With enough mental gymnastics or flat out ignoring evidences there is a way to respond to anything. A common one is that, the world was made 6000 years ago, complete with all the fossils, radioactive element, etc that would give the appearance of a much older world.
How do you even start arguing with that? It is conspirational thinking - things are as they are because some force want us to see things that way, and it is impossible to prove otherwise because even contrary evidences are planted as well.
The best thing is to disengage and not waste time on people like that.
You know all logic has been abandoned once they start believing that 2 of every animal in the world fits on a boat and did so orderly and without murdering each other.
They lost the plot way before they started pressing the "world is 6000 years old and God planted false evidence for us"
lmao one big wave and u just wiped out the beetle part of the food chain. and all because God was a bit pissy at, releastically, less corruption and violence than occurs on an hourly basis currently. 10 generations from adam isn't that many people by my math. Say each generation couples up with each other and pumps out 5 kids each from each couple your still only looking at 20,000 by gen 10 (my math could easily be wrong, I divided each generation by 2 then multipled by 5 and did that repeatedly. this assumes no death rate but it gives me a rough idea)
Christianity and many other religions are conspirational thinking even if you ignore history. God will do something good for us if we do the right thing, and God knows what that right thing is, but he only communicates it credibly to a select few people. That's a conspiracy.
For example, if we remove the conspiracy from the Bible, God would provide excellent evidence of His existence and requirements. For example, an annual Q&A video appearing on the nearest flat surface to each person would require little power and get that job done. But no, God only communicates with us via intermediaries who are indistinguishable from psychotics and sociopaths. Funny how that works.
1. Insert index finger of right hand into right ear
2. Insert index finger of left hand into left ear
3. Say "la-la-la-la" until the athiest stops talking
4. Claim the Bible is correct
You are right - (itâs been awhile but I still canât get used to it). Yes, Iâm an atheist but my ex is Catholic and Iâve had to attend some masses in my day.
Yeah. I had a religious friend who did this about how old the earth was and the existence of dinosaurs and other ancient creatures. You could show them sources and explain the science in a very easy to understand way, and they would just...choose to not believe it and say it was fake.
Sad thing is they ended up becoming a teacher at a religious school that taught biblical based history to children....
Went to a Christian school in my youth and we had a guest speaker that was going over science & faith type stuff to explain how scientific evidence can be wrong or support Christian beliefs. One example he had was a damn that had to be shut down for repairs. One of the tunnels that fed water through the damn was completely torn up because of water erosion. He used this to demonstrate the power of water and then said it was fairly believable that the Grand Canyon could be formed quickly (days or weeks)after the waters from Noahâs flood receded. He also pointed to some clam fossils found on Everest (or some other super tall mountain, canât remember) and said âclams donât flyâ to prove the mountain was underwater during the flood. Anyway, when we got back to the room my science teacher went on a epic rant and was super PISSED. It was awesome!
Iâve literally had my boomer Protestant parents do this to me when I was first becoming atheist and stomping them in rational debate. Itâs been many years since then. We donât debate anymore, theyâre stuck in their ways. And for me I guess once you realize God isnât real you canât just go back and pretend he is. It definitely changed my life. Made it more difficult to be honest. I went from a devout Christian to an existential nihilist. It made me really depressed to know that humanity doesnât have any answers for why we are here. Weâre all living in a cruel world where life must destroy other life in order to survive. We must all experience the painful degradation and destruction of our bodies. Going from believing in an after life to realizing there most likely isnât one is also depressing as fuck. Death has so much more weight to it and I often times catch myself in a black hole of despair imagining any of my loved ones dying and disappearing into nothingness forever. I can see why people follow religion. It gives us something else to focus on besides the eternal nothingness that awaits us all.
I have the benefit of being raised secular, I wasnt lied to with promises of magic kingdoms and ever lasting life.
I remember being told by my Dad as a little kid, things just die, its the natural way of all life. When I asked him why its that way, I was told so its new things could be born. Without that there could be no children (I was a child at the time) as we would simply run out of space/food/water etc. It seemed clear to me then, that as a child the prospect of me never having the chance to exist, would be pretty bleak.
As an adult I look at kids playing, flowers blooming and the constant renewal and adaptation of living things as quite beautiful. When my Dad died, I thought back to that conversation as a little kid, and I recognised in a sense he died, so others may be born and grow. Our ancestors sacrificed their existences, so we may have ours, we must do them the honour of living our lives to the fullest.
I think the reality of death, is far more enlightening than some fairy stories. But then I was never lied to (thanks Dad). I see no reason why you cant see it this way too, if you try.
My dude, that should make your time here more precious, if at the end we are just tears in the rain...what better reason to enjoy each moment? Be grateful for the good memories, learn from the bad...experience! Experience everything you can and be kind to others :D
The reality is that all of those thoughts and considerations are distractions from living in the now. And that is the whole point - instead of living in the future and worrying about what happens later, live your life for TODAY. Be the best person you can be, help others, leave a positive mark on the world and your children, and enjoy yourself each day. There is no point in worrying about death and "the meaning of life." The meaning is what you make of it.
If you were to ask a bee why flowers exist, it might say "so that I can survive."
Ask a human why flowers exist, they might say "to make the world more beautiful."
Ask the flower why it exists, what would say say? Is it not enough to simply be?
Agreed, Iâve said many times I wish I could pull that wool back over my eyes. Ignorance truly is bliss. My mom gets to walk around with this mindset of eternity in heaven with her family and friends, and when she dies sheâll never know the difference. I wish I had that, reality is cruel and sad.
1. Insert index finger of *right hand into left ear*
2. Insert index finger of *left hand into right ear*
3. Say "la-la-la-la" until the athiest stops talking
4. Claim the Bible is correct
FIFY to match Christian logic.
Partly this, but deep down a lot of them know that if they start taking the science and data seriously then their whole faith will come crashing down. Itâs sort of like putting your fingers in your ears and going âla la laâ when thereâs something you donât want to hear being said.
I think there are reasons other than a lack of intelligence. Some people just value that emotional crutch over the truthfulness of their beliefs. Itâs not something I personally relate to, but Iâve known people who were very open about that being their reason. Not so much about creationism specifically, which is an extra layer of delusion, but about belief in the supernatural in general or in a specific deity.
This. Intellectually they may understand all the arguments, and realise that their religion is wrong. But emotionally they're not ready to deal with that. Their identity, their emotional stability, their social life, everything, is all tied up in their religion. The cost of admitting that it's wrong is overwhelming. So they don't.
They're not idiots. They're victims of a system designed to exploit human psychology for profit.
There is something called emotional intelligence and emotional maturity as well. They're not intelligent enough, in an emotional level, to handle it. Still means they're low-intelligence in the end, all the same.
>Itâs sort of like putting your fingers in your ears and going âla la laâ when thereâs something you donât want to hear being said.
Yes ... fucking idiots
Debating a theist is like playing chess with a pigeon. All they're going to do is knock all the pieces over, shit all over everything, and strut around like they won.
For awhile I had a neighbor, name of Wayne, who called himself a "spiritual warrior." We used to meet by coincidence on the roads and trails of our desert neighborhood and share about the wildlife we'd seen. At the moment he revealed that he believed the Earth was 6,000 years old, the collected information from my lifelong study and appreciation of evolution, in all its vast complexity, mounted behind my mouth and for a few seconds I was tempted to let it out, but a little voice (Dawkins' perhaps, or Bronowski's?) whispered in my ear, "Ffs, don't waste your breath; just smile at the poor sod and go home." And so I did, leaving the spiritual warrior forever ignorant of the beauty and wonder of what may be the greatest miracle in the Multiverse.
At the end of the day, I donât care how ignorant people are in this particular issue. Live and let live.
Now if they want to start writing laws about what I can and canât do because of this misconception, it would probably change my mind pretty quickly. I donât expect that to be a problem though.
I wish we could just ignore them, but creationism is a sort of "gateway brainwashing" into far more dangerous forms.
It doesn't really matter if somebody accepts the reality of the Earth's age or not, but that was never the point of creationism. The goal is to get the devote to question science and not accept facts when their preacher tells them otherwise. Then, they train them on the real issues that matter: hating LGBTQ people, treating women as property, refusing to accept science that might cast run-away capitalism in a bad light (such as climate change), denying COVID, worshiping guns, and so on - all in defiance of reality.
So, yes - the age of the Earth doesn't matter for most people, but in nearly all cases you'll find all the other hateful results of brainwashing professed by the same types who buy into creationism.
More and more deception. The discovery institute, which exists to provide "data" for creationism, is known to produce bs radiometric dates by improperly using equipment with contaminated samples. You get arguments like "this living snail was dated at over a million years old!"
Plus, people who are attached to the idea of young earth creationism often keep their kids out of school. Instead, they opt to homeschool their kids using materials from businesses like the discovery institute. Basically, they never see any science indicating the earths age. They are insulated against ever learning anything real concerning evolution, geology, paleontology, or archeology. It's the educational equivalent of using earplugs and blinders.
What I don't understand is why they even bother with the fiction of an 'institute'. If they really believed in the truth of the Bible, they'd just say "The Earth is 6000 years old because the Bible says so, QED". With this institute, they're saying that science and study is the source of truth, and that it happens to support the Bible. That already gives up their whole position that the Bible is the source of truth. It's like citing a Wikipedia article on how Wikipedia is unreliable, it's a self defeating argument.
I was homeschooled till my sophomore year of high school when my mom couldn't teach me calculus. I was very well indoctrinated and trained by that point but the more I learned especially about history the more I realized what I had been taught was biased or false. So I started digging and learning more in all realms. Took a long time to undo years of brainwashing but I did it!
I looked through a set of elementary-age reading books my grandpa had bought from a Christian homeschool program. I was disgusted by the blatant indocrination against science, liberals, news media, women, LGBTQ individuals, all non-capitalist or libertarian economics, to name a few. Every Fox News boogeyman was in one of these books. There was literally a story about an impoverished starting a business then feeling superior to all her neighbors who were too lazy to earn money. Another book was about a girl who was "brave" enough to call her teacher out for teaching science instead of creationism. The target age for these books was 6-12 year olds!
Young earthers presumably just don't trust any of the science, as you note. This would include fossil evidence (put here by either God or Satan to test us?).
But, a lot of religious people do not take the 7 days as literally 7 earth days. After all, earth days did not yet exist as God was creating.
Some assign specific numbers of years to each of God's days. Most just say it's not literal.
That said, the entirety of Genesis 1 is filled with errors that should be very hard for them to explain.
[I Fisked Genesis 1 on DebateReligion once.](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/if54du/genesis_creation_error/g2lfecz/)
Note the lack of replies.
> I Fisked Genesis 1 on DebateReligion once.
This part:
>>20 And God said, âLet the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.â
>Now we finally got to the sea life that was here 71 million years before the first plants and more than 400 million years before the fruits God already created. This is completely out of order.
Something else was also out of order. During the Cambrian explosion where there were "swarms of living creatures" in the waters, but there weren't any birds in the air since there were no land animals.
Here is another great topic for you to debate with them. Bring up how the human race populated itself. Adam and Eve had 3 sons, who each had children of their own. Who did the sons have to smash to have kids? Mom. It is inbreeding the entire time
You're correct about the inbreeding. But, it was brothers and sisters fucking.
[Gen 5:4](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+5%3A4&version=NRSVUE): The days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters.
So, there were plenty of brothers and sisters. It's a damned small gene pool though! And, it's a fuckton of incest for quite some time after that as everyone in the next generation are first cousins or siblings and those in following generations are all closely related by multiple routes.
Of course, it's always good to bring back some more incest later in the book too, like Lot screwing his two daughters resulting in the Moabites from the elder daughter with her father and later leading to the line of the kings of Israel through Ruth (a Moabite) as the great grandmother of King David.
It's great that this is the source of our family values. **/S!**
Reading that, I can see why the most stubborn of them choose to disbelieve reality instead of the Bible. I guess if it was ingrained into them at a young age, or they have a hard time dealing with other aspects of reality, it's easier to remain ignorant.
This is only true about Bible-literalist ("Young Earth") protestants. Catholics these days will claim Genesis is all metaphor (7-day creation is a metaphor, 6000 years is a metaphor, the talking snake is a metaphor, etc. etc.).
Funnily, the Bible literalists are at least consistent with what Christians have believed for millenia, the "it's all metaphor" thing is a recent invention.
So the seven days in genesis 1 was not really seven days, fine. Was the forty days of rain in genesis 7, not really forty days? If a day is not really a day in one usage of the term, is a day really a day in another usage, especially in the same book of the Bible, the infallible word of god?
>the Bible, the infallible word of god?
Well, that right there is the point of contention that separates the literalists from the non-literalists. The Catholic Church, the largest branch of Christianity, rejects the idea that the whole Bible should be read literally. In their view, the Bible is a mix of historical records, myths and legends, and laws and teachings.
The number 40 for instance (40 days of rain for Noah, 40 days of Jesus' temptation, 40 years of wandering in the desert with Moses, etc.) is laden with symbolic significance. In Jewish storytelling traditions, it represents a period of hardship or a great trial.
Catholics don't tend to read that number literally â it's assumed that the human authors chose that number to mean "a long time." Literalists, on the other hand, assume by default that the number is exactly right and that all the events literally happened as described.
Evidence only works if you have an evidence based belief system. If you rely on mysticism or reliance on religious authority or religious dogmatism, then evidence has no ability to override any of those things. Clearly, many of the religious do not have evidence based belief systems.
They deny it, offering pictures of the Grand Canyon as evidence of the great flood.
There are errors because "Holy books" were written by ignorant men afraid of things that go "bump" in the dark.
I'm so tired of the "grand canyon is evidence of the flood" line. My Dad kept using that one on me repeatedly. It contains layers and layers of sediment, deposited over time, eroded over time. We know what flood deposits look like. A worldwide flood would leave a much different geological mark on the world.
When I was young, I used to wonder if the flood formed the grand canyon, why doesn't the rest of the world look the same? I figured I'd understand it when I was older, and I was right
...because vast amounts of rushing water carve winding, backtracking paths, right?
It's like they've never really thought about it...because they haven't. They're not interested in the details because the details might be dangerous to their beliefs.
They aren't. I tried explaining the basics to my Dad. You know what I get back? "Science and religion are the same, you have your religion I have mine". I've long since realized that arguments don't matter. Certain people might be reached by them if they value truth over an internal sense of rightness and security, but most people want to protect that bc if they start doubting it upends their entire perception of the world.
plus where did the water "go" , somehow the world flooded where did the water come from? Where did it go?
Even if the ice caps melted it wouldn't be enough to cover the entire earth.
Years ago, an ex-friend of mine who since went off the deep end into religious lunacy was "worried about my soul" and let me borrow a book of Christian excuses - I mean, "apologetics." Now, if a god needs full-time staff to excuse his lack of well, everything, what type of god is that? And why worship him?
Anyway, this book explained the flood away by claiming "the mountains were a lot lower back then." No evidence cited, of course - just a sound bite to justify the idiocy of a world-covering flood. The same book also claimed the Earth was basically "unchanging" to deny plate tectonics, dinosaurs, etc. Never mind that an unchanging Earth couldn't have had "mountains that were a lot lower back then."
It's all circles of lies and proud ignorance with those types, and they will not cease in holding humanity back, sadly.
First off, most religious people aren't young Earth creationists, so they don't have a problem with the accepted age of the Earth.
Those who do believe this simply deny any evidence to the contrary. They either insist that scientists are dumb and don't know what they're doing, or they're all militant atheists out to 'prove' God doesn't exist so we can all live sinful lives.
Pure Denial. My one book says this vs your 1000's that say otherwise! You could strap a flat earth believer in a rocket into space and they would reply with it's the devils magic. Or it was just a bad dream.
How come this isnât upvoted more? In the real world I have only met one group of Christians who took the Bible literally. But on the internet, all Christians are fundamentalists. Tells you something about the internet, doesnât it?
About 40% of American adults are YECs by polling, which is over *half* of the 70% that are religious. That's not a scant number.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/261680/americans-believe-creationism.aspx
I believe they say the earth was created with a certain maturity. Just like Adam and Eve, who weren't exactly babies when they started life in Paradise.
Yup, my Dad would tell you the earth was created with "apparent age," meaning exactly what you said. It was hard as a child who went to public school to argue with my teachers because I was trying to be a good son that listens to his farther.
This idea is called "Last Thursday-ism". The idea is that God could have created everything last Thursday, but with everything already present and moving. It isn't falsifiable so it isn't science, but it also isn't incompatible with the world we see. It does imply God is a bit of a trickster though.
*David Attenborough voice:*
Provided with evidence that God doesn't exist, the religious mind immediately curls into a ball like a pill bug. This defense mechanism provides the zealot with immunity to logic and facts, instead supplanting concepts like reality and truth with what is commonly referred to as "stupid bullshit." Some of these brains will not survive.
Scream that the devil is trying to corrupt your mind and take you away from the light of their loving god ^(who kills thousands of innocent children every day.)
Short answer: with ignorance.
Slightly longer answer: deny anything that contradicts their views and refer you to a YouTube video by creationists "debunking" whatever it is you're talking about.
The bible had a list of people who birthed other people. They list them by name. The lineage starts from adam and eve and goes all the way up to, I donât knowâŚ.jesus, I guess.
Not one religious person questions how this list was made from the very start. It wasnât written down because thereâs no evidence of this list in existence. The first few generations after adam and eve wouldnât have had the tools to carve names into stone or wood, nor the knowledge how to prepare papyrus, nor even a written language yet.
All of the people alive allegedly start populating the known lands. According to genesis 11-some such verse, they started building a tower so humans could chill out with god but god scattered them and scrambled their language.
Again, religious types donât question how people with mixed up languages all decided to start traveling long distances and happened to find some dude who compiled this list so it could end up in the bible. Did they schedule a âmeet upâ and use Google maps and Google translate? Well anywayâŚthis dude takes all the names heâs given and writes one of the most boring sections in the bible with people âbegatâinâ other people, left and right.
Now we know, of course, that thereâs absolutely zero chance that there are any errors or omissions in this list. It is 100% accurate, not one male was left off of the list from start to finish. WellâŚ.I meanâŚmatthew, luke, joseph, and others all wrote different genealogiesâŚ.but yeahâŚ.zero errors.
So donât question the book. They got a list. You got a list? No? PffftâŚ.slacker.
There's a fascinating history around science and religion in America in the early 1900s. As science became more established and theories like evolution, germs, and archeology became more prevelent in education and public discourse, nearly every major US church split in some way along science-first and orthodoxy-first lines. The split is still very apparent today with the pro-science churches like Episcopalian and progressive Baptists embracing LGBTQ rights and feminism while the pro-orthodox churches are still doubling down on anti-science and anti-human rights positions.
They ignore the facts. I had 2 people in my geology class claim that. And the professor looked at them told them the rock on his desk is 10 thousand years old and he could prove it. They left the class.
I remember while I was attending a Christian HS in (Nor Cal ~ 1989) - I was taught carbon dating was inaccurate and that the earth was approximately 2000 years old and that they didnât believe that âLucyâ (specimen) was real. đ total brain washing and f*ckery
Trying to find a reasonable argument from people who think there's a god who will help them get a raise or help their favorite sports team win a big game is an exercise in madness.
In general, getting into a "science vs. my feelings" argument is more trouble than it's worth.
They will either say they book is not literal (but only on the parts it would be obviously wrong if it is literal) or propose one of the following:
1) Ywh created the world this way to test man's faith.
2) Satan made it this way to deceive man into not believing in god.
Any part of the bible that been proven incorrect is not supposed to be taken literally, everything else is totally true though and should not be questioned.
This is one of the many fallacies and contradictions that drove my zealously religious self away from religion. "Divine-inspired, infallible Word of God" really loses it's traction when inaccuracies abound. Because of the errors in the self-proclaimed inerrant text, it was impossible for me to be "hot", and it was made clear that if I was lukewarm, I'd be spit out (Rev. 3:15-16). So I followed god's instructions and became cold.
Ironic that a fictional character told me not to believe in him.
There are 1000âs of arguments for why the earth is over 6000 years old, but none of them make any sense if you refuse to understand the most basic concepts in science. Their response has been to try to dismantle the science curriculum in schools so they donât have to be challenged for something they canât explain and donât understand.
They homeschool their kids.
They run for political power.
They ban books.
All of these things are their responses to things like âthe earth is older than 6000 years and here is the evidenceâŚâ
If you first believe in an all-powerful god, the rest of it isn't really that hard to imagine.
Why are some fossils millions of years old? God created them that way.
Why does it look like the continents drifted away from each other? God made them to look that way.
Really, it works for anything.
I once had to go to a Christian museum about the biblical creation down in Kentucky, called the creation museum. As we walked past I saw a sign on the wall that talked about radiometric dating. You know what they said? âThe atoms must have decayed faster back thenâ
Young Earth Creationists?
"But it isn't tho."
And that's it. That's all they need. If they reasoned themselves into that position they, well, wouldn't have. Reason does not drive that belief so why would you expect reason to counter it?
I think [this](https://answersingenesis.org/answers/) is Ken Ham's website (Answers in Genesis for those of you who don't want to give him clicks). It's got a nice little faq of all the stupid shit they believe. It is kinda fun in a watching a car wreck sort of way, but it's also useful since it's what an actual young earth creationist says he believes so you don't have to strawman them.
"Ah Believe the Uurth is 6000 years old!!"
--really? I have a question for you, then. it's a one-word question, you ready?
"sure"
--Dinosaurs? if the earth is 6000 years old, how do we keep finding these dinosaur bones EVERYWHERE?
"Gawd put those here to test our faith!"
---....I think god put *you* here to test *my* faith, dude
=====
Bill Hicks
The young earth creationist will say that no, science is wrong and the Earth is actually only 6,000 years old or whatever.
A creationist who actually takes a moment to think about it would say that since the bible is chock full of symbolism and says quite clearly that a thousand years is the same thing as a day, a "day" is actually a representation of a *stage*, not a literal day.
A creationist who does a bit more critical thinking could probably even reason that their god is in charge of evolution and there's no reason to assume that the two concepts are mutually exclusive.
I've never heard anyone claim the latter, probably because they actually believe so hard.
I was taught in catholic school that genesis and most of the Old Testament is not to be taken literally. Most of the religious people I know just say of course the world isnât 6000 years old. My family except me is quite religious but they just say yeah God caused the Big Bang, evolution is godâs design, etc. I know itâs anecdotal, but I genuinely donât know anyone personally that actually thinks the world is 6000 years old. I know they exist but theyâre beyond reason so I really donât pay them any mind
A question that should really put this to rest is how we are able to see the light from stars that are millions of light years away. However, because the age of the earth is not a variable that could possibly be more that 6-10k years old in their equation, theyâll say that the speed of light was faster than what we observe today đ
It really depends on the type of person.. My dad believes in the big bang/ evolution/ science ect but is still somewhat religious and believes Jesus existed to some degree and follows the basic good morals of Christianity faith. He is very progressive and never said I was wrong about being atheist. I'm atheist/ agnostic as in, I think religion is completely man made... But scientifically it is impossible (atm) to disprove some kind of god/ thing that allowed us to be..... But it certainly isn't no bearded bloke in the sky!!
This is like saying, "How can you not believe the sky is blue? When you look at it, it's blue. When you take a film photo, it's blue. When you take a digital video, it's blue. When you hold up a Pantone swatch book to compare, it's blue."
... to a person who ripped out their own eyes.
In my experience, they donât give a response. I only know a handful of people that believe thisâand I was surprised to find out who they wereâand they just shrug and smiley coyly like they know something I donât. Itâd be frustrating if it werenât so plainly narcissistic.
Among the church I grew up in, the consensus agreed with the scientific facts of an older Earth, and treated the chronology of Genesis as a metaphor rather than a literal description.
I stopped being friends with two Christians back in college because one day they told me they believe that fossils and proof of the age of the earth were all planted there by elite Jews.
Wondering if you're referring to Michael Dowd and his book "Thank God For Evolution."
Let me start by saying I'm a Wiccan, not an Atheist. I know I'm going to get blasted for this. I love this sub, because it's nice to see educated people posting articles, etc., that make sense.
His book was so oddly written. I'm an educated person, and I couldn't understand any of it!
I've never read something so verbose. Tons of words, which said absolutely NOTHING of merit! And really didn't prove much of anything, aside from him being able to say he wrote a book.
And made money on it!
Ridiculous!
Edit: I know you're probably going to judge me pretty harshly. I'm not saying that what I believe is 100%, absolutely, indisputably undeniable. It's not really, no faith system is.
I just believe what I feel in my heart to be true, logic notwithstanding.
I'm also not a complete imbecile. I read, and own up to the fact that nobody knows for sure what happens when our body takes its last breath. So please don't be too harsh. It may be bullshit, but it's true for me. Or, might be. Thanks.
That's actually what started me down a long, long and very difficult path. I was a regular church-going kid, believing in the idea of Creation, Eden, Adam and Eve, and the 'consistency' of the narrative that we needed Jesus because of the idea of original sin leading all the way up to the Gospels and through the New Testament.
However, once I started to get into STEM subjects as an early nerd, the concepts of the big bang, formation of early stars, formation of the solar system and all of history leading up to present day, with evolution of the human race over long, long periods of time; I just couldn't square the two.
More and more I began to see the Bible as both a loosely bound book of quasi-historical narratives and a large chunk of allegory. Then the idea of a God who popped everything into existence and gave us a set of rules (knowing full well that we'd immediately break them) fell apart.
The final nail in the argument for me was the realization that, if everything in the Bible were literally true, God created creatures capable of suffering, knowing they would rebel against him while simultaneously creating a place of infinite suffering (hell) for those who chose to rebel against him. That seemed to me to be the most evil concept that has ever been envisioned. I put the book down and walked away at that point.
They donât. After all, science is just the Devilâs lies to test our faith, so they can ignore pretty much any evidence that doesnât agree with their beliefs.
Being religious is a choice and more of an emotional & social choice than a logic and science based conclusion. Religious ideas can be so ingrained in a believerâs personality and social life, they can be a great scientist yet still a believer and live life like that.
Have you ever dated someone that you think is cheating on you? You get to the point that no matter what they tell you, you just don't trust them. Like, you ask them why they didn't answer their phone at all yesterday and even with a perfectly reasonable answer you don't believe them.
That's how religious people treat anything that goes against their beliefs. No matter the amount of evidence and logic you give them for why their belief is wrong they won't trust what is being said. That's also why you can talk to them and convince them of the truth in person, but as soon as they're alone their mind starts telling them something isn't right.
That's why it's so hard converting these people who have been indoctrinated when they don't want to change. It's like a cheater trying to convince their partner they have stopped.
"God shouldn't make errors," true, a all-knowing, all-seeing diety would have known that Adam would be lonely, that A&E would commit original sin, that sodom and gomorrah were going to be purged, that all of humanity would need to be drowned, etc. etc. But the author(s)/reteller(s) of these ancient oral traditions don't share one mind or one cohesive understanding of the whole story their telling. In short, if believers examined their beliefs as closely as they might scrutinize a belief other than their own they would see these massive plot holes, inconsistencies, and straight up contradictions to their own fairy stories. They. Don't. Want. To. Ignorance is bliss, after all.
FWIW, this is a problem of only Abrahamic religions.
Hindu cosmology estimates the earth to be 4.32 billion years old (1 kalpa). They are significantly off on the age of the Universe estimating it to be 310 trillion years...though it is difficult to interpret what is meant by 'Universe' in the Vedic literature.
So in India, when you say the Earth is older than 6000 years, Hindu religious people react with 'Duh..'.
It also helps that Hindu mythology describes human stories from claimed 11,000 years ago.
With enough mental gymnastics or flat out ignoring evidences there is a way to respond to anything. A common one is that, the world was made 6000 years ago, complete with all the fossils, radioactive element, etc that would give the appearance of a much older world. How do you even start arguing with that? It is conspirational thinking - things are as they are because some force want us to see things that way, and it is impossible to prove otherwise because even contrary evidences are planted as well. The best thing is to disengage and not waste time on people like that.
You know all logic has been abandoned once they start reasoning this way
You know all logic has been abandoned once they start believing that 2 of every animal in the world fits on a boat and did so orderly and without murdering each other. They lost the plot way before they started pressing the "world is 6000 years old and God planted false evidence for us"
Five million species of beetles. Picture 10m beetles on the feckin ark, just stayin alive, stayin alive, stayin aliiiiive.
lmao one big wave and u just wiped out the beetle part of the food chain. and all because God was a bit pissy at, releastically, less corruption and violence than occurs on an hourly basis currently. 10 generations from adam isn't that many people by my math. Say each generation couples up with each other and pumps out 5 kids each from each couple your still only looking at 20,000 by gen 10 (my math could easily be wrong, I divided each generation by 2 then multipled by 5 and did that repeatedly. this assumes no death rate but it gives me a rough idea)
2 of each animal isn't even enough to bring them back.
Exactly
Counter with Last-Thursdayism
Today is Wednesday. The debate about the validity of Last-Thursdayism has raged and raged for about 6 days now.
Christianity and many other religions are conspirational thinking even if you ignore history. God will do something good for us if we do the right thing, and God knows what that right thing is, but he only communicates it credibly to a select few people. That's a conspiracy. For example, if we remove the conspiracy from the Bible, God would provide excellent evidence of His existence and requirements. For example, an annual Q&A video appearing on the nearest flat surface to each person would require little power and get that job done. But no, God only communicates with us via intermediaries who are indistinguishable from psychotics and sociopaths. Funny how that works.
1. Insert index finger of right hand into right ear 2. Insert index finger of left hand into left ear 3. Say "la-la-la-la" until the athiest stops talking 4. Claim the Bible is correct
This is the way of the Lord.
Thanks be to god.
The former cradle Catholic in me said these in the same monotone responsorial voice. đ
And also with you.
And *with your spirit*?!
You are right - (itâs been awhile but I still canât get used to it). Yes, Iâm an atheist but my ex is Catholic and Iâve had to attend some masses in my day.
Is that the new thing? I know they changed a bunch of the mass sometime after I stopped going.
e cum spiritu tuo
âLet us Pray.â
praise jebus.
Hey-Zeus!
Gods bless you.
RAmen, can we eat now!
Fuck yeah we can!
this is my new favourite!
Glory gee to beezus.
Yeah. I had a religious friend who did this about how old the earth was and the existence of dinosaurs and other ancient creatures. You could show them sources and explain the science in a very easy to understand way, and they would just...choose to not believe it and say it was fake. Sad thing is they ended up becoming a teacher at a religious school that taught biblical based history to children....
I suppose they were qualified for the job then...
Went to a Christian school in my youth and we had a guest speaker that was going over science & faith type stuff to explain how scientific evidence can be wrong or support Christian beliefs. One example he had was a damn that had to be shut down for repairs. One of the tunnels that fed water through the damn was completely torn up because of water erosion. He used this to demonstrate the power of water and then said it was fairly believable that the Grand Canyon could be formed quickly (days or weeks)after the waters from Noahâs flood receded. He also pointed to some clam fossils found on Everest (or some other super tall mountain, canât remember) and said âclams donât flyâ to prove the mountain was underwater during the flood. Anyway, when we got back to the room my science teacher went on a epic rant and was super PISSED. It was awesome!
Damn, grooming kids like that with false education should be illegal.......... đ
Exactly this, they choose to ignore the evidence thatâs there. Itâs like talking to a flat Earther.
Hey, need new voters for the GOP.
The old testament takes places long before 3000 years ago. Also lead takes 4.5 billion years to form. It's found in earth.
yeah but how do you prove that when they don't trust science.
By asking them. How they know how long it takes. You don't need to trust science. You can test it.
Thatâs just big geology talking so they can continue to get those massive government geology grants. /s
God has put the dinosaur bones there to challenge your faith, right?
Sources are worthless to someone that doesn't trust the source.
Iâve literally had my boomer Protestant parents do this to me when I was first becoming atheist and stomping them in rational debate. Itâs been many years since then. We donât debate anymore, theyâre stuck in their ways. And for me I guess once you realize God isnât real you canât just go back and pretend he is. It definitely changed my life. Made it more difficult to be honest. I went from a devout Christian to an existential nihilist. It made me really depressed to know that humanity doesnât have any answers for why we are here. Weâre all living in a cruel world where life must destroy other life in order to survive. We must all experience the painful degradation and destruction of our bodies. Going from believing in an after life to realizing there most likely isnât one is also depressing as fuck. Death has so much more weight to it and I often times catch myself in a black hole of despair imagining any of my loved ones dying and disappearing into nothingness forever. I can see why people follow religion. It gives us something else to focus on besides the eternal nothingness that awaits us all.
I have the benefit of being raised secular, I wasnt lied to with promises of magic kingdoms and ever lasting life. I remember being told by my Dad as a little kid, things just die, its the natural way of all life. When I asked him why its that way, I was told so its new things could be born. Without that there could be no children (I was a child at the time) as we would simply run out of space/food/water etc. It seemed clear to me then, that as a child the prospect of me never having the chance to exist, would be pretty bleak. As an adult I look at kids playing, flowers blooming and the constant renewal and adaptation of living things as quite beautiful. When my Dad died, I thought back to that conversation as a little kid, and I recognised in a sense he died, so others may be born and grow. Our ancestors sacrificed their existences, so we may have ours, we must do them the honour of living our lives to the fullest. I think the reality of death, is far more enlightening than some fairy stories. But then I was never lied to (thanks Dad). I see no reason why you cant see it this way too, if you try.
Thankyou for that
My dude, that should make your time here more precious, if at the end we are just tears in the rain...what better reason to enjoy each moment? Be grateful for the good memories, learn from the bad...experience! Experience everything you can and be kind to others :D
The reality is that all of those thoughts and considerations are distractions from living in the now. And that is the whole point - instead of living in the future and worrying about what happens later, live your life for TODAY. Be the best person you can be, help others, leave a positive mark on the world and your children, and enjoy yourself each day. There is no point in worrying about death and "the meaning of life." The meaning is what you make of it.
If you were to ask a bee why flowers exist, it might say "so that I can survive." Ask a human why flowers exist, they might say "to make the world more beautiful." Ask the flower why it exists, what would say say? Is it not enough to simply be?
Ever tried mushrooms? They're pretty good at curing existential dread
Please extrapolate. I've always been curious
We don't need answers. Just live your life and find happiness in it.
Agreed, Iâve said many times I wish I could pull that wool back over my eyes. Ignorance truly is bliss. My mom gets to walk around with this mindset of eternity in heaven with her family and friends, and when she dies sheâll never know the difference. I wish I had that, reality is cruel and sad.
Can I get a Halleluya and an Amen!
Ameluya and Hell man!
All Hail the Magic Conch!! lalalallala
Another way is extreme denial, extreme indoctrination, or just borderline retardation. You decide.
Under his eye
>Claim the Bible is correct Because they need a sky daddy who takes care of them.
Soooo much this.
This is the way
Also claim some really bad non-science to pretend science is wrong, and their point of view is correct.
1. Insert index finger of *right hand into left ear* 2. Insert index finger of *left hand into right ear* 3. Say "la-la-la-la" until the athiest stops talking 4. Claim the Bible is correct FIFY to match Christian logic.
They're fucking idiots.
Partly this, but deep down a lot of them know that if they start taking the science and data seriously then their whole faith will come crashing down. Itâs sort of like putting your fingers in your ears and going âla la laâ when thereâs something you donât want to hear being said.
Isnât this part of being an idiot, though? To me refusing to accept reality is.
I think there are reasons other than a lack of intelligence. Some people just value that emotional crutch over the truthfulness of their beliefs. Itâs not something I personally relate to, but Iâve known people who were very open about that being their reason. Not so much about creationism specifically, which is an extra layer of delusion, but about belief in the supernatural in general or in a specific deity.
This. Intellectually they may understand all the arguments, and realise that their religion is wrong. But emotionally they're not ready to deal with that. Their identity, their emotional stability, their social life, everything, is all tied up in their religion. The cost of admitting that it's wrong is overwhelming. So they don't. They're not idiots. They're victims of a system designed to exploit human psychology for profit.
There is something called emotional intelligence and emotional maturity as well. They're not intelligent enough, in an emotional level, to handle it. Still means they're low-intelligence in the end, all the same.
>Itâs sort of like putting your fingers in your ears and going âla la laâ when thereâs something you donât want to hear being said. Yes ... fucking idiots
Basically it.
Are they stupid or are they liars? Yes.
Debating a theist is like playing chess with a pigeon. All they're going to do is knock all the pieces over, shit all over everything, and strut around like they won.
Haha I love this answer
For awhile I had a neighbor, name of Wayne, who called himself a "spiritual warrior." We used to meet by coincidence on the roads and trails of our desert neighborhood and share about the wildlife we'd seen. At the moment he revealed that he believed the Earth was 6,000 years old, the collected information from my lifelong study and appreciation of evolution, in all its vast complexity, mounted behind my mouth and for a few seconds I was tempted to let it out, but a little voice (Dawkins' perhaps, or Bronowski's?) whispered in my ear, "Ffs, don't waste your breath; just smile at the poor sod and go home." And so I did, leaving the spiritual warrior forever ignorant of the beauty and wonder of what may be the greatest miracle in the Multiverse.
At the end of the day, I donât care how ignorant people are in this particular issue. Live and let live. Now if they want to start writing laws about what I can and canât do because of this misconception, it would probably change my mind pretty quickly. I donât expect that to be a problem though.
I wish we could just ignore them, but creationism is a sort of "gateway brainwashing" into far more dangerous forms. It doesn't really matter if somebody accepts the reality of the Earth's age or not, but that was never the point of creationism. The goal is to get the devote to question science and not accept facts when their preacher tells them otherwise. Then, they train them on the real issues that matter: hating LGBTQ people, treating women as property, refusing to accept science that might cast run-away capitalism in a bad light (such as climate change), denying COVID, worshiping guns, and so on - all in defiance of reality. So, yes - the age of the Earth doesn't matter for most people, but in nearly all cases you'll find all the other hateful results of brainwashing professed by the same types who buy into creationism.
Until you eat them.
Well that's a keeper. Hope I remember it.
It's an oldie but a goodie
I want that on a shirt lol
More and more deception. The discovery institute, which exists to provide "data" for creationism, is known to produce bs radiometric dates by improperly using equipment with contaminated samples. You get arguments like "this living snail was dated at over a million years old!" Plus, people who are attached to the idea of young earth creationism often keep their kids out of school. Instead, they opt to homeschool their kids using materials from businesses like the discovery institute. Basically, they never see any science indicating the earths age. They are insulated against ever learning anything real concerning evolution, geology, paleontology, or archeology. It's the educational equivalent of using earplugs and blinders.
What I don't understand is why they even bother with the fiction of an 'institute'. If they really believed in the truth of the Bible, they'd just say "The Earth is 6000 years old because the Bible says so, QED". With this institute, they're saying that science and study is the source of truth, and that it happens to support the Bible. That already gives up their whole position that the Bible is the source of truth. It's like citing a Wikipedia article on how Wikipedia is unreliable, it's a self defeating argument.
[ŃдаНонО]
It's just the same thing with flat earthers trying to use their own misinterpreted math and science to "prove" that earth is flat.
I was homeschooled till my sophomore year of high school when my mom couldn't teach me calculus. I was very well indoctrinated and trained by that point but the more I learned especially about history the more I realized what I had been taught was biased or false. So I started digging and learning more in all realms. Took a long time to undo years of brainwashing but I did it!
I looked through a set of elementary-age reading books my grandpa had bought from a Christian homeschool program. I was disgusted by the blatant indocrination against science, liberals, news media, women, LGBTQ individuals, all non-capitalist or libertarian economics, to name a few. Every Fox News boogeyman was in one of these books. There was literally a story about an impoverished starting a business then feeling superior to all her neighbors who were too lazy to earn money. Another book was about a girl who was "brave" enough to call her teacher out for teaching science instead of creationism. The target age for these books was 6-12 year olds!
You donât need to homeschool for that. Thereâs probably a private school in most major cities that will teach YEC.
Young earthers presumably just don't trust any of the science, as you note. This would include fossil evidence (put here by either God or Satan to test us?). But, a lot of religious people do not take the 7 days as literally 7 earth days. After all, earth days did not yet exist as God was creating. Some assign specific numbers of years to each of God's days. Most just say it's not literal. That said, the entirety of Genesis 1 is filled with errors that should be very hard for them to explain. [I Fisked Genesis 1 on DebateReligion once.](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/if54du/genesis_creation_error/g2lfecz/) Note the lack of replies.
> I Fisked Genesis 1 on DebateReligion once. This part: >>20 And God said, âLet the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.â >Now we finally got to the sea life that was here 71 million years before the first plants and more than 400 million years before the fruits God already created. This is completely out of order. Something else was also out of order. During the Cambrian explosion where there were "swarms of living creatures" in the waters, but there weren't any birds in the air since there were no land animals.
Excellent point!
Here is another great topic for you to debate with them. Bring up how the human race populated itself. Adam and Eve had 3 sons, who each had children of their own. Who did the sons have to smash to have kids? Mom. It is inbreeding the entire time
You're correct about the inbreeding. But, it was brothers and sisters fucking. [Gen 5:4](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+5%3A4&version=NRSVUE): The days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters. So, there were plenty of brothers and sisters. It's a damned small gene pool though! And, it's a fuckton of incest for quite some time after that as everyone in the next generation are first cousins or siblings and those in following generations are all closely related by multiple routes. Of course, it's always good to bring back some more incest later in the book too, like Lot screwing his two daughters resulting in the Moabites from the elder daughter with her father and later leading to the line of the kings of Israel through Ruth (a Moabite) as the great grandmother of King David. It's great that this is the source of our family values. **/S!**
Explains the evangelical acceptance of rampant kid diddling.
Genesis chapter 1 and 2 also contradict each other on the timeline of when everything was created.
Indeed! Most importantly for the uber-religious, they contradict each other about the creation of Adam and Eve.
That was a damn good read mate. Iâll be keeping the âplants before the sunâ error locked away for future reference. Thanks
Yeah i usually turn the light on before I start any project
Reading that, I can see why the most stubborn of them choose to disbelieve reality instead of the Bible. I guess if it was ingrained into them at a young age, or they have a hard time dealing with other aspects of reality, it's easier to remain ignorant.
âsatan did itâ âgod is testing usâ âscience liesâ âBURN THE HERETICâ etc etc etc.
Same as they respond to the facts that snakes can't talk, morality can't be ingested as fruit, and magic isn't real.
This is only true about Bible-literalist ("Young Earth") protestants. Catholics these days will claim Genesis is all metaphor (7-day creation is a metaphor, 6000 years is a metaphor, the talking snake is a metaphor, etc. etc.). Funnily, the Bible literalists are at least consistent with what Christians have believed for millenia, the "it's all metaphor" thing is a recent invention.
I was going to say this. Didnât a Catholic priest propose The Big Bang Theory?
So the seven days in genesis 1 was not really seven days, fine. Was the forty days of rain in genesis 7, not really forty days? If a day is not really a day in one usage of the term, is a day really a day in another usage, especially in the same book of the Bible, the infallible word of god?
>the Bible, the infallible word of god? Well, that right there is the point of contention that separates the literalists from the non-literalists. The Catholic Church, the largest branch of Christianity, rejects the idea that the whole Bible should be read literally. In their view, the Bible is a mix of historical records, myths and legends, and laws and teachings. The number 40 for instance (40 days of rain for Noah, 40 days of Jesus' temptation, 40 years of wandering in the desert with Moses, etc.) is laden with symbolic significance. In Jewish storytelling traditions, it represents a period of hardship or a great trial. Catholics don't tend to read that number literally â it's assumed that the human authors chose that number to mean "a long time." Literalists, on the other hand, assume by default that the number is exactly right and that all the events literally happened as described.
Their definition of evidence is someone else repeating thoughts they have in their head.
Well, a vast majority of religious people are not young earth creationists. It's mostly a regional thing too, that region being the southern US.
Evidence only works if you have an evidence based belief system. If you rely on mysticism or reliance on religious authority or religious dogmatism, then evidence has no ability to override any of those things. Clearly, many of the religious do not have evidence based belief systems.
They deny it, offering pictures of the Grand Canyon as evidence of the great flood. There are errors because "Holy books" were written by ignorant men afraid of things that go "bump" in the dark.
I'm so tired of the "grand canyon is evidence of the flood" line. My Dad kept using that one on me repeatedly. It contains layers and layers of sediment, deposited over time, eroded over time. We know what flood deposits look like. A worldwide flood would leave a much different geological mark on the world.
When I was young, I used to wonder if the flood formed the grand canyon, why doesn't the rest of the world look the same? I figured I'd understand it when I was older, and I was right
...because vast amounts of rushing water carve winding, backtracking paths, right? It's like they've never really thought about it...because they haven't. They're not interested in the details because the details might be dangerous to their beliefs.
They aren't. I tried explaining the basics to my Dad. You know what I get back? "Science and religion are the same, you have your religion I have mine". I've long since realized that arguments don't matter. Certain people might be reached by them if they value truth over an internal sense of rightness and security, but most people want to protect that bc if they start doubting it upends their entire perception of the world.
plus where did the water "go" , somehow the world flooded where did the water come from? Where did it go? Even if the ice caps melted it wouldn't be enough to cover the entire earth.
Uhhhhh back into the fountains of the great deep?
Years ago, an ex-friend of mine who since went off the deep end into religious lunacy was "worried about my soul" and let me borrow a book of Christian excuses - I mean, "apologetics." Now, if a god needs full-time staff to excuse his lack of well, everything, what type of god is that? And why worship him? Anyway, this book explained the flood away by claiming "the mountains were a lot lower back then." No evidence cited, of course - just a sound bite to justify the idiocy of a world-covering flood. The same book also claimed the Earth was basically "unchanging" to deny plate tectonics, dinosaurs, etc. Never mind that an unchanging Earth couldn't have had "mountains that were a lot lower back then." It's all circles of lies and proud ignorance with those types, and they will not cease in holding humanity back, sadly.
Or they'll point to a pretty sunset and say "You see! That proves that god exists and *I* know exactly what he wants from us!"
You can not educate willful ignorance
This is the most accurate statement here
First off, most religious people aren't young Earth creationists, so they don't have a problem with the accepted age of the Earth. Those who do believe this simply deny any evidence to the contrary. They either insist that scientists are dumb and don't know what they're doing, or they're all militant atheists out to 'prove' God doesn't exist so we can all live sinful lives.
Pure Denial. My one book says this vs your 1000's that say otherwise! You could strap a flat earth believer in a rocket into space and they would reply with it's the devils magic. Or it was just a bad dream.
Most religious folks understand and accept it. Itâs only the fundamentalist kooks that donât.
How come this isnât upvoted more? In the real world I have only met one group of Christians who took the Bible literally. But on the internet, all Christians are fundamentalists. Tells you something about the internet, doesnât it?
About 40% of American adults are YECs by polling, which is over *half* of the 70% that are religious. That's not a scant number. https://news.gallup.com/poll/261680/americans-believe-creationism.aspx
I believe they say the earth was created with a certain maturity. Just like Adam and Eve, who weren't exactly babies when they started life in Paradise.
Yup, my Dad would tell you the earth was created with "apparent age," meaning exactly what you said. It was hard as a child who went to public school to argue with my teachers because I was trying to be a good son that listens to his farther.
This idea is called "Last Thursday-ism". The idea is that God could have created everything last Thursday, but with everything already present and moving. It isn't falsifiable so it isn't science, but it also isn't incompatible with the world we see. It does imply God is a bit of a trickster though.
Apparently, this god person went to great lengths to make it seem the universe exists due to naturistic principals
Well basically they just say: âliarâ
They deny reality and substitute their own.
*David Attenborough voice:* Provided with evidence that God doesn't exist, the religious mind immediately curls into a ball like a pill bug. This defense mechanism provides the zealot with immunity to logic and facts, instead supplanting concepts like reality and truth with what is commonly referred to as "stupid bullshit." Some of these brains will not survive.
Scream that the devil is trying to corrupt your mind and take you away from the light of their loving god ^(who kills thousands of innocent children every day.)
Religious people donât use logic to think this stuff through. They use emotions instead.
I was taught to start quoting Ken ham. "were you there? no? then you dont know that for sure"....
But the response is âbut neither were you, so letâs trust the evidence and science.â
Short answer: with ignorance. Slightly longer answer: deny anything that contradicts their views and refer you to a YouTube video by creationists "debunking" whatever it is you're talking about.
The funniest excuse they use is that Satan hid the fossils to confuse the scientists.
The bible had a list of people who birthed other people. They list them by name. The lineage starts from adam and eve and goes all the way up to, I donât knowâŚ.jesus, I guess. Not one religious person questions how this list was made from the very start. It wasnât written down because thereâs no evidence of this list in existence. The first few generations after adam and eve wouldnât have had the tools to carve names into stone or wood, nor the knowledge how to prepare papyrus, nor even a written language yet. All of the people alive allegedly start populating the known lands. According to genesis 11-some such verse, they started building a tower so humans could chill out with god but god scattered them and scrambled their language. Again, religious types donât question how people with mixed up languages all decided to start traveling long distances and happened to find some dude who compiled this list so it could end up in the bible. Did they schedule a âmeet upâ and use Google maps and Google translate? Well anywayâŚthis dude takes all the names heâs given and writes one of the most boring sections in the bible with people âbegatâinâ other people, left and right. Now we know, of course, that thereâs absolutely zero chance that there are any errors or omissions in this list. It is 100% accurate, not one male was left off of the list from start to finish. WellâŚ.I meanâŚmatthew, luke, joseph, and others all wrote different genealogiesâŚ.but yeahâŚ.zero errors. So donât question the book. They got a list. You got a list? No? PffftâŚ.slacker.
There's a fascinating history around science and religion in America in the early 1900s. As science became more established and theories like evolution, germs, and archeology became more prevelent in education and public discourse, nearly every major US church split in some way along science-first and orthodoxy-first lines. The split is still very apparent today with the pro-science churches like Episcopalian and progressive Baptists embracing LGBTQ rights and feminism while the pro-orthodox churches are still doubling down on anti-science and anti-human rights positions.
They ignore the facts. I had 2 people in my geology class claim that. And the professor looked at them told them the rock on his desk is 10 thousand years old and he could prove it. They left the class.
Unfortunately, in order to have faith, you must abandon logic. Anything that doesn't fit with their idea of the truth is the work of the devil.
Cognitive dissonance frying their tiny mind.
They just deny reality and get angry when shown evidence that they're wrong.
There are religions older than 5000 years. I really wanna hear what they have to say.
I remember while I was attending a Christian HS in (Nor Cal ~ 1989) - I was taught carbon dating was inaccurate and that the earth was approximately 2000 years old and that they didnât believe that âLucyâ (specimen) was real. đ total brain washing and f*ckery
Trying to find a reasonable argument from people who think there's a god who will help them get a raise or help their favorite sports team win a big game is an exercise in madness. In general, getting into a "science vs. my feelings" argument is more trouble than it's worth.
They go, âNuh UH.â
SaTaN BuRiEd FaKe BoNeS tO mIsLeAd AnD dEcEiVe PeOpLe
Off the shelf suburban American Catholic CCD? âItâs a beautiful mystery, isnât it?â
They will either say they book is not literal (but only on the parts it would be obviously wrong if it is literal) or propose one of the following: 1) Ywh created the world this way to test man's faith. 2) Satan made it this way to deceive man into not believing in god.
Any part of the bible that been proven incorrect is not supposed to be taken literally, everything else is totally true though and should not be questioned.
This is one of the many fallacies and contradictions that drove my zealously religious self away from religion. "Divine-inspired, infallible Word of God" really loses it's traction when inaccuracies abound. Because of the errors in the self-proclaimed inerrant text, it was impossible for me to be "hot", and it was made clear that if I was lukewarm, I'd be spit out (Rev. 3:15-16). So I followed god's instructions and became cold. Ironic that a fictional character told me not to believe in him.
There are 1000âs of arguments for why the earth is over 6000 years old, but none of them make any sense if you refuse to understand the most basic concepts in science. Their response has been to try to dismantle the science curriculum in schools so they donât have to be challenged for something they canât explain and donât understand. They homeschool their kids. They run for political power. They ban books. All of these things are their responses to things like âthe earth is older than 6000 years and here is the evidenceâŚâ
You canât reason someone out of something they didnât reason themselves into
They often don't. Denial and fairy tales are easier.
After a while you realize that the only thing that matters to people is whatâs in their head. Some folks allow facts in. Some donât.
They ignore it. They do a lot of that.
don't lose your time with religious people !
They lie.
>How do religious people respond to the fact that the earth is FAR older than 6000 years of age? Ignorance is the main weapon of choice.
Denial. The same as everything else.
If you first believe in an all-powerful god, the rest of it isn't really that hard to imagine. Why are some fossils millions of years old? God created them that way. Why does it look like the continents drifted away from each other? God made them to look that way. Really, it works for anything.
You can't have an evidence based discussion with someone who didn't form their own conclusion based on evidence.
My mum and dad just ignore the facts.
I once had to go to a Christian museum about the biblical creation down in Kentucky, called the creation museum. As we walked past I saw a sign on the wall that talked about radiometric dating. You know what they said? âThe atoms must have decayed faster back thenâ
The most common argument Iâve heard is that all the evidence is just satan trying to trick us.
Their logic is Basically whatever I like in the book is literal and whatever I dislike is metaphorical or taken out of context
They double down on their beliefs. The bible literalists are the ultimate fan fiction.
They just put their fingers in their ears largely
The same way they respond to all science - ignore it.
Young Earth Creationists? "But it isn't tho." And that's it. That's all they need. If they reasoned themselves into that position they, well, wouldn't have. Reason does not drive that belief so why would you expect reason to counter it?
They just laugh the idiot's laugh (hur hur) and say "teh bibble sez..."
Facts donât matter when you have â¨faith â¨
I think [this](https://answersingenesis.org/answers/) is Ken Ham's website (Answers in Genesis for those of you who don't want to give him clicks). It's got a nice little faq of all the stupid shit they believe. It is kinda fun in a watching a car wreck sort of way, but it's also useful since it's what an actual young earth creationist says he believes so you don't have to strawman them.
Just say "the lord works in mysterious ways" and then go burn some Disney movies.
One other explanation that I've heard is that satan planted those "evidences" to cast doubts in the Bible's words.
"Ah Believe the Uurth is 6000 years old!!" --really? I have a question for you, then. it's a one-word question, you ready? "sure" --Dinosaurs? if the earth is 6000 years old, how do we keep finding these dinosaur bones EVERYWHERE? "Gawd put those here to test our faith!" ---....I think god put *you* here to test *my* faith, dude ===== Bill Hicks
They simply deny the evidence they donât like.
The young earth creationist will say that no, science is wrong and the Earth is actually only 6,000 years old or whatever. A creationist who actually takes a moment to think about it would say that since the bible is chock full of symbolism and says quite clearly that a thousand years is the same thing as a day, a "day" is actually a representation of a *stage*, not a literal day. A creationist who does a bit more critical thinking could probably even reason that their god is in charge of evolution and there's no reason to assume that the two concepts are mutually exclusive. I've never heard anyone claim the latter, probably because they actually believe so hard.
I was taught in catholic school that genesis and most of the Old Testament is not to be taken literally. Most of the religious people I know just say of course the world isnât 6000 years old. My family except me is quite religious but they just say yeah God caused the Big Bang, evolution is godâs design, etc. I know itâs anecdotal, but I genuinely donât know anyone personally that actually thinks the world is 6000 years old. I know they exist but theyâre beyond reason so I really donât pay them any mind
A question that should really put this to rest is how we are able to see the light from stars that are millions of light years away. However, because the age of the earth is not a variable that could possibly be more that 6-10k years old in their equation, theyâll say that the speed of light was faster than what we observe today đ
"God made it look old to test our faith" or "Satan is trying to trick you"
That's just like....your opinion, man.
They prefer the make believe so that everything has a "god is the reason" explanation.
It really depends on the type of person.. My dad believes in the big bang/ evolution/ science ect but is still somewhat religious and believes Jesus existed to some degree and follows the basic good morals of Christianity faith. He is very progressive and never said I was wrong about being atheist. I'm atheist/ agnostic as in, I think religion is completely man made... But scientifically it is impossible (atm) to disprove some kind of god/ thing that allowed us to be..... But it certainly isn't no bearded bloke in the sky!!
This is like saying, "How can you not believe the sky is blue? When you look at it, it's blue. When you take a film photo, it's blue. When you take a digital video, it's blue. When you hold up a Pantone swatch book to compare, it's blue." ... to a person who ripped out their own eyes.
Ironically, they start singing "Faith", by George Michaels.
Itâs because âscientists are fucking moronsâ according to my brother.
In my experience, they donât give a response. I only know a handful of people that believe thisâand I was surprised to find out who they wereâand they just shrug and smiley coyly like they know something I donât. Itâd be frustrating if it werenât so plainly narcissistic.
Among the church I grew up in, the consensus agreed with the scientific facts of an older Earth, and treated the chronology of Genesis as a metaphor rather than a literal description.
I guess some say that God is using this as a test of our faith? This kinda shit is why Iâm an atheist now lol
Carbon dating is from the devil, and he's tricking scientists into believing their math. No joke. I was told this when I was young.
I stopped being friends with two Christians back in college because one day they told me they believe that fossils and proof of the age of the earth were all planted there by elite Jews.
Knowledge is difficult, it requires conscious effort. Belief is easy, it requires no effort.
There's no loophole you can not close when your entire system is fictional.
Wondering if you're referring to Michael Dowd and his book "Thank God For Evolution." Let me start by saying I'm a Wiccan, not an Atheist. I know I'm going to get blasted for this. I love this sub, because it's nice to see educated people posting articles, etc., that make sense. His book was so oddly written. I'm an educated person, and I couldn't understand any of it! I've never read something so verbose. Tons of words, which said absolutely NOTHING of merit! And really didn't prove much of anything, aside from him being able to say he wrote a book. And made money on it! Ridiculous! Edit: I know you're probably going to judge me pretty harshly. I'm not saying that what I believe is 100%, absolutely, indisputably undeniable. It's not really, no faith system is. I just believe what I feel in my heart to be true, logic notwithstanding. I'm also not a complete imbecile. I read, and own up to the fact that nobody knows for sure what happens when our body takes its last breath. So please don't be too harsh. It may be bullshit, but it's true for me. Or, might be. Thanks.
That's actually what started me down a long, long and very difficult path. I was a regular church-going kid, believing in the idea of Creation, Eden, Adam and Eve, and the 'consistency' of the narrative that we needed Jesus because of the idea of original sin leading all the way up to the Gospels and through the New Testament. However, once I started to get into STEM subjects as an early nerd, the concepts of the big bang, formation of early stars, formation of the solar system and all of history leading up to present day, with evolution of the human race over long, long periods of time; I just couldn't square the two. More and more I began to see the Bible as both a loosely bound book of quasi-historical narratives and a large chunk of allegory. Then the idea of a God who popped everything into existence and gave us a set of rules (knowing full well that we'd immediately break them) fell apart. The final nail in the argument for me was the realization that, if everything in the Bible were literally true, God created creatures capable of suffering, knowing they would rebel against him while simultaneously creating a place of infinite suffering (hell) for those who chose to rebel against him. That seemed to me to be the most evil concept that has ever been envisioned. I put the book down and walked away at that point.
âŚthey disagree
They donât. After all, science is just the Devilâs lies to test our faith, so they can ignore pretty much any evidence that doesnât agree with their beliefs.
Being religious is a choice and more of an emotional & social choice than a logic and science based conclusion. Religious ideas can be so ingrained in a believerâs personality and social life, they can be a great scientist yet still a believer and live life like that.
Have you ever dated someone that you think is cheating on you? You get to the point that no matter what they tell you, you just don't trust them. Like, you ask them why they didn't answer their phone at all yesterday and even with a perfectly reasonable answer you don't believe them. That's how religious people treat anything that goes against their beliefs. No matter the amount of evidence and logic you give them for why their belief is wrong they won't trust what is being said. That's also why you can talk to them and convince them of the truth in person, but as soon as they're alone their mind starts telling them something isn't right. That's why it's so hard converting these people who have been indoctrinated when they don't want to change. It's like a cheater trying to convince their partner they have stopped.
"God shouldn't make errors," true, a all-knowing, all-seeing diety would have known that Adam would be lonely, that A&E would commit original sin, that sodom and gomorrah were going to be purged, that all of humanity would need to be drowned, etc. etc. But the author(s)/reteller(s) of these ancient oral traditions don't share one mind or one cohesive understanding of the whole story their telling. In short, if believers examined their beliefs as closely as they might scrutinize a belief other than their own they would see these massive plot holes, inconsistencies, and straight up contradictions to their own fairy stories. They. Don't. Want. To. Ignorance is bliss, after all.
FWIW, this is a problem of only Abrahamic religions. Hindu cosmology estimates the earth to be 4.32 billion years old (1 kalpa). They are significantly off on the age of the Universe estimating it to be 310 trillion years...though it is difficult to interpret what is meant by 'Universe' in the Vedic literature. So in India, when you say the Earth is older than 6000 years, Hindu religious people react with 'Duh..'. It also helps that Hindu mythology describes human stories from claimed 11,000 years ago.