Life has only been on the planet for about 2 billion years at max. That's even worse. That's off by a factor of about 45%. That would be just like saying a year is a bit more than 6 months.
Im not one who trys to convert others, so imma end that discussion now, because I could go on forever, i could say something stupid like maybe the world wasn't complete when life was created, so i was still right, and then you would say something to combat that, and then I would say something to combat that. I think thats the reason theres always a fight over religion, because neither science or Religion can prove its theories on the universe.
all the bible says is that Humans were created in the last second of the last minute, of the last hour of the earth, and theres no telling when that was written parts of the bible pre-date 5-6 thousand years. So theres no point in even arguing that, and SCIENTIST came up with the Christians believe 10k years crap. But it never says When or how long ago, all it says is that it god created the heavens and the earth in 7 days, but because there was no heaven or earth, How long was a day? There are questions such as that, that will never be answered and thats why this whole debate over religion is stupid, I believe in god and Jesus, thats me, Even though I dont go to church(a bunch of old women running their mouths about their friends behind their backs.)I still hold a strong religious belief.
With that said, I honestly think this whole topic DIED when sixen said he talked to bashiok and bashiok said because of taxes.
So theres no point in even arguing that, and SCIENTIST came up with the Christians believe 10k years crap.
Do you actually know anything?
Quote:
Genesis goes on to list many of Adam's descendants, in many cases giving the ages at which they had children and died. If these events and ages are interpreted literally throughout and the genealogies are considered closed, it is possible to build up a chronology in which many of the events of the Old Testament are dated to an estimated number of years after creation.
My point exactly... Now all I would have to do is ask one question. What calendar where they using. Without this vital piece of information it is Impossible to tell how anything, how long was one day? Was it from Light to Light, or was it a 24 hr calendar or maybe a biblical calander lost throughout the ages.
Example The bible claims moses lived to be hundreds of years old, How long was 100 years back then? 100 years then can be 10 years here, You see my point?
Yes, but you don't see anyone else's point. Christians have to come up with excuses like this every time something doesn't agree with what the Bible says. (I understand not all do, but I'm talking about the ones who do.) As more and more facts we learn disagree with the Bible, it becomes more evident that the fundamentalist Christians are just coming up with stupid excuses because it's obvious that what they're saying is untrue.
My point exactly... Now all I would have to do is ask one question. What calendar where they using. Without this vital piece of information it is Impossible to tell how anything, how long was one day? Was it from Light to Light, or was it a 24 hr calendar or maybe a biblical calander lost throughout the ages.
I feel like I'm taking part in an episode of Yu-Gi-Oh where all the cards are marked "bullshit" or "excuse".
I respect religion for it's artistic and cultural contributions.
I disrespect religion for cockblocking science and desperately forcing god into every gap in human knowledge.
If you have evidence for this fictional spacetime alteration, then source it. Until that point, I'll just assume you're part of my third statement
Isnt there enough of evidence in the past why religion is bad with all killing and such (and I suppose even today you can still see all kinds of crazy shit)
I disrespect religion for cockblocking science and desperately forcing god into every gap in human knowledge.
Time to join in!
Actually, religion never really cockblocked science and the catholic church laid, believe it or not, the foundations for the modern day university. Christianity probably did far more for science than it did to hold it back, tbh.
That said, the discussion is pointless. It's not religion you should be hating on, it's stupid people. 'Being Christian' means what people make of it. If you see 'god hates fags' people on the news, you should hate them for their stupidity - it's not religion causing those acts, it's stupid people. For what it's worth, Atheïsm is as much nonsense as belief in god is.
Actually, religion never really cockblocked science and the catholic church laid, believe it or not, the foundations for the modern day university. Christianity probably did far more for science than it did to hold it back, tbh.
Did you know that the fact that the earth is round was already widely known to the people who cared by the time Galileo came around? The 'Christianity ruined science' argument is WAY outdated and stems from writers in the French revolution who grasped back to Humanists from the renaissance. And they were wrong about a lot more than just that.
You missed the point. Allow me to highlight the only thing that matters on it;
The Dark Ages.
Of Christianity's 2000 year (or 7.3bil years*) lifespan, half of that were spent in a period of scientific retardation as a direct result of religious superstition.
Edit: Converted real time into TaintedWisp's imaginary time compression calender for completeness.
I got your point, I'm saying it sucks. It's outdated and proven in many ways to be not true. This just isn't well known outside the historian circles. The only noticeable 'lull' in all areas of society took place from 900 to 1300 (1) and had little to do with Christianity, which was at that point busy inventing universities through scholasticism. Like I said, the idea that Christianity 'kept science down' is an argument that was created when revolutionairy thinkers from just past the French revolution went overboard on the 1500's humanist idea that "the period prior to the renaissance (again a term not coined by contemporaries, mind you) was a period of darkness where everything was bad", which in itself didn't have anything to do with religion.
Google 'Burckhardt'. What you're doing is taking a 150 year old point that the masses still belief in (mostly because works to the contrary aren't common knowledge yet) and using it as your prime argument without knowing its origin or any evidence to the contrary. Sounds a lot like the product you're bashing here.
Furthermore, the enlightenment, for all the science it brought us, was more about the masses of poor people dethroning the few rich in power than a reaction on religion. And heck, to harken back to your graph; virtually every scientist you'll find who lived during the renaissance was a Christian. Most of them even were priests or had similar religious jobs. Christ, I'm pretty sure some of of them went on to be pope.
Again, though; the point is retarded in itself. Science can never explain everything. Assume for a second you had proof that the big bang theory (or any other theory about the creation of the universe) was true. I could still ask you the follow-up question "then what created the big bang theory?". You prove that, I can then ask you "what created the thing that created the big bang theory?". And I can keep going. It's a question without an end, and it's the simple main reason why a lot of scientists are agnostic. Bashing religion is as stupid as bashing, say, nationalism. Both are terms abused by stupid backwards people for purposes we find bad. Christianity is a stick - it's up to the finder to decide whether to build a house out of it or beat someone with it. You don't yell at sticks for being able to hurt people, do you?
(1) - Unless you want to haul in the social and scientific standstills from 400-500 to 700, which had very little to do with Christianity and more with the giant gap that was left by the fall of the Roman Empire.
Scientists of the past were Christians
Yes, they were. I wonder why...
Science can never explain everything
This is a real gem. I was just about how god is always located at the limits of human knowledge like a celestial carrot on a stick.
There is absolutely zero difference between "I don't know" and "God did it". None. Knowledge gained: 0.
Science doesn't have all the answers. Science probably never will. If you want to fill in the blanks with god then so be it, but know that god is not an answer; god only delays the question.
To be honest, the only debate I would prefer more would be why games cost 20 dollars more in Australia. Anyway!
Well, one nice thing about the human mind is it doesn't like logical inconsistencies. It's called cognitive dissonance, and it has the handy property of keeping our brains in order. One logical inconsistency which we run into a lot is an effect without a cause. It's pretty uncomfortable to try and hold two conflicting ideas in our heads, and so the mind will make up a placeholder to ease the pain. God is a very flexible solution to a lot of puzzles that befuddle us, and so a lot of people embrace it. As we learn, we generally replace "God said so" with actual explanations. The only time God causes problems is when people prefer it over an actual explanation.
Cognitive dissonance can prioritize things making sense over those things being true, and that can be a problem. Net net though, it's a benefit for us; it prevents a single inconsistency from derailing our inner workings. Believing in God isn't really a bad thing; it's refusing it stop believing, and that's the person's fault.
There is absolutely zero difference between "I don't know" and "God did it". None.
Knowledge gained: 0.
If you really believe that I could state similar things such as "There is zero difference between 'there is no point to living' and 'the point to living is to have fun' ". Believing isn't about gaining knowledge, it's about having faith and building on that. There comes a point in your life where you are about to perform an action about which you can ask yourself "why am I doing this?" without being able to come up with an answer. Filling that answer in with 'god' can sometimes encourage people to live on and do something with their life.
But whether you believe or not (or rather, 'why' you belief or not) is a different question though, I guess. I was just trying to point out that your 'religion has stopped science' (or 'human advancement as a whole', if you'd be willing to go that far) is an outdated argument. Not saying religion has never in any way prohibited any kind of science from happening, but the "the church kept everyone stupid from 500 to 1600" argument is such a gross and ridiculous overstatement I can't even begin to explain it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Don't worry guys, we Mormons are right so there's no need to fret.
You're all going to burn in hell anyways. . . South Park says so!
@ProzaicMuze: Go
No, clearly Pastafarians are correct. I can't believe anyone would believe anything else.
... No one reads those... >:)
South Park S15E01.
Im not one who trys to convert others, so imma end that discussion now, because I could go on forever, i could say something stupid like maybe the world wasn't complete when life was created, so i was still right, and then you would say something to combat that, and then I would say something to combat that. I think thats the reason theres always a fight over religion, because neither science or Religion can prove its theories on the universe.
all the bible says is that Humans were created in the last second of the last minute, of the last hour of the earth, and theres no telling when that was written parts of the bible pre-date 5-6 thousand years. So theres no point in even arguing that, and SCIENTIST came up with the Christians believe 10k years crap. But it never says When or how long ago, all it says is that it god created the heavens and the earth in 7 days, but because there was no heaven or earth, How long was a day? There are questions such as that, that will never be answered and thats why this whole debate over religion is stupid, I believe in god and Jesus, thats me, Even though I dont go to church(a bunch of old women running their mouths about their friends behind their backs.)I still hold a strong religious belief.
With that said, I honestly think this whole topic DIED when sixen said he talked to bashiok and bashiok said because of taxes.
Religion is bullshit. End of discussion.
Do you actually know anything?
@Eiviyn: Go
My point exactly... Now all I would have to do is ask one question. What calendar where they using. Without this vital piece of information it is Impossible to tell how anything, how long was one day? Was it from Light to Light, or was it a 24 hr calendar or maybe a biblical calander lost throughout the ages.
Example The bible claims moses lived to be hundreds of years old, How long was 100 years back then? 100 years then can be 10 years here, You see my point?
@Taintedwisp: Go
Yes, but you don't see anyone else's point. Christians have to come up with excuses like this every time something doesn't agree with what the Bible says. (I understand not all do, but I'm talking about the ones who do.) As more and more facts we learn disagree with the Bible, it becomes more evident that the fundamentalist Christians are just coming up with stupid excuses because it's obvious that what they're saying is untrue.
I feel like I'm taking part in an episode of Yu-Gi-Oh where all the cards are marked "bullshit" or "excuse".
I respect religion for it's artistic and cultural contributions.
I disrespect religion for cockblocking science and desperately forcing god into every gap in human knowledge.
If you have evidence for this fictional spacetime alteration, then source it. Until that point, I'll just assume you're part of my third statement
Isnt there enough of evidence in the past why religion is bad with all killing and such (and I suppose even today you can still see all kinds of crazy shit)
Time to join in!
Actually, religion never really cockblocked science and the catholic church laid, believe it or not, the foundations for the modern day university. Christianity probably did far more for science than it did to hold it back, tbh.
That said, the discussion is pointless. It's not religion you should be hating on, it's stupid people. 'Being Christian' means what people make of it. If you see 'god hates fags' people on the news, you should hate them for their stupidity - it's not religion causing those acts, it's stupid people. For what it's worth, Atheïsm is as much nonsense as belief in god is.
Hmm...
Reliable graph is reliable.
Did you know that the fact that the earth is round was already widely known to the people who cared by the time Galileo came around? The 'Christianity ruined science' argument is WAY outdated and stems from writers in the French revolution who grasped back to Humanists from the renaissance. And they were wrong about a lot more than just that.
You missed the point. Allow me to highlight the only thing that matters on it;
The Dark Ages.
Of Christianity's 2000 year (or 7.3bil years*) lifespan, half of that were spent in a period of scientific retardation as a direct result of religious superstition.
@Eiviyn: Go
I got your point, I'm saying it sucks. It's outdated and proven in many ways to be not true. This just isn't well known outside the historian circles. The only noticeable 'lull' in all areas of society took place from 900 to 1300 (1) and had little to do with Christianity, which was at that point busy inventing universities through scholasticism. Like I said, the idea that Christianity 'kept science down' is an argument that was created when revolutionairy thinkers from just past the French revolution went overboard on the 1500's humanist idea that "the period prior to the renaissance (again a term not coined by contemporaries, mind you) was a period of darkness where everything was bad", which in itself didn't have anything to do with religion.
Google 'Burckhardt'. What you're doing is taking a 150 year old point that the masses still belief in (mostly because works to the contrary aren't common knowledge yet) and using it as your prime argument without knowing its origin or any evidence to the contrary. Sounds a lot like the product you're bashing here.
Furthermore, the enlightenment, for all the science it brought us, was more about the masses of poor people dethroning the few rich in power than a reaction on religion. And heck, to harken back to your graph; virtually every scientist you'll find who lived during the renaissance was a Christian. Most of them even were priests or had similar religious jobs. Christ, I'm pretty sure some of of them went on to be pope.
Again, though; the point is retarded in itself. Science can never explain everything. Assume for a second you had proof that the big bang theory (or any other theory about the creation of the universe) was true. I could still ask you the follow-up question "then what created the big bang theory?". You prove that, I can then ask you "what created the thing that created the big bang theory?". And I can keep going. It's a question without an end, and it's the simple main reason why a lot of scientists are agnostic. Bashing religion is as stupid as bashing, say, nationalism. Both are terms abused by stupid backwards people for purposes we find bad. Christianity is a stick - it's up to the finder to decide whether to build a house out of it or beat someone with it. You don't yell at sticks for being able to hurt people, do you?
(1) - Unless you want to haul in the social and scientific standstills from 400-500 to 700, which had very little to do with Christianity and more with the giant gap that was left by the fall of the Roman Empire.
Scientists of the past were Christians
Yes, they were. I wonder why...
Science can never explain everything
This is a real gem. I was just about how god is always located at the limits of human knowledge like a celestial carrot on a stick.
Inserting god into gaps in human knowledge is a complete non-answer.
It literally answers nothing.
There is absolutely zero difference between "I don't know" and "God did it". None.
Knowledge gained: 0.
Science doesn't have all the answers. Science probably never will. If you want to fill in the blanks with god then so be it, but know that god is not an answer; god only delays the question.
you know the REAL reason eiviyn hates god? her daddy didnt love her enough, okay jokes aside,
Can we make a thread actually dedicated to Religion? if we are going to talk about it anyways or re-name this one.
To be honest, the only debate I would prefer more would be why games cost 20 dollars more in Australia. Anyway!
Well, one nice thing about the human mind is it doesn't like logical inconsistencies. It's called cognitive dissonance, and it has the handy property of keeping our brains in order. One logical inconsistency which we run into a lot is an effect without a cause. It's pretty uncomfortable to try and hold two conflicting ideas in our heads, and so the mind will make up a placeholder to ease the pain. God is a very flexible solution to a lot of puzzles that befuddle us, and so a lot of people embrace it. As we learn, we generally replace "God said so" with actual explanations. The only time God causes problems is when people prefer it over an actual explanation.
Cognitive dissonance can prioritize things making sense over those things being true, and that can be a problem. Net net though, it's a benefit for us; it prevents a single inconsistency from derailing our inner workings. Believing in God isn't really a bad thing; it's refusing it stop believing, and that's the person's fault.
If you really believe that I could state similar things such as "There is zero difference between 'there is no point to living' and 'the point to living is to have fun' ". Believing isn't about gaining knowledge, it's about having faith and building on that. There comes a point in your life where you are about to perform an action about which you can ask yourself "why am I doing this?" without being able to come up with an answer. Filling that answer in with 'god' can sometimes encourage people to live on and do something with their life.
But whether you believe or not (or rather, 'why' you belief or not) is a different question though, I guess. I was just trying to point out that your 'religion has stopped science' (or 'human advancement as a whole', if you'd be willing to go that far) is an outdated argument. Not saying religion has never in any way prohibited any kind of science from happening, but the "the church kept everyone stupid from 500 to 1600" argument is such a gross and ridiculous overstatement I can't even begin to explain it.