Why do people still believe in the Big bang theory, when it is disproved by the Bible?
31-35, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Mamapolo2016 · F
@BlueVeins Why do people still believe in science when many of its theories have been disproven by later scientists?
I do not believe faith in God and Science are mutually exclusive. Science is not a Creator. It's an explainer.
It would be interesting to see how a jet engine would be described in Biblical language.
I do not believe faith in God and Science are mutually exclusive. Science is not a Creator. It's an explainer.
It would be interesting to see how a jet engine would be described in Biblical language.
BlueVeins · 22-25
@Mamapolo2016 How about because every time science has ever allegedly failed, it was because of some kind of flaw in the evidence employed, or a deviation from the scientific method, rather than a problem with the scientific method itself? Or how about because those mistakes correct themselves over time over iterations of the process? That very fact is what makes the computer you're viewing this comment on operate; it got us to the Moon.
Religion has never been a significant source of new knowledge. The only thing it's ever accomplished is harboring wisdom that wiser men aquired through experience, which could be done without any kind of mythology at all. I'll consider God to be on equal footing with science whenever that god demonstrates literally any capabilities, including even existing.
[quote]It would be interesting to see how a jet engine would be described in Biblical language.[/quote]
If you're trying to imply that religion only fails to impart technological knowledge unto its followers because of linguistic restraints, you're terribly mistaken. When the Bible was written, everyone was subject to very similar language constraints, but they still managed to invent stuff. Yeah, going right from chariots to jets wouldn't work, but any remotely competent god would be able to do a relatively gradual (but still fast) progression, so such as to allow language to evolve with it.
Also, in the Bible, God isn't limited by shit like language because he's able to give people visions and beam multilingualism into people's minds spontaneously.
Religion has never been a significant source of new knowledge. The only thing it's ever accomplished is harboring wisdom that wiser men aquired through experience, which could be done without any kind of mythology at all. I'll consider God to be on equal footing with science whenever that god demonstrates literally any capabilities, including even existing.
[quote]It would be interesting to see how a jet engine would be described in Biblical language.[/quote]
If you're trying to imply that religion only fails to impart technological knowledge unto its followers because of linguistic restraints, you're terribly mistaken. When the Bible was written, everyone was subject to very similar language constraints, but they still managed to invent stuff. Yeah, going right from chariots to jets wouldn't work, but any remotely competent god would be able to do a relatively gradual (but still fast) progression, so such as to allow language to evolve with it.
Also, in the Bible, God isn't limited by shit like language because he's able to give people visions and beam multilingualism into people's minds spontaneously.