I
Illegal Smile
Guest
When young people hate on religion in general it's usually a psychological displacement of their adolescent rebellion toward parental authority.
Well in Genesis God made the world in 6 days, that is impossible.
they assume that halflife has allways been just over 5700 years.. if i have a 1 gallon bucket and let water drip in it i can caculate how long it will take to fill the bucket up but if for some reason i turn the water up just for a few seconds it will drastically change the time it takes to fill up... is it possable halflife has changed in the last umpteen billion years?
wrong again pal... cuz we know from a little thing called science... the full formation of the earth did not happen in six daysLOL maybe i am reading this wrong but just because it only took 6 days its impossible? if it would of taken him 8days would that be more reasonable?
Look if god made the world he could of done it as quick or took as long as he wanted he is god ya know
LOL maybe i am reading this wrong but just because it only took 6 days its impossible? if it would of taken him 8days would that be more reasonable?
Look if god made the world he could of done it as quick or took as long as he wanted he is god ya know
You are not wrong. The argument here would be though that it was man who punished him not God. People who interpreted the bible incorrectly.correct me if im wrong but wasnt gallaleo placed on house arrest for his theories that went against the word of the church? it just goes to show that the church is far out gunned when it comes to modern science and religion... and that was almost 400 years ago... please read on...
quote from wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed (at least outwardly) to the geocentric view that the Earth is at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began supporting heliocentrism publicly, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. Although he was cleared of any offence at that time, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" in February 1616,[8] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for itwhich he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.
sometimes i think you are very smart other times i think you dont have a clue what your talking about.It is that very church which MADE the Bible. How could they misinterpret it? They were FOLLOWING it.
So who really follows the Bible? The answer of course is not many at all. If any one religion truly followed the teachings of the Bible, they would be OUTCASTS from society very very quickly.
What does this tell us about the Bible? Think hard......
I think you missed the point on creating the sun. Reread the storyYou don't think it's a bit suspicious that by their own time line the earth took an entire day? You don't think it's a bit suspicious that the Bible concentrates on G*D creating the SUN, when G*D would obviously have to create Trillions more of the same complexity?
Or perhaps it shows quite clearly that the authors (men) had no idea that there were Trillions of suns out there........ certainly they did not have this knowledge, else they would have come up with a larger timetable or changed the increments.
What the primitive genesis stories tell us is that the authors thought the Earth was ALONE and the CENTER. Both ideas are 100% incorrect and the Genesis story illustrates that nicely.
oh and ur water dripping thing is not a valid comparison... sorry
you dont think scientist have presupposition?Well the author loses the wheels on his cart pretty early in this article. Again, as with most religions, the first lie is the whopper. Once that lie is accepted, the rest gets a lot easier.
The author states that BOTH sides (religion and science) have built in presuppositions. This is untrue. only religion starts with a presupposition and all info which follows must first pass through this filter. Science has no filter other than can the "new" hypothesis stand up to scrutiny.
No, science has no presupposition, only verifiable data. the more verified, the more it is accepted. If you can walk up and show Newton is wrong, and can prove it over and over, it will be accepted.you dont think scientist have presupposition?
wrong again pal... cuz we know from a little thing called science... the full formation of the earth did not happen in six days
No, science has no presupposition, only verifiable data. the more verified, the more it is accepted. If you can walk up and show Newton is wrong, and can prove it over and over, it will be accepted.
Religion works in the opposite direction.