Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Hodders said:
Commonly known as an open letter to Dr Laura and the later editions include a couple of questions yours has missed out.
The Faith FAQ
- Thread starter Raz
- Start date
Commonly known as an open letter to Dr Laura and the later editions include a couple of questions yours has missed out.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 195
iCraig said:
Especially after the first 100,000 years of Hell.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 May 2007
- Posts
- 230
Bible is OLD
I can't beleive that people base thier life, make decisions and continue traditions based on stories written 1700+ years ago.
Some of the people that wrote the scriptures didn't actually even meet Jesus, lived up to 200+ years later. That's a few generations worth of word-of-mouth. Some didn't even live in the same country or even region. If England won the world cup and people didnt write about it for 200 years would you be suspicious they won at all?
There were many scriptures that didn't make it in to the cannon, simply discarded by a roman because the 'stories' seemed too ridiculous. For example the Gospel of St Thomas, when Jesus as a kid abused his magical powers and turned his young friends in to goats.
As people have said there are loads of contradictions in the bible. If there was a god he wouldn't rely on dodgy old scripts that 100 people could take 100 different ways to spread the word, he'd appear in the sky every year or every day to lets us know that he(she, it) exists. God would know that we need proof of his existence and shouldn't have to rely on faith. He'd perform miracles like giving amputees thier leg back.
Anyways, felt good to get that off my chest, i hope i don't cause offence
I can't beleive that people base thier life, make decisions and continue traditions based on stories written 1700+ years ago.
Some of the people that wrote the scriptures didn't actually even meet Jesus, lived up to 200+ years later. That's a few generations worth of word-of-mouth. Some didn't even live in the same country or even region. If England won the world cup and people didnt write about it for 200 years would you be suspicious they won at all?
There were many scriptures that didn't make it in to the cannon, simply discarded by a roman because the 'stories' seemed too ridiculous. For example the Gospel of St Thomas, when Jesus as a kid abused his magical powers and turned his young friends in to goats.
As people have said there are loads of contradictions in the bible. If there was a god he wouldn't rely on dodgy old scripts that 100 people could take 100 different ways to spread the word, he'd appear in the sky every year or every day to lets us know that he(she, it) exists. God would know that we need proof of his existence and shouldn't have to rely on faith. He'd perform miracles like giving amputees thier leg back.
Anyways, felt good to get that off my chest, i hope i don't cause offence
hrmm just reading what CBS and Semi-pro were arguing about..
Why cant religion and science be compatible?
If you understand science to be about explaining how things are and religion about why things are.
So in that case evolution would be compatible with the religious belief that God created the world. The means by which he achieved this feat is evolution.
Problem solved?
Why cant religion and science be compatible?
If you understand science to be about explaining how things are and religion about why things are.
So in that case evolution would be compatible with the religious belief that God created the world. The means by which he achieved this feat is evolution.
Problem solved?
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 195
Surfer said:So in that case evolution would be compatible with the religious belief that God created the world. The means by which he achieved this feat is evolution.
Problem solved?
Depends on your interpretation of the Creation story in Genesis.
Literal interpretation? No. Allegory? I suppose it could work. But that itself opens up a whole new can of worms. (What can be taken literally or as allegory? Who decides? Why would God leave his message up for so much interpretation/misinterpretation?)
-Chimpdaddy-
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Surfer said:hrmm just reading what CBS and Semi-pro were arguing about..
Why cant religion and science be compatible?
If you understand science to be about explaining how things are and religion about why things are.
So in that case evolution would be compatible with the religious belief that God created the world. The means by which he achieved this feat is evolution.
Problem solved?
If it was that simple then we might have agreed.
Like Chimpdaddy says it depends on how you define things, I would normally also define science as the "how" with religion as the "why" and in that case they do not necessarily become incompatible. However it varies because of how literally you take either religion or science, if you believe that only one must provide absolute 'truth' then they are incompatible since by implication only one can do so and the others must therefore be wrong.As mentioned there are inconsistencies or contradictions within many religious texts (probably within every religion that has ever existed) and depending on the way they explain events in the world they may be directly at odds with science or then again they might just be slightly out of kilter.
Just a little update: I'm sorting out the format at the moment, should post something in the next couple of days. It's obviously going to come in parts, and for the sake of ease I may just do the Islam section first for people here to comment etc.