I think it's of utmost importance that people realise they are participating in a double standard by accepting only some of the doctrines of their faith and rejecting others. Many Christians claim to reject the old testament for example, however, canonical Christian bible includes the old testament. But even just looking to the new testament, it is said in different gospels at various points that none of what went before is to be forgotten 'until judgement day'. And again, the new testament also features homophobic messages.
Once more, if nothing in the bible states that any of it is to be taken literally, why even bother accepting any of it? And nothing in the bible states that it is to be taken as metaphor either can I just quickly point out, so by assuming that you are making a leap of logic which does not follow - one which you have clearly done in order to justify your cherry picking.
Essentially, what is happening is the religious people with a modicum of intelligence in each generation are reduced to less and less pervasive faiths. Once upon a time God (or gods) served as an answer to most of the common person's questions about his place in the world. But as time and science have marched forward, we've been able to construct more rational and evidenced based answers to these questions. In just two hundred years, the methods and tools of science have taken us from complete ignorance about our origins and believing as written the tale of genesis, to having almost a complete picture of how it all happened. And as our investigations in to those origins have deepened, we haven't found any reason to suspect anything divine having had an involvement in what we've discovered so far.
But those who still cling to religious beliefs see that there are gaps in our knowledge, and instead of encouraging scientific enquiry, they want to stifle us and have us accept that 'God did it'. How did we go from inorganic chemistry to cellular life? We don't know for sure yet - we've had some theories of course, none of which involve a deity - but honestly we are not really certain of the exact mechanism yet. Thus, the methods of science have reduced the omnipotence of God to nudging some nucleotide molecules in the right place at the right time as it stands. And I reckon its fair to say, considering what we've achieved so far in the past two hundred years, we'll probably have the scientific answer to that question in a matter of a couple of decades. What will then be left for God? The big bang?
Well we're already on that too. Looking at the current evidence, it is possible that our entire universe has a total energy of zero and arose from a simple, highly improbable quantum fluctuation. What existed before the big bang? A timeless, space-less manifold. Does that blow your mind? It probably sounds ridiculous to you if you are religious. What I must ask then is, what is less ridiculous: A timeless, space-less mathematical object; or a timeless, space-less big beardy man with human emotions who cares about the lives of mere humans and sends down his only son to atone them for the sins he led them to commit?
When you think about it really, it seems far more likely that God evolved from human minds, than humanity being evolved from the product of a God-like mind.
Last edited by omgpop4real; 26-06-2012 at 09:42.