Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-16-2014, 03:32 PM
 
16,427 posts, read 22,272,570 times
Reputation: 9628

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
So I guess giving you scientific reasons why the Bible is full of nonsense is pretty much a waste of time.
It would be, yes. Science is always proving itself wrong, but God's Word never changes. When I meet a science worshipper (and that's what many are) I ask them which science they believe in: the science of today? The science of 100 years ago? The science of the future? They are all different. Just last week the nature of black holes changed again, and coffee became good for children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-16-2014, 04:12 PM
 
6,321 posts, read 4,348,863 times
Reputation: 4336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
It would be, yes. Science is always proving itself wrong, but God's Word never changes. When I meet a science worshipper (and that's what many are) I ask them which science they believe in: the science of today? The science of 100 years ago? The science of the future? They are all different. Just last week the nature of black holes changed again, and coffee became good for children.
What I've discovered is that science is only wrong when it contradicts scripture. The science itself isn't wrong. You yourself used a number you claimed to be espoused by geologists - so why are your geologists right and mine are wrong? See what I mean? The science you use falls under the same standard as the science I use and unlike Christians, I claim your science is wrong because ... the science is wrong, not because it conflicts with centuries-old dogma.

But I'm still waiting for someone to give me one example when science had to move aside and allow religion to give us all the answers. Just one event, one aspect of our world that can only be explained through magic and the supernatural. Has that happened yet? Of course not, so why would I bet on religion being right when it never has been before? No matter how often science might be wrong, if it was right even once, that is one more time than religion has ever been.

And I'm pretty certain you quite often trust your life to science whether you realize it or not. Why aren't the mechanics of flight completely wrong? Why isn't the healing nature of penacillon completely wrong? Why isn't the chemistry that causes fires completely wrong? You can't just pick and choose the science YOU think is right based on a book written during a time when there was no science, and the inhabitants of the time saw demons and monsters and terrifying bogeymen always lurking just beyond the range of their fires.

I sure wish we could move past that; if only our beliefs could be as advanced as our technology.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,337,228 times
Reputation: 14073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
You guys have such useless responses. Give me an example of an untruth in the Bible so I can respond to it.
Genesis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 06:18 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,334,275 times
Reputation: 32583
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
Geologists tell us that the Himalayas were formed only about 10,000 years ago.
Only those who got their credentials by sending in three box tops and $2.00 to cover shipping and handling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2014, 06:33 PM
 
Location: Northeastern US
20,289 posts, read 13,686,670 times
Reputation: 10163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi View Post
We are born with a sin nature due to Adam's original sin. I'm not glorifying Satan. Jesus himself told us that Satan is lord of this world. When Satan offered Jesus all the cities and nations of the Earth if he would worship Satan, Jesus refused the offer, but he didn't deny that Satan had those possessions to offer. Satan is defeated, but he still controls earth. He will control earth until Jesus returns and establishes His Kingdom on Earth.
The defeated control nothing. If Satan is defeated in any meaningful sense of that word, then he is powerless. Yet you say that he animates our very nature, lo, these 2,000 years after the atoning work of Christ that was supposed to free us from all that. That brings more glory to Satan than to God from where I sit.

But the Bible speaks out of both sides of its metaphorical mouth all the time like that. God is not willing that any should perish, and yet, by evangelical theology, most of humanity for most of human history has perished nonetheless and after all this time only 32% of the world is even self-identified as Christian, which ignores that many of them don't subscribe to your particular views on sin and salvation or are just cultural Christians. God can't market his product well enough to convince more than a tattered remnant in any given age. And even they struggle with the supposedly vanquished "sin nature". That's quite a compelling proposition there!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2014, 09:00 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,147 posts, read 20,935,171 times
Reputation: 5941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi
You guys have such useless responses. Give me an example of an untruth in the Bible so I can respond to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude View Post
Genesis.
Nativity.
Resurrection.
Exodus.
Tyre, Babylon.
The Shekel -eating fish.
Sinking Simon.

and most of the rest of the Book..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi
It would be, yes. Science is always proving itself wrong, but God's Word never changes. When I meet a science worshipper (and that's what many are) I ask them which science they believe in: the science of today? The science of 100 years ago? The science of the future? They are all different. Just last week the nature of black holes changed again, and coffee became good for children.
This is actually the reason why science is more reliable. The science of 100 years ago - Newton, Copernicus, is as valid as was then. Medicine is still right with circulation, immunisation and every discovery since.

All that religion has is proof that the cosmos does not revolve around the Flat earth and you do not cure people with casting out devils.

The religious who want to discredit the science that they see as undermining religious faith of course leap on the reappraisal of facts, like rethinking the status of Pluto or what a Black hole does - but Pluto and the black holes are as true as they were since science discovered them.Religion on the other hand is always moving on, reluctantly, in the wake of popular thought, while claiming that it never really changed its mind about anything at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bideshi
Geologists tell us that the Himalayas were formed only about 10,000 years ago.
Last I looked, it was 50 million years ago, not 10,000. Response will be 'how do they know?' Response to that is 'how do the ones Bideshi quoted know it was 10,000?' Let me guess. Because that is the guesswork date of Genesis - literalist Creation.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 02-17-2014 at 09:17 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 12:31 AM
 
64,135 posts, read 40,463,715 times
Reputation: 7930
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn View Post
Only those who got their credentials by sending in three box tops and $2.00 to cover shipping and handling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 06:29 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,435,224 times
Reputation: 4114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
The Bible states we all descended from Adam and Eve. That's good enough for me. If Adam is not the first human then the entire Bible is a lie.
Well Adam of the Creation story in Genesis was not the first human so.....

Last edited by Ceist; 02-18-2014 at 06:43 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 09:49 AM
 
17,966 posts, read 16,042,770 times
Reputation: 1010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
Well Adam of the Creation story in Genesis was not the first human so.....
Huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2014, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
31,373 posts, read 20,337,228 times
Reputation: 14073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Huh?
Don't bother, Ceist. He's built a total immunity to science, logic and reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:04 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top