On Religion
I love that no one reads this. I can write about anything I want.
I haven't rejected Christianity. I definitely have some problems with organized religion and the effects it has on our culture, but I still consider myself a Christian.
Question
A question I wonder is: Would Jesus Christ be affiliated with Christians if he were alive as a human being in 2006?
I really don't think so. Christianity, overall, is a good concept, and I believe that many Christians are doing good for the world, but there are just so many wingnuts who believe they have some sort of monopoly on the meaning of Christianity. In Christ's name, they engage in televangelism, blow up Muslim countries, engage in oppressive capitalism, and influence lawmakers to make laws to give them taxbreaks.
Sure, they're not acting out of the interests of Jesus Christ, but they sure are quick to say they are.
Regardless, I'm so f*cking sick of these mental-case wingnuts, that I don't like being affiliated with them.
Reconciling Science And Religion
One of the other troubles I have with Christianity is that no one in the upper eschelon of any Christian chuch seems to be able to reconcile science with religion.
Big Bang
For instance, the big bang. I'm certainly no expert on this, but from what I understand, the universe is constantly either expanding or contracting, and when it gets to be as big or as small as it gets, it goes bang, and a lot of things happen to re-randomize all matter within the universe. This is the general concensus of most scientists who are actually reputable.
And yet, if it doesn't have the names "Adam" or "Eve" in the context, Christians say it is not the truth.
Dinosaurs
Another example is dinosaurs. Some idiots actually say that dinosaurs were created on day 6 (same as humans, from what I remember from Genesis). In terms of bible timeframe, that would mean that dinosaurs were alive around 6000 years ago (which, anthropologically speaking, was 4000 years after Native Americans crossed the channel to Alaska). I fail to see how geological and archeological evidence fails to convince some that we're talking more like 60 million years ago. Then a meteor crashed into the Gulf of Mexico, and 59 million years later, you have humans.
Evolution
Then of course, there's the human evolution issue. Modern scientific dogma states that we had the Australopithicines, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Neanderthals, and then humans. There is a huge amount of archeological evidence that all these species came before us, and yet, fundamentalists say that we were put here in present form.
It's absurd, and anyone with half a brain can tell you that.
The conclusion to which we must come is that historical analyses in the bible are wrong. Obviously, the universe was probably made to be in its current state by a big bang, the world is more than 6000 years old, dinosaurs were here before any primates, and we're related to chimpanzees. We can't come up with answers that make any more sense than that.
But that's ok. That doesn't mean Jesus Christ was not the son of God, and it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.
What does it all mean?
It simply means that the men who wrote the bible were fallible. They weren't particularly educated, by present standards, and they didn't understand the nature of the universe or of the earth. They never looked at the sky through a telescope. They probably never travelled more than a couple hundred miles away from their birthplace. They didn't understand anything about microbiology, quantum physics, nanoscience, or anything of the sort. They didn't have computers to help them do billions or trillions of calculations per second.
If there were a scientist alive today who fit the above description, we would call him, at best, a lousy scientist. And that's what the writers of the bible were...lousy scientists.
I haven't rejected Christianity. I definitely have some problems with organized religion and the effects it has on our culture, but I still consider myself a Christian.
Question
A question I wonder is: Would Jesus Christ be affiliated with Christians if he were alive as a human being in 2006?
I really don't think so. Christianity, overall, is a good concept, and I believe that many Christians are doing good for the world, but there are just so many wingnuts who believe they have some sort of monopoly on the meaning of Christianity. In Christ's name, they engage in televangelism, blow up Muslim countries, engage in oppressive capitalism, and influence lawmakers to make laws to give them taxbreaks.
Sure, they're not acting out of the interests of Jesus Christ, but they sure are quick to say they are.
Regardless, I'm so f*cking sick of these mental-case wingnuts, that I don't like being affiliated with them.
Reconciling Science And Religion
One of the other troubles I have with Christianity is that no one in the upper eschelon of any Christian chuch seems to be able to reconcile science with religion.
Big Bang
For instance, the big bang. I'm certainly no expert on this, but from what I understand, the universe is constantly either expanding or contracting, and when it gets to be as big or as small as it gets, it goes bang, and a lot of things happen to re-randomize all matter within the universe. This is the general concensus of most scientists who are actually reputable.
And yet, if it doesn't have the names "Adam" or "Eve" in the context, Christians say it is not the truth.
Dinosaurs
Another example is dinosaurs. Some idiots actually say that dinosaurs were created on day 6 (same as humans, from what I remember from Genesis). In terms of bible timeframe, that would mean that dinosaurs were alive around 6000 years ago (which, anthropologically speaking, was 4000 years after Native Americans crossed the channel to Alaska). I fail to see how geological and archeological evidence fails to convince some that we're talking more like 60 million years ago. Then a meteor crashed into the Gulf of Mexico, and 59 million years later, you have humans.
Evolution
Then of course, there's the human evolution issue. Modern scientific dogma states that we had the Australopithicines, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Neanderthals, and then humans. There is a huge amount of archeological evidence that all these species came before us, and yet, fundamentalists say that we were put here in present form.
It's absurd, and anyone with half a brain can tell you that.
The conclusion to which we must come is that historical analyses in the bible are wrong. Obviously, the universe was probably made to be in its current state by a big bang, the world is more than 6000 years old, dinosaurs were here before any primates, and we're related to chimpanzees. We can't come up with answers that make any more sense than that.
But that's ok. That doesn't mean Jesus Christ was not the son of God, and it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.
What does it all mean?
It simply means that the men who wrote the bible were fallible. They weren't particularly educated, by present standards, and they didn't understand the nature of the universe or of the earth. They never looked at the sky through a telescope. They probably never travelled more than a couple hundred miles away from their birthplace. They didn't understand anything about microbiology, quantum physics, nanoscience, or anything of the sort. They didn't have computers to help them do billions or trillions of calculations per second.
If there were a scientist alive today who fit the above description, we would call him, at best, a lousy scientist. And that's what the writers of the bible were...lousy scientists.
posted by Tim C at 11:06 AM
0 Comments:
View Stats
Post a Comment
<< Home