Why do you Atheist guys make fun of religion then ducks a debate?

[JJRod]

Modern science is not the reason why people turned away from religion. Movement such as the New Atheism, Gender Studies, LGBT, Feminism are the reasons why people turned away from traditional religion and mostly it is not even related to science and its basis. Atheism is on the rise out through the mere thought that Atheism would give an upper hand to intellectual reasoning which is quite laughable, people thinks its "Trendy" or makes them intellectually superior. Many atheist themselves are anti-science when it comes to biology (Sex and Gender) or Physics (Universe is Eternal, re-definition of the concept of "Nothing" In order to fit their world view.)

The first book of Genesis is NOT a scientific book nor it is a literal seven day creation. I don't know what basis did you take that because Genesis is not scientifically accurate (Which is not even challenging the claims of science but rather describing metaphorically on the creation of the universe) the rest of the book follows as inherently false when time and time again it is proven that the bible is historically accurate with its timeline and with its time of creation.

The Church's teachings has not been proven wrong time and time again (Proven wrong when extremist demand that 7 day creation is true). The church has been proven right that people of modern times will be more promiscuous than ever in recent times with all the sinful movements and would turn away from human decency as people turn away from God (Though it is only proven in western society as Oriental countries such as Japan, Korea, and China, their Christian population is on the rise). And that if Women are given unending power women will stop become mothers (And once more proven true) and will turn away from their lovers (Check on the divorce rates on how many divorces are initiated by women)

Ah I get it now.
So some parts of the bible are not to be taken literally because they're metaphorical but the rest is accurate. Yes just the parts that had been believed for years until modern science proved it to be incorrect.
Very convenient wouldn't you say.

And as far as these prophecies the bible is supposedly predicting many other books have predicted the same genleric things. He'll i can do the same thing.
I predict california will have a huge earthquake in the future and hundreds will die.
I predict there will be a plane crash somewhere and many will parish.
I predict a hurricane will cause damage to states on the coast.
Etc etc etc.

[Thraxox]

Ah I get it now.
So only the some parts of the bible are not to be taken literally because they're metaphorical but the rest is accurate. Yes just the parts that had been believed for years until modern science proved it to be incorrect.
Very convenient wouldn't you say.

First of all, Genesis has not been literally taken up until the early 1930's where the movement really began. Young Earth Creationism only really began to rise in the 50's under Henry Morris.

Second, people didn't believe that the earth was flat on the earlier times, that movement is recent, people from the ancient times always believed that the earth was round and that modern times falsely claiming that they believe the earth is flat is a myth. And Genesis not be taken literally was established by St. Augustine of Hippo in 400-450 AD, which is 1400-1500 years from Darwin, so you should try again and not to try put sarcasm in your words

Third: There have always been metaphors in the bible. Jesus said that he is a door, according to you in literal way he is a door with a door knob because you take it literally.

Fourth: You didn't address why Atheism is on the rise is not through Modern science but rather from nonsense.

[JJRod]

First of all, Genesis has not been literally taken up until the early 1930's where the movement really began. Young Earth Creationism only really began to rise in the 50's under Henry Morris.

Second, people didn't believe that the earth was flat on the earlier times, that movement is recent, people from the ancient times always believed that the earth was round and that modern times falsely claiming that they believe the earth is flat is a myth. And Genesis not be taken literally was established by St. Augustine of Hippo in 400-450 AD, which is 1400-1500 years from Darwin, so you should try again and not to try put sarcasm in your words

Third: There have always been metaphors in the bible. Jesus said that he is a door, according to you in literal way he is a door with a door knob because you take it literally.

Fourth: You didn't address why Atheism is on the rise is not through Modern science but rather from nonsense.

Laughable how you're trying to change history. Of course the church taught genesis as 100% prior to 1930. Why do you think Darwin's theory of natural selection was so controversial in 1860?

And I understand metaphors, but you're telling me here an entire book in the bible is a metaphor. The one that again for years was taught as true only until it was proven to be false? Again a little convenient isn't it

I suspect youll be quoting me from christiananswers.com, answers in genesis and other similar websites won't you. Just like your Jesus is a door comment.

[Thraxox]

Laughable how you're trying to change history. Of course the church taught genesis as 100% prior to 1930. Why do you think Darwin's theory of natural selection was so controversial in 1860?

And I understand metaphors, but you're telling me here an entire book in the bible is a metaphor. The one that again for years was taught as true only until it was proven to be false? Again a little convenient isn't it

I suspect youll be quoting me from christiananswers.com, answers in genesis and other similar websites won't you. Just like your Jesus is a door comment.

days was occupied in the creation of the world.[15]

From Wikipedia - Saint Augustine 350-430 AD, one of the most influential theologians of the Catholic Church, suggested that the Biblical text should not be interpreted literally if it contradicts what we know from science and our God-given reason. From an important passage on his "The Literal Interpretation of Genesis" (early fifth century, AD), St. Augustine wrote:


It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.[16]

With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvatio

It seems you are the one trying to rewrite history when the Church had not taught Genesis as a literal interpretation. Try again son.

And Darwin's controversy did not stem from the age of the earth but rather stemming from the origin of humans from primates. Try again son.

And if you do not or CANNOT distinguish literal from metaphorical text, then that is your problem and not mine.

[JJRod]

days was occupied in the creation of the world.[15]

From Wikipedia - Saint Augustine 350-430 AD, one of the most influential theologians of the Catholic Church, suggested that the Biblical text should not be interpreted literally if it contradicts what we know from science and our God-given reason. From an important passage on his "The Literal Interpretation of Genesis" (early fifth century, AD), St. Augustine wrote:


It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.[16]

With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvatio

It seems you are the one trying to rewrite history when the Church had not taught Genesis as a literal interpretation. Try again son.

And Darwin's controversy did not stem from the age of the earth but rather stemming from the origin of humans from primates. Try again son.

And if you do not or CANNOT distinguish literal from metaphorical text, then that is your problem and not mine.

I don't need you to quote entire articles from Wikipedia, a link is fine.
And genesis taught more than the age of the universe. It teaches about the origins of man and animals themselves, which is why Darwin's book was so controversial. It went against the bible and the church's teachings, which despite your protest by one guy was taught by the church for years to be the literal word of God.
Galileo wasn't thrown in jail because the church was teaching genesis as a metaphor. The church didn't ban Copernicus for speaking against the metaphors of the bible.

But yes continue the fight son. Continue combing through answers in genesis for your answers.

[Thraxox]

I don't need you to quote entire articles from Wikipedia, a link is fine.
And genesis taught more than the age of the universe. It teaches about the origins of man and animals themselves, which is why Darwin's book was so controversial. It went against the bible and the church's teachings, which despite your protest by one guy was taught by the church for years to be the literal word of God.
Galileo wasn't thrown in jail because the church was teaching genesis as a metaphor. The church didn't ban Copernicus for speaking against the metaphors of the bible.

But yes continue the fight son. Continue combing through answers in genesis for your answers.

LOL Geocentricism is not even in the Genesis, it is in the Psalms and Isiah, you avoided the topic on the question "Did the Church taught that the earth was young?" And I debunked that by citing St. Augustine of Hippo of the Catholic church that they did not.

Geocentricism-Heliocentricism debate did not even start till the early 1600's in which people back then had no reliable technology to validate such works, and one of the Geocentrists are one of the greatest minds on earth in Aristotle and people thought that his works are indeed correct, and it is easily to understand why they stuck with Aristotolean Geocentricism till Copernicus and Gallileo came. And Aristotle wasn't even a Christian!

So first: The greatest mind at that time proclaimed Geocentricism as true: With no technology to validate his claim, people accepted it and defended it, and the church back his research.

And once again, how did you know the people believed in Genesis as the literal word when the only thing that the church actually taught that is related to the universe is Geocentricism that originated from Aristotle? which it is not even addressing the age of the earth/
And why are you contradicting one of the church's greatest theologians in St. Augustine?

Try again son.

[Hype job]

You probably don't know what finite is if you think it hasn't been proven the universe is not eternal.

You make this claim. Now prove it. Show me the unequivocal evidence that the universe is finite.

[Thraxox]

You make this claim. Now prove it. Show me the unequivocal evidence that the universe is finite.

So I ask you, how old is the universe?

[Hype job]

So I ask you, how old is the universe?

You're answering my question with another question.

Do you have unequivocal proof that the universe is finite or not?

[Thraxox]

You're answering my question with another question.

Do you have unequivocal proof that the universe is finite or not?

Yes, since the Universe is universally regarded by all scientist in the world to began at 13,8 billion years ago, it meant that the universe is finite and at this point no amount of evidence point that the universe is otherwise

Care to refute that?