How does quoting the Bible prove the existence of God and God's defeat over science? (See link)?

Question

http://www.godsriddle.com/

I just came across this lovely Christian sight proving that God defeats science. My favorite line is this one: "The world uses science, logic, and mathematics to argue that our Bible is wrong. We also have used science and logic to fight back, but it has not brought us victory. Why have we achieved so little with all our efforts? May I suggest that we have used the wisdom of the world to fight the world. That can never bring victory because their wisdom is false."

THIS is an example of Christians fighting back with science and logic? ~~*Giggles and then cowers in the corner*~~

I was going to respond to our friend Earl D. but you've saved me from it *AcidZebra*. ROTFL. I think we should take away old Earl's computer since it is a sign of technology and progression.

Hey *Jamie*! I was just about to ask you if you had even read the question because I thought you were accusing ME of demonizing YOU. Oops:) I'm glad I went back and re-read. It is a crazy argument, huh? The bomb scare was particularly hostile.
Thanks for your response - wonderful!

Answer 1

"Every atom in distant galaxies beats a different tempo than local atoms. All distant orbits defy our laws of physics."

Holy shiat.

Answer 2

You are so right, Christians can only ever quote the bible in a debate.

Hey Earl D. If you are now finding that everything you learnt is wrong, does that mean that you are going to become an atheist because god must be wrong.

And isn't growing one organism from another (Eve from Adam's rib) something like biology. I'm not too sure, I'm just one of those unwise atheists.

Answer 3

Something weird happens when you try to shatter strongly held beliefs with common sense and logic. The believer becomes even more entrenched in their precious faith and launches into the "God can do anything", defense. If you constantly had to justify a delusion you held most dearly against the forces of logic you'd be as nutty as they are!

Answer 4

This is what happens when religions abandon what they genuinely have to offer. This is what happens when religion and science are conflated. It's BAD. Scriptural literalism, the attempts to use scientific rationalism to "prove" the historical and/or scientific validity of what ought to be understood in terms of mythos/mystic thought.

More of me pontificating on the subject:

We have to understand that scripture literalism is a relatively recent thing. It's essentially a reaction to the post-1900s modern world.

Because we tend to project our own thoughts and reactions backward onto people of earlier ages, most of us don't know that people even as recently as 200 years ago thought very differently than we do. But they did, and spritually, in particular, they were very different than we are today. They had evolved two ways of thinking (knowing, speaking, acquiring knowledge), both of which were considered essential. These two ways of thinking (understanding, looking at the universe) were regarded as complimentary ways of arriving at truth...each had it's own area in the lives of earlier people.

1. Mythos (religious thought, religious practice, religious mysteries, religious rituals) was concerned with what these people thought of as timeless truths and what was constant in human existence. It looked back to the origins of life and the foundations of culture and looked into the deepest levels of the human mind. Mythos provided people with a context that made sense of their day-to-day lives and directed their attention to the eternal and universal. It dealt with *internal* realities

2. Logos was the rational and pragmatic; the scientific thought that allowed people to function well in the world. It related exactly to facts and corresponded to external realities. Logos forged ahead and tried to find something new...to gain greater control over the environment, to find out how things worked, to conquer or overthrow the limitations of humans in relationship to our survival. This we are all familliar with, because it's what has lately been accepted as the ONLY path to "truth" in most modern socieities. But Logos has it's limitations. It cannot provide comfort in tragedy. It has nothing to say about the ultimate value of human life.


By the end of the 19th century, the Western world had achieved such astonishing advancements through science and technology that they began to think that Logos was the only means to "truth"...and they began to dismiss Mythos as false and superstitious. And so was born scripture literalism, out of the acceptance that the scientific method of proof is the only valid measure of truth.

It's a bad idea.

It would be far healthier, IMO, to reclaim the separation of mythic/mystic and scientific thought. Religious scriptures were not intended to be science textbooks. And the measuring devices of the scientific method are not applicable to religious insights.


No one thinks that the point of the story of Echo and Narcissus ought to be utterly ignored becuase we know that nymphs never existed. And no one dismisses the insights into human behavior supplied by Aesop's Fables becuase we know, scientifically, that lions and mice don't actually talk to each other, or that wolves don't actually wear the skins of sheep in order to fool other sheep.


Agains, religious truths are not like the proofs of scientific rationalism, but more like the intuitive insignts of poetry or music or art. Conflating the two only results in bad science and bad religion.


But I don't think that it's going to go away, because a lot of people are threateneed by modernism. There are people who, having acdepted the scientific method as the only valid path to truth, feel that their most sacred values are being challenged, and who are motivated by fears, anxieties, and desires that are not unpredictable in the face of the modern (and largely secular) world. The "timeless truths" are now put under the microscope and found to be historically false or scientifically invalid.

And so they push back, and try to reclaim the truths of their religious texts by insisting on the literal, material factuality of the stories in those texts. And they become more entrenched in their positions because *they have thrown away* the value of mystic/mythic thought and accepted scientific rationalism where it doesn't belong; where, in fact, it actually destroys the value or religion.



It really is a bad idea.

And it makes the proponents of scriptural literalism look...well...naive is the nicest way to put it.

Answer 5

I find this an odd sort of argument.

Myself I never set out to 'prove' the Bible wrong and I don't know anyone that has actually.

Myself I simple look at things and they either make sense and ring true or they don't sit right and just don't stand up to scrutiny.

We conflict from both directions. I don't want to live your way and you don't want to live mine.

I don't care if you want to live your way but, you keep pushing your way on me trying to change me.

I don't like that because I have in the past been very respectful of you but you don't seem to understand that no means no.

Then you start to dehumanize me and demonize me for my beliefs so I recognize you as a threat to my survival. (Christians have a bad track record for killing people for their beliefs.)

So I start to fight back.

Then you accuse me of attacking you.

I am using the 'you' to refer to Christians' and the 'me' to everyone else.


Science is a work in progress and is always evolving. It is in the nature of science to be critical of itself always checking and reassessing its own thinking. This is a good thing.

The bible is a collection of historical texts from a variety of different sources. Some Christians are encouraged to scrutinize these texts and others are told to leave it to their priests or pastors to interpret.

People who go to traditional theological schools have to face alot of realities about the Bible that you never here. Everyone should get that same education.

I love Jesus but I am not a Christian. I could never stand being associated with any of the Christian churches existing today.
I also so enjoy hearing about all the different ways of seeing the devine in the human experience. I am not about taking sides I am about making peace. But you guys don't really seem to get that.

Agnostics/Athiests, keep everyone on their toes and keep the compass on truth. Yeah! So does science! Yeah.

Things like keeping schools and government secular allow us all our space. I am referring to different religions for the most part here. This is helpful for keeping the peace and allows us to get to know one another as human beings.

You may not believe in evolution but teaching it in schools and showing how it is constantly changing out world is a reality check . It would do a lot more harm not to be aware of these things and to teach creationism to everyone in stead.

I don't mind if that's what you believe, I don't care , but I want an education for myself and my family so just teach it at home where and keep public spaces neutral ground so we can live in peace!


Have a good day.

PS It is a great deal easier to continue teachings such as creationism at home or through the church than it would be to attempt to teach science at home or through a special organization. Science needs a great deal of time and in depth study.

Would you be willing to give up you internet, electricity, vehicle, medicines both naturopathic and traditional western, herbal remedies and antibiotics alike, eye glasses, television, radio, the potential to travel in space or in the depths of the ocean, your video cameras, paint both for your home and the great works of art around the world, the paper that your bibles are made with, anticeptic, a good surgeon and all their facilities and tools when you need them, all of history, seeing a set of dinosaur bones reasembled, learning the stories of the people of Pompea, learning how our wonderful horses evolved and why we can through selective breeding develope magnificent breeds like the Thoroughbred race horses, Hanovarians, Arabians and the like! All these things we owe to science. How wonderful!

Whatever bad has come from science and there has been some very bad things, we owe that to our own poor judgment as with the atom bomb.

The good far outways the bad and I for one am not ready to go back to being a hunter gatherer at this time.

Answer 6

"That can never bring victory because their wisdom is false."

Ah...... totally unsubstantiated wild claims........ beautiful.

That wisdom is false? How so? Just because you assert it is?

Answer 7

??? How do facts make wisdom false?
LOL

Answer 8

I was taught in school Pluto is a planet

Why is what I was taught all wrong now

Is that what your science is all about

That, and A-BOMBS

May one strike your city, maybe that'll make you realize what SCIENCE is about.