The Debilitating Effect of Taking Genesis Literally

[Diogenes]

The proposition for debate is that when one takes the tales of Genesis literally, one becomes intellectually disabled, at least temporarily. Taking Genesis literally requires one to reject biology (which includes evolution) and other sciences in favor of 'magic.' Geology and radiometric dating have to be rejected since the Earth formed only about 6000 years ago, during the same week the Earth was made (in a single day).

Much of the debate in the topic of Science and Religion consists of theists who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis rejecting basic science. Most of the resulting debates are not worth engaging in.

[Diagoras]

Embracing the religion that earth is just some insignificant little dot in the universe and that it is all an accident is about as sexy as suicide.

This is a fun app - you can see how significant you are compared with, say, the Fornax Cluster:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... n_NZ&gl=US

It’s available in the Apple Store as well. Anyone interested in learning how big (or small) things like galaxies, planets, viruses and quarks really are should find it interesting.

Personally, it’s taught me to be happy and humble in my cosmic insignificance.

[dad1]

Hate and murder and sin and etc are bad. Very bad. Jesus came to fix it, though some might prefer death and hell.

Jesus fixed nothing. What a waste of a visit from an omnipotent deity. Oh, wait. i think he cured a few lepers. Big deal.

We will disagree. The only thing debilitating is the hatred for God around here.

[dad1]

Embracing the religion that earth is just some insignificant little dot in the universe and that it is all an accident is about as sexy as suicide.

This is a fun app - you can see how significant you are compared with, say, the Fornax Cluster:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... n_NZ&gl=US

It’s available in the Apple Store as well. Anyone interested in learning how big (or small) things like galaxies, planets, viruses and quarks really are should find it interesting.

Personally, it’s taught me to be happy and humble in my cosmic insignificance.

Sorry you fell for the illusion and faith based fabrication.

[dad1]

The proposition for debate is that when one takes the tales of Genesis literally, one becomes intellectually disabled, at least temporarily.

The other proposition is that when one rejects truth one becomes intellectually disabled and enters into delusion, in some cases, if serious enough, permanently.

Taking Genesis literally requires one to reject biology (which includes evolution)

False. I accept plenty of evolving went on after creation! I even think it used to happen at rates far far far far far far far far faster than anything possible today in this present nature.

and other sciences in favor of 'magic.' Geology and radiometric dating have to be rejected

No. Dating is good for a few thousand years! Geology involves more than dream dates as well! The patterns we see in rocks need interpreting and dream date interpretation is not the only kid on the block.

since the Earth formed only about 6000 years ago, during the same week the Earth was made (in a single day).

It sure was.

Much of the debate in the topic of Science and Religion consists of theists who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis rejecting basic science. Most of the resulting debates are not worth engaging in.

Then try to improve your arguments so they will be of some worth I guess.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to dad1 in post #34]

I even think it used to happen at rates far far far far far far far far faster than anything possible today in this present nature.

On what basis? Or is this just a wild guess with no thought (or evidence) involved?

No. Dating is good for a few thousand years!

No, radiometric dating is valid for lengths of time that depend on the isotopes being used and their half lives. 14-C is good for only about 40,000 years because the half life is relatively short, while the half life of 238-U is about 4.5 billion years. There are lots of isotopic combinations used for radiometric dating to cover the age ranges of anything on Earth. Of course, you can't have some untrained, uneducated person off the street preparing samples or operating the equipment, but that's always true.

Geology involves more than dream dates as well!

What is a "dream" date? Sofia Vergara?

[dad1]

On what basis? Or is this just a wild guess with no thought (or evidence) involved?

On the basis that you have no basis that is not faith based. If you think you do then post it.

No, radiometric dating is valid for lengths of time that depend on the isotopes being used and their half lives.

No, not at all. The method(s) are only valid as long as the state of nature and forces we know today existed. How long can you prove they did exist as they are now? I have no reason to assume they were this way even in Noah's day. You must first prove a same state past for dates based on a same state past to be good.
I happen to know you cannot do that.

What is a "dream" date? Sofia Vergara?

A dream date is a date you dream up based on a belief that the forces and laws we have today have always existed on earth.

You see, if nature was not the same, the way ratios came to exist as we see them today would not be the same either. Period.

[brunumb]

Hate and murder and sin and etc are bad. Very bad. Jesus came to fix it, though some might prefer death and hell.

Jesus fixed nothing. What a waste of a visit from an omnipotent deity. Oh, wait. i think he cured a few lepers. Big deal.

We will disagree. The only thing debilitating is the hatred for God around here.

No hatred for God. It's patently clear he is just a human invention.

[brunumb]

I accept plenty of evolving went on after creation! I even think it used to happen at rates far far far far far far far far faster than anything possible today in this present nature.

On what basis do you hold that belief? What specifically was responsible for the rate decreasing so significantly?

[brunumb]

On what basis? Or is this just a wild guess with no thought (or evidence) involved?

On the basis that you have no basis that is not faith based. If you think you do then post it.

WHAT? "On the basis that you have no basis that is not faith base"??? In other words you just plucked the idea out of the air and you have absolutely no means of justifying your claim. That is exactly how faith poisons reason.

[Inquirer]

Hate and murder and sin and etc are bad. Very bad. Jesus came to fix it, though some might prefer death and hell.

Jesus fixed nothing. What a waste of a visit from an omnipotent deity. Oh, wait. i think he cured a few lepers. Big deal.

Christ revealed profound knowledge, knowledge undiscoverable through any other means. Of course you don't see that, you don't accept that and that's fine, each in his own time, but it is true.

Even the Pharisees admitted he was a messenger from God, they openly admitted it yet still sought to destroy him, imagine that, imagine the hatred.