religion was/is just a way to explain the unexplainable for lack of science.
and since we have gotten so much better in recent modern times of explaining things, religion is just some antiquated relic people hold onto from ancient times, further pushed by the fact that someone wrote it down a long time ago.
the difference is that in science there is peer review, such as the scientific method and the ability to reproduce, verify/review and publish results.
whereas in religion it’s a lot of opinions on things that may or may not have happened.
but hey, if it makes you a better person and love thy neighbor and sticketh to they 10 commandments and all that, then more power to you. to each their own.
but not when you start pushing your beliefs onto others or blowing shit up or waging all out war.
This is known of the idea of a “god of the gaps”, a strawman that claims god is simply an explanation for an origin of life. But that’s basically a few chapters in the Bible. We wouldn’t need any more than that if it was just a creation narrative.
Natural science and theology are two separate things. That’s like saying the American Constitution is unneeded because of science. It doesn’t make any sense why the two are compared. Apart from the very vague and likely figurative creation accounts in the beginning of Genesis, there’s not much else pertaining to science in the Bible. Tidbits here and there, like how we now know Jesus likely had a collapsed lung, but still tidbits.
“2000 year old goat herder fairytales are more real to me than consistently tested and verified modern scientific findings”
And what do modern scientific findings say?
Here is a very brief summary…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science
Nothing in that article about Christianity
Shocker.
So how is it relevant?
religion was/is just a way to explain the unexplainable for lack of science.
and since we have gotten so much better in recent modern times of explaining things, religion is just some antiquated relic people hold onto from ancient times, further pushed by the fact that someone wrote it down a long time ago.
the difference is that in science there is peer review, such as the scientific method and the ability to reproduce, verify/review and publish results.
whereas in religion it’s a lot of opinions on things that may or may not have happened.
but hey, if it makes you a better person and love thy neighbor and sticketh to they 10 commandments and all that, then more power to you. to each their own.
but not when you start pushing your beliefs onto others or blowing shit up or waging all out war.
(imo)
So science is a religion or…?
This is known of the idea of a “god of the gaps”, a strawman that claims god is simply an explanation for an origin of life. But that’s basically a few chapters in the Bible. We wouldn’t need any more than that if it was just a creation narrative.
Natural science and theology are two separate things. That’s like saying the American Constitution is unneeded because of science. It doesn’t make any sense why the two are compared. Apart from the very vague and likely figurative creation accounts in the beginning of Genesis, there’s not much else pertaining to science in the Bible. Tidbits here and there, like how we now know Jesus likely had a collapsed lung, but still tidbits.
Christianity? It’s not.
The Bible isn’t a scientific textbook
No, it’s a fairy tale.
That is correct.