Barr's work seeks to find evidence for an intelligent creator of the universe through science and the argument for intelligent design. It does not and cannot support any particular religion, certainly not "ancient faith." Science has already disproven several of the cosmological assertions of ancient faith (world is 6000 years old, made in 6 days, etc.). Even if science were able to provide satisfactory evidence of a god, it wouldn't prove any particular faith. It would just suggest that lack of belief wasn't supported by science.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by BlackPawnMartyr

Houston, TX

Member since Dec 2010

15346 posts

Posted on 12/31/14 at 1:10 am to CrimsonCrusade

When discussing evolution we should also look at the evolution of religion over time. For instance polytheism came long, long before monotheism. Then from there separate monotheistic gods came to be.

Also most of the early empires were from different religions that were not Christian. It was only that Christianity was widespread when the atheist Constantinople was struggling to defeat the muslim based empires, and he needed to create some sort of propaganda he could rally his kingdom behind. And thus the state created what is today Christianity and passed it along through European conquest and domination.

I did particularly enjoy the poster who tried to point out that some early "scientists" were a part of Catholicism as if that would give the religion some sort of legitimacy. Apparently it never occurred to him out a lack of historical knowledge, or logic, that this was a bad way to try to prove legitimacy since you are opening yourself up to the fact that previous civilizations in both the Arabic, Indus valley, and China, were far more advanced than Europeans for much of history.

Maybe if you spent less time trying to backasswardly use the scientific method to prove Christianity is legit, you people could educate yourself more about history and the world.