Anonymous wrote:The terms “religion” and “mythology” refer to two completely different things.
Mythology is traditional stories associated with a particular culture that have been passed down from generation to generation and have profound cultural and/or religious significance to the members of that culture. Myths can sometimes be religious in nature, but they can also be important to other aspects of the culture.
Religion is complicated. The term “religion” generally encompasses some kind of worldview, which usually includes some sort of mythology, but also the attitudes, ritual practices, communal identity, and moral teachings associated with the worldview.
If you have ever been religious, then you probably already know that there is more to a religion than just a bunch of stories; a religion also involves an array of actions, practices, and attitudes.
So the Bible is a collection of Christian myths. Equivalent to the Greek myths we read about today.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1-4). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Oh dear, what a lot of wasted words. Not the PP, but I am the PP who explained that the word "myth" is used by scholars to indicate any sacred story that is believed to be true. By anyone. You are going in circles if you try to distinguish one religion's sacred stories from another religion's sacred stories based on which ones YOU believe to be true or important. That is not how anthropology works. Every sacred story falls into the same category of sacred story - if anyone believes it to be true, and it is a sacred story to those people, then it is called a "myth." You could call it something else, and probably they should, because that word means "false story" to most people who don't have PhD's in anthropology. But whatever you call it, all those stories are in the same category objectively. You cannot attempt to create a scholarly definition based on your own religious beliefs - it is the definition of bad scholarship.
The Edict of Milan was the Western world’s first known government document to proclaim the freedom of belief. At the time, Christianity probably made up 7 to 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire. A mere hundred years later, half the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed allegiance to the Christian tradition.
How did Christianity triumph? Christianity was something new on this earth. It wasn’t closed to women. It was so concerned with questions of social welfare (healing the sick, caring for the poor) that it embedded them into its doctrines.
Christian believers go from roughly 1,000 in A.D. 60, to 40,000 in A.D. 150, to 2.5 million in A.D. 300.
There was no Christian secret police forcing pagans to convert: The empire was too large and diffusely governed to make such an effort feasible.
we do not see every religion grow, and I don't believe there has been much to parallel the growth of Christianity.
Everyone likes a good story. Look at how many millions of people have gotten sucked into the Q-anon theories.
Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Dr. Anon DCUM Poster has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be correct at any point.”
Known among followers and friends as Dr. Henry, Dr. Morris was a hydraulic engineer and taught at several universities before developing his critique of evolution and a history of Earth that spans 4.5 billion years in the 1961 work "The Genesis Flood." The book, written with the theologian John C. Whitcomb, was the first to take a scholarly approach to proving the Old Testament creation story, and it argued that Noah's flood, rather than eons of erosion, sculptured the earth.
"It was a groundbreaking work in that he basically, in this culture, in this day and age, showed that there were scientific answers to be able to defend the Christian faith and uphold the Bible's account," said Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, a group based in Kentucky.
After graduating in 1939, Morris served as a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission (1939–1942).[1] He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946.
From 1946–1951, he studied at the University of Minnesota, where he earned a master's degree in hydraulics (1948)and a PhD in hydraulic engineering (1950).
In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956. Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.
In 1959, Morris moved to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) to serve as Professor of Civil Engineering in the area of hydraulics, and to serve as department chairman for civil engineering. There, Morris co-authored an advanced text on engineering hydraulics with J.M. Wiggert that was used in many universities, and under a decade of leadership the department became one of the country's largest civil engineering departments. While Morris' religious views and writings were controversial among university biology and geology faculty, and in the broader debate, it has been reported that Morris "kept his own counsel on [them], unless... pressed", such that his university engineering colleagues respected Morris as "a good administrator" and his religious views "because they never influenced his [administration]".
Again, people who believe that the earth is <10,000 years old shouldn’t be commenting on archeology.
This trend of archaeology corroborating Biblical accounts continued so consistently that in 1959 Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck declared "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Since then, the evidence has kept coming.
Really, anyone can comment on anything. At least this poster provided information about the education and professional qualifications of the commenter.
The people posting here don’t list their degrees, they don’t tell us their jobs, they don’t tell us the number of books they have written.
Someone called themselves “doctor anon dcum poster” and completely lied, and that’s considered bright and valuable debate, though.
Someone calling themselves an atheist but who doesn't list their degrees, tell us their job, or tell us the number of books they've written, expects to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, religious people expect to be taken seriously on the subject of religion because they believe in God.
No. Religious people gave actual evidence from archeologists and other scientists.
Evidence of what exactly?
Actual "scientists" don't believe in creationism.
Robert Boyle is known as the father of modern chemistry and considered to be the greatest physical scientist of his time. He discovered the scientific laws that show the relationship of gas pressure to temperature and volume. Boyle was a devoted student of the Bible and even sponsored a series of talks known as the “Boyle Lectures” which taught Christians about the facts for their faith.
Isaac Newton is undoubtedly known as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. Although he is most famous for the discovery of gravity, he also formulated the three laws of universal motion and helped to develop the math known as calculus. His work laid the foundation for the great scientific law of energy conservation. Newton believed in the Creator and wrote papers defending creation and the Bible. He also believed that the world-wide flood, as described in Genesis, accounted for most of earth’s features.
In addition to his many accomplishments, Newton was also an astronomer, responsible for making the first reflecting telescope. Newton unmistakably witnessed the hand of God at work as he studied the movement of the planets. He said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Many people owe their lives to the work of physicist and chemist, Louis Pasteur, for identifying several harmful bacteria and creating vaccines to cure many diseases. Pasteur also challenged the notion of spontaneous generation – the idea that life can form from non-living objects. The ancient Greeks used to believe that mice could form from dirty rags, or that if you left out rotting meat, maggots would come to life. Although the maggot and mice theory was successfully challenged by Italian biologist, Francesco Redi in 1668, scientists continued to cling to the idea of spontaneous generation of microscopic creatures. In Pasture’s most famous experiment, he disproved spontaneous generation altogether. He did this by boiling broth to kill any microbes that might be living inside. He then placed the broth in a special glassware that allowed air to penetrate the broth while keeping the microbes out. As Pasteur expected, no microbes formed in the broth, proving that living microbes could only come from other microbes – that life only comes from life. Louis Pasteur firmly believed in creation and strongly opposed Darwin’s theory of spontaneous generation because it did not fit well with scientific evidence.
In Pasteur’s own words, “science brings men nearer to God.”
A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.
Is Christian philosophy good for science? In this series we showcase many examples, but the case could hardly be made stronger than to point to Mr. Scientific Method himself, Sir Francis Bacon.
Although not a practicing scientist, Bacon is considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science.” His philosophy and writings were largely responsible for igniting the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Numerous intellectuals like Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton seized on the “new philosophy” of Bacon that emphasized empiricism and induction. Casting aside dependence on authorities like Aristotle, the new science exploded on the scene, yielding a wealth of discoveries and inventions that has continued unabated to this day. But this “new philosophy” was really nothing new; it was a return to the principles of the Bible. The “founder of modern science” was a Bible-believing Christian, and Christian doctrine was the foundation of his thinking.
Why should anyone answer any questions asked here- pp posted that Spider-man is equivalent to the Bible. It’s literally a joke of a forum.
Because this is a forum for discussion and people are discussing interesting topics. If the questions are too difficult for you to answer and if you are only capable of copy and pasting irrelevant info then maybe this isn’t the thread for you. No one is forcing you to troll here.
If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Anonymous wrote:If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Who are you, and who is “Collins?” Why should anyone listen to either of you?
Anonymous wrote:The terms “religion” and “mythology” refer to two completely different things.
Mythology is traditional stories associated with a particular culture that have been passed down from generation to generation and have profound cultural and/or religious significance to the members of that culture. Myths can sometimes be religious in nature, but they can also be important to other aspects of the culture.
Religion is complicated. The term “religion” generally encompasses some kind of worldview, which usually includes some sort of mythology, but also the attitudes, ritual practices, communal identity, and moral teachings associated with the worldview.
If you have ever been religious, then you probably already know that there is more to a religion than just a bunch of stories; a religion also involves an array of actions, practices, and attitudes.
So the Bible is a collection of Christian myths. Equivalent to the Greek myths we read about today.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1-4). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Oh dear, what a lot of wasted words. Not the PP, but I am the PP who explained that the word "myth" is used by scholars to indicate any sacred story that is believed to be true. By anyone. You are going in circles if you try to distinguish one religion's sacred stories from another religion's sacred stories based on which ones YOU believe to be true or important. That is not how anthropology works. Every sacred story falls into the same category of sacred story - if anyone believes it to be true, and it is a sacred story to those people, then it is called a "myth." You could call it something else, and probably they should, because that word means "false story" to most people who don't have PhD's in anthropology. But whatever you call it, all those stories are in the same category objectively. You cannot attempt to create a scholarly definition based on your own religious beliefs - it is the definition of bad scholarship.
The Edict of Milan was the Western world’s first known government document to proclaim the freedom of belief. At the time, Christianity probably made up 7 to 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire. A mere hundred years later, half the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed allegiance to the Christian tradition.
How did Christianity triumph? Christianity was something new on this earth. It wasn’t closed to women. It was so concerned with questions of social welfare (healing the sick, caring for the poor) that it embedded them into its doctrines.
Christian believers go from roughly 1,000 in A.D. 60, to 40,000 in A.D. 150, to 2.5 million in A.D. 300.
There was no Christian secret police forcing pagans to convert: The empire was too large and diffusely governed to make such an effort feasible.
we do not see every religion grow, and I don't believe there has been much to parallel the growth of Christianity.
Everyone likes a good story. Look at how many millions of people have gotten sucked into the Q-anon theories.
Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Dr. Anon DCUM Poster has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be correct at any point.”
Known among followers and friends as Dr. Henry, Dr. Morris was a hydraulic engineer and taught at several universities before developing his critique of evolution and a history of Earth that spans 4.5 billion years in the 1961 work "The Genesis Flood." The book, written with the theologian John C. Whitcomb, was the first to take a scholarly approach to proving the Old Testament creation story, and it argued that Noah's flood, rather than eons of erosion, sculptured the earth.
"It was a groundbreaking work in that he basically, in this culture, in this day and age, showed that there were scientific answers to be able to defend the Christian faith and uphold the Bible's account," said Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, a group based in Kentucky.
After graduating in 1939, Morris served as a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission (1939–1942).[1] He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946.
From 1946–1951, he studied at the University of Minnesota, where he earned a master's degree in hydraulics (1948)and a PhD in hydraulic engineering (1950).
In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956. Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.
In 1959, Morris moved to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) to serve as Professor of Civil Engineering in the area of hydraulics, and to serve as department chairman for civil engineering. There, Morris co-authored an advanced text on engineering hydraulics with J.M. Wiggert that was used in many universities, and under a decade of leadership the department became one of the country's largest civil engineering departments. While Morris' religious views and writings were controversial among university biology and geology faculty, and in the broader debate, it has been reported that Morris "kept his own counsel on [them], unless... pressed", such that his university engineering colleagues respected Morris as "a good administrator" and his religious views "because they never influenced his [administration]".
Again, people who believe that the earth is <10,000 years old shouldn’t be commenting on archeology.
This trend of archaeology corroborating Biblical accounts continued so consistently that in 1959 Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck declared "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Since then, the evidence has kept coming.
Really, anyone can comment on anything. At least this poster provided information about the education and professional qualifications of the commenter.
The people posting here don’t list their degrees, they don’t tell us their jobs, they don’t tell us the number of books they have written.
Someone called themselves “doctor anon dcum poster” and completely lied, and that’s considered bright and valuable debate, though.
Someone calling themselves an atheist but who doesn't list their degrees, tell us their job, or tell us the number of books they've written, expects to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, religious people expect to be taken seriously on the subject of religion because they believe in God.
No. Religious people gave actual evidence from archeologists and other scientists.
Evidence of what exactly?
Actual "scientists" don't believe in creationism.
Robert Boyle is known as the father of modern chemistry and considered to be the greatest physical scientist of his time. He discovered the scientific laws that show the relationship of gas pressure to temperature and volume. Boyle was a devoted student of the Bible and even sponsored a series of talks known as the “Boyle Lectures” which taught Christians about the facts for their faith.
Isaac Newton is undoubtedly known as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. Although he is most famous for the discovery of gravity, he also formulated the three laws of universal motion and helped to develop the math known as calculus. His work laid the foundation for the great scientific law of energy conservation. Newton believed in the Creator and wrote papers defending creation and the Bible. He also believed that the world-wide flood, as described in Genesis, accounted for most of earth’s features.
In addition to his many accomplishments, Newton was also an astronomer, responsible for making the first reflecting telescope. Newton unmistakably witnessed the hand of God at work as he studied the movement of the planets. He said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Many people owe their lives to the work of physicist and chemist, Louis Pasteur, for identifying several harmful bacteria and creating vaccines to cure many diseases. Pasteur also challenged the notion of spontaneous generation – the idea that life can form from non-living objects. The ancient Greeks used to believe that mice could form from dirty rags, or that if you left out rotting meat, maggots would come to life. Although the maggot and mice theory was successfully challenged by Italian biologist, Francesco Redi in 1668, scientists continued to cling to the idea of spontaneous generation of microscopic creatures. In Pasture’s most famous experiment, he disproved spontaneous generation altogether. He did this by boiling broth to kill any microbes that might be living inside. He then placed the broth in a special glassware that allowed air to penetrate the broth while keeping the microbes out. As Pasteur expected, no microbes formed in the broth, proving that living microbes could only come from other microbes – that life only comes from life. Louis Pasteur firmly believed in creation and strongly opposed Darwin’s theory of spontaneous generation because it did not fit well with scientific evidence.
In Pasteur’s own words, “science brings men nearer to God.”
A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.
Is Christian philosophy good for science? In this series we showcase many examples, but the case could hardly be made stronger than to point to Mr. Scientific Method himself, Sir Francis Bacon.
Although not a practicing scientist, Bacon is considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science.” His philosophy and writings were largely responsible for igniting the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Numerous intellectuals like Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton seized on the “new philosophy” of Bacon that emphasized empiricism and induction. Casting aside dependence on authorities like Aristotle, the new science exploded on the scene, yielding a wealth of discoveries and inventions that has continued unabated to this day. But this “new philosophy” was really nothing new; it was a return to the principles of the Bible. The “founder of modern science” was a Bible-believing Christian, and Christian doctrine was the foundation of his thinking.
Why should anyone answer any questions asked here- pp posted that Spider-man is equivalent to the Bible. It’s literally a joke of a forum.
Because this is a forum for discussion and people are discussing interesting topics. If the questions are too difficult for you to answer and if you are only capable of copy and pasting irrelevant info then maybe this isn’t the thread for you. No one is forcing you to troll here.
With no due respect, comparing Spiderman comics to the Bible is utterly laughable.
Copying and pasting relevant examples from science, research, and history, is not trolling.
These are real world examples of great scientists who also believed their religious beliefs and relationship with God was important. I find it fascinating that some of the most important scientists in history thought that their relationship with God was more important than their work.
Anonymous wrote:If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Who are you, and who is “Collins?” Why should anyone listen to either of you?
Collins was one of the scientists on the PP’s list. I’m an intelligent person with strong STEM background and critical thinking skills who enjoys discussing various topics.
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
Anonymous wrote:The terms “religion” and “mythology” refer to two completely different things.
Mythology is traditional stories associated with a particular culture that have been passed down from generation to generation and have profound cultural and/or religious significance to the members of that culture. Myths can sometimes be religious in nature, but they can also be important to other aspects of the culture.
Religion is complicated. The term “religion” generally encompasses some kind of worldview, which usually includes some sort of mythology, but also the attitudes, ritual practices, communal identity, and moral teachings associated with the worldview.
If you have ever been religious, then you probably already know that there is more to a religion than just a bunch of stories; a religion also involves an array of actions, practices, and attitudes.
So the Bible is a collection of Christian myths. Equivalent to the Greek myths we read about today.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1-4). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Oh dear, what a lot of wasted words. Not the PP, but I am the PP who explained that the word "myth" is used by scholars to indicate any sacred story that is believed to be true. By anyone. You are going in circles if you try to distinguish one religion's sacred stories from another religion's sacred stories based on which ones YOU believe to be true or important. That is not how anthropology works. Every sacred story falls into the same category of sacred story - if anyone believes it to be true, and it is a sacred story to those people, then it is called a "myth." You could call it something else, and probably they should, because that word means "false story" to most people who don't have PhD's in anthropology. But whatever you call it, all those stories are in the same category objectively. You cannot attempt to create a scholarly definition based on your own religious beliefs - it is the definition of bad scholarship.
The Edict of Milan was the Western world’s first known government document to proclaim the freedom of belief. At the time, Christianity probably made up 7 to 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire. A mere hundred years later, half the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed allegiance to the Christian tradition.
How did Christianity triumph? Christianity was something new on this earth. It wasn’t closed to women. It was so concerned with questions of social welfare (healing the sick, caring for the poor) that it embedded them into its doctrines.
Christian believers go from roughly 1,000 in A.D. 60, to 40,000 in A.D. 150, to 2.5 million in A.D. 300.
There was no Christian secret police forcing pagans to convert: The empire was too large and diffusely governed to make such an effort feasible.
we do not see every religion grow, and I don't believe there has been much to parallel the growth of Christianity.
Everyone likes a good story. Look at how many millions of people have gotten sucked into the Q-anon theories.
Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Dr. Anon DCUM Poster has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be correct at any point.”
Known among followers and friends as Dr. Henry, Dr. Morris was a hydraulic engineer and taught at several universities before developing his critique of evolution and a history of Earth that spans 4.5 billion years in the 1961 work "The Genesis Flood." The book, written with the theologian John C. Whitcomb, was the first to take a scholarly approach to proving the Old Testament creation story, and it argued that Noah's flood, rather than eons of erosion, sculptured the earth.
"It was a groundbreaking work in that he basically, in this culture, in this day and age, showed that there were scientific answers to be able to defend the Christian faith and uphold the Bible's account," said Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, a group based in Kentucky.
After graduating in 1939, Morris served as a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission (1939–1942).[1] He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946.
From 1946–1951, he studied at the University of Minnesota, where he earned a master's degree in hydraulics (1948)and a PhD in hydraulic engineering (1950).
In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956. Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.
In 1959, Morris moved to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) to serve as Professor of Civil Engineering in the area of hydraulics, and to serve as department chairman for civil engineering. There, Morris co-authored an advanced text on engineering hydraulics with J.M. Wiggert that was used in many universities, and under a decade of leadership the department became one of the country's largest civil engineering departments. While Morris' religious views and writings were controversial among university biology and geology faculty, and in the broader debate, it has been reported that Morris "kept his own counsel on [them], unless... pressed", such that his university engineering colleagues respected Morris as "a good administrator" and his religious views "because they never influenced his [administration]".
Again, people who believe that the earth is <10,000 years old shouldn’t be commenting on archeology.
This trend of archaeology corroborating Biblical accounts continued so consistently that in 1959 Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck declared "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Since then, the evidence has kept coming.
Really, anyone can comment on anything. At least this poster provided information about the education and professional qualifications of the commenter.
The people posting here don’t list their degrees, they don’t tell us their jobs, they don’t tell us the number of books they have written.
Someone called themselves “doctor anon dcum poster” and completely lied, and that’s considered bright and valuable debate, though.
Someone calling themselves an atheist but who doesn't list their degrees, tell us their job, or tell us the number of books they've written, expects to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, religious people expect to be taken seriously on the subject of religion because they believe in God.
No. Religious people gave actual evidence from archeologists and other scientists.
Evidence of what exactly?
Actual "scientists" don't believe in creationism.
Robert Boyle is known as the father of modern chemistry and considered to be the greatest physical scientist of his time. He discovered the scientific laws that show the relationship of gas pressure to temperature and volume. Boyle was a devoted student of the Bible and even sponsored a series of talks known as the “Boyle Lectures” which taught Christians about the facts for their faith.
Isaac Newton is undoubtedly known as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. Although he is most famous for the discovery of gravity, he also formulated the three laws of universal motion and helped to develop the math known as calculus. His work laid the foundation for the great scientific law of energy conservation. Newton believed in the Creator and wrote papers defending creation and the Bible. He also believed that the world-wide flood, as described in Genesis, accounted for most of earth’s features.
In addition to his many accomplishments, Newton was also an astronomer, responsible for making the first reflecting telescope. Newton unmistakably witnessed the hand of God at work as he studied the movement of the planets. He said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Many people owe their lives to the work of physicist and chemist, Louis Pasteur, for identifying several harmful bacteria and creating vaccines to cure many diseases. Pasteur also challenged the notion of spontaneous generation – the idea that life can form from non-living objects. The ancient Greeks used to believe that mice could form from dirty rags, or that if you left out rotting meat, maggots would come to life. Although the maggot and mice theory was successfully challenged by Italian biologist, Francesco Redi in 1668, scientists continued to cling to the idea of spontaneous generation of microscopic creatures. In Pasture’s most famous experiment, he disproved spontaneous generation altogether. He did this by boiling broth to kill any microbes that might be living inside. He then placed the broth in a special glassware that allowed air to penetrate the broth while keeping the microbes out. As Pasteur expected, no microbes formed in the broth, proving that living microbes could only come from other microbes – that life only comes from life. Louis Pasteur firmly believed in creation and strongly opposed Darwin’s theory of spontaneous generation because it did not fit well with scientific evidence.
In Pasteur’s own words, “science brings men nearer to God.”
A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.
Is Christian philosophy good for science? In this series we showcase many examples, but the case could hardly be made stronger than to point to Mr. Scientific Method himself, Sir Francis Bacon.
Although not a practicing scientist, Bacon is considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science.” His philosophy and writings were largely responsible for igniting the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Numerous intellectuals like Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton seized on the “new philosophy” of Bacon that emphasized empiricism and induction. Casting aside dependence on authorities like Aristotle, the new science exploded on the scene, yielding a wealth of discoveries and inventions that has continued unabated to this day. But this “new philosophy” was really nothing new; it was a return to the principles of the Bible. The “founder of modern science” was a Bible-believing Christian, and Christian doctrine was the foundation of his thinking.
Why should anyone answer any questions asked here- pp posted that Spider-man is equivalent to the Bible. It’s literally a joke of a forum.
Because this is a forum for discussion and people are discussing interesting topics. If the questions are too difficult for you to answer and if you are only capable of copy and pasting irrelevant info then maybe this isn’t the thread for you. No one is forcing you to troll here.
With no due respect, comparing Spiderman comics to the Bible is utterly laughable.
Copying and pasting relevant examples from science, research, and history, is not trolling.
I’m sorry these topics are difficult for you discuss.
Did you understand the PP’s point that just because there may be some true “facts” in a story don’t make the entire story true?
Anonymous wrote:If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Who are you, and who is “Collins?” Why should anyone listen to either of you?
Collins was one of the scientists on the PP’s list. I’m an intelligent person with strong STEM background and critical thinking skills who enjoys discussing various topics.
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
What is your STEM background? Are you actively working as a scientist?
Anonymous wrote:The terms “religion” and “mythology” refer to two completely different things.
Mythology is traditional stories associated with a particular culture that have been passed down from generation to generation and have profound cultural and/or religious significance to the members of that culture. Myths can sometimes be religious in nature, but they can also be important to other aspects of the culture.
Religion is complicated. The term “religion” generally encompasses some kind of worldview, which usually includes some sort of mythology, but also the attitudes, ritual practices, communal identity, and moral teachings associated with the worldview.
If you have ever been religious, then you probably already know that there is more to a religion than just a bunch of stories; a religion also involves an array of actions, practices, and attitudes.
So the Bible is a collection of Christian myths. Equivalent to the Greek myths we read about today.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1-4). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Oh dear, what a lot of wasted words. Not the PP, but I am the PP who explained that the word "myth" is used by scholars to indicate any sacred story that is believed to be true. By anyone. You are going in circles if you try to distinguish one religion's sacred stories from another religion's sacred stories based on which ones YOU believe to be true or important. That is not how anthropology works. Every sacred story falls into the same category of sacred story - if anyone believes it to be true, and it is a sacred story to those people, then it is called a "myth." You could call it something else, and probably they should, because that word means "false story" to most people who don't have PhD's in anthropology. But whatever you call it, all those stories are in the same category objectively. You cannot attempt to create a scholarly definition based on your own religious beliefs - it is the definition of bad scholarship.
The Edict of Milan was the Western world’s first known government document to proclaim the freedom of belief. At the time, Christianity probably made up 7 to 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire. A mere hundred years later, half the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed allegiance to the Christian tradition.
How did Christianity triumph? Christianity was something new on this earth. It wasn’t closed to women. It was so concerned with questions of social welfare (healing the sick, caring for the poor) that it embedded them into its doctrines.
Christian believers go from roughly 1,000 in A.D. 60, to 40,000 in A.D. 150, to 2.5 million in A.D. 300.
There was no Christian secret police forcing pagans to convert: The empire was too large and diffusely governed to make such an effort feasible.
we do not see every religion grow, and I don't believe there has been much to parallel the growth of Christianity.
Everyone likes a good story. Look at how many millions of people have gotten sucked into the Q-anon theories.
Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Dr. Anon DCUM Poster has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be correct at any point.”
Known among followers and friends as Dr. Henry, Dr. Morris was a hydraulic engineer and taught at several universities before developing his critique of evolution and a history of Earth that spans 4.5 billion years in the 1961 work "The Genesis Flood." The book, written with the theologian John C. Whitcomb, was the first to take a scholarly approach to proving the Old Testament creation story, and it argued that Noah's flood, rather than eons of erosion, sculptured the earth.
"It was a groundbreaking work in that he basically, in this culture, in this day and age, showed that there were scientific answers to be able to defend the Christian faith and uphold the Bible's account," said Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, a group based in Kentucky.
After graduating in 1939, Morris served as a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission (1939–1942).[1] He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946.
From 1946–1951, he studied at the University of Minnesota, where he earned a master's degree in hydraulics (1948)and a PhD in hydraulic engineering (1950).
In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956. Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.
In 1959, Morris moved to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) to serve as Professor of Civil Engineering in the area of hydraulics, and to serve as department chairman for civil engineering. There, Morris co-authored an advanced text on engineering hydraulics with J.M. Wiggert that was used in many universities, and under a decade of leadership the department became one of the country's largest civil engineering departments. While Morris' religious views and writings were controversial among university biology and geology faculty, and in the broader debate, it has been reported that Morris "kept his own counsel on [them], unless... pressed", such that his university engineering colleagues respected Morris as "a good administrator" and his religious views "because they never influenced his [administration]".
Again, people who believe that the earth is <10,000 years old shouldn’t be commenting on archeology.
This trend of archaeology corroborating Biblical accounts continued so consistently that in 1959 Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck declared "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Since then, the evidence has kept coming.
Really, anyone can comment on anything. At least this poster provided information about the education and professional qualifications of the commenter.
The people posting here don’t list their degrees, they don’t tell us their jobs, they don’t tell us the number of books they have written.
Someone called themselves “doctor anon dcum poster” and completely lied, and that’s considered bright and valuable debate, though.
Someone calling themselves an atheist but who doesn't list their degrees, tell us their job, or tell us the number of books they've written, expects to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, religious people expect to be taken seriously on the subject of religion because they believe in God.
No. Religious people gave actual evidence from archeologists and other scientists.
Evidence of what exactly?
Actual "scientists" don't believe in creationism.
Robert Boyle is known as the father of modern chemistry and considered to be the greatest physical scientist of his time. He discovered the scientific laws that show the relationship of gas pressure to temperature and volume. Boyle was a devoted student of the Bible and even sponsored a series of talks known as the “Boyle Lectures” which taught Christians about the facts for their faith.
Isaac Newton is undoubtedly known as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. Although he is most famous for the discovery of gravity, he also formulated the three laws of universal motion and helped to develop the math known as calculus. His work laid the foundation for the great scientific law of energy conservation. Newton believed in the Creator and wrote papers defending creation and the Bible. He also believed that the world-wide flood, as described in Genesis, accounted for most of earth’s features.
In addition to his many accomplishments, Newton was also an astronomer, responsible for making the first reflecting telescope. Newton unmistakably witnessed the hand of God at work as he studied the movement of the planets. He said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Many people owe their lives to the work of physicist and chemist, Louis Pasteur, for identifying several harmful bacteria and creating vaccines to cure many diseases. Pasteur also challenged the notion of spontaneous generation – the idea that life can form from non-living objects. The ancient Greeks used to believe that mice could form from dirty rags, or that if you left out rotting meat, maggots would come to life. Although the maggot and mice theory was successfully challenged by Italian biologist, Francesco Redi in 1668, scientists continued to cling to the idea of spontaneous generation of microscopic creatures. In Pasture’s most famous experiment, he disproved spontaneous generation altogether. He did this by boiling broth to kill any microbes that might be living inside. He then placed the broth in a special glassware that allowed air to penetrate the broth while keeping the microbes out. As Pasteur expected, no microbes formed in the broth, proving that living microbes could only come from other microbes – that life only comes from life. Louis Pasteur firmly believed in creation and strongly opposed Darwin’s theory of spontaneous generation because it did not fit well with scientific evidence.
In Pasteur’s own words, “science brings men nearer to God.”
A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.
Is Christian philosophy good for science? In this series we showcase many examples, but the case could hardly be made stronger than to point to Mr. Scientific Method himself, Sir Francis Bacon.
Although not a practicing scientist, Bacon is considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science.” His philosophy and writings were largely responsible for igniting the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Numerous intellectuals like Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton seized on the “new philosophy” of Bacon that emphasized empiricism and induction. Casting aside dependence on authorities like Aristotle, the new science exploded on the scene, yielding a wealth of discoveries and inventions that has continued unabated to this day. But this “new philosophy” was really nothing new; it was a return to the principles of the Bible. The “founder of modern science” was a Bible-believing Christian, and Christian doctrine was the foundation of his thinking.
Why should anyone answer any questions asked here- pp posted that Spider-man is equivalent to the Bible. It’s literally a joke of a forum.
Because this is a forum for discussion and people are discussing interesting topics. If the questions are too difficult for you to answer and if you are only capable of copy and pasting irrelevant info then maybe this isn’t the thread for you. No one is forcing you to troll here.
With no due respect, comparing Spiderman comics to the Bible is utterly laughable.
Copying and pasting relevant examples from science, research, and history, is not trolling.
I’m sorry these topics are difficult for you discuss.
Did you understand the PP’s point that just because there may be some true “facts” in a story don’t make the entire story true?
Gumball poster
emoji poster
burning in hell poster
gish gallop poster
Spider-man is like the bible poster.
I honestly think Spiderman is like the bible poster is the most interesting poster we’ve had lately.
Imagine the depth and breadth of denial and delusion it would take to propose that?
Anonymous wrote:If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Who are you, and who is “Collins?” Why should anyone listen to either of you?
Collins was one of the scientists on the PP’s list. I’m an intelligent person with strong STEM background and critical thinking skills who enjoys discussing various topics.
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
What is your STEM background? Are you actively working as a scientist?
Multiple degrees in STEM. Not actively working as a scientist.
You missed my question:
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
Anonymous wrote:The terms “religion” and “mythology” refer to two completely different things.
Mythology is traditional stories associated with a particular culture that have been passed down from generation to generation and have profound cultural and/or religious significance to the members of that culture. Myths can sometimes be religious in nature, but they can also be important to other aspects of the culture.
Religion is complicated. The term “religion” generally encompasses some kind of worldview, which usually includes some sort of mythology, but also the attitudes, ritual practices, communal identity, and moral teachings associated with the worldview.
If you have ever been religious, then you probably already know that there is more to a religion than just a bunch of stories; a religion also involves an array of actions, practices, and attitudes.
So the Bible is a collection of Christian myths. Equivalent to the Greek myths we read about today.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1-4). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Oh dear, what a lot of wasted words. Not the PP, but I am the PP who explained that the word "myth" is used by scholars to indicate any sacred story that is believed to be true. By anyone. You are going in circles if you try to distinguish one religion's sacred stories from another religion's sacred stories based on which ones YOU believe to be true or important. That is not how anthropology works. Every sacred story falls into the same category of sacred story - if anyone believes it to be true, and it is a sacred story to those people, then it is called a "myth." You could call it something else, and probably they should, because that word means "false story" to most people who don't have PhD's in anthropology. But whatever you call it, all those stories are in the same category objectively. You cannot attempt to create a scholarly definition based on your own religious beliefs - it is the definition of bad scholarship.
The Edict of Milan was the Western world’s first known government document to proclaim the freedom of belief. At the time, Christianity probably made up 7 to 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire. A mere hundred years later, half the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed allegiance to the Christian tradition.
How did Christianity triumph? Christianity was something new on this earth. It wasn’t closed to women. It was so concerned with questions of social welfare (healing the sick, caring for the poor) that it embedded them into its doctrines.
Christian believers go from roughly 1,000 in A.D. 60, to 40,000 in A.D. 150, to 2.5 million in A.D. 300.
There was no Christian secret police forcing pagans to convert: The empire was too large and diffusely governed to make such an effort feasible.
we do not see every religion grow, and I don't believe there has been much to parallel the growth of Christianity.
Everyone likes a good story. Look at how many millions of people have gotten sucked into the Q-anon theories.
Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Dr. Anon DCUM Poster has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be correct at any point.”
Known among followers and friends as Dr. Henry, Dr. Morris was a hydraulic engineer and taught at several universities before developing his critique of evolution and a history of Earth that spans 4.5 billion years in the 1961 work "The Genesis Flood." The book, written with the theologian John C. Whitcomb, was the first to take a scholarly approach to proving the Old Testament creation story, and it argued that Noah's flood, rather than eons of erosion, sculptured the earth.
"It was a groundbreaking work in that he basically, in this culture, in this day and age, showed that there were scientific answers to be able to defend the Christian faith and uphold the Bible's account," said Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, a group based in Kentucky.
After graduating in 1939, Morris served as a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission (1939–1942).[1] He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946.
From 1946–1951, he studied at the University of Minnesota, where he earned a master's degree in hydraulics (1948)and a PhD in hydraulic engineering (1950).
In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956. Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.
In 1959, Morris moved to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) to serve as Professor of Civil Engineering in the area of hydraulics, and to serve as department chairman for civil engineering. There, Morris co-authored an advanced text on engineering hydraulics with J.M. Wiggert that was used in many universities, and under a decade of leadership the department became one of the country's largest civil engineering departments. While Morris' religious views and writings were controversial among university biology and geology faculty, and in the broader debate, it has been reported that Morris "kept his own counsel on [them], unless... pressed", such that his university engineering colleagues respected Morris as "a good administrator" and his religious views "because they never influenced his [administration]".
Again, people who believe that the earth is <10,000 years old shouldn’t be commenting on archeology.
This trend of archaeology corroborating Biblical accounts continued so consistently that in 1959 Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck declared "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Since then, the evidence has kept coming.
Really, anyone can comment on anything. At least this poster provided information about the education and professional qualifications of the commenter.
The people posting here don’t list their degrees, they don’t tell us their jobs, they don’t tell us the number of books they have written.
Someone called themselves “doctor anon dcum poster” and completely lied, and that’s considered bright and valuable debate, though.
Someone calling themselves an atheist but who doesn't list their degrees, tell us their job, or tell us the number of books they've written, expects to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, religious people expect to be taken seriously on the subject of religion because they believe in God.
No. Religious people gave actual evidence from archeologists and other scientists.
Evidence of what exactly?
Actual "scientists" don't believe in creationism.
Robert Boyle is known as the father of modern chemistry and considered to be the greatest physical scientist of his time. He discovered the scientific laws that show the relationship of gas pressure to temperature and volume. Boyle was a devoted student of the Bible and even sponsored a series of talks known as the “Boyle Lectures” which taught Christians about the facts for their faith.
Isaac Newton is undoubtedly known as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. Although he is most famous for the discovery of gravity, he also formulated the three laws of universal motion and helped to develop the math known as calculus. His work laid the foundation for the great scientific law of energy conservation. Newton believed in the Creator and wrote papers defending creation and the Bible. He also believed that the world-wide flood, as described in Genesis, accounted for most of earth’s features.
In addition to his many accomplishments, Newton was also an astronomer, responsible for making the first reflecting telescope. Newton unmistakably witnessed the hand of God at work as he studied the movement of the planets. He said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Many people owe their lives to the work of physicist and chemist, Louis Pasteur, for identifying several harmful bacteria and creating vaccines to cure many diseases. Pasteur also challenged the notion of spontaneous generation – the idea that life can form from non-living objects. The ancient Greeks used to believe that mice could form from dirty rags, or that if you left out rotting meat, maggots would come to life. Although the maggot and mice theory was successfully challenged by Italian biologist, Francesco Redi in 1668, scientists continued to cling to the idea of spontaneous generation of microscopic creatures. In Pasture’s most famous experiment, he disproved spontaneous generation altogether. He did this by boiling broth to kill any microbes that might be living inside. He then placed the broth in a special glassware that allowed air to penetrate the broth while keeping the microbes out. As Pasteur expected, no microbes formed in the broth, proving that living microbes could only come from other microbes – that life only comes from life. Louis Pasteur firmly believed in creation and strongly opposed Darwin’s theory of spontaneous generation because it did not fit well with scientific evidence.
In Pasteur’s own words, “science brings men nearer to God.”
A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.
Is Christian philosophy good for science? In this series we showcase many examples, but the case could hardly be made stronger than to point to Mr. Scientific Method himself, Sir Francis Bacon.
Although not a practicing scientist, Bacon is considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science.” His philosophy and writings were largely responsible for igniting the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Numerous intellectuals like Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton seized on the “new philosophy” of Bacon that emphasized empiricism and induction. Casting aside dependence on authorities like Aristotle, the new science exploded on the scene, yielding a wealth of discoveries and inventions that has continued unabated to this day. But this “new philosophy” was really nothing new; it was a return to the principles of the Bible. The “founder of modern science” was a Bible-believing Christian, and Christian doctrine was the foundation of his thinking.
Why should anyone answer any questions asked here- pp posted that Spider-man is equivalent to the Bible. It’s literally a joke of a forum.
Because this is a forum for discussion and people are discussing interesting topics. If the questions are too difficult for you to answer and if you are only capable of copy and pasting irrelevant info then maybe this isn’t the thread for you. No one is forcing you to troll here.
With no due respect, comparing Spiderman comics to the Bible is utterly laughable.
Copying and pasting relevant examples from science, research, and history, is not trolling.
I’m sorry these topics are difficult for you discuss.
Did you understand the PP’s point that just because there may be some true “facts” in a story don’t make the entire story true?
Gumball poster
emoji poster
burning in hell poster
gish gallop poster
Spider-man is like the bible poster.
I honestly think Spiderman is like the bible poster is the most interesting poster we’ve had lately.
Imagine the depth and breadth of denial and delusion it would take to propose that?
Seems like you missed the point that the PP was trying to make with the comic book reference.
Just because some factual happens in a story, doesn’t make the entire story factual.
Anonymous wrote:The terms “religion” and “mythology” refer to two completely different things.
Mythology is traditional stories associated with a particular culture that have been passed down from generation to generation and have profound cultural and/or religious significance to the members of that culture. Myths can sometimes be religious in nature, but they can also be important to other aspects of the culture.
Religion is complicated. The term “religion” generally encompasses some kind of worldview, which usually includes some sort of mythology, but also the attitudes, ritual practices, communal identity, and moral teachings associated with the worldview.
If you have ever been religious, then you probably already know that there is more to a religion than just a bunch of stories; a religion also involves an array of actions, practices, and attitudes.
So the Bible is a collection of Christian myths. Equivalent to the Greek myths we read about today.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has a historical framework. Its characters are real people living in verifiable locations during historical events. The Bible mentions Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Cyrus, Herod, Felix, Pilate, and many other historical figures. Its history coincides with that of many nations, including the Egyptian, Hittite, Persian, Babylonian, and Roman empires. The events of the Bible take place in geographical areas such as Canaan, Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and others. All this certifiable detail refutes the idea that the Bible is mere mythology.
Unlike mythology, the Bible has many confirmations in sciences such as biology, geology, astronomy, and archaeology. The field of biblical archaeology has absolutely exploded in the last century and a half, during which time hundreds of thousands of artifacts have been discovered. Just one example: at one time, skeptics used the Bible’s references to the Hittite civilization as “proof” that the Bible was a myth. There was never any such people as the “Hittites,” according to the science of the day. However, in 1876, the first of a series of discoveries was made, and now the existence of the ancient Hittite civilization is well documented. Archaeology continues to bolster the Bible’s historicity. As Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Unlike mythology, the Bible is written as history. Luke wrote his Gospel as “an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us . . . just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses.” Luke claims that he had “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” and so wrote “an orderly account . . . so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (see Luke 1:1-4). Did Luke include miracles in his account? Yes, many of them. But they were miracles verified by eyewitnesses. Two thousand years later, a skeptic might call Luke’s account a “myth,” but the burden of proof rests with the skeptic. The account itself is a carefully investigated historical document.
Unlike mythology, the Bible contains an astounding number of fulfilled prophecies. Myths do not bother with prophecy, but fully one third of the Bible is prophecy. The Bible contains over 1,800 predictions concerning more than 700 separate subjects found in over 8,300 verses. The Old Testament contains more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ alone, many with amazing specificity. Numerous prophecies have already been fulfilled, and they have come to pass precisely as foretold. The mathematical odds of someone making this number of predictions and having every one of them come to pass are light-years beyond the realm of human possibility. These miraculous prophecies could only be accomplished with the supernatural guidance of Him who sees the end from the beginning (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Unlike mythology, the Bible has transformed a countless number of lives. Yet many people allow the views of others—who have never seriously studied the Bible—to shape their own opinions. Each of us needs study it for ourselves. Put it to the test. Live by the Bible’s precepts and experience for yourself the dynamic and transforming power of this amazing Book. Apply its teachings on forgiveness and see how it can mend a broken relationship. Apply its principles of stewardship and watch your financial situation improve. Apply its teaching on faith and feel a calming presence in your heart even as you navigate through a difficult trial in your life. The Bible works. There is a reason Christians in various countries around the world risk their lives daily to expose others to the life-giving truth of this remarkable Book.
Oh dear, what a lot of wasted words. Not the PP, but I am the PP who explained that the word "myth" is used by scholars to indicate any sacred story that is believed to be true. By anyone. You are going in circles if you try to distinguish one religion's sacred stories from another religion's sacred stories based on which ones YOU believe to be true or important. That is not how anthropology works. Every sacred story falls into the same category of sacred story - if anyone believes it to be true, and it is a sacred story to those people, then it is called a "myth." You could call it something else, and probably they should, because that word means "false story" to most people who don't have PhD's in anthropology. But whatever you call it, all those stories are in the same category objectively. You cannot attempt to create a scholarly definition based on your own religious beliefs - it is the definition of bad scholarship.
The Edict of Milan was the Western world’s first known government document to proclaim the freedom of belief. At the time, Christianity probably made up 7 to 10 percent of the population of the Roman Empire. A mere hundred years later, half the empire’s 60 million inhabitants claimed allegiance to the Christian tradition.
How did Christianity triumph? Christianity was something new on this earth. It wasn’t closed to women. It was so concerned with questions of social welfare (healing the sick, caring for the poor) that it embedded them into its doctrines.
Christian believers go from roughly 1,000 in A.D. 60, to 40,000 in A.D. 150, to 2.5 million in A.D. 300.
There was no Christian secret police forcing pagans to convert: The empire was too large and diffusely governed to make such an effort feasible.
we do not see every religion grow, and I don't believe there has been much to parallel the growth of Christianity.
Everyone likes a good story. Look at how many millions of people have gotten sucked into the Q-anon theories.
Dr. Henry M. Morris has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be in error at any point.”
Dr. Anon DCUM Poster has remarked, “There exists today not one unquestionable find of archaeology that proves the Bible to be correct at any point.”
Known among followers and friends as Dr. Henry, Dr. Morris was a hydraulic engineer and taught at several universities before developing his critique of evolution and a history of Earth that spans 4.5 billion years in the 1961 work "The Genesis Flood." The book, written with the theologian John C. Whitcomb, was the first to take a scholarly approach to proving the Old Testament creation story, and it argued that Noah's flood, rather than eons of erosion, sculptured the earth.
"It was a groundbreaking work in that he basically, in this culture, in this day and age, showed that there were scientific answers to be able to defend the Christian faith and uphold the Bible's account," said Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, a group based in Kentucky.
After graduating in 1939, Morris served as a hydraulic engineer working with the International Boundary and Water Commission (1939–1942).[1] He returned to Rice, teaching civil engineering from 1942 until 1946.
From 1946–1951, he studied at the University of Minnesota, where he earned a master's degree in hydraulics (1948)and a PhD in hydraulic engineering (1950).
In 1951, he became a professor and chair of civil engineering at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and served as the Acting Dean of Engineering in the fall of 1956. Morris then served as a professor of applied science at Southern Illinois University in 1957.
In 1959, Morris moved to the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) to serve as Professor of Civil Engineering in the area of hydraulics, and to serve as department chairman for civil engineering. There, Morris co-authored an advanced text on engineering hydraulics with J.M. Wiggert that was used in many universities, and under a decade of leadership the department became one of the country's largest civil engineering departments. While Morris' religious views and writings were controversial among university biology and geology faculty, and in the broader debate, it has been reported that Morris "kept his own counsel on [them], unless... pressed", such that his university engineering colleagues respected Morris as "a good administrator" and his religious views "because they never influenced his [administration]".
Again, people who believe that the earth is <10,000 years old shouldn’t be commenting on archeology.
This trend of archaeology corroborating Biblical accounts continued so consistently that in 1959 Rabbi Dr. Nelson Glueck declared "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference." Since then, the evidence has kept coming.
Really, anyone can comment on anything. At least this poster provided information about the education and professional qualifications of the commenter.
The people posting here don’t list their degrees, they don’t tell us their jobs, they don’t tell us the number of books they have written.
Someone called themselves “doctor anon dcum poster” and completely lied, and that’s considered bright and valuable debate, though.
Someone calling themselves an atheist but who doesn't list their degrees, tell us their job, or tell us the number of books they've written, expects to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile, religious people expect to be taken seriously on the subject of religion because they believe in God.
No. Religious people gave actual evidence from archeologists and other scientists.
Evidence of what exactly?
Actual "scientists" don't believe in creationism.
Robert Boyle is known as the father of modern chemistry and considered to be the greatest physical scientist of his time. He discovered the scientific laws that show the relationship of gas pressure to temperature and volume. Boyle was a devoted student of the Bible and even sponsored a series of talks known as the “Boyle Lectures” which taught Christians about the facts for their faith.
Isaac Newton is undoubtedly known as one of the greatest scientists who ever lived. Although he is most famous for the discovery of gravity, he also formulated the three laws of universal motion and helped to develop the math known as calculus. His work laid the foundation for the great scientific law of energy conservation. Newton believed in the Creator and wrote papers defending creation and the Bible. He also believed that the world-wide flood, as described in Genesis, accounted for most of earth’s features.
In addition to his many accomplishments, Newton was also an astronomer, responsible for making the first reflecting telescope. Newton unmistakably witnessed the hand of God at work as he studied the movement of the planets. He said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the council and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
Many people owe their lives to the work of physicist and chemist, Louis Pasteur, for identifying several harmful bacteria and creating vaccines to cure many diseases. Pasteur also challenged the notion of spontaneous generation – the idea that life can form from non-living objects. The ancient Greeks used to believe that mice could form from dirty rags, or that if you left out rotting meat, maggots would come to life. Although the maggot and mice theory was successfully challenged by Italian biologist, Francesco Redi in 1668, scientists continued to cling to the idea of spontaneous generation of microscopic creatures. In Pasture’s most famous experiment, he disproved spontaneous generation altogether. He did this by boiling broth to kill any microbes that might be living inside. He then placed the broth in a special glassware that allowed air to penetrate the broth while keeping the microbes out. As Pasteur expected, no microbes formed in the broth, proving that living microbes could only come from other microbes – that life only comes from life. Louis Pasteur firmly believed in creation and strongly opposed Darwin’s theory of spontaneous generation because it did not fit well with scientific evidence.
In Pasteur’s own words, “science brings men nearer to God.”
A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.
Is Christian philosophy good for science? In this series we showcase many examples, but the case could hardly be made stronger than to point to Mr. Scientific Method himself, Sir Francis Bacon.
Although not a practicing scientist, Bacon is considered by many historians to be the “founder of modern science.” His philosophy and writings were largely responsible for igniting the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Numerous intellectuals like Robert Boyle and Isaac Newton seized on the “new philosophy” of Bacon that emphasized empiricism and induction. Casting aside dependence on authorities like Aristotle, the new science exploded on the scene, yielding a wealth of discoveries and inventions that has continued unabated to this day. But this “new philosophy” was really nothing new; it was a return to the principles of the Bible. The “founder of modern science” was a Bible-believing Christian, and Christian doctrine was the foundation of his thinking.
Why should anyone answer any questions asked here- pp posted that Spider-man is equivalent to the Bible. It’s literally a joke of a forum.
Because this is a forum for discussion and people are discussing interesting topics. If the questions are too difficult for you to answer and if you are only capable of copy and pasting irrelevant info then maybe this isn’t the thread for you. No one is forcing you to troll here.
With no due respect, comparing Spiderman comics to the Bible is utterly laughable.
Copying and pasting relevant examples from science, research, and history, is not trolling.
I’m sorry these topics are difficult for you discuss.
Did you understand the PP’s point that just because there may be some true “facts” in a story don’t make the entire story true?
Gumball poster
emoji poster
burning in hell poster
gish gallop poster
Spider-man is like the bible poster.
I honestly think Spiderman is like the bible poster is the most interesting poster we’ve had lately.
Imagine the depth and breadth of denial and delusion it would take to propose that?
Seems like you missed the point that the PP was trying to make with the comic book reference.
Just because some factual happens in a story, doesn’t make the entire story factual.
You would agree with this?
Find someone else to play word games with, I am not interested.
Georgia M. Dunston is a pioneering scientist and Christian. She has spent a career performing cutting edge research in the field of human genetics and precision medicine, and she has established competitive programs for research scientists at minority institutions of higher learning. In addition to her scientific and organizational work, she has also spent time formally reflecting on the implications of the latest discoveries in human genetics for our concepts of race and ethnicity. And as a devout Christian, she has explored the questions of human identity that are raised by our rapidly increasing knowledge of the human genome.
Dr. Dunston was born in 1944 in Norfolk, Virginia and grew up in the segregated south on the cusp of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Dr. Dunston became the first member of her family to graduate from college in 1965 when she earned her BS in Biology from Norfolk State University, a historically black college. After gaining a master’s degree from Tuskegee University, another historically black college, she went on to the University of Michigan, the first predominantly white institution she had attended, where she received a PhD in Human Genetics in 1972.
Upon completion of her PhD, Dr. Dunston was recruited to the faculty of the Howard University College of Medicine (HUCM). At Howard she rose through the academic ranks to become a full professor of microbiology, to serve as chairwoman of the department of microbiology, and to become a member of the Graduate Faculty in the Department of Genetics. She served as a member of the HUCM faculty for a total of 45 years before retiring in 2017
direct quote from Dr. Dunston:
In recognition of Black History Month, I want to conclude this personal perspective with the immortal words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:
“I have a dream that my four little children, will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
The science of the human genome beautifully reflects Biblical themes of human identity. It affirms our belief in a human population that is incredibly diverse, yet undoubtedly one: created in God’s image, redeemed by Jesus’ blood, and united by the Holy Spirit in the renewing and reconciling work of the Church.“
Anonymous wrote:If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Who are you, and who is “Collins?” Why should anyone listen to either of you?
Collins was one of the scientists on the PP’s list. I’m an intelligent person with strong STEM background and critical thinking skills who enjoys discussing various topics.
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
What is your STEM background? Are you actively working as a scientist?
Multiple degrees in STEM. Not actively working as a scientist.
You missed my question:
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
What degrees in STEM? Did you ever do research? Are you published? Did you teach?
What do you think the symbolism of Jesus dying at 33 years of age on April 3, year 033 is?
Saint Augustine first articulated the theological concept of the triune God comprising Father, Son and Holy Spirit as one.
Was this intended to point to the triune God, do you think ?
It is amazing how many archeological findings support core elements of various Bible stories - although I am not a biblical literalist, there are so many core transcendent truths in the Bible.
You know that dates changed when Europe moved from a Julian calendar to a Gregorian one around 1583.
I wondered when someone would finally point this out. All these highly educated people and they know so little about basic things like dates.
Anonymous wrote:If a scientist believes that a religious explanation supersedes a scientific explanation of events then that's bad science, not based on data.
If a scientist compartmentalizes and uses religion to fill the gaps in our scientific understanding then that's not bad science. Just a person who is uncomfortable with uncertainty and needs “answers” to the unknown.
Collins:
”the scientific method and the scientific worldview can't be allowed to get distorted by religious perspectives”
Who are you, and who is “Collins?” Why should anyone listen to either of you?
Collins was one of the scientists on the PP’s list. I’m an intelligent person with strong STEM background and critical thinking skills who enjoys discussing various topics.
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
What is your STEM background? Are you actively working as a scientist?
Multiple degrees in STEM. Not actively working as a scientist.
You missed my question:
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
What degrees in STEM? Did you ever do research? Are you published? Did you teach?
I have been answering your questions in good faith. You continue to ignore mine.
Is my question too difficult for you?
Do you think a scientist in 2023 would accept a religious explanation for a natural phenomenon when a scientific explanation already exists?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
