Mormonism

The fact that other Christians pussy foot around science to try and stay relevent whilst Mormons just roll with it is a sign of Mormon superiority.

>other Christians pussy foot around science
I think you mean "pioneered and created what we now know as it in the modern day".

this

>Science did not exist before Christianity
>Christian scientists of the early modern era had the same pure lack of integrity in their beliefs as modern day liberal churches.

Put your trip back on, Aelian.

It's just a prank bro

Plenty of Mormons pretend the inconvenient stuff is "just a metaphor, bro" too.

The wonders of the scientific method make ot possible for christians to conduct proper research
There are many factors in western thought that made it possible for the scientific method to come to being, not only religion. The thing is simply that an intellectual class can rarely sustain itself, the church was capable of sustaining them on occasion

Not him but pic very related.

who are you quoting?

The enlightenment ideals that "pioneered and created what we know as science in the modern day" were very much shunned by mainstream Christianity at the time. Only much later did "lel it's not supposed to be LITERAL" gain widespread adoption, as the Bible itself became more and more embarrassing in the light of evidence.

He was quoting that Alien guy.

I acknowledge lots of important scientists have been Christian.

I'm saying people like Issac Newton had integrity in their beliefs and otherwise did not mess around. Whereas modern churches generally just crumple in submission whenever faced with scientific findings that challenge the faith then make excuses about the inconvenient parts being metaphorical.

A huge number of scientists were literally clergy, it certainly was not "shunned" by mainstream Christianity and in fact scientific empricism as we know it was also contributed to by clerical scientists. You don't know what you're talking about, as do most people that use buzzphrases like "enlightenment ideals".

Creationism didn't exist until the 19th century you retarded piece of shit

>the Bible itself became more and more embarrassing in the light of evidence
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_biblical_figures_identified_in_extra-biblical_sources

I don't get it, Alien, how does that prove the Earth is 6000 years old?

Not mentioned: Jesus.

Or Noah or Moses, funny that.

The 6 days of creation are not meant to be taken literally and never were taken literally.

Richard Carrier pls, no one takes you seriously.

There is more evidence for Jesus and Moses than there is for Homer, Pythagoras or plenty of other ancient historical figures. The Son of Man's resurrection is also the greatest event in human history. The Apostles didn't lie and certainly didn't get crucified, beheaded, stabbed, burned alive, stoned and bludgeoned to death for nothing. If they didn't see the resurrected Jesus they would've kept denying Him.

storage.cloversites.com/fcfgroups/documents/Why We Believe 7.pdf

Homer is quite likely to be mythical, I don't know anything about Pythagoras desu.

>Christianity just sprung up out of nowhere
I have literally never seen anybody question Jesus's existence, only his divinity. learn a little bit about history before you come here and shitpost, why don't you.

>The Apostles didn't lie and certainly didn't get crucified, beheaded, stabbed, burned alive, stoned and bludgeoned to death for nothing.

What are your primary sources for these claims?

The only one I am aware of there being any for is Peter and those are pretty bad and not contemporary.

Nobody claims that the existence of homer is certain

>Sage
kys

>I have literally never seen anybody question Jesus's existence

Jesus mythicism is gaining a bit of ground among academics at the moment.

>kys
hang yourself

>My concept of learning history is just believing whatever it is common to believe.

"Jesus mythicism" belongs in the trash.

So does Christianity.

And religion for that matter.

I don't think so.

>Creationism didn't exist until the 19th century you retarded piece of shit

That's from some silly film, I forget the name, it's nothing to do with the arguments being made by academics.

>The 6 days of creation are not meant to be taken literally and never were taken literally.

Except that's completely wrong?

>Stalin
>Gulags
>Russian revolutionaries.

Fuck yeah.

"Academics" such as Richard Carrier?

You know 19th century sermons about aliens and evolution were pretty common, right?

>my concept of history is denying the existence of every single non-aristocratic person that doesn't have a primary source explicitly confirming their existence at a certain time and place
Again, Christianity did not come from nowhere. To think so is beyond reasonable criticism of religion.

Are you saying Richard Carrier isn't a real academic?

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p4.htm

Christianity as we know it today came from Paul's posterior.

It's not unreasonable to think the rest of the New Testament came from somewhere similar.

Sure. Thomas Brodie and Robert M. Price are a couple of others.

good thread

I don't suppose you'll be able to substantiate that claim.

>Prove what Paul said wrong.
I'd prefer Paul was able to prove himself right.

Paul himself claims he got much of his knowledge from revelations, i.e. his own imagination.

>le paul changed christianity completely maymay

Facts are not memes.

Memes are not facts.

I should say Paul didn't change Christianity completely, in truth he more or less invented it.

I don't see what you are disputing about my post with that bizarre piece of cryptic greentexting.

Are you seriously claiming Paul is an unimportant figure in Christianity or his own words aren't that he got his information from revelation?

While Aelian is an obnoxious christard, he's not wrong about mormonism being based on preposterous nonsense.

See this post here and the link it contains.
>richarddawkins.net/2012/10/mormonism-in-the-mainstream/

>While Aelian is an obnoxious christard, he's not wrong about mormonism being based on preposterous nonsense.

Obviously, but the question is whether it is more preposterous than normal Christianity.

This cute Asian girl I know does, so I'm not going to mock it

Yes

>Do they actually believe this preposterous nonsense?
yeah pfft religious people are retarded af

Any time anyone calls out anything in any religion the answer is always

>but it's not meant to be taken literally!!

For shame religidiots

It is.

Normal Christianity doesn't require you to give x% of your income to a literal corporation in order to get spiritual advancement.

I think that since mormonism uses Christianity as a base for its nonsense it could be argued to be more preposterous.

a + b > a for b > 0

If you define the vatican as a corporation then yes you do, provided you accept catholicism as normal christianity.

Most churches now have a more voluntary system but tithing is not a new thing invented by Mormonisn.

Yeah I can see that as an argument, additional nonsense on top of existing nonsense.

>Whereas modern churches generally just crumple in submission whenever faced with scientific findings that challenge the faith then make excuses about the inconvenient parts being metaphorical.
>modern
It was already a thing in medieval thought.

As an intellectual movement in defiance of science, yes
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_creationism

Well yeah dude it is more preposterous because the book of mormon was written down in the 19th century and we have plenty of critics and dissenters who will point out the dubious origins of said book.

The origins of christianity are in the distant past, where reliable records are scarce.

Mormonism is a faith concocted by joseph smith and it is plainly obvious that this is so to all non-mormons.

Reminder.

Joseph Smith said people lived on the moon who lived for 1000 years and dressed like Quakers.

mormonism is a belief system based on pure logic.
youtube.com/watch?v=v7CfdwH0GsY

Read Kingdom of Matthais. Interesting read on how cults grew at a rapid rate in the early 1800s

my sides

what the fuck is this thread. you're fucking cancer.

hah triggert

funny how autistic Christians are and quick to forgot how Platonism can be thanked for all modern conceptions of Christianity