"throughout history science has supported the only source book of truth: the bible"
39 comments
Wrong. Not only does science not support the bible but the bible has not even existed throughout history.
Please, *please* educate yourself on the bible you hold up so proudly. You might be surprised.
Word salad. More or less.
Throughout the bible, truth has supported the only source science of history : book.
Even though the Bible is not complete, and science says the earth is billions of years old as opposed to 6,000. Oh and water into blood is most likely ore. According to science.As the other plagues too have been explained.
"That statement is patently stupid, considering how much science contradicts the archaic writings in that book."
Not if you read the book right... But then again, they're fundies ):
@Michael, when you think about it "mother church" is kind of odd way to describe the church, when most of the priests are male and quite a few of them still oppose any woman becoming a priest. How it can be a "mother church" when it is ran by men?
<< "That statement is patently stupid, considering how much science contradicts the archaic writings in that book."
Not if you read the book right... But then again, they're fundies ): >>
TheReligiousCommie: How does science ever NOT contradict the Bible? Consider the following:
* Bats are mammals, not birds.itself in the Genesis creation story. Even if one account were correct, they couldn't both be true -- so, by default, at least one account is erroneous, even if everything else known scientifically about cosmology and evolution were wrong.
So, how exactly do you "read the book right" to gloss over all of this, and more, verifiable wrongness? If you mean reading it allegorically, that doesn't mean it isn't in conflict with science or reality -- it still is, it just doesn't matter so much, any more than it matters that science and reality conflict with the claims that the wolf in "Little Red Riding Hood" can speak to her and can even impersonate her grandmother by dressing in drag.
* Bats are mammals, not birds.
Half of these things I know for a fact aren't even in the bible. Can you tell me where you found this information so I can look it up?
And FYI: Stop treating these bastards like they're real christians. It's insulting to me and my religion.
* Bats are mammals, not birds.
Lev. 11:13-19
* Insects have 6 legs, not 4.
Lev. 11:23
* Pi is not equal to 3.
This one is arguable, but it's in there. Chronicles II 4:2-5
* Rabbits do not chew cud.
This is also arguable. Lev. 11:6
* Snakes do not speak.
Genesis obviously
* Earth has never been uniformly flooded so much that all mountains were covered by the flood (certainly not within the known existence of life on this planet).
Noah
* Earth (and especially living plants) could not have existed before the sun.
Genesis
* Animals existed before plants.
Genesis
* The Bible contradicts itself in the Genesis creation story. Even if one account were correct, they couldn't both be true -- so, by default, at least one account is erroneous, even if everything else known scientifically about cosmology and evolution were wrong.
Genesis
Because the earth is flat, and the sun goes around the earth, and salt can lose its flavour, and breeding goats in front of striped rods makes striped goats.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
