Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#7 - pooflinger (05/16/2013) [-]
Science and religion don't actually have to be quite opposed as people think.


For instance, the Catholic church actually says nothing against the theory of Evolution, and encourages its followers to interpret the Bible, rather than to read it literally.

There are fundamentalists, however, who do read every line literally, and that is where conflict ensues. This does not represent the majority of your every day religious people. They just happen to have the loudest voices.
#261 to #7 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
If you're looking for biblical accuracy, don't search for it at Catholicism...
Even among different congregations, different priests or pastors they often have slight different ideas about what the bible actually teaches. They often adapt the bible to the modern point of view and thereby (often unknowingly) twist what the bible really teaches.

When people say that evolution and the bible's account of creation add up, it indicates that they don't really know a lot about the bible. Whenever biblical characters referred to creation, they didn't take it figuratively . The bible even has a genealogical account of Jesus that shows that he is a descendant from Adam.
Nowhere in the bible is there any indication that early Christians or the Jews believed or were meant to believe that the bible was merely being symbolic when it came to the existence of man.
#265 to #261 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
PLEASE DAILEY PLANETS/ BIG BANGS/ WE WILL GLADLY SHOW THE GOLF / BIBLE PRO YOUR THEORIES/ FAMILIES/ TRUE NAMES / ALL GRANDS~ TRUE DAT~ REAL FRONT PAGE THEY SAID$$$
#252 to #7 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
but the bible isent true
#244 to #7 - seantheprawn (05/17/2013) [-]
So everyone believes what they want. For example, no sex before marriage that doesn't apply to me that's open to 'interpretation'. The fact is people change what the bible says to match their own belief. Conflict ensues when an issue is twisted to fit a belief in a sense facts are changed to match a belief or opinion and and not the other way around
#231 to #7 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
Science is based on evidence, religion is not. That is the main difference and it is a pretty big one.
User avatar #216 to #7 - cadencee (05/17/2013) [-]
Kinda hard to interpret the story of adam and eve metaphorically without ripping apart the entire religion
#211 to #7 - cabbagemayhem (05/17/2013) [-]
I've seen this exact post before. You copied pasta'd it from someone else. Admit it.
User avatar #284 to #211 - pooflinger (05/17/2013) [-]
I'd love a link, because that would be a fantastically astronomical situation.



Considering I typed it all out myself.
#301 to #284 - cabbagemayhem (05/18/2013) [-]
Perhaps you just rehashed a common argument in a strikingly similar way to one I've read before.
User avatar #302 to #301 - pooflinger (05/18/2013) [-]
Perhaps.
#203 to #7 - mirrorsmirrors (05/17/2013) [-]
If the Christian god was a real dude, I think he would've written the Bible himself rather than leave things like slavery and rape in an "interpretation" gray area.
If the Christian god was a real dude, I think he would've written the Bible himself rather than leave things like slavery and rape in an "interpretation" gray area.
#166 to #7 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
religuon and scince don't has to be atack
#140 to #7 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
it's always the dullest of minds that speak the loudest
User avatar #104 to #7 - gorginhanson (05/17/2013) [-]
if everyone has a different interpretation, how the hell would you know what god told some guy to tell everyone to do
User avatar #106 to #104 - pooflinger (05/17/2013) [-]
Different interpretations don't always lead to different teachings.



The issues here are people taking stories from the Bible literally, and using them to "carbon-date" the Earth.

Christianity sees many of these stories as fictional, and their purpose is served by explaining or highlighting a teaching of God.


The actual written teachings and lessons that are also present are much less open to interpretation.
User avatar #107 to #106 - gorginhanson (05/17/2013) [-]
ok buddy
not always just means once in a blue moon
User avatar #110 to #107 - pooflinger (05/17/2013) [-]
Allow me to rephrase.



The stories in the Bible that contradict history probably do. They are stories meant to teach and inspire. Stories to be interpreted by clergy and participants in the faith to find meaning.

For instance, Adam and Eve did not beget all of humanity, nor did they name all of the animals, and God certainly did not hand create the Earth in a matter of seven days. The former was a way of indicating humanity's significance to God, and the latter was a method for the Jews of the Diaspora to better explain to their Babylonian captives their beliefs (the Babylonians utilized a seven day calendar).


My point being, in the Bible their are both stories meant to be interpreted, stories meant to be read more literally, and actual guidelines for how God would like his people to live.

Much of modern theology is devoted to these areas.
User avatar #117 to #110 - gorginhanson (05/17/2013) [-]
that still wouldn't explain why new monotheistic religions keep appearing, as well as the fact that people interpret the bible literally
User avatar #119 to #117 - pooflinger (05/17/2013) [-]
Well that's good news.



I had no intention of explaining either of those two things.
User avatar #121 to #119 - gorginhanson (05/17/2013) [-]
listen here poo flinger, your poo isn't making any sense anymore, so fling it elsewhere
#122 to #121 - pooflinger (05/17/2013) [-]
I guess it is about time to go to sleep.
I guess it is about time to go to sleep.
User avatar #124 to #122 - gorginhanson (05/17/2013) [-]
that's exactly what they want you to do
User avatar #97 to #7 - mtndewisgreat (05/17/2013) [-]
Thank you, it feel like hope now
User avatar #76 to #7 - RiflemanFunny (05/17/2013) [-]
Yes, The physicist who made the Big Bang Theory was also a priest.
#68 to #7 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
Yeah but the Bible says not to "interpret" the Bible
User avatar #77 to #68 - RiflemanFunny (05/17/2013) [-]
The Bible is a collection of books written by men who generally opposed each other.
User avatar #67 to #7 - cullination (05/17/2013) [-]
Yeah, I'm a Catholic in a Catholic High School receiving theology classes and I can verify that this man is saying the truth.
User avatar #95 to #67 - psychopsychedelic (05/17/2013) [-]
I second this.

But Catholic High School, man I hated it. I'm in college now, but man high school was a drag. I was arguably the poorest person in the whole school.
#298 to #95 - cullination (05/17/2013) [-]
Everyone at my school is super rich driving mustangs to school...


And I drive to school in a flintstones mobile.
User avatar #299 to #298 - psychopsychedelic (05/17/2013) [-]
Funny you mention that.

My floorboards did rust out. Talk about awkward
User avatar #49 to #7 - weenieandthebutt (05/17/2013) [-]
Exactly, science and religion coexist and go hand in hand.
"Let there be light": big bang theory.
"Man turning from dust": evolution.
Evolution is not a theory, it's a fact and there are definite empirical evidence for it in cases of natural selection, parasitic insects developing immunity from poisons (survival of the fittest), domesticated foxes in Russia, the genetic link between dogs and wolves, and the hierarchical structure in DNA between various organism.
#45 to #7 - physicsdude (05/17/2013) [-]
The problem is that they interpret it. If they followed the bible fully I wouldn't have a problem with it, but picking only the things they "want" to follow and then claiming they have divine right to do so, is where the problems at.
User avatar #53 to #45 - dosburritos (05/17/2013) [-]
If we followed the bible fully, we'd still be stoning people who **** more than the person they're married to. Deuteronomy was written by Moses specifically to combat the Israelite's habit of falling back into sin. This laws are believed to no longer relevant by most Christian denominations. Interpreting the Bible literalistically causes to miss the actual underlying message. Besides, the Bible is chock full of idioms, pop-culture references, and other references that are no longer relevant.
For instance, the main reason Jesus walked on water was to prove that he was above the gods of other cultures (specifically Egyptian). The reason egyptian gods made land was because they couldn't walk on water.
User avatar #22 to #7 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
a religion is either true or it isn't, you do not pick and choose which parts you like so the ones with the loudest voice are the ones following it as it was meant to be. The others are even stupider because they are not even following their own religion.... religion does nothing but hold us all back as a whole, it is opposed to science in it's very nature.
#262 to #22 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
Is thus Rev graham church if NUTS?? WE KNOW $$$ BEE/ DEE GLOBE/ LEGALLY/ **** / POISON/ MAKE UP RULES
#23 to #22 - iamphoenix (05/16/2013) [-]
Looking at religion as black and white is intellectually bankrupt.
User avatar #24 to #23 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
no it is not, it is black and white pure and simple. Either the texts are true and what is written is what it is... or they are wrong, at which point you do not pick and choose, if it is not 100% true then it is not the word of (insert god here) and therefor is not true.
just because your a pussy and cannot accept that you are a decaying biological organism with no afterlife does not mean you have to ruin it for everyone else.
#25 to #24 - iamphoenix (05/16/2013) [-]
The issues of morality and purpose of mankind are black and white, pure and simple?
User avatar #27 to #25 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
first off that is not what we were talking about do not be a douche
secondly since when do you NEED religion to have morality....

religion is either true or it is not that is black and white, morality has nothing to do with religion twisty mctwisterson. I understand you wish to make a point but do not sink to twisting words around to make you feel you have an upper hand, that was pretty weak dude, I am happy to debate but only if you are going to do it with at least a little thought.
#28 to #27 - iamphoenix (05/16/2013) [-]
Morality has plenty to do with religion. This isn't at all to say that you need religion to be moral. But, the parts that make religion a matter of interpretation are the morals and ethics involved with it. I will agree that, when it comes down to it, you're either right or wrong. Since there's no objective reference for God's will, people continue to interpret texts in various ways. It isn't black and white because we have yet to reach a point where we could with 100% certainty prove or disprove the existence of God/god/gods. That's why it's called faith.
User avatar #29 to #28 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
dude, faith is another word for ignorance. Morality is down to cultural conditions and generally a personal affair, yes religion tries to teach morals but from a barbaric age, what I am getting at is a simple fact. Either it is true or it is not, if it is true there is no interpretation. It is either the word of god or it is not and if it is not then it has no reason to be an example of morality in a modern society. We are not talking about an interpretation of morality of religion, we are talking about religion and I stick by what I have said not as a matter of opinion but as a matter of fact. Just because you cannot disprove them does not mean you should be allowing the corruption of society from the barbaric ramblings of extremely underdeveloped individuals from hundreds and even thousands of years ago, you may as well be going back in time and asking a random passer by how to fix your computer because they have as much expertise on that as they do about the nature of the universe, and please before continuing know that I have A levels in religion as well as chemistry, biology, physics and philosophy and am working toward a doctorate in neuro biology, I am not just pulling opinions out of my ass here. (that was not a jab at you FYI just a figure of speech)
#31 to #29 - iamphoenix (05/16/2013) [-]
Are you saying either religion is true or it isn't?
I know that much. But interpretations of the Bible exist because people don't know for sure what the correct interpretation is. You can't know for sure, really. I'd argue that everybody has faith, but that's a debate for another time.
You need to login to view this link
You need to login to view this link

You'd benefit from reading those articles.
User avatar #32 to #31 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
it is not interpretation... it is the word of god, that is not down to interpretation and if it is not the word of god then it is just the musings of some ancient people in which case it is obviously not real... can you really not get past that simple premise?

how many times do I have to say, this is not about interpretation, religions are set out in their texts as the word of that deity, that is simply not up for interpretation, and if it is then it is not from that deity, and if it is not from that deity then it is from man and well, you ever heard the saying don't believe everything you read, especially the delusional scribblings of man from hundreds of years ago who cannot understand a simple concept as lightening without having to explain it as magic... seriously man, I am not counting buddhism or any of the self advancement through internal study, those are nothing but good as they promote knowledge and the betterment of ones self rather than some mumbo jumbo from some flea ridden nutbag.
#35 to #32 - pooflinger (05/16/2013) [-]
Actually, much of the Bible in the Catholic church, and perhaps others, is the inspired word of God, not his words exactly. That's why it is so open to interpretation, first by our clergy and now by our congregation as well.   
   
   
You might be thinking of Islam, in which their holy texts are actually the words of God hand written by the illiterate Mohammed. That's why the Qur'an is never translated: any translation would not be the same as the original divine text.   
   
   
So aspects of the Bible not happening does in no way debunk the beliefs of Christianity. The parables of Jesus, and the stories of the Old Testament are often used to teach a moral lesson. Much as iamphoenix was trying to point out.   
   
   
*shrug* A simple misunderstanding.
Actually, much of the Bible in the Catholic church, and perhaps others, is the inspired word of God, not his words exactly. That's why it is so open to interpretation, first by our clergy and now by our congregation as well.


You might be thinking of Islam, in which their holy texts are actually the words of God hand written by the illiterate Mohammed. That's why the Qur'an is never translated: any translation would not be the same as the original divine text.


So aspects of the Bible not happening does in no way debunk the beliefs of Christianity. The parables of Jesus, and the stories of the Old Testament are often used to teach a moral lesson. Much as iamphoenix was trying to point out.


*shrug* A simple misunderstanding.
User avatar #40 to #35 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
ya know what, my last point was REAALY vague and ******* put, I think I am gonna call my side for now, I had a long day at work and it is nearing 1 am, my brain has decided to opt out at this point so it would be pointless on all of our parts if I carried on, I would however like to continue this at a later date if you guys are up for that, I am always up for a good debate with respectful chaps such as yourselves, gonna thumb you gents up just for your respectful approach on the subject as it is a rare occurance on here.
User avatar #37 to #35 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
you may be right it is pretty late here my apologies on that one... howeever it is also _inspired__by or should I say plagiarized from over 18 predating religions which kinda nullifies the premise in itself.
#33 to #32 - iamphoenix (05/16/2013) [-]
I'm not saying it's down to interpretation. I agree with you that there is only one correct interpretation. There can be only one, but there's no objective reference for the will of God so people don't know what it is.
User avatar #36 to #33 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
oh for ***** sake I typed up a large response and accidently backed up a page... ok trying that again.... First off sorry I thought that is the route you were headed with the constant reference to interpretation, now i understand where you are coming from but if you are going down that route how about looking at the 18+ religions christianity plagiarized from, maybe one of those could offer an answer... there is no point at looking for an interpretation of a man made religion when we can be focusing on finding out far more by discarding it. Let us say there is a god, now if god is all loving as MOST religions claim) and if this god teaches morality for the purpose of getting along universally then would it not be favorable for such an intellectually advanced being to see us strive together without religion than fighting with one another over whos interpretation of a being (who has no influence on our lives further than the fact we argue about it) is right? Sorry if that was a ****** answer, I am running out of steam at this point and am waiting for the conversation to end so I can get stoned and watch some supernatural haha
#39 to #36 - iamphoenix (05/16/2013) [-]
No, it's fine. It's the internet, so I expect people to get ranty.
As far as Christianity 'plagiarizing', that might be a matter of every religion having a little bit of it right. I would like to see a day where people stop fighting over religion or faith, but I don't think that faith or religion are the real problem. I know plenty of atheists who are moral and trustworthy just like I know Christians who are selfish, arrogant bastards. This isn't to say that I think I'm better than them, mind you, but the point stands that greed and hatred have always been a driving force behind the terrible things people do. Try reading those articles I linked later on, and enjoy your Supernatural.
User avatar #43 to #39 - shaddz (05/16/2013) [-]
dude trust me I know what you mean, believe it or not I am actually an ordained pagan priest... I just like my religious debates, keeps you sharp, my beliefs stem on the basis of disregarding gods and focusing on personal and social development in order to better mankind rather than praising beings who even if they did exist would rather see us advancing peacefully than arguing over whos god is prettier.
thank you for the debate I quite enjoyed it even if it was a misinterpretation of a reitterated point, perhaps we can do this again sometime.
#12 to #7 - curses (05/16/2013) [-]
Actually which religion has ever stated that their God didn't make everything? :/

All religions claims God created stuff in the beginning.

That kinda clash with Science a whole lot.
User avatar #250 to #12 - iamchicken (05/17/2013) [-]
Ive always thought about what if the bible simplified stuff so that the common masses of the Ancient times could understand i doubt they would have been able to comprehend millions of years of life,planet and solar creation so they simplified it into 7 days.
#253 to #250 - curses (05/17/2013) [-]
Doesn't explain why the God hasn't decided on renewing the Bible or any other holy book.
#87 to #12 - anonymous (05/17/2013) [-]
theistic evolution. look it up
User avatar #57 to #12 - krasnogvardiech (05/17/2013) [-]
Certainly, the theory states that there was a Big Bang at the beginning of time. But there has to be materials, or at least energies to create an explosion, correct? But where did those energies/materials come from?
Boom.
#198 to #57 - curses (05/17/2013) [-]
Big bang just let out all the materials it had. Those materials could also have just been there from the very start or you get this "Who made God?" which just gets so much tougher to answer.

The stuff in space has always been around. It's just that the universe expand and then shrink to the point of a big bang.

I doubt a God would make a tiny tiny little planet and put us on it and then with a book. After that he never shows up.
User avatar #226 to #198 - krasnogvardiech (05/17/2013) [-]
Or he could be the ultimate god of dickery. trolling would be too plebian a term for him.
User avatar #55 to #12 - dosburritos (05/17/2013) [-]
it's not whether or not he created it, it's more how he created it. Did he will into existence spontaneously? Or did he set up a chain of events that fell into a mostly determined path that resulted in the universe we know today?
#13 to #12 - anonymous (05/16/2013) [-]
maybe god is resposible for evolution?

I mean whoever sees the bible as plain facts has som serious problems....
#17 to #13 - teranin ONLINE (05/16/2013) [-]
Thank you for getting it.
Thank you for getting it.
#8 to #7 - teranin ONLINE (05/16/2013) [-]
You should probably research the origins of protestantism before claiming that the catholic church endorses individual interpretation of the bible... just sayin'...
User avatar #9 to #8 - pooflinger (05/16/2013) [-]
Since Vatican II they have come to the realization that some of the Bible isn't actually history. i.e Adam and Eve.


And I said interpret, not make their own interpretation. The church has its own interpretations, which it presents different ideas.


Poor wording aside, Vatican II took it from no reading Bibles allowed to every kid should have a bible.
User avatar #163 to #9 - thereoncewasaman (05/17/2013) [-]
I hate to be the asshole but If Adam and Eve didn't exist then where did original sin occur from?
#248 to #163 - iamchicken (05/17/2013) [-]
I thought for the longest time about that, keep in mind im no bible scholar, i wondered if God had made sin just to keep the universe interesting, it'd be pretty boring if everything was perfect for forever. It'd give God a purpose to try and fix sin or something.
User avatar #287 to #248 - thereoncewasaman (05/17/2013) [-]
That just seems vindictive and evil though don't you think? If there was no reason for sin to occur then all the suffering and pain of humanity (and all life) has happened simply because god thought it would make things interesting.
#291 to #287 - iamchicken (05/17/2013) [-]
Well like i said im no bible scholar so im in no position to debate.
User avatar #292 to #291 - thereoncewasaman (05/17/2013) [-]
I'm no scholar either I'm just using what you said and reasoning along those lines. You don't have to be an expert to debate as long as you have some knowledge and can use logic.
User avatar #293 to #292 - iamchicken (05/17/2013) [-]
Fair enough.
#10 to #9 - teranin ONLINE (05/16/2013) [-]
That's fair, and not untrue. I suppose I simply misread your original statement.
User avatar #11 to #10 - pooflinger (05/16/2013) [-]
I didn't really word that part well.
 Friends (0)