'Of course, there will always be a few nutjobs that cling to these old beliefs, just like the ones that still worship the Norse gods.'
How offencive to the Astur religion! Have you ever taken the time to sit down and reaserch there belifes? Have you ever reaserched any religion? I am intrested to know.
'The only reason science re-interprets evidence is because some new evidence comes along. Religion has no new evidence, it has supposedly infallible books that never change. All that happens is people try to change the meanings of the words to make it compatible with science. This is a ludicrous way of doing things, and nulls the possibility of any of their claims being infallible or even true.'
Says who? Religion takes the new evidence brought forward by science, philosophy and others and shapes a new belife around that. Darwinism has done the same countless times. For instance, in the 1970's some die hard evolutionists refused to even concider the possibility that astroids existed and could wipe out species on earth because this added a new dimension to evolution they were not willing to concider. They are largly discredited. There is no reason religions can not do the same, they just take longer to do it because of stiffed backed conservitives who flock to various religions for some reason.
Holy books never change? Thats rubbish. Holy Books change all the time. The Mormons added a whole new book to the bible. New translations are constantly forcing us to re-evaluate certian passages and a universal version of the bible wasn't decided apon untill about the 6th or 7th century. Even then certian groups were always sproutting up to challenge scripture. And then there are Gnostic Satanists who put a whole new spin on the bible. I am sure other religions are simmilar.
How offencive to the Astur religion! Have you ever taken the time to sit down and reaserch there belifes? Have you ever reaserched any religion? I am intrested to know.
'The only reason science re-interprets evidence is because some new evidence comes along. Religion has no new evidence, it has supposedly infallible books that never change. All that happens is people try to change the meanings of the words to make it compatible with science. This is a ludicrous way of doing things, and nulls the possibility of any of their claims being infallible or even true.'
Says who? Religion takes the new evidence brought forward by science, philosophy and others and shapes a new belife around that. Darwinism has done the same countless times. For instance, in the 1970's some die hard evolutionists refused to even concider the possibility that astroids existed and could wipe out species on earth because this added a new dimension to evolution they were not willing to concider. They are largly discredited. There is no reason religions can not do the same, they just take longer to do it because of stiffed backed conservitives who flock to various religions for some reason.
Holy books never change? Thats rubbish. Holy Books change all the time. The Mormons added a whole new book to the bible. New translations are constantly forcing us to re-evaluate certian passages and a universal version of the bible wasn't decided apon untill about the 6th or 7th century. Even then certian groups were always sproutting up to challenge scripture. And then there are Gnostic Satanists who put a whole new spin on the bible. I am sure other religions are simmilar.
