Add Chris Jones to the list of pro athletes that think the earth is flat

[BrunswickDawg]

Damn are you an idiot or what no wonder this generation is so 17'd up. I'm not a creationist by any means but if you can ignore or think the complexity of just our solar system or the brain didn't have an intelligent designer far beyond our puny exsistance there is no hope and you deserve your ignorance.

Isn't it a basic tennent of almost all religions that you have to have faith in something you can not see, can not be explained, can't be proven by science, and is omnipotent? That it is Faith that God exists despite the rational idea that he shouldn't or doesn't, that taking that leap of Faith and trusting what can not be seen begins the path to salvation, and that it is that Faith that should guide you? Because I'm pretty sure that was the jist of a whole lot sermons I've sat thru. Therefore the OP's statement about suspending rational thought is accurate?

[Lord McBuckethead]

If you are a creationist like myself, you believe God created a mature man (Adam). I also believe God created a mature universe with a mature Earth in that universe. Did God create Earth 6000 or so years ago? I have no idea bc "With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." (2 Peter 3:8). If believing God created us makes me "stupid", so be it

Sounds like a bunch of hoops you are trying to jump through. Maybe God created the earth and universe 5 billion years ago. Maybe the men who wrote the story, 5000 years was as big of a number that they knew?

[Lord McBuckethead]

Isn't it a basic tennent of almost all religions that you have to have faith in something you can not see, can not be explained, can't be proven by science, and is omnipotent? That it is Faith that God exists despite the rational idea that he shouldn't or doesn't, that taking that leap of Faith and trusting what can not be seen begins the path to salvation, and that it is that Faith that should guide you? Because I'm pretty sure that was the jist of a whole lot sermons I've sat thru. Therefore the OP's statement about suspending rational thought is accurate?

Sounds like a convenient requirement.

[msstate7]

Sounds like a bunch of hoops you are trying to jump through. Maybe God created the earth and universe 5 billion years ago. Maybe the men who wrote the story, 5000 years was as big of a number that they knew?

I know what Jesus has done for me in my personal life. I won't get bogged down in arguments over how old the earth or the like bc I don't know nor care. Jesus is real and He saved me.

[Jack Lambert]

I'm pretty confused by this belief. Do they think satellite pics from space are fakes?

They think there is a bubble over the sky. My cousin is one and we all have a good time at his expense at family reunions. When I listen to him I think of that Jim Carrey Movie.

[BeardoMSU]

I know what Jesus has done for me in my personal life. I won't get bogged down in arguments over how old the earth or the like bc I don't know nor care. Jesus is real and He saved me.

Thats all fine, 7...but you did take offense to my young earth comment, as if believing the universe is 6000 years old is a requisite for Christian faith. Young earth creationists actually make up a minority of the overall faith, btw. And the recommendation of Hugh Ross as a writer on intelligent design is a great one, especially since he, as a Christian, fiercely challenges the young earth peddlers like Ken Hamm et. al.

[Jack Lambert]

I know what Jesus has done for me in my personal life. I won't get bogged down in arguments over how old the earth or the like bc I don't know nor care. Jesus is real and He saved me.

I agree totally with you. Here is one way of looking at it. God created every thing but it developed after he created it. Then the question comes up about Adam and Eve how could it when they were here. Then the next question should how long were they in the Garden? They were not completely mortals yet. They could have been there billions of years. I am not saying I believe this I am just saying god is god and he can do what he want to how he wants to.

[msstate7]

Thats all fine, 7...but you did take offense to my young earth comment, as if believing the universe is 6000 years old is a requisite for Christian faith. Young earth creationists actually make up a minority of the overall faith, btw. And the recommendation of Hugh Ross as a writer on intelligent design is a great one, especially since he, as a Christian, fiercely challenges the young earth peddlers like Ken Hamm et. al.

It was late and I thought you were taking a shot at my faith. I apologize

[BeardoMSU]

It was late and I thought you were taking a shot at my faith. I apologize

It's all good, man.

[Dawg2003]

They think there is a bubble over the sky. My cousin is one and we all have a good time at his expense at family reunions. When I listen to him I think of that Jim Carrey Movie.

OMG, really? I had no idea. I thought it was all trolling.

[Pennywise]

Per his twitter earlier this afternoon. Is this like a new fad amongst pros now?

Is there a succinct podcast or article that can explain these flat earthers' beliefs and explanations on why they actually think the earth is flat in the face of science and facts and stuff?

[Really Clark?]

Isn't it a basic tennent of almost all religions that you have to have faith in something you can not see, can not be explained, can't be proven by science, and is omnipotent? That it is Faith that God exists despite the rational idea that he shouldn't or doesn't, that taking that leap of Faith and trusting what can not be seen begins the path to salvation, and that it is that Faith that should guide you? Because I'm pretty sure that was the jist of a whole lot sermons I've sat thru. Therefore the OP's statement about suspending rational thought is accurate?

Yes but the same is true with aspects of science. Whether it?s evolution, the complexity and stored information in cells (that still can?t be solved and Darwin didn?t even know how to address properly) or how the universe is created (the Big Bang theory was developed by a catholic priest and believed it was part of creation by God)...there are many aspects that scientists believe to happen but can?t prove and theories being changed constantly that debunks previously held ?truths? in science. What is also interesting is scientist themselves are nearly evenly split for the last century between those who do not believe in some sort of higher power vs those who do. Less than the general public but more than most people would believe and some are being more vocal that their studies the deeper they go point to intelligent design. Even those who believe in both and merging theories. It is an interesting debate from scientific side but it?s the philosophical debate and arrogance that drives the divide and tempers

[StateDawg44]

Pennywise isn't lurking anymore ha

[smootness]

I mean, there's a certain amount of rational thought you have to suspend to believe in any religion. In order to believe creationism, you have to completely reject science. I honestly never knew creationists existed until I went to graduate school and met some. Of course, you also have to completely reject science and twist your mind into a pretzel to believe in God, so most people are irrational about something. Just don't become an anti-vaxxer because they are public nuisances.

I think thoughts along this line are disheartening, to be honest. There is no need to reject science to believe in God, and I think this line of thinking has led to unnecessary conflict because people on both sides have bought into it.

Let's assume a purely materialistic worldview and look at the origin of all things. Everything that you see resulted from a single cell, or at the very least all living things resulted from a common ancestor, common descent, all that. I understand that belief, because things do adapt, microevolution is observable in nature, closer looks at DNA and all these things can point to that. That is totally fine. So you wind everything back to its beginning through purely rational, scientific thought. Still, at the end of that (or the beginning), you have the question of, how? How did something come from nothing? What is life, and how is it here? Where did thought come from? How did the whole process begin?

And at the end of that, you either say, 'It just is' or you say 'Something outside our plane of existence started it.' And I would argue that neither of those is an intellectual, scientific thought. Both of those are beliefs based not in evidence but in a belief. There is no evidence that there is nothing beyond our plane of existence, just as there is no evidence that there is. Both require faith. The other option is to say, 'I don't know, I don't believe anything that is not proven by science,' but I would argue that is the laziest, most morally bankrupt of the three options.

[smootness]

Damn are you an idiot or what no wonder this generation is so 17'd up. I'm not a creationist by any means but if you can ignore or think the complexity of just our solar system or the brain didn't have an intelligent designer far beyond our puny exsistance there is no hope and you deserve your ignorance.

You should be ashamed of yourself. There's no reason to insult.

[PassInterference]

Y?all all being trolled.

[smootness]

Isn't it a basic tennent of almost all religions that you have to have faith in something you can not see, can not be explained, can't be proven by science, and is omnipotent? That it is Faith that God exists despite the rational idea that he shouldn't or doesn't, that taking that leap of Faith and trusting what can not be seen begins the path to salvation, and that it is that Faith that should guide you? Because I'm pretty sure that was the jist of a whole lot sermons I've sat thru. Therefore the OP's statement about suspending rational thought is accurate?

I would argue that any formation of an all-encompassing worldview requires a leap of faith. In fact, it's not really an argument, it's just truth. But yes, absolutely there is a leap required, at some point you decide to dive in or get out. I don't believe that means you suspend rational thought. It's not that a person of faith in a religion or a god looks at truth and says, 'That isn't true.' It's that they view Scripture as ultimate truth, and a current scientific understanding of things is immaterial to that truth. After all, it was science that at one point said the earth was flat. We are constantly gaining a greater understanding of our surroundings; that is a process that has been taking place for thousands of years and will continue to for thousands more. Our current understanding is not an endpoint, it is but one mark on the timeline.

[Really Clark?]

I mean, there's a certain amount of rational thought you have to suspend to believe in any religion. In order to believe creationism, you have to completely reject science. I honestly never knew creationists existed until I went to graduate school and met some. Of course, you also have to completely reject science and twist your mind into a pretzel to believe in God, so most people are irrational about something. Just don't become an anti-vaxxer because they are public nuisances.

That?s not true. There are scientific theories that are still debated because there is a point of suspending what you consider logic or rational thought to make the theory believable. There are many scientists, top Noble Prize winning scientists, top academic scientist that believe in God, a higher power, intelligent design and/or creation as well. You will find that your thinking is what is more prevalent to pressure young students into a Weinberg totalitarian view of doing ANYTHING (which does not have to be based in truth or science) to weaken the hold of religion. It?s a false and dangerous viewpoint and proven wrong by many many scientists over the centuries who are pure scientists and also believe in God or a higher power and/or creation.

[Dawg2003]

And at the end of that, you either say, 'It just is' or you say 'Something outside our plane of existence started it.' And I would argue that neither of those is an intellectual, scientific thought. Both of those are beliefs based not in evidence but in a belief. There is no evidence that there is nothing beyond our plane of existence, just as there is no evidence that there is. Both require faith. The other option is to say, 'I don't know, I don't believe anything that is not proven by science,' but I would argue that is the laziest, most morally bankrupt of the three options.

I hear what you're saying, but I don't think that believing in science is lazy or morally bankrupt. Science actually differs from religion because science doesn't claim to know it all. It's always open to discovery.

We make fun of the flat earthers, but how is that different than believing a virgin gave birth to God? It's not. It's just as silly sounding.

[Commercecomet24]

I would argue that any formation of an all-encompassing worldview requires a leap of faith. In fact, it's not really an argument, it's just truth. But yes, absolutely there is a leap required, at some point you decide to dive in or get out. I don't believe that means you suspend rational thought. It's not that a person of faith in a religion or a god looks at truth and says, 'That isn't true.' It's that they view Scripture as ultimate truth, and a current scientific understanding of things is immaterial to that truth. After all, it was science that at one point said the earth was flat. We are constantly gaining a greater understanding of our surroundings; that is a process that has been taking place for thousands of years and will continue to for thousands more. Our current understanding is not an endpoint, it is but one mark on the timeline.

Very well said.