What about God?

Here’s a great documentary from PBS called “What about God”. I think I can easily answer this question by an equally useless one: “What about the flying spaghetti monster?” Watching these kids at Wheaton College try and reconcile their fairy tale bullshit with science is an exercise in futility if I ever saw it. I almost feel bad for them, until I remember these are the same people who are holding back science education and progress in order to keep their ridiculous faith alive.

It’s about an hour long, so set aside some time for this one.

Comments (24)

  • avatar

    Brandon

    I think Christians have backed themselves into a corner with this whole evolution debate, like they have many times in the past. They have said they are right so much that they can’t even look at the facts because they are afraid they will have to agree that evolution is true.

    I love the comments from the girl at 33:40. “there can’t be that many idiots in science”. I would also add, there can’t be that many scientists that are producing results to kill God. Scientists are not the bad guys who are against Christianity and they are not all in on a big conspiracy to debunk the Bible.

    I think that the discoveries we are seeing in science don’t contradict what’s in the Bible. I’m reading now More Than a Theory: Revealing a Testable Model for Creation By Hugh Ross. You can read it on Google books for free. http://books.google.com/books?id=UJRbBcF6YsMC&printsec=frontcover

  • avatar

    Bob

    I remember watching this when it first aired. I was so annoyed at the father and that pig in shit grin the mom had when she thought he was saying something clever. I wonder if that Nathan guy ever became an atheist.

    Also, I thought I saw in a cartoon that mocked creationism a kid that looked just like one of those high school students. I wonder if he was the inspiration for that.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon: Do you know what is in the bible is a myth, right?

  • avatar

    Michelle

    That guy in 07:20 asked a question about millions of years ago if we were there…
    ok, I would say to him: You believe that everything was created in 6 days, the earth has 6000 years old and we came from Adam and Eve…so I would ask him: were you there?

    Probably he would answer: But it’s what says in the bible.

    I would answer: the origin of the universe, the origin of life on earth and the evolution are in astronomy books, biology books and the origin of the species by Darwin respectively (and in other science books). The advantage those books have over the bible is that they are based on scientific facts while your bible is a fairy tale book written by people who didn’t have scientific knowledge to explain how everything was created…

  • avatar

    Dan

    Okay, good for them, evolution’s bullshit I guess they can ruin any chance of their kids getting a decent college education if they want.
    But they can teach both sides in school, the minute they let me go to sunday school to give an evolution lecture.

  • avatar

    BlueIndependent

    While these students wet their pants over how much the world isn’t conforming to their god, millions of Chinese and Indian students are learning science and technology so they can earn something more than a subsistence living in a vibrant, growing economy. It’s hard not to weep for the future of the US, especially being one of its citizens. So much effort spent on so much worthlessness as religion. That those kids in Ohio don’t see the stark inanity of having students – students not even out of puberty – choose what they’re taught and how, is one of the most intellectually repugnant displays I’ve seen in a while.

    These young people are the result of a god-soaked conservative society. You can hear a few of them wanting to rebel against familial admonishment, but fear of losing god, or worse, losing the approval of the closest people they’ve known all their lives, continues to rule them. Seeing stuff like this done to people, and them accepting it uncritically, makes me physically unsettled. There is so little exposure to anything scientific here, and I can see the teachers trying. But the pulpits are winning, and when these people realize the folly of their path, it’ll be too damn late, and they’ll be angry that it happened, but they still won’t understand why.

    America could use about a hundred Carl Sagans right now.

  • avatar

    Brandon

    “The advantage those books have over the bible is that they are based on scientific facts while your bible is a fairy tale book written by people who didn’t have scientific knowledge to explain how everything was created…” -Michelle

    Good point Michelle. I think the problem that Christians have is that the Bible wasn’t ever meant to explain the origins of earth. We, Christians, take it literally but in actuality it gives a quick summary of how God created the earth and people. The reality is, science gives us the details.

    In that light, science doesn’t prove the Bible wrong.

    God didn’t create everything in 6, 24 hour days, He created it over a period of 2.5+ billion years, but the Bible simplifies it so that it can get on to the stories and lessons.

    The earth doesn’t actually rest on pillars, but the Bible uses this language metaphorically to denote “from one end of the earth to the other.” We still say the sun rises in the east and sets in the west but does that happen? The Bible actually states that the earth is round. The Hebrew word חוּג – “chuwg” is found in Isaiah 40:22 “It is he who sits above the circle of the earth.”

    There wasn’t actually a firmament that separated the waters described in Gen 1:6-7 but this is describing an atmospheric division involving water, not the creation of the Earth’s atmosphere (i.e., the air surrounding the Earth). It was not “a solid platform in space containing reservoirs of water, the valves of which open to produce rain” as Steve Allen might suggest.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon: I’m an atheist and the explanations the bible have about the origin of everything is as real as the greek mithology

  • avatar

    Brandon

    @Michelle: In a weird way, I am agreeing with you. The Bible gives these small snippets of vague explanations about the origins of everything but in reality science is now explaining the details. The Bible isn’t a book written to explain the origins of the Universe because it is not a book about the origins of the Universe. It is a book about God and His people.

    Once Christians realize this we will be able to move past this dark time. Christians don’t need to teach intelligent design in schools and certainly should not interfere with teaching theories based on evidence that supports evolution and an earth that is at least 2.5 billions years old.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon: But some parts of the bible shows how everything originated according to the beliefs of those who wrote it.

    Now you’re saying that everything science discovered until now about the origin of evrything proves the bible is right…sorry, but is not like that. Everything science discovered until now doesn’t corroborate what is in the bible – quite the opposite – shows the bible is wrong (it wasn’t the sole purpose’s science to disprove the bible, but that’s exactly what happened.)

    Some religious people accepted what science discovered. But other religious people refused to see the fact that their bible is a myth when is about the origin of everything they know. So, they want to push their outdated beliefs on other people by demanding the teaching of creationism and Intelligent Design on schools and by say every non-sense idea that comes to their narrow-minded heads to try to disprove science.

    No need to say they fail, because they have no proof of what they say.

  • avatar

    Brandon

    “Everything science discovered until now doesn’t corroborate what is in the bible – quite the opposite – shows the bible is wrong” -Michelle
    Not true. If a Christian can understand that the term “day” used in the Bible meant “an era” (an era can be a period of time lasting millions or billions of years) then everything that we’ve discovered collaborates with the Bible.

    Let’s just say that I try to explain to someone how a car works. I say “You put the key in, turn it, the engine ‘starts’ and pushing the gas pedal makes it go”. It’s this true? yes, but there is so much more going on. The Bible gives this type of general explanation.

    Ignorant Christians are causing too many walls for progress and are hindering education. But this doesn’t mean that the Bible is ‘wrong’, it means that many Christians are wrong.

    A good resource is reasons.org. They have a ‘old earth model’ that explains many points about how science and the Bible coexist. Here’s a great diagram that explains how the first few billion years matches up with the first 6 “days” or eras of the Bible. http://www.reasons.org/files/articles/creation_timeline_chart_color_200805.pdf

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon: according to this chart the each day of creation matches a geological era? This is not right…the bible was written way before the scientists divided the origin and evolution of life on earth into eras. The bible is a book which texts are pre-science.

    Considering your point of view that the scientific discoveries explains in details what the bible says in a vague way. So – for example – in the future one of these discoveries made by science – that in your opinion proves the bible is right – is revised, proved wrong and therefore discarded?

    What is going to happen? Christians will say the science is wrong because it goes against what is in the bible or they are going to come up with some non-sense explanation for that? They are going to change the interpretation of what is in the bible about the recently discarded scientific discovery?

    What would you do?

  • avatar

    Brandon

    “the bible was written way before the scientists divided the origin and evolution of life on earth into eras. The bible is a book which texts are pre-science.” -Michelle

    I’m not sure what your point is here. Why does it matter when the Bible was written? The point I was making was that the order of creation in the Bible matches fossil records dating for each of earth’s milestones were reached. Since the Bible was written before started dating fossils then that means the Bible told us about the earth’s creation timeline way before scientist did. Pretty cool huh?

    “So – for example – in the future one of these discoveries made by science – that in your opinion proves the bible is right – is revised, proved wrong and therefore discarded? ” -Michelle

    If there is revision to a discovery and it contradicts the Bible then I guess we’ll talk about it. Maybe I’ll change my mind. Maybe I’ll deconvert.

    What kind of reasoning is that? By your reasoning I could say what will you do when a discovery is made that proves God’s existence? What will you do?

    You say this is a nonsense explanation but I don’t hear you (or anyone else) giving any sort of explanation as to what is wrong about what I’ve presented. Pointing out that the Bible was written before the dating of the earth’s milestones doesn’t disprove anything.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon: of course it does matter when the bible was written…

    as I said before, the texts in the bible were written in a time where people didn’t have scientific knowledge to explain how everything was created, so they came up with myths. When they put on genesis that god created everything in 6 days they weren’t thinking if 1 day = 24hs or 1 day = 1.000.000 years or whatever… or the time pass differently for god like he’s in a different dimension or thinking “after some thousands years from now scientists will make discoveries that proves us right and they will divide the world’s natural history in geological ages that will match the period of six days told by us”

    If one day a discovery is made that proves the existence of god, it wouldn’t change my life a bit…I would still be the same person I am now, I would still do the things I like and I wouldn’t follow him in anyway.

  • avatar

    Brandon

    Michelle, Those “myths” in Genesis match the order in which scientist tell us the earth, the moon and everything on the earth were formed.

    Please give me evidence to prove otherwise.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon

    That is the thing, sweety…you are the one who believes on those myths in Genesis. To give me evidences to prove otherwise it’s on you, which you tried to…but your theories are bogus

  • avatar

    Brandon

    Michelle,

    True, the burden of proof rest on believers when we are discussing the existence of God. However, I am not trying to prove the existence of God in this conversation. I’m just trying to tell you a simple fact, the Genesis creation order is the same as the order found by scientist.

    Many atheists seem to think that because a person is a theist that the burden of proof lies on us for every subject we talk about. Not true.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon

    I didn’t say anyhting about proving the existence of god

    I said that if you’re the one that believes the scientific discoveries about the origin of everything backs up the order of creation found on genesis, the burden of proving that lies on you and you alone – which you tried to do, but your explanation wasn’t convincing enough because it’s not based on real scientific facts; there’s nothing to do with you being a theist…

  • avatar

    Brandon

    Ok. Let’s start here: I listed evidence for the order of creation that is based on scientific dating. If you disagree with this evidence please tell me which order you believe the earth was created.

    http://www.reasons.org/files/articles/creation_timeline_chart_color_200805.pdf

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon

    You sent me this chart before and I saw it. I saw a term there called concordism. According to the definition presented by this same chart, concordism is “an integrative approach to biblical interpretation known as ‘concordism’ belief that the facts of nature, as discovered by scientific investigation, will be discernibly consistent with Scriptural statements about the natural realm.”

    I made a more profound research about concordism and I came to the conclusion that this belief was made with the sole purpose to make the myth of creation presented in the bible look credible (which is the same purpose of ID). That’s why I said the explanation you gave me about scientific discoveries backing up what’s in the bible is bogus.

    I saw on one of your previous comments about the origin of the moon. There are passages in the bible about it.

    There are two hypotheses about the moon’s origin:

    1 – the moon and the earth have a common origin. The moon was detached of an incandescent mass of a recently formed liquefied rock through the centrifugal force.

    2 – this is the most accepted one: in the beggining of the formation of earth, a missing planet almost the same of Mars hit our planet. This collision caused the complete disintegration of this planet and forced the expulsion of pieces of liquid rock. Those pieces were condensed in a same body and this body was caught by earth’s gravitational field.

    Now, please tell me. According to the bible and according to concordism, which one of these two hypotheses is the true one?

  • avatar

    Brandon

    Michelle, I think it’s funny how you dodge the question I give you.

    But to answer your question:
    The Bible tells us that on the first era the universe was made, this includes the earth, the moon, and everything in the universe. It doesn’t explain the details. Like I said before the Bible is not a science book. It is a book written to tell the story about the Jewish people and their God.

    Science is now giving us the details and what I’m proposing is that these details match the Bible’s very vague and general explanation that the Bible gives, the order of creation.

    You are asking the Bible to give details that it just doesn’t have. Do you look in a book of poetry to learn how to become a chef?

    So now that I’ve answered your question, please answer mine.

    It’s a simple question: Please tell me what you believe the order of creation is and how you came to that conclusion.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon: honey, the geological eras in that chart you showed me are right – thanks to scientific discoveries (I never said it was wrong); what said is wrong is using real science to make the myth of the origin of the universe/the planet earth/the life on our planet presented on genesis credible – concordism is exactly that.

    I know the bible isn’t a scientific book (thankfully) and by saying that you proved my point exactly…the main purpose of those who wrote the bible were to tell the story of the jew people, god, jesus, the end of the world, the judgement day and to give moral guidance for those who read it (moral guidance that is not exactly moral, but that’s a subject for another discussion.

    For example: time travel today is not possible (there’s a lot of hypoteses on how this can be done, but it’s out of our reach to accomplish that) but I write a book full of myths saying that time travel is possible. But I don’t give the details about how time travel can be done because I don’t have the scientific knowledge. 500 years later, a group of scientists discover a way to travel through time and then someone comes with my book saying: “This woman here wrote about time travel and all the discoveries the scientists made about this subject confirm that her explanations are true”. How? That book was written hundreds of years before the scientists figured out a way to make time travel possible and my book was studied, tested and so on and proved to be a myth created by someone who knew nothing about time travel…

    It’s the same thing with the bible. How the origin of everything according to the genesis can be proved right by science if it doesn’t really match on how everything was really created and it was written in a time where people didn’t have enough scientific knowledge?

  • avatar

    Brandon

    Michelle,

    I understand what you are saying. There are many claims in the Bible that are not backed up by science. True. And in this whole conversation I wasn’t trying to say anything else but the one point I wanted to make.

    You are correct, just because the order of creation in the Bible matches what scientist say the order is does not mean that everything in the Bible is true. It just means that the Bible had the order of creation correct.

  • avatar

    Michelle

    @Brandon
    The bible says what things were created in each day (in a very confusing and contraditory way)…but then someone had the “brilliant idea” to come up with a “theory” (concordism) to make the myth of creation credible by saying the geological eras correspond to the 6 days god took to create everything by saying the “bible explained it in a vague and then science came and gave the details”. Please…

    It’s like those people who came with Intelligent Design with the purpose of making creationism look credible by giving a misinterpreted/wrong understanding of scientific discoveries towards the existence of the universe and life on earth.

Leave a Comment

Scroll to top