English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

First of all let me just start off by looking back centuries ago. There was minimal understanding of the world, religion was about all there was to go from and it was educated more or less as fact. However, these days there is enough scientific proof to disprove large chunks of what Christians believe to be true. Examples include God creating the Earth & humans .
Firstly, the Earth was meant to be the centre of the universe, which of course we now know to be false (and considering how volatile its structure is, God didn't do a very good job with it if he did create it). Secondly, humans weren't created as we are now, it's taken millions of years of evolution, and there are fossilised remains that prove this.
These are two fundamental points that are preached, and yet Christians still don't seem to have any doubt in their beliefs even though the evidence to the contrary is right there.
So my question is why still do so many people believe this, instead of acknowledging the truth?

2006-10-05 09:52:02 · 34 answers · asked by Marc 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

"You see you believe in your truth as you see it,and you have no conclusive evidence.but believers in god have faith.i would love to see the expression on your face when you wake in the next world"

See, this is what annoys me. I believe in what I see around me. I see vast landscapes formed by the elements over millions of years, I see modern civilisation, but to choose to believe that this has occured without any higher power and I should be worried about what your "God" has to say about it in the "next world"? Is this what is used to keep people believing, fear?

2006-10-05 10:20:37 · update #1

34 answers

I was alway very sceptical about religion, but Like alot of children I went to a christian school and was envolved in christian activities it wasnt imposed but it was just the way the school was run. When I left I knew I didnt believe in God because of the arguments science held against it but I wanted to believe in something, anything to be there for when I died, like reincarnation. Then I watch a two part series called 'The Root of All Evil' on bbc1 which was presented by the scientist Richard Dawkins and it made me realise there is no need for there to be anything after death. people who believe in religion believe they are working through their lives to become part of a paradise in the afterlife, heaven. But why waste the life we have now in hope of another? there is so much beauty in this world, we can live a fullfulling life in the world we live in now. I believe religion is imposed on children, and as a result it is all they grow up to believe in despite what science may have proven, I believe it is followed because people want to believe there is something after death, and I believe that it provides guidlines by which people can live by, but these guidelines are followed by those who are also athiests because it is already in human nature to know what is right and what is wrong.Sometimes I think some religious people follow it just incase there is a God so they have not sinned in disbelieving but that is in very few cases. It may also be a need to follow something, a need to be in a group and involved. I have nothing personal against religious people but i also have my own beliefs. You should definatly look up Richard Dawkins and see his understandings of religion. I hope this has also seemed relevant to your question because I find it an interesting subject. alana x

2006-10-05 10:15:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Your assumption is that Evolution is true. On the contrary, most scientific evidence points away from that assumption.

What Evolutionists are left with is alot of If's and Then's.

Amazing how "science" keeps changing, "evidnece" continues to be tested. Amazing how even centuries after the fact, "theories" are presented, changed, re-presented, & changed again.

Amazing, the Bible has yet to come up with another "theory" of creation & human "developement."

Also, your "facts" are a bit skewed (comes from being indoctrinated with Evolutionary theories).

--The Earth was MEANT to be the center of the universe? I haven't come across that in Scripture - only that the Earth was the only planet populated.

Further, I would submit that BECAUSE the earth is so "volatile," chance & circumstance could never have produced such a possibility. I would submit that this is evidence FOR an "Intelligent designer."

--Fossilized humans that "prove" Evolution? You might want to check into that some more. I can give you scientific evidence to the contrary in at least a dozen cases.

Your "truth" is not an absolute lack of fallacy. It's a regurgitation of what you've been taught (which, BTW, is the same thing Christians are accused of).

2006-10-05 10:10:09 · answer #2 · answered by azar_and_bath 4 · 1 0

I do, and apparently some other people too. Science has nothing to do with it. We are all using this network and these computers which are possible because of modern science and technology. Science, however, has no possibility to explore God's existence, for example. But these are big words; science can't capture even human experience and emotion, as for example a poem does. It can explain processes, create mathematical models of things, measure all sorts of quantities, but can it really say anything about man's being in the world?
You mention how the earth was sort of moved out from the centre of the universe. No doubt about it. But has this changed in any way the manner in which we experience earth in our everyday life?
I really don't see why scientists (and their adepts) cannot accept that science has a limited scope and there are other ways of knowledge and expression, that are not comparable to it in any way. Can you say Einstein was more correct than Mozart or Michelangelo? Does your scientific logic allow you to make such a comparison? Then what is the problem with Moses?

2006-10-05 22:09:41 · answer #3 · answered by todaywiserthanyesterday 4 · 0 0

Whenever the bible touches on science it is incredibly accurate. For example only a couple of hundred years ago did 'scientists' like yourself believe the earth was 'Flat'. The bible descibed the earth as a 'globe' and that it was hanging upon nothing whereas science believed it was held up by ELEPHANTS. Is that correct? And as for fossilised remains of evolution, well there isnt any. Surely there would be thousands of such remains instead of just a few missing link skeletons that have been found out to be hoax's. And lastly, where did you get this idea about the earth being the centre of the universe? This is not biblical and i really suggest you get your facts right before asking questions on here and trying to belittle believers of God.

2006-10-05 11:10:12 · answer #4 · answered by dunc 3 · 0 0

This one is easy.

Science can explain a lot of things but it can only tell us what something is it can't tell us why it is. If you know your science properly then you would realise that according to it anti-matter and matter should be in balance (for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction) but there not matter is blatantly in more abundance and no scientist can explain why this is.

At the end of the day people need something to believe in and they need to feel close to others. A belief in a higher being and a place of salvation after a harsh life full of suffering (yes not talking about you & I with our home, warmth and running water) can make people want to go on living. Relgion is an ideal that brings hope to millions.

Your also mixing your facts. It wasn't just christian's that belived the earth was the centre of the universe. It was pretty much all religons and peoples.

Can you acknowlede the truth that science can never explain everything?

2006-10-05 10:02:19 · answer #5 · answered by Andy C 3 · 2 0

The scientific method is also a matter of faith, though like any religion, the strongest adherents will deny that any but their system is the true one.

It seems that the most gifted scientists come to the conclusion that there is a God. After gaining enough knowledge and understanding they tend to believe strongly in the Creator.

It is organized religion that they reject.

The strength of faith is not something accountable, particularly when so many without faith profess to have it.

Charles Darwin who so many Jack Christians condemn, was a religious man. He is buried in the floor of Westminster Abbey very close to Newton. He regarded the process of evolution as a tool used by the creator, not a proof that the Creator does not exist.

2006-10-05 09:59:16 · answer #6 · answered by Gaspode 7 · 2 0

Knowing this, Christians still believe in God because there are just some things that cannot be explained by science: Like how life started. What are the chances of me, telling you this right now and we even existing. I heard that the first life forms may have been created from chemical reactions caused by lightning. Think about this: The exact chemicals, group together in an exact pattern, charged by electricity with the exact voltage to create the double helix pattern of DNA and us later on... us! Look where we are now, we have gotten pretty far for living just a few thousand years. We can make our own decisions instead of nature making them for us. I find it hard to belive that this happend without any outside help...

2006-10-05 10:02:28 · answer #7 · answered by • Nick • 4 · 2 0

Science is not the only way to knowledge and all things cannot be known by science. In fact science itself relies on the basis that the universe is understandable and reasonable, but that cannot be proved by science.
Love cannot be known by the scientific method. You can investigate the effects in health, hormones, etc. But you cannot prove or disprove love. You end up talking about sexual attraction and emotional reactions, but they are not love.
To say that God created the universe does not mean he could not or did not do it so that it evolved. In fact, that would take far greater precision to plant into the tiniest beginning the possibilities of what would later come to be.
If you think that the theory of evolution disproves God's creation, think again. There is not one single piece of evidence of one species becoming another. There is evolution WITHIN species but no evidence of one developing into another. While humans are closely related to apes and chimps, the "link" is "missing."

2006-10-05 10:06:40 · answer #8 · answered by jakejr6 3 · 1 0

I actually agree with you on this, This is a question ultimately about eveolution through the years, I seriously think that the world wasn't created in seven days, for starters, it isn't even level, mountains and canyons have been formed over millions of years. Human evolution has taken almost 3 million years to do, and still we are evolving, Animals and plants didn't spring up over-night, again, they've taken the same eveolutionary timescale that we have. However, even though we are taght that all this happened within a few days, this is not the case, science can prove religion wrong over many issues, again, humans didn't look like us originally, we've all seen the evolutionary chart at school from Stone-Age man (Homo-Apeus or something, right) I know that miodern day humans are known as Homo-Sapiens, but it's taken us three million years to go from tree dwelling mammals to the ultimate hunter on the planet! The religious people refuse to acknowledge the truth because they are totaly blinded by their faith in their religion, that they beliveve religion, not scientific knowledge is power. in the war between Science and Religion, I think Religion is fighting a losing battle. Don't get me wrong, I am a Christain myself, but Christains shouldn't be blinded by what the bible tels them, there are certain things in the bible that I seriously question and other things I cast a skeptical look over, even though I'm a Christian, Science gets my vote, because Science is the ultimate truth and written records of FACT!!

2006-10-05 10:04:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

They don't wholeheartedly believe in him... not the way the Christians centuries ago did. This is a watered-down version we have today. It's the "god of the gaps".

Anything that is unexplained, is a gap. They keep god in there. Whenever we explain away that gap, they shuffle him over to another one.

The gaps are getting fewer and fewer however. And the religion is getting more and more watered down as a result. I would say that most moderate Christians these days do little more than give lip service to Jesus. Most of them no longer care that the bible has been disproven, etc.

They simply believe in some sort of omnipotent energy field that may or may not be called "god", and that Jesus was that god's messenger, etc. In essence, they are intellectually dishonest, lazy, and simply don't care to confront the truth.

And this... I actually don't mind.

What I mind is, when they allow people like Dubya or Pat Robertson to represent their beliefs, simply because they wrap their insanity around the name "Jesus". Even though most non-insane people know that those two are nuts... they're still afraid to speak out against them, because that would possibly offend...

God?

2006-10-05 10:06:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers