's "main stream" scientific theories. You know, like such widely accepted theories that the earth has a molten nickel outer core and a solid iron inner core- or that the sun's core temperature remains steady at about 27 million degrees F?
For instance, let's take your theory that life- other than carbon based- will never be found elsewhere in our universe; Is this theory testable, falsifiable?
Quote from piezoe:
The "mumbo jumbo" I referred to are ideas of man held to be scientific, but nevertheless don't, and can't, meet Popper's requirements.
You mean "mumbo jumbo" like the "Big Bang" theory? I don't know about you, but I'm still waiting for those tests to take place to see whether or not it can be falsified...
