Can you be religious and pro science and technology?

[Divine Wind]

My proof is on page one of the bible, god made the world and everything in it in 6 days. Nope. Didn't happen like that. Ever.

Agreed. ding, I and others agreed it didn't happen like that yet you want to disprove the existence of David, Jesus, etc because of the creation story.

Let's cut to the chase, the entire first 5 books of the Bible were said to have been written by Moses. This would be thousands of years after they supposedly happened. So what was the source of this information for Moses to write down? Logic says that it is the same as other human tribes; it was passed down in stories around the campfires of a thousand generations. This would help explain the similarity of other creation stories among western human tribes.

 

[Mudda]

If all you do is point out the errors and not correct me...

I did correct you. You've made multiple false accusations against others and myself on this thread. I quoted another one and said you were wrong. By your own logic, if you make an assertion, you need to back it up with proof. Have at it......or, you don't have to agree with it and you are free to act like a little boy who is mad because his parents made him eat his peas.

..aren't you trying to obey a book so you can get into heaven to be with angels?...

No, it's just that I reply to a lot of jackasses on here, and it's sometimes hard for me to remember which 'tard told me which goofy story. Geez, soooooorry.

 

[Mudda]

My proof is on page one of the bible, god made the world and everything in it in 6 days. Nope. Didn't happen like that. Ever.

Agreed. ding, I and others agreed it didn't happen like that yet you want to disprove the existence of David, Jesus, etc because of the creation story.

Let's cut to the chase, the entire first 5 books of the Bible were said to have been written by Moses. This would be thousands of years after they supposedly happened. So what was the source of this information for Moses to write down? Logic says that it is the same as other human tribes; it was passed down in stories around the campfires of a thousand generations. This would help explain the similarity of other creation stories among western human tribes.

So what? That doesn't prove its veracity.
As for the Creation story, well, if people who say they believe in the god of the bible don't believe the first story about god, well, they aren't real Christians now, are they? Like, I'm glad for them that they don't believe the fiction, but what are they believing in anyways? If not what the bible says god did? Then what?

 

[Divine Wind]

I did correct you. You've made multiple false accusations against others and myself on this thread. I quoted another one and said you were wrong. By your own logic, if you make an assertion, you need to back it up with proof. Have at it......or, you don't have to agree with it and you are free to act like a little boy who is mad because his parents made him eat his peas.

..aren't you trying to obey a book so you can get into heaven to be with angels?...

No, it's just that I reply to a lot of jackasses on here, and it's sometimes hard for me to remember which 'tard told me which goofy story. Geez, soooooorry.

Dude, it's becoming clearer every day who it the real jackass and/or "tard" here. Your lack of logic, lack of maturity, trolling and, now, inability to sincerely apologize for being wrong prove to me you have the mind of an adolescent. My guess is somewhere between 13 and 25 regardless of your actual chronological age.

When you want to step up your game, please let me know.

So what? That doesn't prove its veracity.
As for the Creation story, well, if people who say they believe in the god of the bible don't believe the first story about god, well, they aren't real Christians now, are they? Like, I'm glad for them that they don't believe the fiction, but what are they believing in anyways? If not what the bible says god did? Then what?

Another post that proves what I just wrote.

 

[Mudda]

I did correct you. You've made multiple false accusations against others and myself on this thread. I quoted another one and said you were wrong. By your own logic, if you make an assertion, you need to back it up with proof. Have at it......or, you don't have to agree with it and you are free to act like a little boy who is mad because his parents made him eat his peas.

..aren't you trying to obey a book so you can get into heaven to be with angels?...

No, it's just that I reply to a lot of jackasses on here, and it's sometimes hard for me to remember which 'tard told me which goofy story. Geez, soooooorry.

Dude, it's becoming clearer every day who it the real jackass and/or "tard" here. Your lack of logic, lack of maturity, trolling and, now, inability to sincerely apologize for being wrong prove to me you have the mind of an adolescent. My guess is somewhere between 13 and 25 regardless of your actual chronological age.

When you want to step up your game, please let me know.

So what? That doesn't prove its veracity.
As for the Creation story, well, if people who say they believe in the god of the bible don't believe the first story about god, well, they aren't real Christians now, are they? Like, I'm glad for them that they don't believe the fiction, but what are they believing in anyways? If not what the bible says god did? Then what?

Another post that proves what I just wrote.

All you do is dodge the topic and call me names. Why do you bother? You have nothing to say. Just stfu.

 

[Divine Wind]

All you do is dodge the topic and call me names. Why do you bother? You have nothing to say. Just stfu.

Thanks, kid, for proving my opinion of you is balls on dead accurate.

Dude, it's becoming clearer every day who it the real jackass and/or "tard" here. Your lack of logic, lack of maturity, trolling and, now, inability to sincerely apologize for being wrong prove to me you have the mind of an adolescent. My guess is somewhere between 13 and 25 regardless of your actual chronological age.

When you want to step up your game, please let me know....

....Another post that proves what I just wrote.

 

[Mudda]

All you do is dodge the topic and call me names. Why do you bother? You have nothing to say. Just stfu.

Thanks, kid, for proving my opinion of you is balls on dead accurate.

Dude, it's becoming clearer every day who it the real jackass and/or "tard" here. Your lack of logic, lack of maturity, trolling and, now, inability to sincerely apologize for being wrong prove to me you have the mind of an adolescent. My guess is somewhere between 13 and 25 regardless of your actual chronological age.

When you want to step up your game, please let me know....

....Another post that proves what I just wrote.

I'm glad that you're happy. Now

 

[Unkotare]

...religion & science are not compatible regarding knowledge acquisition. Science is based on objective methods & evidence, while religion is based on dogma reflecting "easy button" explanations for simple-minded people.

Wrong.

 

[Mudda]

...religion & science are not compatible regarding knowledge acquisition. Science is based on objective methods & evidence, while religion is based on dogma reflecting "easy button" explanations for simple-minded people.

Wrong.

No, you're wrong.

 

[ding]

If all you do is point out the errors and not correct me...

I did correct you. You've made multiple false accusations against others and myself on this thread. I quoted another one and said you were wrong. By your own logic, if you make an assertion, you need to back it up with proof. Have at it......or, you don't have to agree with it and you are free to act like a little boy who is mad because his parents made him eat his peas.

..aren't you trying to obey a book so you can get into heaven to be with angels?...

No, it's just that I reply to a lot of jackasses on here, and it's sometimes hard for me to remember which 'tard told me which goofy story. Geez, soooooorry.

Sounds like you have an external locus of control. Big surprise.

 

[RWNJ]

I know a southern Baptist who served as a military officer who loves movies like The Martian, Star Wars, etc and TV shows like Babylon 5, Star Trek, and Battlestar Galactica.

One thing is certain. The universe had a beginning. It also operates by immutable laws. These laws are the foundation of all scientific inquiry. Now ask yourself. Where did these laws come from, if not a creator?

 

[sealybobo]

Lot of people say that genesis is made up, do you have any proof that a woman was made out of a man's rib?

Only people like you. People like me say it is allegorical and is true.

So if it's true, how did Noah get marsupials from OZ and back?

You really struggle with the concept of allegory, don't you?

Is the Virgin birth an allegory?

I don't think so.

Do you watch Blackish? It is a very well written show. The uncle and oldest daughter were atheists. In the end the girl converted back to theism. But they didn't try to prove Christianity. When someone tried to suggest the stories were not believable the grandmother yelled oh lord jesus and they changed the subject.

I have decided if you believe in God you need it. It's in you and whatever that gene is, people who choose to believe need it and should not be denied it. I just don't want cults pushing their ways. Not Muslims Christians Jews or even us atheists. I would never mock someone in person. These threads it's fair game because you know everyone here is looking for a discussion.

My hope is that people wise up. I think it's good people are not swallowing organized religion because I think they are a big scam. But belief in generic God is completely fine. Generic God doesn't have 78 virgins waiting if you blow yourself up, if you know what I mean

 

[Cecilie1200]

We aren't talking about the NT, Einstein.

While I agree, to Christians, isn't the NT all that matters? If not, why do so many people offer only the "Good News" section of the Bible?

Christians care about the ENTIRE Bible. Publishers offer copies of just the NT because there are people who want it for various reasons. You can also buy copies of just the OT, just the Gospels, just the individual books, just the ministry of Christ . . .

 

[Cecilie1200]

We aren't talking about the NT, Einstein.

While I agree, to Christians, isn't the NT all that matters? If not, why do so many people offer only the "Good News" section of the Bible?

Are you sure that isn't just your perception? We read a passage from the Old Testament at every Mass.

Okay. I can be wrong. You tell me which parts of the OT apply and which do not....or do they all apply?

Apply to what, precisely?

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Bible tells us that Creation was created in steps. Science tells us that the universe and everything in it was created in steps.

The Bible is mythological folklore.
How can anyone take that crap seriously in modern times?

Wow, thanks for sharing your personal opinion, masquerading as a statement of fact. I'll get right on not giving a crap about it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

If god is a watchmaker, why doesn't he repair this broken watch called earth?

What do you think is broken?

Wars, cancer, famine, birth defects, stupidity...

What's the point of repairing that? Such you live well in 100 years of life then go to hell?

A perfect world (heaven) is only made for those God thinks deserve it. God's only job here is to save the souls of them. Earth is rather a one time gift for humans and it now servers no other purpose than identifying the saved from the unsaved by the measurement of faith. And it remains your own stupidity to think that God should repair those 'defects'.

God made a world full of defects and then is waiting to see who he is going to cherry pick into heaven because they followed something they read in a book?

Did G-d made a world full of defects? Read Genesis, and get back to me on that.

That depends on how you're defining "defects".

 

[MattMc750]

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history. There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[BreezeWood]

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history. There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

.

There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.

that's a good joke, the 4th century bible is a political document disguised as a religion whatever evidence you are claiming is manifested from prejudice without factual documentation, not exactly a methodology of science.

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history.

science and history are as compatible as water and oil much less the derivative of a disguised literature.

 

[MattMc750]

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history. There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

.

There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.

that's a good joke, the 4th century bible is a political document disguised as a religion whatever evidence you are claiming is manifested from prejudice without factual documentation, not exactly a methodology of science.

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history.

science and history are as compatible as water and oil much less the derivative of a disguised literature.

Those are a lot of big words that are not remotely relevant to my claim nor are they evidence to disprove it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[BreezeWood]

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history. There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

.

There is also no biblical evidence that technology in itself is contrary to religious belief.

that's a good joke, the 4th century bible is a political document disguised as a religion whatever evidence you are claiming is manifested from prejudice without factual documentation, not exactly a methodology of science.

There is no empirical science that is not compatible with biblical history.

science and history are as compatible as water and oil much less the derivative of a disguised literature.

Those are a lot of big words that are not remotely relevant to my claim nor are they evidence to disprove it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

.

Those are a lot of big words that are not remotely relevant to my claim nor are they evidence to disprove it.

like your first post, your statement lacks substance I was able to convey by mine, science is incompatible with deception, the 4th century bible.