Does religion give excuse to be ignorant/mental?

lunamoth · Apr 22, 2008

Draka said:
I just want to reiterate, I am not talking about anything here but what can be scientifically tested and proven. Since deity and afterlife and spirits and so on cannot really be touched by science then differing beliefs in those things are to be expected. But when we have scientific data coming out of our ears that all agrees that the Earth is around 4.5 BILLION years old then trying to base a few thousand year old Earth on the literal translation of some verses of the bible is ridiculous. I don't care if that offends some people either...it IS ridiculous...plain and simple.

I agree with you that it's ridiculous and that things like Creationism have no place in a science class.

However, I have friends who are Creationists. I'm not going to tell them they are ignorant, altough I do tell them I disagree and it's better that we don't talk about that particular subject. What will it accomplish for me to get in their face and tell them they are wrong?

uss_bigd · Apr 22, 2008

lunamoth said:
I agree with you that it's ridiculous and that things like Creationism have no place in a science class.

However, I have friends who are Creationists. I'm not going to tell them they are ignorant, altough I do tell them I disagree and it's better that we don't talk about that particular subject. What will it accomplish for me to get in their face and tell them they are wrong?

creationism has its place in science class....

didn't you know that the mineral composition of the human body is pretty much the same as the soil? which corroborates creation accoutns that man was made from soil.

Draka · Apr 22, 2008

There is a difference in believing in some kind of creation and believing in a literal creation in 7 days. One can believe that their deity worked their creation through the means of evolution. That science is the tool of creation. But believing in the literal translation of Genesis (an obviously allegorical book) becomes foolish when presented with the facts of the Earth.

uss_bigd · Apr 22, 2008

Draka said:
There is a difference in believing in some kind of creation and believing in a literal creation in 7 days. One can believe that their deity worked their creation through the means of evolution. That science is the tool of creation. But believing in the literal translation of Genesis (an obviously allegorical book) becomes foolish when presented with the facts of the Earth.

Its definitely not literally seven days.

I remember having this question in highschool " Where would you fit in the dinosuars in the 7 days of creation?"

apparently, biblically speaking it was not literally seven days

look at what Peter said:

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.:bow:

Draka · Apr 22, 2008

uss_bigd said:
Its definitely not literally seven days.

I remember having this question in highschool " Where would you fit in the dinosuars in the 7 days of creation?"

apparently, biblically speaking it was not literally seven days

look at what Peter said:

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.:bow:

But even that will lead people to believe the Earth was "created" in 6 to 7000 years, and that isn't so. It's the interpretations of what is to be a spiritual book into the realms of science that don't work. And then we have these people running around claiming that the Earth is either 6000 years old (7 day creation) or 13000 years old (7000 year creation). They are living in ignorance and seem quite happy to remain there.

uss_bigd · Apr 23, 2008

Draka said:
But even that will lead people to believe the Earth was "created" in 6 to 7000 years, and that isn't so. It's the interpretations of what is to be a spiritual book into the realms of science that don't work. And then we have these people running around claiming that the Earth is either 6000 years old (7 day creation) or 13000 years old (7000 year creation). They are living in ignorance and seem quite happy to remain there.

first of all i would like to agree that the earth is not 13,000 years old only. i believe that Dinosaurs roamed the earthand so on and so forth.

But again, that is not literally 1000 years, Peter wouldnt really know for sure right? he based his assumption on the fact that God is long suffering for humankind's sins.

The verse just proves God's days are not earth days.:angel2:

Draka · Apr 23, 2008

uss_bigd said:
first of all i would like to agree that the earth is not 13,000 years old only. i believe that Dinosaurs roamed the earthand so on and so forth.

But again, that is not literally 1000 years, Peter wouldnt really know for sure right? he based his assumption on the fact that God is long suffering for humankind's sins.

The verse just proves God's days are not earth days.:angel2:

It could also be that the whole story is allegorical in nature. That the jist of it is to get across that God created everything in time. That all the wonders of the sky, the earth, the sun, the animals, and man itself can be attributed to God, BUT taking it so seriously and literally is just taking it too far. One can be a Christian and believe that Genesis was meant to be allegorical and STILL that attributes all to God. I don't believe that one must be so darn literal in order to believe. That is why it's called "faith" right?

I just don't understand why some people will hold so tightly to something that has been proven false time and time again simply because they are so concerned with everything in their particular "holy book" being word-for-word literally true. Things don't have to be taken literally for one to hold the idea of any truth in something. I'm not even Christian but I can understand that much about it.

Captain Civic · Apr 23, 2008

lunamoth said:
I have friends who are Creationists. I'm not going to tell them they are ignorant, altough I do tell them I disagree and it's better that we don't talk about that particular subject. What will it accomplish for me to get in their face and tell them they are wrong?

That was the basis of my argument. I'm a leader with one of my church's youth groups. Most people at my church, I assume, are creationists. I know the guy who runs it (who is also a good friend of mine) is a creationist. He was talking about doing some of the creationist 'science' for this term(?)'s topics, so I told him my position on it. We didn't clash, although he did say he wasn't going to alter it. I said fair enough. I might ask him actually if he'd let the kids talk to me if they wanted a different point of view after the night's over.

So yeah, he believes in creationism. I don't care that much. Ultimately all that matters to me is that he believes in Jesus. The rest, as far as I'm concerned, is window dressing.

McBell · Apr 23, 2008

Captain Civic said:
Can you accept, however, that they do this more out of good-will and, to an extent, fear?

I do not know about Draka, But I do not accept it.
To excuse it because they are afraid they may be wrong is doing them no favours.

Captain Civic said:
Some people's idea of God would collapse if certain beliefs were to be accepted as false.

Then I say that their idea is not worth much if TRUTH causes it to collapse.
Especially given that they claim said God is all about TRUTH.

Captain Civic said:
And sure, it would be lovely if we all lived in the real world, but ultimately I wouldn't care if you believed something which was radically different to what I did, the evidence be damned.

So your beliefs are much more important to you than the Truth?
I cannot help but wonder what your deity thinks of this type of attitude.

Captain Civic said:
I agree that it's dumb about creationists pushing non-essential 'doctrine' into secular settings, but for those who believe in anything unusual or proven to be wrong, even if it's ignorant or intellectually dishonest, I don't think it should matter.

{SARCASM**
Yes, because the Truth is way over rated.
Especially if said truth interferes with your world view.
{/SARCASM**

Again, I cannot help but wonder what your deity thinks of such dishonesty.

Captain Civic · Apr 23, 2008

Mestemia said:
So your beliefs are much more important to you than the Truth?
I cannot help but wonder what your deity thinks of this type of attitude.

My beliefs try to mirror as much as the truth as I can comprehend it. Obviously, because you're not Christian, you don't believe what I believe to be true. I think you're wrong, but I'm not going to start screaming at you because our concepts of truth collide.

Maybe I should join the evangelicals on the streets demanding you change to my set of beliefs of truth because yours don't match mine? There is such a thing as peaceful co-existance.

{SARCASM**
Yes, because the Truth is way over rated.
Especially if said truth interferes with your world view.
{/SARCASM**

Again, I cannot help but wonder what your deity thinks of such dishonesty.

The only truth that matters to me is that of Jesus. That's all that really matters to me. I think creationists are wrong, but to believe in such a thing is to turn away from scientific facts.

What can I do? Yell and scream at them because they're not right? Yeah, it's obviously done wonders so far. Maybe I can just keep mocking them and hope they'll turn around?

I don't know if you meant this post to be offensive, but it certainly came off that way.

McBell · Apr 23, 2008

Captain Civic said:
My beliefs try to mirror as much as the truth as I can comprehend it. Obviously, because you're not Christian, you don't believe what I believe to be true. I think you're wrong, but I'm not going to start screaming at you because our concepts of truth collide.

Maybe I should join the evangelicals on the streets demanding you change to my set of beliefs of truth because yours don't match mine? There is such a thing as peaceful co-existance.

The only truth that matters to me is that of Jesus. That's all that really matters to me. I think creationists are wrong, but to believe in such a thing is to turn away from scientific facts.

What can I do? Yell and scream at them because they're not right? Yeah, it's obviously done wonders so far. Maybe I can just keep mocking them and hope they'll turn around?

I don't know if you meant this post to be offensive, but it certainly came off that way.

Interesting.
The thread topic (I thought) was about when beliefs contradict solid scientific fact.
I.E. the age of the earth being (according to scientific fact) billions of years old as apposed to (creationists) thousands of years old.

How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?

Captain Civic · Apr 23, 2008

Mestemia said:
Interesting.
The thread topic (I thought) was about when beliefs contradict solid scientific fact.
I.E. the age of the earth being (according to scientific fact) billions of years old as apposed to (creationists) thousands of years old.

How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?

How does my "truth" of Jesus differ from your "truth?"

I don't believe truth is subjective. However, I think that a creation's "truth" is subjective.

McBell · Apr 23, 2008

Captain Civic said:
How does my "truth" of Jesus differ from your "truth?"

I don't believe truth is subjective. However, I think that a creation's "truth" is subjective.

So you refuse to answer my post then?

Originally Posted by Mestemia

Interesting.
The thread topic (I thought) was about when beliefs contradict solid scientific fact.
I.E. the age of the earth being (according to scientific fact) billions of years old as apposed to (creationists) thousands of years old.

How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?

I know that truth is subjective.
Though I strongly suspect we have vastly differing views on what truth actually is.

How would I know how our beliefs of Jesus differ?
I know not what it is your believe about him.

And why are you trying to sidetrack the conversation?

Captain Civic · Apr 23, 2008

Mestemia said:
So you refuse to answer my post then?
Originally Posted by Mestemia
Interesting.
The thread topic (I thought) was about when beliefs contradict solid scientific fact.
I.E. the age of the earth being (according to scientific fact) billions of years old as apposed to (creationists) thousands of years old.
How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?

It was supposed to be a question answering a question. >.>

I know that truth is subjective.
Though I strongly suspect we have vastly differing views on what truth actually is.

Yes, I think we might.

How would I know how our beliefs of Jesus differ?
I know not what it is your believe about him.

Well, I assume because you don't believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and I'm Christian, which means I do, I assume our beliefs of Jesus differ.

And why are you trying to sidetrack the conversation?

I wasn't sidetracking it. :sarcastic

If you want a flat out plain answer that's no fun, I believe scientific evidence is truth and the belief of creationism is false. Mostly, because science begins at a neutral point and tries to find truth, whereas creationism starts at its answer and tries to prove it, which said beginning is proven false.

Charity · Apr 23, 2008

I'm sorry but I was ignorant/mental before religion, so I guess I can't use that as an excuse.

Anything else I can blame it on? :shrug:

:woohoo:

McBell · Apr 23, 2008

Captain Civic said:
It was supposed to be a question answering a question. >.>

My apologies.
For I do not understand the relevance.

Captain Civic said:
Well, I assume because you don't believe that Jesus is the Son of God, and I'm Christian, which means I do, I assume our beliefs of Jesus differ.

Why would I not believe that Jesus is the Son of God?
The Bible flat out states as such.

Captain Civic said:
I wasn't sidetracking it. :sarcastic

If you want a flat out plain answer that's no fun, I believe scientific evidence is truth and the belief of creationism is false. Mostly, because science begins at a neutral point and tries to find truth, whereas creationism starts at its answer and tries to prove it, which said beginning is proven false.

But this does not answer the question I asked:

How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?

I ask this because I agree with what you say here:

And sure, it would be lovely if we all lived in the real world, but ultimately I wouldn't care if you believed something which was radically different to what I did, the evidence be damned.

But only on subjects that have little to no scientific fact to support it. I.E. That Jesus actually existed.

However, since it is my impression that the thread is about beliefs that directly contradict scientific fact, I made it a point to specifically mention one such instance, billions of years or merely thousands.

Captain Civic · Apr 23, 2008

Mestemia said:
Why would I not believe that Jesus is the Son of God?
The Bible flat out states as such.

What, no sarcasm quotes?

But this does not answer the question I asked:
How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?
I ask this because I agree with what you say here:
And sure, it would be lovely if we all lived in the real world, but ultimately I wouldn't care if you believed something which was radically different to what I did, the evidence be damned.
But only on subjects that have little to no scientific fact to support it. I.E. That Jesus actually existed.

However, since it is my impression that the thread is about beliefs that directly contradict scientific fact, I made it a point to specifically mention one such instance, billions of years or merely thousands.

I apologise. I misunderstood. Let me try again. :areyoucra

To answer this question:

How then does the "truth" of the creationist, merely differ from the scientific "truth"?

Their truths don't "merely differ." The "truth" of a creationist is more aligned to ignorance and self preservation. The scientific "truth" accepts all evidence and forms an opinion on the most likely explanation from said evidence. Creationist "truth" only has interest in scientific "truth" insofar as it supports their ideals.

Draka · Apr 23, 2008

Mestemia said:
However, since it is my impression that the thread is about beliefs that directly contradict scientific fact, I made it a point to specifically mention one such instance, billions of years or merely thousands.

Just as clarification: This is right. I was starting this thread to discuss the ignorance of beliefs that are in direct contradiction to proven/testable fact/science. As far as belief in anything else that science cannot test or prove or disprove, I leave that entirely up to faith and expect disagreements (such as afterlife/deity/spirits...). This is about beliefs that fly in the face of science. Belief of things that have been proven false over and over again. To continue to believe such things even after seeing evidence to the contrary is willfull ignorance and should be confronted.

As to having friends that are strict creationists and not openly disagreeing with them and telling them that they are flat out wrong...more power to anyone who can do that. I, on the other hand, cannot. I would view myself a hypocrit. I could not honestly retain friends that chose to be that pigheaded and stubbornly ignorant of reality.

Does religion give excuse to be ignorant/mental?

lunamoth

Will to love

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member

Draka

Wonder Woman

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member

Draka

Wonder Woman

uss_bigd

Well-Known Member

Draka

Wonder Woman

Captain Civic

version 2.0

McBell

Resident Sourpuss

Captain Civic

version 2.0

McBell

Resident Sourpuss

Captain Civic

version 2.0

McBell

Resident Sourpuss

Captain Civic

version 2.0

Charity

Let's go racing boys !

McBell

Resident Sourpuss

Captain Civic

version 2.0

Draka

Wonder Woman