List of Things Christianity Has Made Worse

[Heisenberg]

exactly,theyre not scientific fact are they?nope,theyre scientific theories,with evidence made by assumptions based on observations,explain to me how evolution and the big bang theory can be proved? i want you to post up facts that 100% prove they happened

If we are going to set the standard for belief at 100% proof, Christianity is in trouble. Of course, Christianity is in trouble if we worry about just 1%. The big bang and evolution are much more than simple theories based on observations. The theories are given weight because they have considerable explanatory and predictability power. They have survived rigorous standards of scrutiny and doubt, test after test. They are the best approximation of the truth a systematic method of careful, thorough and consistent study can produce.

Meanwhile, if we did prove evolution 100%, would it cause you to disbelieve in God? Do you suppose either the big bang or evolution exclude God as possible authors? The theories make no attempt to explain a creator, not even to the point of saying there was none. These theories have no problem with the idea of God, it is the idea of a Christian god that has a problem with them.

 

[eye exaggerate]

I interpret them as they are presented by the research as they were intended to be interpreted

...so the bible, being penned for quite a few people, should be a representation of each individuals thoughts and processes? Well, I can see how you'd feel the perspective is narrow.

...research, both theist and atheist, can lead nowhere. which is the better nowhere? is there a better nowhere? Both want progress - that's half obvious.

 

[Heisenberg]

...how do you interpret scientific findings?

Objectively

 

[Hepheastus420]

Because your hypocritical philosophy is not welcome in this discussion. Go make your own Atheist bashing thread and we'll leave you alone

How is my philosophy hypocritical?

So you say to leave you atheists alone, then you tell me to make an atheist bashing thread. You're a confused individual.

 

[Heisenberg]

Because your hypocritical philosophy is not welcome in this discussion. Go make your own Atheist bashing thread and we'll leave you alone

Speak for yourself


However if there was a thread of things atheists made worse, and I felt the items listed were justified, I would have no problem with it.

 

[massah]

Lol you're ignorant too. I believe in ALL science. How can you not?

How is that an ignorant statement? Christians interpret the bible...an interpreted book to begin with, written in a completely different society, rewritten based on assumptions and interpretations as to the original meaning...so now 2000 years later you have people who go to school to study this interpreted, rewritten, manual for life that in turn make their own assumptions and interpretations that a simple "wisper in your classmates ear" test tells you always ends up skewed and manipulated even in such a short duration. So...explain to me how after 2000 years something some random set of dudes wrote, and had rewritten about centuries later, and converted in to several languages who's roots did not easily translate, make any sense to "believe" in?

 

[Hepheastus420]

Speak for yourself


However if there was a thread of things atheists made worse, and I felt the items listed were justified, I would have no problem with it.

You're gonna pick in me heis? .

 

[eye exaggerate]

Objectively

...which is a respectful path. Absolute subjectivity is the same.

 

[Hepheastus420]

How is that an ignorant statement? Christians interpret the bible...an interpreted book to begin with, written in a completely different society, rewritten based on assumptions and interpretations as to the original meaning...so now 2000 years later you have people who go to school to study this interpreted, rewritten, manual for life that in turn make their own assumptions and interpretations that a simple "wisper in your classmates ear" test tells you always ends up skewed and manipulated even in such a short duration. So...explain to me how after 2000 years something some random set of dudes wrote, and had rewritten about centuries later, and converted in to several languages who's roots did not easily translate, make any sense to "believe" in?

i said you're ignorant because you think Christians ignore science. You ignore the fact that many Christians don't ignore the facts of science, so that makes you ignorant to that fact.

 

[massah]

...so the bible, being penned for quite a few people, should be a representation of each individuals thoughts and processes? Well, I can see how you'd feel the perspective is narrow.

...research, both theist and atheist, can lead nowhere. which is the better nowhere? is there a better nowhere? Both want progress - that's half obvious.

But the "progress" you speak of has two separate driving forces behind it, one is for control and order, the other is for enlightenment and knowledge. They all have their bad seeds fudging information, but a person who doesn't have a monetary, power, or fear driven consciousness, at least in my opinion, would be more believable because they have nothing to gain from it.

 

[massah]

i said you're ignorant because you think Christians ignore science. You ignore the fact that many Christians don't ignore the facts of science, so that makes you ignorant to that fact.

never once said christians ignore science...quit "interpreting" my words to your own agenda please...

 

[Hepheastus420]

never once said christians ignore science...quit "interpreting" my words to your own agenda please...

Well you asked a question that made it seem as though Christians don't believe science. That shows some ignorance.

 

[Heisenberg]

You're gonna pick in me heis? .

No, not all the items on this list are justified. You have a right to defend those that aren't. Also, I recall someone saying something like "eat shit Christians". If I saw an anti-atheism thread and it said "eat shit atheists", I might feel compelled to join the discussion. So I feel you have the right to be here.

 

[eye exaggerate]

But the "progress" you speak of has two separate driving forces behind it, one is for control and order, the other is for enlightenment and knowledge. They all have their bad seeds fudging information, but a person who doesn't have a monetary, power, or fear driven consciousness, at least in my opinion, would be more believable because they have nothing to gain from it.

...right! ...and given that information does it not show the obvious? Believer or non-believer sees when he's fckd up - I know we all have this in common. The order and control side of the coin is 'what you get' when you push too far. You don't have to be christian to see that in effect out in the world.

 

[Heisenberg]

Well you asked a question that made it seem as though Christians don't believe science. That shows some ignorance.

The point I got from that is that some Christians, particularly creationists, tend to favor science when they perceive it backs them up, and totally discredit it when it doesn't.

 

[massah]

Well you asked a question that made it seem as though Christians don't believe science. That shows some ignorance.

nope, it was your "interpretation" and assumptions that "proves" the ignorance in your beliefs. I take things as they are presented, if they do not have a definitive representation of information I request more facts to continue the debate. That is something I hold very dear to my beliefs, the ability to object to something that someone has told me so that they have to provide enough scientific evidence to make their hypothesis a theory. Something religious people tend to forget about when sitting in a church listening to someone with a book in front of them believing every last bit of it, because if they don't they are going to hell...

 

[sso]

what? it aint all bad lol

 

[Heisenberg]

But the "progress" you speak of has two separate driving forces behind it, one is for control and order, the other is for enlightenment and knowledge. They all have their bad seeds fudging information, but a person who doesn't have a monetary, power, or fear driven consciousness, at least in my opinion, would be more believable because they have nothing to gain from it.

I am not sure what the church does can be equivocated to the progress that science produces. Science serves to bring us all together with it's free sharing of ideas and findings, to make our lives more comfortable and enjoyable with technology, and to extend our lives with medical advancement. Religion serves to separate us, teaches us to accept ideas without thought, and has resisted nearly every major scientific change it has ever encountered. Science said the world is round, religion said no. Science said lives can be saved through stem cell research, religion said no. It seems the church averts progress more often than it embraces it.

 

[massah]

I honestly think religion stifles the brain by not letting it think for itself. Hell here is a study for you:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/religion_vs_iq.html

^^ So either religious people don't use their brains enough, or their reduction in intelligence vs athiests makes them more apt to gravitate towards the fantasy given to them?

 

[eye exaggerate]

The point I got from that is that some Christians, particularly creationists, tend to favor science when they perceive it backs them up, and totally discredit it when it doesn't.

...here's the part I don't get. Science provides theories - ok, great. But, it doesn't have an answer as to why life 'exists' at all. In the mean time, no believer ('cept the odd harry potter fearing ones) are against progress and technology. It keeps family members alive, and so on. This is something that I am highly grateful for!