Truth 1725

Neither do you, bud.
MOST people, not just Catholics, had a hard time accepting a heliocentric 'verse.
Desire to be the center of the universe is hardly limited to those who call themselves Christian.

Scientific rigor lies with its falsifiability, true (though I prefer to say "testability", as scientific theories that happen to be true cannot be falsified). My Bio prof spent a week on that - simply for the climax of "Evolution is 'just a theory', yes - but so's gravity."
Never mind that he insisted that evolutionary theory include common ancestry of all organisms, which is entirely untestable.
Science tests theories of principle to predict outcome of experiments to explain observed phenomena.
Somehow, secular scientists have forgotten.

Here is something to ponder, Gus. Life is short and but an eternity in hell is a big price to pay for a small period of gadget fads.

You see, I have nothing to lose by my faith in the Lord Jesus and his promise of salvation through grace. I get to enjoy all those gadgets too while I'm alive. But here is the kicker, If I am right, when I die, I get to go to a place with streets lined in gold and you will be going to a place of eternal fire. But if there is no eternal salvation as you believe then I will be dead just like you. Either way I lose nothing but you have a lot to lose in your beliefs.

I made the same argument on another thread earlier this morning. What many non-believers who try to argue that they rely on science and not unproven myths written in a book don't understand, is that science supports most everything in the Bible. Many scientists are Christians who see the complexity of organisms as absolute proof of a Creator. Everything tends toward randomness and caos, so how can all these elements manage by randomness to form these complex structures? Additionally a note to Gus85, if you read the teachings of the Koran, then read the teachings of Jesus in the Bible and his fulfillment of Old Testament prophesy, you will see there is a big difference.

I don't think Pascal's Wager is a very logical way to prove your point. If the only reason to become a believer is out of fear of eternal punishment, then that's not a valid reason. Fear and force are never valid reasons. And isn't it also somewhat morally relative to have the prospect of punishment as the sole determination of whether or not you believe in something? And what if Jesus was wrong? What if the Quran was right? Wouldn't you suffer just as much as the atheists?

Streets lined in gold. Eternal fire. It is incredible, unbelievable, that in the most advanced country in world history, in the 21st century, seemingly normal - even gifted and extraordinary - people can cling to this childish, Bronze-Age nonsense. It's like a virus, passed from parent to child down the generations.

Wow Herald, where to start. You obviously have no concept of why millions of people accept(ed) Jesus. You erroneously try to pare it down to one single reason, that of fear of eternal damnation. I will admit though, that eternal damnation should be reason enough. And where is force an aspect of anything other than the muslim religion? Moral relavitism is a term that applies to the religion of secularism and not applicable to Christians as our moral code as dictated by the Bible is not relative but absolute. Please explain how "Thou shall not..." is relative. Your strawman argument questions are extraneous to the discussion of Christianity vs. the religion of science.

Try it Nick before you knock it. You might just understand why gifted and extraordinary people do cling to religion. I'm sure there were people like you in every generation throughout the AD era asking the same question. And it is incredible isn't it.