Senate Christianity Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Community' started by Jabba-wocky, Aug 1, 2013.

  1. PRENNTACULAR VIP

    Member Since:
    Dec 21, 2005
    star 6
    Egyptian god of dope ass beats
  2. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7

    That was my thought and I don't even give a crap about "winning," I was more interested in whether or not there are any accredited scientists that espouse the young earth theory and can back it up with non-Bible-based evidence.
  3. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    These christianity threads never fail to entertain, although the ones with Wormie were solid gold. Lee Strobel and Kirk Cameron owe their careers to that girl, I think she bought every psycho christian apologetics book ever published just so she could argue on a SW message board.
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  4. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    God said, "Let there be light" and the photons streamed forth across the face of the darkness and they were both waves and particles simultaneously and the scientists were greatly astonished at the sophistication and elegance of God's creation.
    My point is, for God (who had just created the universe and everything in it and all the laws that govern it) it would be simpler than simple to create light billions of light years from its source an instant after it was created.
  5. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    This is the second time tonight that I've spit beer at my screen after reading a post here, and the first time involved a mental image of Chewbacca with a keg.

    Well played, TF.N, well played.

    (ETA: not directed at you, Sarge.)
    Last edited by anakinfansince1983, Aug 4, 2013
  6. Zapdos Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 7, 2013
    star 5
    I believe Morgan Freeman created the Earth
    You don't need proof if you believe
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  7. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    So the Bible is immutable then? Despite the fact that there's evidence, even in the text itself, that its been copied and changed over the millennia? Have you heard of apocrypha? The Gnostic gospels?
  8. Rogue_Ten Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 18, 2002
    star 7

    i dont think you know what "elegance" means, but your acceptance of my suggestion that god is a cosmic troll warms the cockles of my heart
    LostOnHoth and Sarge like this.
  9. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    Yup, God's definitely ****ing with us.
  10. Point Given Mod of Literature and Community

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Dec 12, 2006
    star 5
    No way, it's definitely one of Satan's temptations.
  11. Rogue_Ten Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 18, 2002
    star 7
    no that's just what god WANTS you to think
  12. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    @Rogue_Ten, what does elegance mean to you?
  13. Rogue_Ten Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 18, 2002
    star 7
    not needless complication
  14. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    It's quite interesting for SkywalkerNumbers to talk about people not accepting her faith as proof when she won't accept basic science as evidence.
  15. Katana_Geldar Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 3, 2003
    star 8
    Religious hypocrisy FTW.
    timmoishere likes this.
  16. Rogue_Ten Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 18, 2002
    star 7
    thanks for that valuable contribution, katana. you're a gem
  17. Jabba-wocky Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 4, 2003
    star 8
    There's no reason she should. This line of discussion started when someone asked about supposed contradictions in the Bible. In answering what was frankly a huge number of them, SkywalkerNumbers correctly noted the lives of Adam and Eve. When pressed further about explaining Adam and Eve's existence relative to the rest of history, she again offered a quite valid Biblical interpretation that resolved the issue without creating contradictions. She then concluded by noting that people who were not Christian probably would not accept these explanations as true.

    Where is the big flaw here? I understand perfectly well that you think it would be more reasonable for to be atheist, or at least not to be a creationist. But she never really claimed to "prove" anything other than a lack of contradictions in the passages she was asked about. This was more or less successfully demonstrated, and doesn't require accepting or rejecting scientific evidence to do so.
  18. MandaloreYak Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 29, 2004
    star 5
    What happened to this being a discussion within the Bible? Or at least, like, respectful?
  19. Lord Vivec Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 17, 2006
    star 7
    Wocky, you are misunderstanding the scope of my post. I am only commenting on her biblical creationism. Don't try to expand my post into any other topic.
  20. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7

    Nothing says "respect" like telling other people they're going to hell for not believing in the same book that you do. Just sayin'.
    Katana_Geldar likes this.
  21. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    Also, nothing says respect like offering to pray for those who don't believe in said book. "I'll pray for you" is just a passive-aggressive middle finger. It's grown tiresome.

    Here's the deal: science says the earth is 4.6 billion years old, religion says it's 6000. Science has evidence, religion does not. Therefore, science wins.
    Last edited by timmoishere, Aug 4, 2013
    anakinfansince1983 likes this.
  22. Darth Guy Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2002
    star 10
    As PRENN said earlier, nothing in the Bible directly says anything about the age of the planet. It's just an interpretation-- from people studying the "begat" chapters or something-- that gained wide acceptance among some Christians. In other words, it's a complete ass-pull. Like the trinity! [face_beatup]
  23. Sarge Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 4, 1998
    star 4
    Evidence is not proof. So no one has won, yet.

    I would also dispute that religion does not have evidence. Creationists look at the evidence and interpret it differently than evolutionists.
  24. LostOnHoth Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2000
    star 5
    Well, generally speaking one satisfies the burden of proof with evidence. Evidence itself falls into different levels of reliability. Most, if not all, of the so called 'evidence' which supports a religious worldview (that, is, the existence of god as creator) falls into the lowest level of reliability (that is, the bible and personal experience), whilst the evidence which supports a non-religious worldview (but doesn't necessarily exclude the existence of god) falls into a higher level of reliability simply because of the methodology which is used to support that evidence.

    There may well be a god and everything in the bible may well be true, there is just no objective, reliable evidence which supports that proposition. All science does is offer up an alternative explanation to the religious narrative which is more reliable in terms of methodology. That there is no methodologically reliable evidence for the existence of god is the essence of religious faith.
    Last edited by LostOnHoth, Aug 4, 2013
  25. timmoishere Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 2, 2007
    star 6
    How else can you interpret the existence of fossils, both of humankind and of dinosaurs, other than how they completely invalidate the biblical story of creation?