Welcome friendly readers. Thanks for being here.
Two things converged for me this week. For fun I occasionally go on Youtube and debate creationists. I’m OK with most any religious belief unless it expresses harm for another (which many do) but I have a problem when theists try to force their way into the science classroom.
I had an extended debate this week with someone very devout in their belief that the universe was created by a supernatural being. We went back and forth several times. When I expressed doubt about his science(?) he argued that my rejection of his theories was merely because science is a religion too and I am just dogmatically attached to a theory that is false because I have faith in science.
Then just two days ago I read an article regarding a new discovery I recently touted in this blog as further proof of the Big Bang. Turns out that this new discovery may not be correct. Apparently some of their data was wrong and their results are being questioned. OK, back to the drawing board.
See? There is the difference between science and biblical science. One group of scientists found something interesting, then other scientists tested the first groups work. Found a mistake? No problem, we accept that and move on. What can we learn from this mistake?
I don’t see this in theists. I have several problems with Christian philosophy, one of them being their insistence in their scripture being a historical document. There is some history in the Bible but to ignore it’s metaphor is to miss the greater meaning in the text.
The JW come to my door often because I am quite polite to them and treat them with respect. I enjoy our conversations, really. But they4 argue often that their faith comes in part from the belief that the Bible is a literal representation of creation. I think they are missing the point of their own scripture. To see the Bible as a literal text is to miss the beauty and philosophy completely.
Never mix red wine with Oodo.
Earth Year 2014