agreed. found on the webs a while back.. Therefore, God!" Science. Because reality is too interesting to be content with ignorance.. Why cant I be religious AND agree with science? science is da Bomb


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#126 - tholomewsense (05/29/2012) [-]
MFW i'm going to read the comments
MFW i'm going to read the comments
User avatar #16 - hwangw ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
John Locke was a Christian apologist, the creator of the first social contract theory and a father of modern philosophy. He believed this: God is a logical being. If God (this rational and logical being) created the universe, everything in the universe must make sense. If everything makes sense, one can deduce everything's purpose and place in the universe by experimentation and exploration when rationality is applied. Sound familiar? John Locke, based on his belief in God, created the scientific method. Isaac Newton took that philosophy and applied it to his sciences and calculus was born. In fact, the enlightenment was sparked by this revolutionary idea. Modern science was birthed by the belief in God. If there were no religion, there would be no science as we know it.

I just copied and pasted this for the record, can't remember the user who originally said it but props to him.
User avatar #40 to #16 - GoldenLotus ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
Actually, the Socratic method is pretty much the essence of the scientific method. John Locke was never needed. It's all about perspective. Where one person reaches a conclusion one way, a different person can reach the same conclusion from a complete different way.

I'm not saying things would of better without religion, I'm just stating that if they didn't figure it out, someone else would of. If Charles Darwin didn't discover evolution, I have no doubt in my mind that someone else would of and it wouldn't matter how they came to the discovery, it could of popped up in a dream.
User avatar #37 to #16 - PrismaLowell (05/29/2012) [-]
The Ancient Greeks were the ones to first use the Scientific Method, John Locke just refined it
#108 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
science and atheism aren't the same thing
#6 - bitchimflawless (05/29/2012) [-]
Why cant I be religious AND agree with science?
Why cant I be religious AND agree with science?
User avatar #30 to #6 - inyourmind ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
Of course you can I know many who do.
#19 to #6 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
because you believe in a god, and that good created everything. if good created everything, then how could science create something? that is why you cant believe in both. and because your fater molests you, and youre adopted
#32 to #19 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
This man tried to bridge the gap between science and religion, and you shot him down because you're butt-hurt about Christians. Not to mention, your classy response of "Because your father molests you, and youre adopted"

Congratulations, you're an asshole.
User avatar #10 to #6 - ilolzville (05/29/2012) [-]
I know! **** us right?
User avatar #149 - kingnarnode (05/29/2012) [-]
I'm sorry, but what I read at the end part was "Being an asshole. Because life is more hilarious when you're an arrogant prick"
#75 - Sunset has deleted their comment [-]
#110 to #75 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
shhh. no more tears. only dreams now
#77 to #75 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
Who do you think I am?
#81 to #77 - isradam (05/29/2012) [-]
#91 to #82 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
I wanna re-watch this now.
#163 to #91 - isradam (05/29/2012) [-]
Watch the movies
#114 - boogeymansam (05/29/2012) [-]
The opinion of an open-minded Christian.
#127 to #114 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
Too bad church didnt think that we could have both when they burned scientists who proved the church wrong in the middleages.
#133 to #127 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
Are you ******* kidding me? I like to think of myself as nothing when it comes to religion, but are you blaming the church for something they did in the middle ages on christians today? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
#145 to #133 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
Well... they are the reason we don't have flying cars...
#154 to #145 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
Actually, science is the reason we don't have flying cars.
Back in the 80's we were said to have them by this point in time.
Where the **** are my flying cars, Science?
User avatar #123 - IamEllis (05/29/2012) [-]
I'm christian but I have a good balance between religion and science
#151 - WakaTakaBang (05/29/2012) [-]
Because science obviously only belongs to atheists. Forget the fact that my Christian uncle has worked for NASA most of his career and continues physics work as a consultant.
#7 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
No recognition for the vast amounts of Christian scientists?
#11 to #7 - telestriation (05/29/2012) [-]
<5% of scientists identify with ANY religion, Christianity notwithstanding.

But I guess since there's a ******* of scientists you're still technically right.
#17 to #11 - hwangw ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
#103 to #11 - mrgreatnames **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
#44 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
I think we're just looking for excuses to be assholes now. I don't think it's the religion that's important; it's the self satisfaction in ridiculing people different from yourself.
#141 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
It's funny because the vast majority of Christians are of the latter opinion. See, it's ironic!

Sure you can find a few who believe the first, but most don't. In fact, religion and science don't even contradict each other! Whoa! Crazy!
#155 to #118 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
They were equal in strength. They fought until the bitter end, died warriors. But, 3 days later. Bam! Risen from the dead. JFW
They were equal in strength. They fought until the bitter end, died warriors. But, 3 days later. Bam! Risen from the dead. JFW
User avatar #5 to #3 - sketchE (05/29/2012) [-]
darwin was a christian he just believed that everything had a common ancestor
User avatar #8 to #5 - illegit (05/29/2012) [-]
i believe it was a joke
User avatar #46 to #5 - GoldenLotus ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
Darwin actually renounced his Christianity during his study of natural selection and evolution.
#140 - trojanmannn (05/29/2012) [-]
"I don't see God."
Therefore he doesn't exist
"I don't see God"
I read the bible and I believe in him

No need to bash on religious people just because you think you're smarter than them because you don't believe in something they do. No one has dis-proven Christianity/Islam/Judaism/etc.

Plus, evolution is a theory...meaning it hasn't been proven. It takes the same amount of faith to believe in the big bang as it does to believe in the bible.

The picture is a bit of a stretch, but it shows that there are bad people on both sides of the spectrum
#143 to #140 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
What? Someone who is reasonable and sees both sides of the issue? Get off the internet!
User avatar #160 to #140 - GoldenLotus ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
A theory in scientific terms is a fact. Gravity is also a theory.

Actually, most of the bible has been disproven through historical evidence (i.e. very little is found to support most of the stories in the bible) as well as many of the claims made in the Qu'ran. And non existence cannot be proven.

No, it does not take the same amount of faith to believe in the big bang and the bible. Most cosmologists are in agreement through evidence that the big bang happened. There is no evidence in support of a living incarnation of a god coming down to earth and performing magic tricks.

Those atheists in your picture did not kill in the name of atheism and that is the major difference. There are good people who do good things and bad people who do bad things. But religion makes good people do bad things. There have been many people who have killed in the name of their religion or their god.
User avatar #164 to #160 - trojanmannn (05/29/2012) [-]
there has also been a lot of people who have done great things for people in the name of his/her religion. Man made Global Warming was a theory, and has been disproved countless of times. However, many people still accept it as fact. And show me a link where in the New Testament, something was disproved. "No support of a living incarnation of a god coming down to earth and preforming magic tricks." Obviously, you've never read the New Testament.

1. Jesus didn't "come down" from heaven. He was born, like you an I, accept he was allegedly never conceived. That is obviously not something that can be proven but historians actually accept that a man named Jesus who came from Nazareth actually existed.
2. Jesus wasn't a living reincarnation. God said he would never take the form of a man. Jesus is the son of God. He isn't God.
3. What about all the eye witness reports, all the stories, all the written accounts? That obviously doesn't prove anything, but still, you can't say there was "no evidence"
4. Magic Tricks? We can't even have a simple conversation without you taking an incompetent, vague jab at Jesus?

Pol Pot killed Christians just because they were Christians because he believed it was too strong of a force to give people faith. Josef Stalin destroyed churches and killed clergy for the same reason.
User avatar #165 to #164 - GoldenLotus ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
Actually, I don't know where you get your facts from, but Global Warming is accepted by over 90% of earth scientists. The New Testament isn't evidence that that New Testament is correct, that's called circular logic and is a logical fallacy. That's like saying a book on unicorns is evidence that unicorns exist.

Well I suppose I'll start with the first thing in the Gospel of Luke where there is a worldwide Roman Census that brought Jesus to Bethlehem in order to fulfill the prophecy. Historians agree that there was never actually such a large Census conducted by the Romans.

1. Yes, historians accept that a Jesus of Nazareth did in fact exist. No argument there.
2. Catholics would disagree on that point.
3. There are no eye-witness reports. The Gospels were not actually written by the apostles, almost all biblical scholars agree on that point. They also agree that the Gospels were not actually written by any who lived during the estimated time that Jesus lived, but were written at the earliest, 20 years after his death and at the latest, 70.
4. I apologize, that was indeed rude and condescending of me.

Pol Pot was a Buddhist. Though Buddhists do not believe in a God, they are not atheist.

I'll also add a note on if there actually were any eye-witness reports:
- Do you understand how many eye-witness reports we have from people who were abducted by aliens? This isn't even lone individuals, we have reports from whole families that all say they were abducted by aliens. And that's today in the modern era where a much higher percentage of the population is literate and educated.

But seriously, we don't have eye-witness reports of Jesus. We do have second-hand reports if I'm not mistaken, but they are even less reliable because historians at the time didn't work as hard to discern between truth and fiction as modern historians.
#146 to #140 - mrbosss (05/29/2012) [-]
true but the fact that you read the bible and didnt die laughing kinda hurts you credibility just saying
#144 to #140 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
I hate the Evolution is a Theory argument because even going by the idea that it is a theory, it is so preposterously well supported that it is basically proven already. And then there's the other little fact that we can and have witnessed evolution in progress. Maybe not watching a fish become a mammal, but we have definite proof of watching one species become another, separate species. Which if you didn't know is what evolution is all about.
User avatar #158 to #144 - trojanmannn (05/29/2012) [-]
If you look at evolution, then wouldn't there have to be a middle ground? Like, if we evolved from monkeys, then where are the mutations that haven't fully gone human, but have still evolved some? And evolution is based on mutations, no? When have mutations in the animal kingdom actually helped animals out? If a mother in the animal kingdom has a child with a mutation, then she kills it, because it realistically has no chance to survive.
#156 to #140 - theholum (05/29/2012) [-]
Do you even know what a theory is?
"Scientists create scientific theories with the scientific method, when they are originally proposed as hypotheses and tested for accuracy through observations and experiments."

There, it's a testet hypothesis, not a ******* guess, which means it's been proven, just as all the other theories. No-one has disproven the religions, i know, but it's not scientists' job to disprove it, it's your job to prove it right.

Had i said leprechauns and unicorns are real, but only invisible and can't be touched, then it's up to me to prove it, not other to disprove it.
#139 - roodypooer ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
The only reason i find this funny is because the person that posted this and most of the people that viewed this havent got a ******* clue how amazingly complex our world is and therefore have no say in this matter. Heres what i have to say in this matter, religiousfags that think science in general is a threat to your religion, GO **** YOURSELF, science is awesome and i bet that a higher power that gave us a brain that if used correctly is your greatest possesion would want us to think for ourself and realise that such a power wouldnt have made us intelligent if it wanted us to just blindly follow some nutjobs that take things to far. And atheistfags, if you really think there is no higher power what so ever, just an hero and get it over with, this world dont need more narrowminded people like you.
User avatar #161 to #139 - GoldenLotus ONLINE (05/29/2012) [-]
Telling people to leave this world just because they don't hold the same beliefs as you is a bit narrow minded, don't you think?
#132 - vunguard (05/29/2012) [-]
-sigh- just put this on that bloody atheist channel.  I come here to laugh, not to listen to anti-/pro-religious bickering.  Seriously, I'm tempted to leave FJ for 			****		 like this.
-sigh- just put this on that bloody atheist channel. I come here to laugh, not to listen to anti-/pro-religious bickering. Seriously, I'm tempted to leave FJ for **** like this.
#95 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
*Reading the comments*

#107 to #95 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
stop posting homestuck you flaming 12 year old homosexual faggot
User avatar #109 to #107 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
The reactions are appropriate, though! People post reactions from Family Guy and other TV series all the time, so why hate on Homestuck?
#111 to #109 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
homestuck is ******* retarded

get your **** together and stop bandwagoning with 12 year olds, and post your **** all over funnyjunk, also, nobody cares if you're Christian and you get upset everytime you read an anti-christian post.

now **** off faggot
#113 to #111 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
1. Homestuck is the single most epic webcomic ever created.

2. Homestuck is riddled with swear words, below-the-belt humor and penis jokes. What's more, the majority of the fanbase are in their teen years. And by that, I mean a BIG majority.

3. I WASN'T getting mad, in case you didn't notice (of course you didn't). I was telling everyone ELSE to calm down.

4. No you.
#117 to #113 - anon (05/29/2012) [-]
If I could thumb you down more than 20 times I would thumb this comment down. But I can't, so oh well.

Hurrhurr it has penis and poop jokes it's totally not for edgy 12 year olds with the internet thinking it'll make them cool by constantly referencing a ****** web comic.
#119 to #117 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
>Hurr I hate Homestuck so you have to hate it too.

And even if kids are dirty nowadays, that doesn't change the fact that the majority of the fanbase is not actually comprised of kids.
#130 to #119 - Manihatecows (05/29/2012) [-]
I'm 17....and homestuck is amazing.
I'm 17....and homestuck is amazing.
#89 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
I'm a Christian. This is my reaction.
I'm a Christian. This is my reaction.
User avatar #112 to #89 - graphically (05/29/2012) [-]
the only thing is, you do give a **** .

I've seen a plethora of "OMG WHY DOES EVERYONE PICK ON CHRISTIANS" posts spew from your asshole. I wish you didn't honestly give a **** so we can all stop hearing your whining.
User avatar #115 to #112 - draezeth (05/29/2012) [-]
I only "give a **** " when the post is actually offending and/or innacurate. This post is neither. Thus, no ***** were given.
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)