To believe the earth is 6000 years old is pathological and antisocial. Real Christians don't believe the earth is 6000 years old.
Why Deep Space Nine is the Most Realistic Star Trek Series
- Thread starter Enterpriserules
- Start date
^ I think you may be overreaching.
Why?
Just because one may believe the earth to be 6000 years old has no bearing on them being a "Real" Christian. Christianity is about believing in the fallen-ness of humanity, it's need for salvation from sin and Jesus (God's Son) as the redeemer. So the interpretation of Genesis does in no way have an implication on the status of one's belief in Christ as savior.
Yeah it does. Believing the earth is 6000 years old is akin to believing the sky is green or wood doesn't come from trees. You're welcome to you're own opinions but not you're own facts. Creationist young earthers are an embarrassment to real Christians.
I am sorry but there is nothing in any confession of faith that says if yo believe the earth is 6000 yrs old that you are not a Christian. It's just categorically untrue what you are saying. If you think they are embarrassing that has no reflection on what Paul says people need to be saved. "Then he brought them out and said, 'Sirs, what must I do to be saved?' And they said, 'Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.'" -Act 16:30-31
Now I am going to stop because this is about DS9 and not Christianity (Which I am a firm believer in and follower of)
Now I am going to stop because this is about DS9 and not Christianity (Which I am a firm believer in and follower of)
I'm not going to argue religious doctrine w you or anyone else on a Star Trek fansite. Read your bible. Nowhere in the bible does is say the earth is 6000 years old. That's something people made up. Read your bible.
^ I never said it did say that. I said believing it does not mean someone is not a Christian. It's about interpretation.
Well, the Ha'mara season starts earlier every year ...
I have no idea. We know that the Ferengi purchased warp technology (DS9 "Little Green Men") but we don't know when...except that it was clearly before 2151 (ENT "Acquisition")
Beyond that I have no clue.
This presumes the person you are addressing has one.
Ironically, "read your Bible" is itself a very religious (specifically Protestant) notion: the idea that all the answers are found in a single collection.
I'm curious: could the length of the Bajoran year be extrapolated from Ha'mara? Assuming it's an anniversary, and given Bajor's orbit, we might be able to say that two Bajoran years have passed between The Emissary and Starship Down.
ETA: if that is correct, the next Ha'mara is September 19, 2015. Mark your calendars.
ETA: if that is correct, the next Ha'mara is September 19, 2015. Mark your calendars.
Last edited:
I think there are a few things that make me like DS9. It did some things so well but others it did poorly. Space travel was at its lowest point for excitement here. One of the reasons I love TMP and Trek '09 was that they both felt like they were on incredibly advanced ships for travel through space. It was too much business as usual in DS9, and even with the amazing special effects, they weren't really thinking about tactics very much.
DS9 definitely had the best enemy cannon fodder in history though. The Jem'Hadar were established appropriately and never became silly.
DS9 definitely had the best enemy cannon fodder in history though. The Jem'Hadar were established appropriately and never became silly.
The 6000 years thing was just one example of the small minority of Christians who categorically believe all science is a lie, in contrast to the majority whose belief in divinity doesn't cause them to distrust all observable evidence.
It's true the Bible doesn't say specifically the Earth is 6000 years old, but it does say that all species that exist now always existed and no new can come into existence, no? The majority of Christians see the timeline in the creation story as more metaphorical and focus on the things Jesus said in the Gospels. Just they're not the ones ranting on Fox News and dictating national textbook content from the Texas school board.
It's true the Bible doesn't say specifically the Earth is 6000 years old, but it does say that all species that exist now always existed and no new can come into existence, no? The majority of Christians see the timeline in the creation story as more metaphorical and focus on the things Jesus said in the Gospels. Just they're not the ones ranting on Fox News and dictating national textbook content from the Texas school board.
alright I can't ignore it any longer: Texas has some of the best educational standards in the nation if you account for schools that actually have good attendance. Ironically, well for atheists anyway, they are usually the religious schools. They have higher standards and don't contribute to the average educational standard in Texas because they aren't public schools, but they are so common as to be in every town and city of more than 10,000 people. Those public schools who have less are of a quality depending on your area. The further south you go - in other words, the closer to Mexico - the worse their attendance, academic standards, and overall performance is. So contrary to that cartoonishly simple evil redneck, it is another demographic entirely that is responsible for the average education in Texas. Before anyone tells me that I'm being prejudiced or that they know lots of smart immigrants, I'll say first that I know a lot of smart ones too. Go and ask them to explain averages to you.
No, different species are created at different times. And no, it makes no comment on the immutability of creation. The idea that creation should be perfect--that it would be the same at all times--came from the Neo-Platonists, and religious thinkers appended it to their interpretation of religious texts.
I can't say anything about Texas, but across the country, secular/religion-neutral private and charter schools tend to have comparable success rates to their religious counterparts, and one of the big reasons for that is because private schools tend to have smaller class sizes than public schools. Additionally, private schools tend to be better financed, or at least managed better, because there's more money spent per student, plus less red tape and bureaucracy to hamper proper spending on resources. Public schools, especially in today's climate of villifying educators, are notorious for teachers having their hands tied (lack of admin. support and resources, large class sizes, large workload that comes from those class sizes) while administrators overreach.
A school's guiding mission and vision leading to success is one thing for sure, but if that path to achievement is successfully used elsewhere with a different mission, then the mission is not the only integral part of that formula.
Just out of curiosity, because I am not at all religious, but isn't it difficult to believe in a religion that has been required to constantly redefine itself due to scientific discovery? After all, the bible is the writings of mans perceptions of the world a few thousand years ago. Some troglodyte that believes flash floods means god is angry with us isn't going to dictate how I perceive the world.
Not to mention that certain historical facts have also been attributed to religions that predate it?
The idea of a greater power, I can understand how people would believe in that. There is no way to refute it. But religion is very human centric. And the universe is greater than we comprehend. It's fine as a philosophy, there are great messages in all religions. I just don't see how the bible is any different than the writings of Descartes, Kierkegaard, or Aristotle.
Not to mention that certain historical facts have also been attributed to religions that predate it?
The idea of a greater power, I can understand how people would believe in that. There is no way to refute it. But religion is very human centric. And the universe is greater than we comprehend. It's fine as a philosophy, there are great messages in all religions. I just don't see how the bible is any different than the writings of Descartes, Kierkegaard, or Aristotle.
Last edited:
Similar threads
