Mikaels interview kind of inspiret me to ask. Who's christian?

[Reelo]

The Bible does not say how old the Earth is actually, good try though.

Well, according to the bible, as far as I remember, there is a thorough genealogy with age at death given. So, if (IF!) you would take the bible literally, you could extrapolate the age of the Earth:

The earliest event in the Bible that can be dated with reasonable certainty is the beginning of Saul's reign as the first king of Israel. It is generally believed to have occurred about 1020 BCE, at a time when Egypt and Assyria were weakened and the Israelites were able to assert domination over their own territory. Many theologians have attempted to compute the date of creation by working back from this or a similar known date, through the various time intervals mentioned in the Bible. For example:

Most contemporary historians establish a base date of Saul's accession to the throne of Israel to have happened 1020 BCE. However, Bishop James Ussher, a 17th century Irish archbishop from Armagh, Ireland, estimated this date as 1095 BCE in his work: Annales Veteris et Novi Testamenti

Work backwards through the Book of Judges. Ussher computed 330 years for the duration of the rule of Judges. He based this on the intervals specified in the Hebrew Scriptures. Modern theologians believe that the "Judges" did not rule over all of Israel in a regular sequence. Instead, each Judge controlled separate tribe(s), so that their interval of rule overlapped. A modern estimate for the duration of time covered by the Book of Judges is perhaps 180 years.

If Joshua's conquest of Canaan happened, it would have occurred circa in the 13:th century BCE which was a time when Egypt's influence over the area was at a low ebb. Bishop Ussher estimated that it began in 1451 BCE; that is unlikely because Egyptian power was at its peak at that time and completely dominated the area. In reality, if it did happen, it probably occurred in about 1237 BCE under Pharaoh Rameses II, a time when Egypt was in steady decline.

Ussher dated the arrival of Abraham in Canaan to 2126 BCE and the Noachian flood at 2349 BCE. The latter is unlikely, because historical records in China and Egypt continued without disruption through that date, and contain no record of a massive world-wide flood that would have wiped out their civilizations.

Ussher was able to use the ages of famous pre-flood personages in the Bible to estimate the number of years between creation and the flood. In 1650 CE, he published his book "Annales veteris testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti" ("Annals of the Old Testament, deduced from the first origins of the world.") He calculated that God had created the Earth in 4004 BCE.

 

[ozric]

Raised as a catholic. Don't practice anymore.

Nowadays I try to live my life by the ultimate teaching of that dude the catholic church seems to have forgotten. You know, Jesus.

do you mean the dude who is at the centre of every mass in the eucharist??

 

[MidianGTX]

no human can fully comprehend how life was started and how we are the way we are today, but to me it seems like just as big a step of faith (or bigger) to believe it was a scientific accident then to believe God created all.

I'm not trying to flame your beliefs or anything... but have you seen how many scientific accidents happen all the time? Given the size of the universe and the trillions upon trillions of particles colliding and reactions occurring on a very frequent basis, I'd have to say that I think the chances of this happening eventually were actually pretty good.

Keeping with the civil discussion I'd have to say that I'm agnostic. I don't believe in God but I'm perfectly willing to accept there are so many things that we don't know, and will never know... that's it's not a total impossibility. I sincerely doubt I'll ever believe in him or that anyone will ever really prove his existence, but hey... if they do then sure, I'll believe and I'll tell him I think he's cool but I won't totally change my life for him cause that'd be taking away some of my freedom... and I'm sure he'd be kind of against that.

 

[Nasty-Fire]

I'm not trying to flame your beliefs or anything... but have you seen how many scientific accidents happen all the time? Given the size of the universe and the trillions upon trillions of particles colliding and reactions occurring on a very frequent basis, I'd have to say that I think the chances of this happening eventually were actually pretty good.

Yes and this is why it's possible that life exists elsewhere in the universe, and I'd say there's quite good chance. However, we will probably never have the capacities nor the time to discover and prove those.

 

[de_aztec]

no human can fully comprehend how life was started and how we are the way we are today, but to me it seems like just as big a step of faith (or bigger) to believe it was a scientific accident then to believe God created all. Why do we assume our minds have the capacity to understand everything on our own power? Can an ant understand the internet? no, just like our brains will never understand the way God works and creates.

That's a cop-out. "Life is too complex for us humans, we will never understand it, let's give up now and just read this book."

I don't find scientific predictions about the world's beginning being harder to believe than God. Science is by definition, based on evidence. People extrapolated the Big Bang theory based on expansion and background radiation. This has been learned through experimentation and observation. For god and religion, there is NOTHING that even indirectly supporting his existence.

It's like saying unicorns created the universe. It's no more or less plausible than God creating it. Whilst the Big Bang theory is a theory, it is supported by at least some evidence, whereas God isn't supported by any. Why would it be easier to believe? IMO there is a smaller leap of faith for science.

 

[Reelo]

Whilst the Big Bang theory is a theory, it is supported by at least some evidence, whereas God isn't supported by any.

The problem with believers tends to be that for them, the existence of a scripture (Bible, Qur'an etc) is just as much evidence of Gods existence than Background radiation is for believers in Big bang Theory.

 

[hexwind]

For god and religion, there is NOTHING that even indirectly supporting his existence.

Wrong dude. well.. there are methods of justifying things, I don't actually know their names in English coz I study in French. But one of em is that helped to justify God's existence, at least for myself, and the truth of Qur'an.
Take one document that u doubt about its truth, and see if there is anything that justifies most of what the document is about, science for example, would still doubt about the correctness of the document? I don't mean NO doubt, coz probably the next generations will prove it by their developed minds and "tools". Why should Religion asks me for working hard and learning as much as I can to prove it true if it is actually wrong? just to fool me?
And there is a different between non-believers i think. Some support their ideas with mature arguments and some just deny religions because of its rules.

 

[de_aztec]

Wrong dude. well.. there are methods of justifying things, I don't actually know their names in English coz I study in French. But one of em is that helped to justify God's existence, at least for myself, and the truth of Qur'an.
Take one document that u doubt about its truth, and see if there is anything that justifies most of what the document is about, science for example, would still doubt about the correctness of the document? I don't mean NO doubt, coz probably the next generations will prove it by their developed minds and "tools". Why should Religion asks me for working hard and learning as much as I can to prove it true if it is actually wrong? just to fool me?
And there is a different between non-believers i think. Some support their ideas with mature arguments and some just deny religions because of its rules.

Nope sorry, that's not evidence of God. Justifying one part of the a holy text (excluding God) does not justify God. And there is probably more fallacies in holy texts than truths.

Religion doesn't want you questioning it. The whole point of religion is faith. Can you deny faith is important to your religion? Faith is almost the polar opposite of coceivable evidence.

Religion is useful for controlling a population.

 

[cuntface]

That's a cop-out. "Life is too complex for us humans, we will never understand it, let's give up now and just read this book."

I don't find scientific predictions about the world's beginning being harder to believe than God. Science is by definition, based on evidence. People extrapolated the Big Bang theory based on expansion and background radiation. This has been learned through experimentation and observation. For god and religion, there is NOTHING that even indirectly supporting his existence.

It's like saying unicorns created the universe. It's no more or less plausible than God creating it. Whilst the Big Bang theory is a theory, it is supported by at least some evidence, whereas God isn't supported by any. Why would it be easier to believe? IMO there is a smaller leap of faith for science.

well put yes as we all know religion is just belief, just as believing in father christmas or the easter bunny it's the same thing. except religion is taken more seriously, but it's the same thing

 

[SerenityPaintedLife]

well put yes as we all know religion is just belief, just as believing in father christmas or the easter bunny it's the same thing. except religion is taken more seriously, but it's the same thing

Yes, good point. Bill Maher made a good comment about organized religion. He basically said that what often validates something is how long it has been around (I am sure that others have said that, too, but this is fresh in my mind).

He said that if you were to hypothetically take out Christianity out of world history, and if today, some guy showed up and a group of people thought that he was the son of god, people would just say that this was some terrible cult.

 

[Nasty-Fire]

@de_aztec : I agree, but you forgot the little fact that the Flying Spaghetti Monster actually created the universe.

V

 

[Snusgropen]

But history shows that science was wrong at some points. you never know.

Unlike religion which has never been shown to be correct at any points.

Religion fails, and you fail with it.

Atheist claim there is no God, so it is up to them to prove that there is none!

I mean come on, can't you be more shallow?

!!!

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

 

[Lateralus14]

This thread is such an abomination now.

 

[Lateralus14]

Unlike religion which has never been shown to be correct at any points.

Religion fails, and you fail with it.




!!!

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

Considering mexicola said the exact same thing, you just proved yourself to be a narrow-minded, arrogant jackass. Congrats.

 

[Kamel]

Originally Posted by sotua View Post
Raised as a catholic. Don't practice anymore.

Nowadays I try to live my life by the ultimate teaching of that dude the catholic church seems to have forgotten. You know, Jesus.

I hope you're kidding, man; The Catholic church (Roman - apostolic) nowadays bases their whole Dogma on Jesus' Teachings, am I right?

ON the other hand, to reply to someone's post, I wouldn't think of hell as a Firey place but a dark and silent prison that would eternally drive you insane, caught by fear

 

[Snusgropen]

Considering mexicola said the exact same thing, you just proved yourself to be a narrow-minded, arrogant jackass. Congrats.

You just proved yourself as someone who assume people have nothing better to do than read every post in a thread before they post, as opposed to commenting on something and moving on.

Stop living in front of your computer and go outside for a change. You know... outside? That scary place on the other side of the door.

But I guess there's no need for you to ever step outside, you can always beam yourself to the next Star Trek convention, right? But try it, just once. It appears your brain could use the oxygen.

 

[Lateralus14]

lol, it was actually quoted in the post you quoted, try again sport.

 

[Snusgropen]

I can only assume you are referring to this remark by mexicola, which hexwind quoted in the post I in turn quoted:

Religious people claim there is a god. It is up to them to prove there is one.
Not the other way around.

If so, how does that constitute as "the exact same thing" mexicola said?

You need to start making sense real soon, "sport". Should we do this in Klingon? Let me know and I'll hire an interpreter who speaks Nerdish.

 

[Kamel]

According to what's been said, The Cthulhu Mythos would be a perfect religion;

 

[Caesar Metallius]

Anyone who says they KNOW the answers about the existence of a god and the creation of the universe is full of shit.