Modern Christianity in a nutshell.

reply to post by DarthMuerte

Same with SOME of the other stuff he lists. He seems to be accepting what others say without seeking direct knowledge himself.

Well he is not all alone here, there are many of our members like that. They come in here with their gospel, but get shut down quickly if they don't know what they are talking about, and this not only in the religious thread either.
There are a lot of people these days who Think they know everything they need to know, and yet they don't know hardly anything of intellectual value.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by autowrench

 

SOME of what he listed is not Biblical. There is no where in the Bible that states that the earth is 6,000 years old for example. This number is inferred by some, but not supported by the Bible itself. The fact is that we have no idea how old the earth or the universe is from strictly Biblical sources. Same with SOME of the other stuff he lists. He seems to be accepting what others say without seeking direct knowledge himself.

But the OP never said the Earth was 6000 years old, he said "The Earth is young."

Having been raised Christian, I really didn't find anything that my congregation would have disagreed with, including the young earth. BTW, we were taught the earth was 6000 years old.

There are many things he didn't list, like:

Jesus died for the sins of the world
Jesus was born of a virgin
Jesus was resurrected from the dead

Originally posted by rambo1112
First of all, lets look at what the majority of christians believe.

A lot of what your list comprises there are things that fundamentalists believe, but fundamentalists are hardly the "majority of Christians". If you have a beef with fundamentalists, I would suggest that you take it to them, and not assume that "Modern Christianity" is reflected in this list of traits copied from an anti-Christian blog.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
I can't say, i've never been to wherever God is so i don't know, all i have to go on is faith. I can;t put my trust in science because science leaves a great many things to be unexplained and so science too falls into a category of faith.

Science is merely a tool of observation of our natural world. What's so wrong about using it? The more we know about the natural world, the more we can understand and assume about the supernatural world - the "unexplained".

Astronomy is my favorite science, and IMO learning more about the cosmos is a very humbling experience.

If anything, I think science and critical thought will expose Mystery Babylon. Aren't you glad that we are no longer being kept in the Dark Ages by the Catholic Church? Aren't you glad that Astronomy replaced Astrology and the Babylonian System?

quoted for truth:

Originally posted by Fineousstitch
I thought some people may enjoy this. probably not the OP lol

Arguing with a Christian is like playing chess with a pigeon.
You could be the greatest player in the world, but the pigeon will still knock over all the pieces, sh!t on the board and strut around triumphantly

reply to post by rambo1112


Oh so you found some atheist diatribe and decided to post it here, how wonderful. Note that half of those things listed are fallacy's and not what the Bible actually says.

Why can't atheists understand that God isn't an argument...?

reply to post by DarkKnight21

If anything, I think science and critical thought will expose Mystery Babylon. Aren't you glad that we are no longer being kept in the Dark Ages by the Catholic Church? Aren't you glad that Astronomy replaced Astrology and the Babylonian System

I didn't say i was glad we were still in the dark ages. People take science in the wrong direction and they think that God doesn't exist. It leads them down the path of a false sense of security, leading to hopelessness. In the bible it is called "being wise in their own ways".

Science in itself is just a tool like anyting else, it's how it's used what makes it evil.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by DarkKnight21

 

If anything, I think science and critical thought will expose Mystery Babylon. Aren't you glad that we are no longer being kept in the Dark Ages by the Catholic Church? Aren't you glad that Astronomy replaced Astrology and the Babylonian System

I didn't say i was glad we were still in the dark ages. People take science in the wrong direction and they think that God doesn't exist. It leads them down the path of a false sense of security, leading to hopelessness. In the bible it is called "being wise in their own ways".

Science in itself is just a tool like anyting else, it's how it's used what makes it evil.

I think what you are referring to is Scientism, and unfortunately it is very common in this age. People turning science into religious belief. These people will often point to Galileo's death at the hands of the Catholic Church as their form of martyrdom. So, it's easy to see why some "scientists" are hostile against the Church. Thinking themselves wise, they became fools.

Originally posted by DarkKnight21

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by DarkKnight21

 

If anything, I think science and critical thought will expose Mystery Babylon. Aren't you glad that we are no longer being kept in the Dark Ages by the Catholic Church? Aren't you glad that Astronomy replaced Astrology and the Babylonian System

I didn't say i was glad we were still in the dark ages. People take science in the wrong direction and they think that God doesn't exist. It leads them down the path of a false sense of security, leading to hopelessness. In the bible it is called "being wise in their own ways".

Science in itself is just a tool like anyting else, it's how it's used what makes it evil.

I think what you are referring to is Scientism, and unfortunately it is very common in this age. People turning science into religious belief. These people will often point to Galileo's death at the hands of the Catholic Church as their form of martyrdom. So, it's easy to see why some "scientists" are hostile against the Church. Thinking themselves wise, they became fools.

Exactly. They say: "Your God doesn't exist because man evolved from a puddle of goo" Yet there is no proof but it is nonetheless taken as scientific fact even though it can never be proven. It's their version of faith but the world takes it as fact without proof, while ridiculing us for believing in "fairy tales" because even though we have historical and archeaological proof backing up what we believe, because they cannot see God with their own eyes then he must not exist. It's hypocrisy.

But, i say God can be proven, even if we cannot see him we can still see his fingerprint in the scriptures. Hidden in the mathematical gematria of the hebrew letters in the Torah and Tenach are the words "my name is Yeshua" repeated over and over. Before mathematics was even invented or equations, we can find equations imbedded in the gematria that give us Messiah's name. If it was just once it'd just be a fluke, but it's spread across the entire book of the hebrew bible not just once, but literally hundreds of times.

As i said before there is also science in the bible, proving his advanced knowledge. He gave man clues 3500 years ago and told Moses what we are made of, long before it could ever be proven God said we were made from the dust of the earth. Science says everything came from dust, particularly stardust. So man is made of dust. This couldn't even be proven until the invention of electron microscopes and the periodic table of elements, but low and behold we discovered that yes indeed man is made from the earth. Literally every component in our bodies comes from the earth. From our water, to our carbon, and the calcium in our bones, to the other amounts and traces of dozens of other elements that comprise us, all found right there in good 'ol dirt. So, who gave Moses this advanced knowledge 3500 years ago when there was no such thing as science?

God can not be proven. If God were to be proven, that would defeat the concept of faith. If something can be proven, then it isn't faith to believe in it.

That's what faith is all about, believing in something that can't be proven, along with belief in something that is a higher power that is better than you.

But I don't know what the proper term for something to be believed if it can be verified and proven.

The only thing God can be is argued and claimed and interpreted.

And that's all Christianity really has to offer.

Originally posted by DarkKnight21
These people will often point to Galileo's death at the hands of the Catholic Church as their form of martyrdom. So, it's easy to see why some "scientists" are hostile against the Church.

And when did the Catholic Church kill Galileo? Oh yeah, that's right, that never happened.

Galileo, who remained loyal to the Church to the very end of his life — and was even carried to daily mass when he became too feeble to walk — clearly understood that he had been the victim of an academic feud and that the Church had been drawn in on the side of his enemies only through beguilement. (Source)

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Science in itself is just a tool like anyting else, it's how it's used what makes it evil.

Science is Evil now?

You sound like a Medieval Catholic Priest. Still living in the Dark Ages, are we? I know what you said that, because Science is slowly but surely proving everything the Church teaches is wrong.

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

Science in itself is just a tool like anyting else, it's how it's used what makes it evil.

Science is Evil now?

Actually, he said that the use of science is evil, not science itself.

I don't think that it is inherently evil, but only a fool would say that it has not been used to further the cause of evil in some instances.

reply to post by adjensen

Care to list a few examples? Are you talking about this recent find?
files.abovetopsecret.com...
The Ancient Papyrus you yourself have been trying to prove a fake, without success, that your Saviour was married to Mary Magdalene, and probably left a bloodline? Is that something science is doing that you classify as evil?
Now if you are talking about those specimens over at Fort Mead, then yes, they ARE doing evil things. But mainstream science is not, to the best of my knowledge, unless one counts proving the Bible wrong more every day. I don't consider that to be evil at all.

reply to post by autowrench


Kinda went off the rails there, Autowrench

Here's a good illustration of the reaction to that fragment, don't take it personally:



As to evil in science? Geez, there are so many ethical slips to choose from...

How about Eugenics?

Social Darwinism?

Physics?

Biology?

When ethics are divorced from discovery, good things rarely result, my dear Autowrench.

reply to post by autowrench


Agreed but I myself believe they may not have it but maybe they are seeking it. You see the problem with Christians is they think they know everything. But in honesty know nothing of the truth. How can one book be the only truth? It cannot honestly because there is more than just one book of knowing in the world. For example history books they have truth in them because they are human pasts. But why can't christians except this? Because they are brainwashed into believing that what they know is the only thing truth on earth. Wrong think again Christians.

Originally posted by vlykan21
reply to post by autowrench

 

For example history books they have truth in them because they are human pasts. But why can't christians except this? Because they are brainwashed into believing that what they know is the only thing truth on earth. Wrong think again Christians.

What is the difference between a history book and a Bible? You're still accepting information from an authority figure and taking it on faith that it is true.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by DarkKnight21
These people will often point to Galileo's death at the hands of the Catholic Church as their form of martyrdom. So, it's easy to see why some "scientists" are hostile against the Church.

And when did the Catholic Church kill Galileo? Oh yeah, that's right, that never happened.

Galileo, who remained loyal to the Church to the very end of his life — and was even carried to daily mass when he became too feeble to walk — clearly understood that he had been the victim of an academic feud and that the Church had been drawn in on the side of his enemies only through beguilement. (Source)

My mistake. He was placed on house arrest and then later died. Still a victim of the Dark Ages and the pyramid hierarchy of knowledge - a victim of Babylon, not Christianity.

I don't know why you chose to bring in that quote because I never argued he was not loyal to the Church. My argument was that one can be loyal to both science and God. In fact many brilliant scientists were believers - Galileo, Newton, and even Darwin to name a few.

Get that nitpicking # outta here.

Originally posted by DarkKnight21

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by DarkKnight21
These people will often point to Galileo's death at the hands of the Catholic Church as their form of martyrdom. So, it's easy to see why some "scientists" are hostile against the Church.

And when did the Catholic Church kill Galileo? Oh yeah, that's right, that never happened.

Galileo, who remained loyal to the Church to the very end of his life — and was even carried to daily mass when he became too feeble to walk — clearly understood that he had been the victim of an academic feud and that the Church had been drawn in on the side of his enemies only through beguilement. (Source)

My mistake. He was placed on house arrest and then later died. Still a victim of the Dark Ages and the pyramid hierarchy of knowledge - a victim of Babylon, not Christianity.

I don't know why you chose to bring in that quote because I never argued he was not loyal to the Church. My argument was that one can be loyal to both science and God. In fact many brilliant scientists were believers - Galileo, Newton, and even Darwin to name a few.

Why would I point out that he was not only faithful until he died, but that the church was accommodating to him until the end, as well? I suppose because it demonstrates that "Galileo's death at the hands of the Catholic Church" was an invalid assertion on your part. He died of natural causes at the age of 77, not burned at the stake when he was actively promoting the rejection of Aristotelian physics in favour of Copernicus' view.

And his biggest mistake wasn't scientific, but rather political, when he threw away the pseudo-patronage of Pope Urban VIII by including him in a refuting text, implying that Urban was also in favour of heliocentrism, and a bit of a dunce, to boot. That was one of the primary causes of Galileo's undoing.

reply to post by DarkKnight21


no dark knight i am not i am merely stating opinions. if you have a problem with that well thats not any of my concern.