Using science to make christians think

[Wertbag]

I've got a friend who was a Christian, but who was definately on the lite/open minded side to start with (which sadly seems to be a rare thing). My discussions with him about some of the major questions raised by science has changed him from Christian to theist (still thinks there must be a god, but understands that the Christian ideas don't make sense).

This is para-phrased heavily but the basic idea is I started discussing his YEC views. He said "carbon dating is flawed, everyone knows that", so I asked did he know that there were numerous isotopes that could be used (eg argon) and all of them give the same old earth results.

No he hadn't heard of these but thought if one is wrong who is to say the others aren't?

So I tried a different track "Do you realise there are many ways to see the age of the planet? Fossils show order from basic creature to mammals, continetal drift takes millions of years, glacier movements, canyon formation, erosion, the change between ice ages, coral, sediment layers, granite formation and all that agrees with the numerous dating methods like carbon dating"

This got him thinking and reading, and he agreed there was alot of evidence for an old earth, but said the reasons that he kept coming across (both online and I believe from his family) was that the global flood could create most of these things.

It seemed obvious to my mind that a global flood could not create any of these things, but went into a discussion to point out the problems with the story of Noah. I had got to 30 points that showed holes in the flood myth (inbreeding between both the animals and humans would not have allowed for the survival of any species, there was not enough space on the boat, there is no way for 8 people to look after that many animals, there is no way for the types of animals such as artic or desert creatures to be looked after, there is no way to have enough food or the right types of food, there is no explanation for the dinosaurs, there is no explantion for the predators, there is no way for them to spread across the planet to their current locations etc) before he stopped me and said he'd research the points I'd mentioned.

His findings agreed with me. Apart from adding a couple of dozen extra miracles that are not mentioned in the Bible the whole story is junk. That meant the Bible which he had been told was irrefutable due to being Gods word was wrong. I expected him to chuck religion and accept atheism, but he held to the idea of God and accepted Christianity was wrong.

I was wondering if this could work for showing the light to other Christians, but my attempts have been met with close minded scripture recitals, or claims I'm satanic and sent to test their faith. Sadly it looks like my one partial success is bound to stay that way.

 

My two questions: Are there any other major glaring errors with christianity vs science that can easily be discussed in laymans terms? And has anyone been able to get any such logical information passed the walls of ignorance?

[pandora]

Wow! I am impressed with your success! I am unable to hold the interest of Christian for very long, so I havnet gotten far with any of my friends that I have started these conversations wtih... ah well.

[oberon]

The story of the Tower of Babel is always a tough one for literalists. A brick building can only be so high since the weight of the bricks at the top will eventually crush the ones at the bottom. Why would God care about a building that could only have reached a few hundred feet max.? There were already 1 story buildings set on large mountains that reached higher, and obviously he doesn’t have a problem with us building and flying higher now. Did heaven move when the skys near Earth got crowded?

[MrSpooky]

Neil has that great sediment argument against Noah's Ark.

 

Also, be sure to note HOW and WHY Theists so often tout the "carbon dating is wrong!" argument. The reason is that the instances in which odd figures crop up is because carbon dating methods were misused.

[Mr. Neil]

A brick building can only be so high since the weight of the bricks at the top will eventually crush the ones at the bottom. Why would God care about a building that could only have reached a few hundred feet max.?

You'd think that God would be much more concerned about buildings made of reinforced concrete. Heck, if the Tower of Babel was such a threat, why didn't the almighty God do something about the piramids?

 

Neil has that great sediment argument against Noah's Ark.

Ah yes. Angular unconformities. The achilles heel of biblical literalism. Haven't met a creationist yet who can harmonize their bankrupt "science" with that kind of formation.

[Ouroboros]

Neil has that great sediment argument against Noah's Ark.

 

Also, be sure to note HOW and WHY Theists so often tout the "carbon dating is wrong!" argument. The reason is that the instances in which odd figures crop up is because carbon dating methods were misused.

And what upsets me is that these Apologists complain about carbon dating, but yet use it gladly to "prove" the age of "Biblical" artifacts.

[Mr. Neil]

Yeah, I've seen that. If carbon dating actually dates a Christian artifact to the first century, then they treat it like it's a meaningful verification of their theology. In science, if a false methodology accidentally gives you the right answer, then it doesn't mean anything. Like the old saying goes, even a broken clock is right two times a day. You still have to find another more reliable method to test your theory.

 

If you think about it, there isn't a single method of dating that they actually approve of, because they all give estemates that the creationists don't like. But they have to accept these dating methods sometimes, because otherwise they have nothing with which to make any arguments about estemating time other than "The Bible says so."

 

They know that's not scientfic.

[spamandham]

Heck, if the Tower of Babel was such a threat, why didn't the almighty God do something about the piramids?

 

Have you considered the possibility that the last pyramid built is in fact the basis of the tower of Babel story?

 

I suspect Hebrew mythology was heavily influenced by Egypt.

[Mr. Neil]

That is a very compelling possibility. I wonder what any of our resident scholars might have to say about that.

[Megistias]

 

Have you considered the possibility that the last pyramid built is in fact the basis of the tower of Babel story?

 

I suspect Hebrew mythology was heavily influenced by Egypt.

 

Indeed is was, however with respect to the Tower of Babel, I think you have the right idea but the wrong exile.

 

Many consider that the Tower of Babel = Tower of Babylon, and that the Tower of Babel was a kind of terraced pyramid called a ziggurat.

[NotBlinded]

Heck, if the Tower of Babel was such a threat, why didn't the almighty God do something about the piramids?

 

Have you considered the possibility that the last pyramid built is in fact the basis of the tower of Babel story?

 

I suspect Hebrew mythology was heavily influenced by Egypt.

Yes, I have read that also. Moses got much from Egypt and there is supposed to be a mystery language that can explain the construction of the pyramids. This language has seven keys to understanding it and Moses only got away with two of them.

 

They had it; and it is on this "knowledge" that the programme of the MYSTERIES and of the series of Initiations was based: thence, the construction of the Pyramids, the everlasting record and the indestructible symbol of these Mysteries and Initiations on Earth, as the courses of the stars are in Heaven. The cycle of Initiation was a reproduction in miniature of that great series of Cosmic changes to which astronomers have given the name of tropical or sidereal year. Just as, at the close of the cycle of the sidereal year [25,868 years], the heavenly bodies return to the same relative positions as they occupied at its outset, so at the close of the cycle of Initiation the inner man has regained the pristine state of divine purity and knowledge from which he set out on his cycle of terrestrial incarnation.

 

Moses, an Initiate into the Egyptian Mystagogy, based the religious mysteries of the new nation which he created, upon the same abstract formula derived from this sidereal cycle, which he symbolised under the form and measurements of the tabernacle, that he is supposed to have constructed in the wilderness. On these data, the later Jewish High Priests constructed the allegory of Solomon's Temple -- a building which never had a real existence, any more than had King Solomon himself, who is simply, and as much a solar myth as is the still later Hiram Abif, of the Masons, as Ragon has well demonstrated. Thus, if the measurements of this allegorical temple, the symbol of the cycle of initiation, coincide with those of the Great Pyramid, it is due to the fact that the former were derived from the latter through the Tabernacle of Moses.

From

here.