Recommended Posts

It's been a five year journey into de-converting from my beliefs in Jesus. I really believed at the time that Jesus was going to bring me into a right relationship with him, but the more I held onto that hope the less actually happened. I remember as far back to my teen year's of hanging out with the Christian youth group in my area and feeling so alone. I always had little doubts about Christians, but I pushed those doubts deep down inside. 

 

As I got older I went from church to church, from one bible study to another looking for the right people I could feel comfortable with. (But I always felt on edge when I was around them) I used to feel awfully anxious when I had to pray in front of other believers. They could never see the pain I was going through, and even though they all believed they had born again eye's they never saw my real heart. I hated them for that, and that made me start thinking that if Jesus was real why can't they perceive my thoughts like he did? 

 

I got into a bit of TV evangelism, but most of the time they made me so angry. I'd get up early in the morning to watch them so I could yell at the television. I eventually went online looking for some believer who actually had evidence, but I found nothing but the old arguments repackaged from the 80's and 90's. Then one night I thought I'd serach in YouTube "Real miracles" but it was mostly testimony and fake reports. 

 

From here I had nowhere to go, there just didn't seem to be anything true to my beliefs anymore. So I started to research the evidence against Christianity and what I found made my stomach churn. But I didn't run away, I kept researching until I was satisfied it was all bullshit. It took five year's to wake up out of my religious comma, and it hurt.

 

I'll never go back now, well I can't can I. 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deconversion is certainly an uncomfortable process for many people. But, like you said, once you complete the process, it's difficult to even imagine going back.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Derek said:

Deconversion is certainly an uncomfortable process for many people. But, like you said, once you complete the process, it's difficult to even imagine going back.

That is true. 

 

Another thing I'll add is that Christian beliefs turned me into a monster. I'm in monster recovery now, and I love it. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DevilsCabanaBoy said:

tumblr_m5xbil4IRM1qzmowao2_r1_500.jpg.904f2de3a460839b4700ec53c648d54c.jpg

So, in the church of the cookie monster, do you put cookies in the collection plate? Or do you give money so he can buy the cookies that he wants?  :D

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Derek said:

So, in the church of the cookie monster, do you put cookies in the collection plate? Or do you give money so he can buy the cookies that he wants?  :D

Cookies. 

 

For it is written. 

 

Matthew 20:8-9 8"When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Call the workers and pay them in cookies, beginning with the last ones hired and going on to the first.' 9"The workers who were hired about five in the afternoon came and each received a cookie.10 So when those came who were hired first, they expected to receive more. But each one of them also received a cookie. 11 When they received it, they began to grumble against the landowner. 12 ‘These who were hired last worked only one hour,’ they said, ‘and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the work and the heat of the day.’

13 “But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a cookie? 14 Take your cookie and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. 15 Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own cookies? Or are you envious because I am generous?’

16 “So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2019 at 5:26 AM, DevilsCabanaBoy said:

I'll never go back now, well I can't can I. 

 

Nope I think once you see all the information against Christianity like you have there is no believing again. 2 things still boggle my mind. 

 

1. How did I get sucked so deep into a belief that is an obvious lie for so long.

 

2. When believers are faced with what we now know. How can they keep believing? Or not at least consider the possibility. 

 

When I was first seeing all of this I was very open with my wife. She heard everything I was seeing myself. But she is still a believer. Amazingly it is what she saw in her grandfather that keeps her faithful. Not really anything based on fact or proof. Just that she saw what all he lived through and remained faithful. 

 

For me someone else’s faith isn’t proof but whatever. It makes her happy, that’s all I can say about that. 

 

DB

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Nope I think once you see all the information against Christianity like you have there is no believing again. 2 things still boggle my mind. 

 

1. How did I get sucked so deep into a belief that is an obvious lie for so long.

 

2. When believers are faced with what we now know. How can they keep believing? Or not at least consider the possibility. 

 

When I was first seeing all of this I was very open with my wife. She heard everything I was seeing myself. But she is still a believer. Amazingly it is what she saw in her grandfather that keeps her faithful. Not really anything based on fact or proof. Just that she saw what all he lived through and remained faithful. 

 

For me someone else’s faith isn’t proof but whatever. It makes her happy, that’s all I can say about that. 

 

DB

But is she really happy? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DevilsCabanaBoy said:

But is she really happy? 

 

Basically And I quote “you can find anything on the internet if you want to, it doesn’t mean it’s true”.

 

so basically everything I found. Everything. The history, the forgeries, the history they have discovered evidence for that doesn’t add up with the Bible, the contradictions. It all fake. Every bit of it. 

 

So so yeah she is happy believing. She’s not happy with me not believing but that has gotten better. I think she realizes I do still love her. Even without God. 

 

DB

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Basically And I quote “you can find anything on the internet if you want to, it doesn’t mean it’s true”.

 

so basically everything I found. Everything. The history, the forgeries, the history they have discovered evidence for that doesn’t add up with the Bible, the contradictions. It all fake. Every bit of it. 

 

So so yeah she is happy believing. She’s not happy with me not believing but that has gotten better. I think she realizes I do still love her. Even without God. 

 

DB

It's quite amazing you made it work. 

 

Do you think this bible verse is in the back of her mind. 

 

New International Version
For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That whole section that pertains to the subject is in her mind I’m sure. I even brought it up. It also says if the unbelieving   Husband is happy to dwell with her then she should stay with him. But if he’s not let them depart. She will not be held under bondage in such cases. 

 

So biblically as long as I’m happy to stay with her we are good. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

That whole section that pertains to the subject is in her mind I’m sure. I even brought it up. It also says if the unbelieving   Husband is happy to dwell with her then she should stay with him. But if he’s not let them depart. She will not be held under bondage in such cases. 

 

So biblically as long as I’m happy to stay with her we are good. 

 

DB

I think some people are happy in their beliefs, but I never got that. It always seems like a shallow happiness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to X-Xian! Yeah the insincerity that permeates Xianity is a lot to wake up to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/19/2019 at 11:35 AM, DevilsCabanaBoy said:

I think some people are happy in their beliefs, but I never got that. It always seems like a shallow happiness. 

Well, I think some things are deeper than that. I mean what people look like and how they really are and feel can be two different things. I mean modern depth psychology has shown that even the individual has no conscious idea of it. But lies cannot make one truly happy, as alcholol cannot make one truly happy. In the best case a good anesthesic, but a man basicaly forfeits his reason and depth in order for that to happen. Some kind of voluntary lobotomy. Anyway my own experience is that the human psyche is a very tricky thing.

 

On 2/19/2019 at 9:03 AM, DarkBishop said:

 

Basically And I quote “you can find anything on the internet if you want to, it doesn’t mean it’s true”.

 

so basically everything I found. Everything. The history, the forgeries, the history they have discovered evidence for that doesn’t add up with the Bible, the contradictions. It all fake. Every bit of it. 

 

So so yeah she is happy believing. She’s not happy with me not believing but that has gotten better. I think she realizes I do still love her. Even without God. 

 

DB

 

Well technically, she is right. I mean can you PROVE that all those histories weren't just made up or edited to make the Bible look bad?  Do you know ancient languages and have you seen manuscripts yourself? Plus I really , really don't understand the whole literal approach to the Bible thing. I mean, that is a books full of metaphor, parables, and the such meant not as a modern objective history book but as a sacred text for evangelizing and teaching. A propaganda object. I get that there are real historical figures and that a lot of Gospel discrepancies can be explained, even if a little streching is required, but really? And it is weird because , you know, GOD HIMSELF never wrote anything down, only had his prophets and apostles write some of it. 

 

Plus, I think it could a matter of faith, something like - well the standard of truth I hold is THIS, meaning the bible, anything that contradicts it is false from the start., and anyway God took care somehow that his message came to us, despite human flaws and wickedness. You see, even I can make some pretty good explanations ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2019 at 2:31 PM, Myrkhoos said:

Well technically, she is right. I mean can you PROVE that all those histories weren't just made up or edited to make the Bible look bad?  Do you know ancient languages and have you seen manuscripts yourself? Plus I really , really don't understand the whole literal approach to the Bible thing. I mean, that is a books full of metaphor, parables, and the such meant not as a modern objective history book but as a sacred text for evangelizing

 

The specific instances that I was mentioning are the one's where the bible has stated events in history that 150 years or more of research have not been able to prove ever happened. Yes there are a lot of metaphorical teachings in the bible. But there are whole stories in the old testament that have absolutely no historical proof to back them. When one side is saying it isn't there and the other side is making apologies for why it isn't there then yes it can be proven. 

 

No I don't know ancient hebrew. Like most people I have my own area of expertise that I do for a living and studying Hebrew isn't one of them. archaeology isn't one of them either. All I can do is research and verify that these people are in fact professionals in their fields and read the studies that they have done. 150 years of research and researchers coming up to the same conclusions are enough proof for me. 

 

DB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

 

The specific instances that I was mentioning are the one's where the bible has stated events in history that 150 years or more of research have not been able to prove ever happened. Yes there are a lot of metaphorical teachings in the bible. But there are whole stories in the old testament that have absolutely no historical proof to back them. When one side is saying it isn't there and the other side is making apologies for why it isn't there then yes it can be proven. 

 

No I don't know ancient hebrew. Like most people I have my own area of expertise that I do for a living and studying Hebrew isn't one of them. archaeology isn't one of them either. All I can do is research and verify that these people are in fact professionals in their fields and read the studies that they have done. 150 years of research and researchers coming up to the same conclusions are enough proof for me. 

 

DB

For you, yes. But let me play the devil's advocate here. Let me give an example of normal and religious logic. 

 

First absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This about the stories in the old testament. Plus I do suspect that as there many instances in ancient historical records fir which there is not a lot of evidence. And the are many biblical accounts that verified by archaeology, like the existence of Pontius Pilate. Second history is nit such a stable field, historical records are discovered and reinterpreted all the time. But this is just normal logic. Plus you are making an argument from authority. You belive those that you credit with knowledge. I could sau the same thing about people who say and are verified to have mystical knowledge. Why is your argument from authority better than mine? 

 

But plain religious logic. All those proffesionals are deluded by the devil in his attempt to keep christians from God. End of case. Can you respond at all to this line of reasoning? 

 

By the way I am just saying all of this in order to show that there are numerous ways one can reject/ deny/ rationalize away about anything. You underestimate how stubborn and creative we humans are : ) I am not trying to start a debate here, anyway. Just that I am not surprised any more about the stregth of the trickery of the human mind. There so many cases of addicts for example denying with all their might and truly believing they are ok and the others are wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

For you, yes. But let me play the devil's advocate here. Let me give an example of normal and religious logic. 

 

First absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This about the stories in the old testament. Plus I do suspect that as there many instances in ancient historical records fir which there is not a lot of evidence. And the are many biblical accounts that verified by archaeology, like the existence of Pontius Pilate. Second history is nit such a stable field, historical records are discovered and reinterpreted all the time. But this is just normal logic. Plus you are making an argument from authority. You belive those that you credit with knowledge. I could sau the same thing about people who say and are verified to have mystical knowledge. Why is your argument from authority better than mine? 

 

But plain religious logic. All those proffesionals are deluded by the devil in his attempt to keep christians from God. End of case. Can you respond at all to this line of reasoning? 

 

By the way I am just saying all of this in order to show that there are numerous ways one can reject/ deny/ rationalize away about anything. You underestimate how stubborn and creative we humans are : ) I am not trying to start a debate here, anyway. Just that I am not surprised any more about the stregth of the trickery of the human mind. There so many cases of addicts for example denying with all their might and truly believing they are ok and the others are wrong

No I don't underestimate the ability of humans to be stubborn in their beliefs. You are right there is no debating hard core religious logic. The first thing that made me question the biblical account was when I saw the moon through a telescope. I said so myself; "there is no way that is only 7000 years old." I guess seeing was unbelieving for me. LOL. I finally reconciled that in my Christian mind that the 6 days of creation were not 6 24 hour days but 6 Eras that could  have lasted millions of years each. That was me being a stubborn Christian.

 

As far as the normal questions you mentioned I would have to quote the biblical account and ask them to reconcile that to me without reducing the reported number of people that were involved in the exodus. There is no way that 2 million people could have wondered in the desert for 40 years, God doing all the remarkable things he supposedly did, and it not leave a mark that archaeologists couldn't find. I would have to say how is the absence of evidence not proof that either:

 

1. It was a made up story

 

or

 

2. the group was much much smaller and didn't do all the things reported (which means the "word of God isn't inerrant")

 

Either way it has to be a blow to the Christian psyche. The fact that it couldn't be supported by historical proof at it's very foundations is what made me deconvert. It's easy to throw in a few real names like pontious pilate, Herod, Rameses, Etc and then make up a completely bullshit story around it. And it appears that is exactly what happened.

 

DB 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

No I don't underestimate the ability of humans to be stubborn in their beliefs. You are right there is no debating hard core religious logic. The first thing that made me question the biblical account was when I saw the moon through a telescope. I said so myself; "there is no way that is only 7000 years old." I guess seeing was unbelieving for me. LOL. I finally reconciled that in my Christian mind that the 6 days of creation were not 6 24 hour days but 6 Eras that could  have lasted millions of years each. That was me being a stubborn Christian.

 

As far as the normal questions you mentioned I would have to quote the biblical account and ask them to reconcile that to me without reducing the reported number of people that were involved in the exodus. There is no way that 2 million people could have wondered in the desert for 40 years, God doing all the remarkable things he supposedly did, and it not leave a mark that archaeologists couldn't find. I would have to say how is the absence of evidence not proof that either:

 

1. It was a made up story

 

or

 

2. the group was much much smaller and didn't do all the things reported (which means the "word of God isn't inerrant")

 

Either way it has to be a blow to the Christian psyche. The fact that it couldn't be supported by historical proof at it's very foundations is what made me deconvert. It's easy to throw in a few real names like pontious pilate, Herod, Rameses, Etc and then make up a completely bullshit story around it. And it appears that is exactly what happened.

 

DB 

Hmm, I personally have absolutely no problem in believing The world is only 7 000 years old, whatever TIME actually means and is measured. And this because the starting point of this belief is an all powefull God.  

 

About the absence of evidence  thing in Exodus. Well, sincerely I have no idea how. But that does really not prove anything as well. I mean what could have they have found? Skeletons, pots and pans, statues, etc? I do not know how easily these deteriorate in that desert. I mean the had no stable buildings, so what could a nomadic tribe leave behind? But this is a thing (archaeology) I have no data, so I cannot comment.  I do know how how much they searched, how, any bias, etc. BUUUUT, thank you for this, I really want to research a little on this problems. Actually, I want to go to Israel and Egypt and these areas to see them for myself.  Even without the christianity part, they must be awesome to see. History was and is one of my passions. had a semi dream in completing an ancient languages/history course.

 

And there are lot more that just A FEW names here and there. From a historical point of view of an ancient document, there are a lot of things in there. From the contacts with Babylon, with Syria, with Rome, etc. And this , remember, judging it as an ancient document. I mean HOW reliable are these things anyway?  But anyway, in that Exodus story there are a lot of supernatural events. So if there is, again, an all powerful God, then maybe that's the cause of the lack of historical evidence. God somehow destroyed every trace of their pilgrimage in order for them to COMPLETELY forget the life of slavery. Again, this is the supernatural logic here.  And that is my main problem about trying to find some kind of scientific approach ( which has a methodological naturalism) to a a story of events with clea supernatural elements in it. I mean Genesis could have happened in six days. Why not? I mean one you accept the basic premise - God is all powefull and all knowing and we cannot fathom his Ways, you can easily reject (almost) absolutely any argument.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

Hmm, I personally have absolutely no problem in believing The world is only 7 000 years old, whatever TIME actually means and is measured. And this because the starting point of this belief is an all powefull God.  

 

About the absence of evidence  thing in Exodus. Well, sincerely I have no idea how. But that does really not prove anything as well. I mean what could have they have found? Skeletons, pots and pans, statues, etc? I do not know how easily these deteriorate in that desert. I mean the had no stable buildings, so what could a nomadic tribe leave behind? But this is a thing (archaeology) I have no data, so I cannot comment.  I do know how how much they searched, how, any bias, etc. BUUUUT, thank you for this, I really want to research a little on this problems. Actually, I want to go to Israel and Egypt and these areas to see them for myself.  Even without the christianity part, they must be awesome to see. History was and is one of my passions. had a semi dream in completing an ancient languages/history course.

 

And there are lot more that just A FEW names here and there. From a historical point of view of an ancient document, there are a lot of things in there. From the contacts with Babylon, with Syria, with Rome, etc. And this , remember, judging it as an ancient document. I mean HOW reliable are these things anyway?  But anyway, in that Exodus story there are a lot of supernatural events. So if there is, again, an all powerful God, then maybe that's the cause of the lack of historical evidence. God somehow destroyed every trace of their pilgrimage in order for them to COMPLETELY forget the life of slavery. Again, this is the supernatural logic here.  And that is my main problem about trying to find some kind of scientific approach ( which has a methodological naturalism) to a a story of events with clea supernatural elements in it. I mean Genesis could have happened in six days. Why not? I mean one you accept the basic premise - God is all powefull and all knowing and we cannot fathom his Ways, you can easily reject (almost) absolutely any argument.    

 

Ok i'm trying to understand where your coming from here. Are you still playing devils advocate? or are you a believer. I've already said that there is no reasoning with fundamentalist logic and that is all I saw in your last post. It is almost impossible for a fundy to think rationally or critically about their religion. It takes something to finally click before they can open their minds. I think most of us know that. 

 

But to go along with what your saying. Basically the all knowing, all powerful, eternal god who wants "Everyone" to come to know him completely erased any proof of his past exploits? Thats about as irrational as it gets. That is fundamentalist rationality and can not be argued against. The basis for their conclusion is founded completely on the excuse that their imagination has dreamed up. Just like my justification for the earth being over 7000 years old. At that point I would have to ask them that if they so whole heartedly believe that science is wrong and the bible is right to please prove science wrong. 

 

The bible in no way can prove that science is wrong. But scientific research and the absence of evidence does prove the biblical account to be wrong. 2 million people and their livestock can not travel anywhere and not leave a mark. Yes there would have been broken pottery, there would have been post holes where the tents and tabernacle were placed. there would be trash. there would be bones of dead people and dead animals, there would have been all the evidence of life that every other culture on the face of earth has left behind in the past. And to conclude that their "God" just erased all the evidence is ludicrous. Even in their own bible their god is supposedly "not the author of confusion". Would erasing all evidence not be the ultimate way to confuse everyone who may have believed on him otherwise? Does that not mean then that he really doesn't want "everyone" to come to him? Because if he really did want everyone to come to him then he would also us to know him. But that isn't the case is it?

 

Dark Bishop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, not a believer standpoint, but just that stuff about some kind of critical thinking vs fundamentalist rationality.

 

What do you think is necessary for that click?

 

For me it is something about it, like it just adapts no matter what argument. Like, God cannot be wrong, but he created beings that knowing what is right did bad things. Doesn't that show HE was wrong? No, because he is loving and the possibility for is because of love. What is Love. God is Love. So God is not wrong..It has something of a circular logic, do you get me. This bothers me a lot, God always comes up on top, like in weird psychological games. It is something that changes with your argument, it's that stable. This is my current quarrel with it. 

9 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Ok i'm trying to understand where your coming from here. Are you still playing devils advocate? or are you a believer. I've already said that there is no reasoning with fundamentalist logic and that is all I saw in your last post. It is almost impossible for a fundy to think rationally or critically about their religion. It takes something to finally click before they can open their minds. I think most of us know that. 

 

But to go along with what your saying. Basically the all knowing, all powerful, eternal god who wants "Everyone" to come to know him completely erased any proof of his past exploits? Thats about as irrational as it gets. That is fundamentalist rationality and can not be argued against. The basis for their conclusion is founded completely on the excuse that their imagination has dreamed up. Just like my justification for the earth being over 7000 years old. At that point I would have to ask them that if they so whole heartedly believe that science is wrong and the bible is right to please prove science wrong. 

 

The bible in no way can prove that science is wrong. But scientific research and the absence of evidence does prove the biblical account to be wrong. 2 million people and their livestock can not travel anywhere and not leave a mark. Yes there would have been broken pottery, there would have been post holes where the tents and tabernacle were placed. there would be trash. there would be bones of dead people and dead animals, there would have been all the evidence of life that every other culture on the face of earth has left behind in the past. And to conclude that their "God" just erased all the evidence is ludicrous. Even in their own bible their god is supposedly "not the author of confusion". Would erasing all evidence not be the ultimate way to confuse everyone who may have believed on him otherwise? Does that not mean then that he really doesn't want "everyone" to come to him? Because if he really did want everyone to come to him then he would also us to know him. But that isn't the case is it?

 

Dark Bishop

 

And about science. Well, I would not at all be surprised that, in 100 years scientists would say- we were wrong, the earth IS 7 000 years old. I mean this stuff changes ll the time in physics. Even the science about evolution has gone a long way and there ARE several opinions on it. So on human biology. I mean that is the essence of this activity, there is ONLY provisional knowledge. So I could not really make a stable case on what some scientists say in one moment in time. Or my intuition. Intuition have been proven wrong, by science and just plain old reality.  A lot of science, recent and ancient, contradicts other science. And that is really ok. I mean there are the well know atheist Sam Harris and Daniel Dennet who have a fundamental contradiction about free will. Scientific interpretations and explications are diverse and fluid. Have been, probably will continue to be for some while. 

 

About the supernatural and science. It first depends on how you define science. My idea there was THAT scientific activity has a limit. That limit is the natural/material world in which we reside. It CANNOT, therefore investigate or conclude anything about supernatural causation. So science CANNOT prove some religious points wrong, because it is beyond its scope and possibility. Hence the accusation commonly given to religions, that a lot of religious ideas are untestable. 

 

PS. Note to self, study more about archaeology.  

 

If I am arguing FOR something, that would be some form of agnosticism. As in, there might be something I don't know so I am only going to consider my present knowledge and opinions with some skepticism. I pressupose my knowledge is incomplete and my conclusions partially wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2019 at 7:04 AM, Myrkhoos said:

Well, I would not at all be surprised that, in 100 years scientists would say- we were wrong, the earth IS 7 000 years old. I mean this stuff changes ll the time in physics. Even the science about evolution has gone a long way and there ARE several opinions on it. So on human biology. I mean that is the essence of this activity, there is ONLY provisional knowledge.

 

It is provisional in that it gets refined, but it almost never gets completely overturned. Individual hypotheses get overturned, but whole theories, not so much. There's no such thing as "just a theory." The theory of anything is the entire body of knowledge about it. People colloquially use the word "theory" in place of the technical term "hypothesis," so it is confusing.

 

So although we don't know everything about evolution, and bits of what is believed get replaced with better information, the entire theory isn't going to be found to be incorrect. Although scientists technically won't talk of facts, the whole body of evolutionary theory has been confirmed well enough that it can be considered fact. And the approximate age of the Earth and of the Universe are not in doubt. The Universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old. It could be 13.7 or 13.9 billion, but it can't be 10 billion, or 2 billion, or 1 million, or 6000.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/7/2019 at 9:34 PM, Lerk said:

 

It is provisional in that it gets refined, but it almost never gets completely overturned. Individual hypotheses get overturned, but whole theories, not so much. There's no such thing as "just a theory." The theory of anything is the entire body of knowledge about it. People colloquially use the word "theory" in place of the technical term "hypothesis," so it is confusing.

 

So although we don't know everything about evolution, and bits of what is believed get replaced with better information, the entire theory isn't going to be found to be incorrect. Although scientists technically won't talk of facts, the whole body of evolutionary theory has been confirmed well enough that it can be considered fact. And the approximate age of the Earth and of the Universe are not in doubt. The Universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old. It could be 13.7 or 13.9 billion, but it can't be 10 billion, or 2 billion, or 1 million, or 6000.

 

I am sorry to be so blunt, but I think you are wrong here. There have been paradigm shifts in science before.  Like quantum theory after mechanical theory of physics. There have been paradigm shifts in medicine - cancers cured by psychotherapy alone. And before that, the discovery that germs can cause or amplify diseases. 

 

But this discussion is going nowhere so we might just as well end it here. At least I will end it here. Thx for the talk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

 

I am sorry to be so blunt, but I think you are wrong here. There have been paradigm shifts in science before.  Like quantum theory after mechanical theory of physics. There have been paradigm shifts in medicine - cancers cured by psychotherapy alone. And before that, the discovery that germs can cause or amplify diseases. 

 

But this discussion is going nowhere so we might just as well end it here. At least I will end it here. Thx for the talk. 

 

Myrkhoos, welcome to Ex-c. Good to have you here! If you want to debate topics, there are other sections on Ex-c for you to do that. So feel free! But this section is for testimonies of christians to tell their story and for us to encourage. This section is not for debating theological points. So keep posting all your points of view.... just in the other sections! Thanks my friend!

 

And Welcome to Ex-c DevilsCanaBoy! Good to have you here at Ex-c with us! Thanks for sharing! 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 3/9/2019 at 3:47 PM, Margee said:

Myrkhoos, welcome to Ex-c. Good to have you here! If you want to debate topics, there are other sections on Ex-c for you to do that. So feel free! But this section is for testimonies of christians to tell their story and for us to encourage. This section is not for debating theological points. So keep posting all your points of view.... just in the other sections! Thanks my friend!

 

And Welcome to Ex-c DevilsCanaBoy! Good to have you here at Ex-c with us! Thanks for sharing! 

That is why I wanted to end the discussion.  thx for the heads up, though. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/9/2019 at 7:47 AM, Margee said:

Myrkhoos, welcome to Ex-c. Good to have you here! If you want to debate topics, there are other sections on Ex-c for you to do that. So feel free! But this section is for testimonies of christians to tell their story and for us to encourage. This section is not for debating theological points. So keep posting all your points of view.... just in the other sections! Thanks my friend!

 

And Welcome to Ex-c DevilsCanaBoy! Good to have you here at Ex-c with us! Thanks for sharing! 

 

Sorry -- really my fault here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...