The people who spread the teachings and wrote to churches with instruction (which is the bulk of the New Testament) were all literate in several languages.

Yeah, but not the common farmer

The people that made the bulk of any population before the industrialization

The comon farmer could still listen.

And those who spoke were not exempt from abusing their position

Hey, not everyone involved with Christianity was stupid and uneducated. A few of them went on to become great scientists, who then after becoming intelligent and educated, denounced Christianity, or were just plain persecuted for learning too much and tainting the populace.

#ListenAndBelieve

Christianity is a cultural stabilizer, not so much a scientific one

@Lios Oh please. The only time when Christianity actively denounced science is when it went out of its way to create an openly contrary dogma.

Best way to shut someone uneducated up is to give them a ridiculous answer they have no reason to deny.

You realize that lasted for hundreds of years, right, Jake?

It never stopped. The anthropologists basically created their own sect.

So if you disagree with that stance, why stand up for it now? :^)

Because the dogma of Darwinism is just that, a dogma. It's not science.

It's a presumption.

It's fairly well proven.

A dogma with a rational approach, a lot of which simply adopted the concept of skepticism.

With what? Spontaneous generation?

Or rather the darwinian theory of evolution.

A good amount of it has also been disproven, so it isn't taken as gospel like Christianity likes to do.

I agree with @Lios
``Christians are more tolerant of atheists, because they failed to suppress the rebellion, because they wanted to be more subjugative by passive law, rather than oppressive force.
See Islam``

That's the key with the sciences, they're malleable, they change. Science is always open to new information. Dogma is not. Religion is not.

No, no. It still operates on a purely naturalistic mindset that everything came from nothing with no guiding force whatsoever and that people are no better than monkeys.

Evolution is not open to being questioned.

We are better than monkeys

I will never like to see people not been given choice, like they have in this second evolution cycle of the UK which has included gay marriage

We're also not monkeys

We're primates, sure, but not monkeys

We discovered that, and learned it by disproving skeptical claims

By the end of the day the Church of England in the house of lords has been able to change and reform education, so that the state enforces power of acceptance on to islamic extremists

Science takes the basis of "I might be wrong, but..."
The whole idea is that we might be wrong. We're fucking stupid. We're humans. Lets start learning, instead of making up a bullshit answer to make the problem disappear.

Darwin expected his theory to be proven by a near-endless supply of missing links, which we have not found.

We've found giant wombats.

Well yeah. Darwin was the father of the scientific method and skepticism. Neither of which he actually intended. People called him out on his bullshit, but looked into it anyway.

I was against it when I was younger but now I am for the Church of England having more power in the UK. I am also for, all forms of cultural indegenious people in Europe having more control than Islam.

There's no solid evidence for evolution, it's all semantics as to what's related to what. If you question that you're thrown out as a religious zealot. That's not malleable.

He was not a great genius, but we must thank him for his ignorance, as it drove us to become more precise.

"Science is not always correct, and some scientists are dogmatic, therefore scientific theories are no better than Christianity"

Islam is unrefined dogma.

There's plenty of very solid evidence for evolution

Very little of that comes from Darwin.