The debate "Science goes directly against a literal translation of the Abrahamic holy books" was started by
September 9, 2017, 9:19 pm.
13 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 24 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
Diogenes_of_Sinope posted 4 arguments, locke posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
locke posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
Diogenes_of_Sinope, castor and 11 visitors agree.
officiallsse, sabrina, locke, kaio, mirah_luv, lito and 18 visitors disagree.
then you kinda agreed what I'm saying. I'm saying it goes in direct opposition to what the stories literally say. case in point. my sister believes the world is 6000 years old, God poofed us on here, and there was a worldwide flood. science goes against all that
I won't say it like.. it's opposition to it... but.. see science is only based up on the observations... scientists look for something different.. like say it for newton.. bcz everyone know his story.. right.??. anyways... when the gravitational law was not introduced... newton saw a pattern .. which is if any thing goes up ... it'll come down definitely.. he worked on this observation and gave a law... and first of all do you know what is a law.? in science, law is something that is repeating by doing some action.. universe follows a pattern and science is the way to uncover it.. and about holy books... as far as i know they're just stories... there are no proofs... if there are, then i don't know about them.. let me know if there are some.. and there are some phonomenas that even science can't explain but we've just scratched the surface of science... there was a scientist, i don't know his name but he once said that if science is the whole ocean then we just know as much as a drop of water in it...
eg. evolution vs creation, the idea of a world wide flood, the book of job
how does science go directly against the holy books
Bible, quran, torrah, hadethes, etc.
now with "holy books" are we talking about?
I'm not saying the holy books are wrong. I'm saying science is in direct opposition to a literal interpretation of the holy books
So the holy books are wrong, considering science is based proof backed facts.