-
Subscribe
2,200 subscribers. 7,000 daily views.
Recent Comments
Joreth: And, the point is not whether they are atheists or not, but whether they base their... NASA Launches First-Ever Faith-Based Space Program
Heidi: Got anything from the past 40 years? NASA Launches First-Ever Faith-Based Space Program
Siberia: Mm, I suppose the main difference of perspective here is that you’re from a mostly Protestant country. I’m... Stealing for Jesus
Yoav: So that’s the real reason they missed Mars a few years ago. NASA Launches First-Ever Faith-Based Space Program
rodneyAnonymous: Fear for non-Muslims, and I agree. Personally, I would happily ally with Christians... Christian Propaganda About Islam Overlords
Baconsbud: This is the portion of total expenses that is spent on charitable programs. In AIP’s view, 60% or greater is... Stealing for Jesus
-
63 Comments
Are you absolutely sure that you have ALL facts in place?
empy,
Of course not. Facts are innumerable. However, the cartoon is right on target in that science is about taking the facts and letting THEMtell US what is happening in the universe. If new facts are found that alter the currently held view, then scientists will adjust the conclusions accordingly. That is the ultimate strength of science, the ability to work toward the truth step by step using all of the facts available. Creationism, on the other hand, must discard/ignore whatever facts don’t fit into the preconceived conclusion. Thus, creationists miss out on so much of what is wonderful about the world around them.
@ empy
Scinece does not claim to have all the answers. It is merely a method for finding them. Religion on the other hand arrogantly claims to have all of the answers you’ll ever need. Empy, I suggest you do a little fact checking yourself. For instance, what what happened at the tomb on the day of the resurrection. (Hint: Every gospel is different). If you want more contradictions, I will be happy to supply then to you.
The bible is nothing more than a hodge-podge of various stories of one group of peoples struggle for existence on the planet we call earth. Some stories inspire, some terrify, some enlighten, and some are downright nasty. Is the bible interesting? Yes. Insightful? Sometimes. A guidebook for how to live your life? Only if you think your daughter should marry her rapist. A ticket to salvation? Absolutely not! You have NO facts, only an ancient bloodsoaked amalgam of stories and genealogies. If this is where you draw your reference from, you are in no place to talk about the factual.
Ha! If only the creationists used facts.
It really is difficult for anybody to be unbiased when you have a passion.
Hi friends,
I am glad that I am in a good company of honest and truth loving friends. I am also glad that there are several responses to my comment. I must admit that that there are a lot of hypocrites in religion, though not all. But I am absolutely sure that I can get an honest appraisal from you guys here. I wish you would give me an honest evaluation of my life after reading my posts in my blog. Since it is too long, here I am giving you a gist of my life for you to look at and give your comments. After reading this, please tell me how I survived all these years if God did not answer my daily prayers.
I dare not leave you to the conclusions you reached by your arguments, simply because it lacks practical application in our daily living. Any theory if it is not practical is of little value, isn’t it?
My life of faith really began in 1975.
The first thing I did was to resign my job and I was found without a regular source of income to sustain my family. This I did knowing that the God who fed Israel in the wilderness is alive and active in the world today. For the next three and a half years I was all alone with a family of two children then, with no salary, no job as a preacher or as a social worker-which would let one be in constant contact with people- and without any known source of income from any estate or from any business. In other words, if I went hungry no one in the entire world was responsible. In fact people could blame me for my situation as I could have easily earned a good living with my educational background. But during those years I proved to my satisfaction that God was indeed very real in our lives.
Three and a half years later, my local worshipping group commended me to the service of the Lord following the pattern found in Acts 13:1-4. They just promised to pray for us and nothing more. From 1975 till this day I live without a regular salary, no bank balance, no business income or income from any estate. Now we have five children and I want to testify to the fact that we never ever went hungry nor we were found in need and were left with out a help. We never approached any man any where for any financial help. We went to a remote jungle-tribe trying to learn their unwritten language and trying to make them literate, so that our contact with the extended family and friends became practically nil.
By 1986 I had sufficient faith to believe in God to erect a concrete building without any contact with any man for the finance of it. I started with little money in my hand, completed a 700 sft. of concrete building within a matter of thirty calendar days; ended with no debt, and informed no man any where even for prayer about this project as I wanted to prove a point. That building has a granite inscription which reads, “This building stands witnessing the fact that God of Elijah lives”. For over six months I spent eight to ten hours every day in my prayer-closet praying, planning and interacting with God for the same. The purpose of the building was to house their children to educate them.
When the building was completed within 30 days, I was amazed to the core. Even I could not believe it myself. I thought my life-purpose was indeed achieved as I proved once again without a speck of doubt that indeed God answers prayers today. In 1991 I became semi-paralyzed and for the last seventeen years I am unable to walk even one step without crutches. And I had to leave my station for health reasons.
Now I am almost confined to my bedroom. The enormous amount of money for my treatment and for the education of all my children, now five in number (the eldest was only 16 when I became ill), all were well taken care of as direct, tangible, undeniable, unbelievable answer to prayer day by day. No individual, no organization, no church could ever claim that it was they who kept us going all these years without us going bankrupt. Oh, yes, I have been getting money from people known and unknown to me, from family and from friends, from believers and from unbelievers; indeed often I never knew where our next meal would come from, but it always, yes, indeed, always came right in time. I just don’t know how our needs are taken care of. But we are well cared for.
In 1996 Nov. some one with whom I do not have much association would bring hot cash to my house saying that the Lord was asking him to give me money to buy a car! This was in answer to my prayer less than twenty-four hours before.
In the light of my experiences, I wish you to prove to me that God never answered my prayers. Please tell me how I survived all these years. Tell me how I educated my five children to earn a good living today; one as an audio engineer, a second one as programmer and a third one as an electronic graduate and two others as graduates in Maths and in Sociology (three of them serve the Lord full time with their talents and training today). Tell me how I met my huge medi-bills every now and then. Tell me how I maintained an automobile all these years for the family. (Mind you, I am almost confined to my room without any ministry for the last seventeen years and practically without much contact with the world out side. No, No. I would have published a dozen and a half articles in Christian magazines in the last 32 years. That is it. Yes, I did go out once or twice a year to teach but it is far too expensive as I could never travel alone. I worked as a volunteer for three years in a Bible College. But health prevented me from continuing. That was just about the touch I had with the world outside. I must also tell you that this email facility I have now only from Oct.07.) Most of all, please tell me how that building came up in just 30 days. Would you be able to explain my life from your philosophy of life? If so, please do it.
So here I stand. I say that the God of the Bible is true and is alive. I simply subsisted by trusting in Him. It is true that I have many unanswered questions about the Bible and its statements. But I found the Bible to be a very practical book suitable to be trusted for my subsistence here on earth and giving me an eternal hope.
Hi guys, I wish to hear from you. God is real! If any one meets His conditions results are inevitable!!
Empy — I know that we can always agree to disagree on this one, so I’ll throw in my two cents.
As a former Christian myself, I understand the value of faith and its ability to sustain us through trying times.
I have to commend you in your unrelenting commitment to what you believe in. For that, you deserve to be respected: in the commitment to a belief.
But a life that is without any utter personal accomplishment to speak of (I say personal because the raising of five children is a wonderful thing, and that is excempt from “personal”) is not something I would be proud of.
To have nothing to my name, to not have been able to contribute a piece of my mortality to the world, to have not enriched someone’s story through my own, to not have helped someone succeed through my own success, to not have contributed something worthwhile to the fabric of humanity… that’s a life I cannot live.
Nothing compares to the taste of a meal that I earned with my own two hands: be it salmon or soup-in-a-can and a cracker. The sense of pride that comes from putting on a shirt I patched myself, or the ability to step into a Banana Republic to replace a stained shirt… on a whim…. because I can. Nothing compares to the pride of opening up the driver’s side window of a beat-up ‘91 Honda that I paid for, in cash, with money I had set aside after 10 gruelling months of 12-hour days.
The meal handed to me by a stranger, the free clothes, the car I received as renumeration simply for idly BEING… how can I take pride in that.
Ah, and now we go into the argument of pride: which we won’t, because what kind of God creates people just to love Him and praise Him. Which leads us into the argument of Agape and organized religion: which we won’t. Because every major dysfunctional war in our history was caused by religion, including 9/11, where many of us lost loved ones.
Selfless is the new evil. Having no pride in our personal ability to be productive, to think, to use logic, to earn an honest living, to buy, to sell, to own (ourselves): that is the new evil.
Before this turns into a verbatim quotation of John Galt’s 3-hour mental masturbatory treatise, I leave you with the words of Ayn Rand:
“My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason his only absolute.”
WOW! Two people not listening to each other AT ALL!
OK, empy, I’m going to give you my take
you say the lord provided, but every time it’s been a person handing these things over, lifting you up, helping to build the church… it’s always been people. Their actions are in accordance with your prayers, but correlation does not imply causation, as we say in the sciences.
I believe that people can be good, and that sometimes the religious impulse can drive them to open up that goodness to the world, but often also that religion drives people to bring out their evil and call it righteousness. I think that every time someone came to help you feed your family, every time you were motivated to do something beyond yourself… that was something human.
Now, if every once in a while you were fed by manna from heaven, or one of the walls of your church was propped up by a beam of light until it could stand alone, that would be a different matter. But what you’ve described is a human story of human charity.
Oh, and Obamarxist, that comic is exactly in line with everything I’ve seen over several years following this debate. Come back and explain how exposing religious hypocrites makes you a bigot (a word which once meant “religious hypocrite”)
empy,
Nice story. Any chance you might respond to the criticisms of your original comment?
Good point wazza! Humanity, when inspired, can achieve great things. Look at the cathedrals of Europe, the pyramids of Egypt, and the sacred Cantatas of Bach. All are triumphs of human achievement. To me, attributing them to an imaginary god only cheapens the wonder that they instill.
@ empy
No reasonable person will ever say that you haven’t accomplished some amazing things in your life, most notably raising five children. However, all of these blessings you attribute to god, came from purely human sources. Did bread fall from the sky when your family was hungry? Did bricks and mortar magically appear when your required building materials? Did clothing magically weave itself before your very eyes when you needed it. No, they all came from human sources, you can say these humans were inspired by god, or one could argue they they are just nice people who are suffering from a god delusion.
I can’t prove that your god didn’t do these things any more that I can’t prove that Wotan or Baal didn’t do these things. Yet, these results you speak of are not proof of the existence of a god.
The best “proof” I can give you is this. Let’s say I decided to quit my job and start my own self-sustaining farm. I would ask for handouts and trust in good-natured people to help me out. I would not be rich, but I would have what I needed to survive. Yet, instead of attributing my good health and good fortune to a god, I would attribute it to my own hard work and the innate good will of others. How is this accomplishment any different from yours?
You are obviously a resectable, hard working person. Don’t sell yourself short by attributing your successes to an imaginary sky fairy that doesn’t even have the decency to give us legitimate, verifiable proof of his existence.
As a former Xtian who agonized over ‘faith for several decades, I agree with wazza and Joel. Your experiences were in no way a function of the Sky Fairy, a Ghost or Jeebus.
You did things others appreciated, some through common faith, and some through practical values you may have offered. The latter saw selfish value for themselves in what you did, but were also Just in having treated you accordingly.
Their justice is what some are now calling “the new selfishness”, but it is more like the rational selfishness identified by Ayn Rand. This proper selfishness is known as the morality of egoism —not to be confused with arrogant, sacrifice-others-to-oneself egotism (note the ‘t’). When men trade values (material or spiritual, in an earthly sense) both sides gain and make their world a better place.
Don’t be afraid to make money, as it is the symbol of successful trade with others, to mutual benefit. Rational selfishness is the moral basis for true Capitalism. Though the Left and Right argue that Capitalism is full of evils (that therefore require even more evil, coercive, government regulations), they are looking at egotists who seek to cheat true, mutual-benefit trade (e.g by breaking or disingenuous interpretation of contracts). The egotists are not capitalists and give it a bad name.
Egoists look at Man’s nature, the reality of Nature’s laws & materials, and the most beneficial ways to deal with other men. They do not turn to faith, because no one can determine which faith is valid, which Sky Fairy to follow, or which person has the real truth. Take a hard look at what you have done and you will find it was all human intelligence and an effort at fair trade. Then maximize that to create wealth. Bill Gates has helped millions more people through is software that did Mother Theresa through soup kitchens, shelters for the homeless, and prayer. The moral principle is that Bill, for all his faults, was rationally selfish.
The best way to help the poor is to not be one of them —Mark Victor Hansen.
@ empy
Interesting. You came up with a moving story, but you did not answer the primary questions, as Daniel said.
It’s just a distraction to don’t have to respond. It’s a fallacy.
But how wazza has answered you, anyway, please now respond the questions. Like: where are the facts corroborating the creationist theory? Or, in a better way, are there really facts that do this? And tell us what fact is today showing that evolutionist theory is wrong. Or why just believing in a old book is better than watch the real facts.
@empy
“In the light of my experiences, I wish you to prove to me that God never answered my prayers.”
Actually, since one cannot prove a negative, why don’t you show me proof that he did? (Did the money have “In God We Trust” or something stamped on it, huh?)
You’ve done some admirable things, aside from spreading the contagion called theism. But those things were made possible by other humans. If you look behind them you won’t see any great puppet-master. You’ll see nothing but their own very human motivations.
And isn’t that wonderful? Doesn’t it make you want to thank … well, them, of course.
Hello every one,
Thank you so much for taking time out to comment on my post. There was one comment which placed me as a blatant liar. I must thank the moderator for deleting it form the board. I am glad that others see my story as true story. I must confirm it. It is one hundred per cent true. The problem comes only when it is explained.
You all unanimously blame me for avoiding to answer questions that were raised about the Bible and Science. In giving my answer, I meant to say that the Bible is a very practical book containing ancient wisdom for modern living.
In my understanding the Bible and science could never contradict each other as they are dealing with two different areas of human existence. Science deals with the Physical side of man like electricity and light; like chemicals and plant/animal life. Science is knowledge gained by man over the last thousands of years by close observation about the nature around us. With out this scientific knowledge, we would all be cave dwellers even now. I thank God for scientists. I thank God for modern medicines. I thank God for all that science gave to humanity.
But we all know that man is not merely a physical being. Man has love and hatred within him. Man has envy and jealousy, malice and price. Man has kindness and sympathy. Man has goodness and evil within him. I do not know what science can tell us about this area of man’s life. You may probably live with out electricity and magnetism. Could any one live with out human emotions? The Bible talks about the metaphysical side of human existence. I can not see how they could contradict each other. They are trying to answer two different questions about two different essential areas of human existence. My life would be miserable with out scientific advancement. My life would be more miserable with out the Bible as I would be left to myself in the other area of my life.
Just as scientists observed the physical world and discovered the physical laws which govern our universe, men who experienced God observed for us the unchanging laws of man’s spiritual existence which are written for us in the Bible given to them as revelations.
Now here is my take about creation and evolution. I very strongly believe that the earth came to its present stage with millions of years of development. My Bible does not tell me that one fine moment the whole creation appeared just as we have it today. That is what one would expect form an ancient book. My Bible tells me that matter appeared before life appeared. It tells me that plant life appeared before animal life. It tells me that man came to the scene on the final day of creation; that is on the sixth day. If it is not progressive creation, what is it? Essentially, is it not what modern science tells us from observation of the universe? I see here general agreement and not contradiction.
Don’t you all agree that there is some force behind this process of evolution? I believe that force MUST be a person simply because we are persons. Do you think water could rise higher above the level of its source? Simply because we are persons, the ONE behind this process MUST also be a person. After all, none of us decided to be born here! It was some thing else which forced us here. That ‘force’ I believe is God who is a personal being.
Now about the days of creation. We know that a day is 24 hours here on our planet earth. We know days in different planets are of different length. We calculate a day as 24 hours based on our earth’s rotation on its axis around the Sun. The Bible clearly says that our Sun appeared on the scene on the 4th day of creation. How could a day be 24 hours before our Sun appeared on the scene? To me ‘day’ in Genesis 1 is ‘a geological day’ and the length of it is not given in the Bible. In the light of the present scientific discovery, I have no problem to see a day as thousands of years (cf.Ps.90:4). This is the teaching of the Bible as far as I am concerned. If some one has funny/Fundy understanding of the Bible and blames the Bible for it, who is responsible for it? It is your understanding about the Bible which must be thrown away; and not the Bible itself.
The Bible does not give any hint about the date of creation. It simply says, “In the beginning…” It must be billions of years ago that the process of creation began. After all what was an ‘Eternal God’ doing all through eternity?
Have a great day. God is real to those who trust Him. If you wish to fly an airways, don’t you first trust the company and don’t you accept its terms and conditions? If you would not, how could you ever get benefited from it? Same with God
burnhoyumpa
You said,
“But a life that is without any utter personal accomplishment to speak of (I say personal because the raising of five children is a wonderful thing, and that is excempt from “personal”) is not something I would be proud of.”
I agree with you. If you knew my whole story you would not have blamed me for not contributing to human life around me. I went to this remote village where there was no electrcity and telephone. In my list there were forty hamlets where my people lived in the jungles along with wild elephants, bisons and leopards. Only two of their hamlets were accessable by a motor bike or a jeep. I chose to live near one one these two. I went to the village every day as some one would go to his office. Stayed with a language helper till noon and collected data. I paid him his daily wages. Six years of work found fruit when I was able to analyse the sound system of the language. A phonemic summary was made. Orthography was worked on. A basic word list was made. And a basic grammar was written fot the language before producing pimary reading materials in the language.
Then came the problem of literacy. None among them could read. So I planned to bring their children to my home and I started teaching them. I started with five children at first. I knew that was not sufficient. Then I prayed for a piece of land and for the building to accommodate them. That was the ‘miracle building’ which was constructed with in 30 days with out approaching any man for the finance of it. No one in the entire world knew about this project. They all contributed for a project they did not know was taking place. Who could have moved them to donate during that particular month? I know God did it. Because every day I began my prayer from 4pm to 10 or 12 pm. If I had not done that, I am absoluteoy sure that money just would not have come. I KNOW this for a fact. If money was coming every day like that, I would have become a millionaire soon! But it stopped as soon as my needs were met.
By the time I became ill in1991, we were feeding and teaching 25 of their children with out a human sponsor, with out a magazine report and with out an appeal for funds. Our five children and the 25 tribal children sat together at the same table for their meals. We gave them the same meals that we ate. We had one or two helpers looking after cooking etc. Other wise most of the work was done by my wife and me.
Then the villagers had hundreds of acres of uncultivated land. I wrote an application and got their thumb impressions and I approached government agencies who were supposed to help them. Their land was made to beautiful tea plantations with cloned tea bushes. They were given wages to work in their own farms. Clones and manure were given to them freely. All that I did was to link them with the government agencies which could have been done years ago if some one had taken initiative.
At the inaguration of the building for the education of their children, some three hundred villagers came to our house. The headman made the following remarks. He said, “This sir came to us. He learnt our language. He ate with us. He danced with us. He showed us the way to get government help. All these years, he never told us one word about his God or religion” . Then he went on to say, “But I wish to tell you that his God is the real God”. That was the greatest compliment I ever received in my life. I never preached to them. How could I? They had to be made human first. If you say that I did not do any thing towards that, you are saying it simply because you did not know about it. Those people venerate me like a demigod
Again some of you suggested that God was just my imagination. Now let me ask you, whether you could live out a whole life trusting in your imagination?
Then you all said, it was all human donations/ human hands. Ok. Of a truth help came from human sources. But my question is how would they donate funds for some thing whihc they never knew was taking place when I was constructing that building? Who moved them to donate? Why did they donate lavishly only during that month ALONE? No one ever knew that I was praying eight hours in that remote village. No one ever knew that a concrete building was being built to accommodate tribal children. If you say it is all natural and human, that is your take. But I know this would never have taken place had I not prayed for the same. That is my understanding of the whole situation.
No one could tell the taste of an apple with out biting it. Could you?
My experiences would never prove to you the existence of God. But I know that I did all these trusting in the God of the Bible. I could have never done it simply trusting my imagination.
A lot more to talk about. Be sure that God is real to those who trust Him. If you leave Him, He will leave you to yourself. If you trust Him, He will surely take care of you. Bye for now.
@empy:
“Don’t you all agree that there is some force behind this process of evolution?”
No.
In fact, understanding this is essential to understanding evolution.
Evolution is inductive. It does not move towards a specific goal; instead, it moves away from unfavorable circumstances. There’s no guiding force and thus no conscious plan behind this.
Simple rules (and here I use the term “rules” loosely) can give rise to vast complexity. The evolution of biological life is an example of this. It is a so-called complex adaptive system, which organizes itself according to its own state and a set of rules defined by the laws of physics.
Sounds very boring and uninspirational to a believer, I suppose. But to people who take an interest in science, and people generally curious about our world, it is not (and even if it were, personal preferences say nothing what so ever about validity).
I second what trj just said. It is vital to realize that evolution is just a side effect of heredity and reproduction. It is not some mystical force that drives all life to some ‘higher’ state. Further -
“But we all know that man is not merely a physical being. Man has love and hatred within him. ”
I think you’ll find that most atheists are non-dualists. We don’t believe that man is more than ‘merely’ physical. For example:
“You may probably live with out electricity and magnetism. Could any one live with out human emotions?”
Emotions ARE electricity - and chemistry. Chemicals produce electric impulses in the brain, producing the sensations of attraction, affection, anger, etc. As one scientist put it, “The mind is what the brain does!” The mind - all the thoughts, sensations, emotions, awareness, and so forth - is an emergent property of the chemical reactions within the physical brain. And I, for one, see no reason to posit anything ‘other’ to explain things.
@empy
The same history. Ever trying to distract us with a moving history (fallacy). I’m not saying they’re lies, if you were talking about me. Just that these histories don’t matter to the subject of discussion. “Scientific vs creationist method”.
“In my understanding the Bible and science could never contradict each other as they are dealing with two different areas of human existence.”
The bible say that the first human was Adam, e he was made of clay, so god have breathed life in his nose. Well, this tale say that the human life have begun with Adam. Could this be more contradictory with the evolutionist theory?
The evolutionist and the creationist theory are talking about how the life came up to what it is now. They are talking about the same thing. They are contradictory. And not only in the propositions they do, but the method they use. And this is the point of discussion. What you do is mainly distract and avoid this subject. You talk about it one minute than start a 50 minutes speeching about your life.
If your history is really true as you say, and you’re not a troll, it’s better came with better arguments than:
“God is real to those who trust Him. If you wish to fly an airways, don’t you first trust the company and don’t you accept its terms and conditions? If you would not, how could you ever get benefited from it? Same with God”
Yes, we have to trust them, but we don’t give our lives to them. And trust or believe that somebody or something exists doesn’t make it real at all. At least not out of your mind.
Empy, I think the greatest question is, if God loves you so, why did he decide to make you semi-paralyzed?
empy,
This why I rarely respond to posts such as your initial comment.
1. You make a comment in response to a cartoon that illustrates an observed pattern in creation ’science’. That comment implies that there are some facts that are either unknown to or being ignored by real scientists. As one of those real scientists, I want to hear more about these facts. Any credible researcher would. It is our job to seek out and investigate things like that.
2. I and some others respond by giving you my perspective on why we believe your comment is wrong and misrepresents the process of scientific inquiry.
3. In response, we all get a long-winded story that completely ignores the substance of our criticisms and fails miserably to even attempt to support the initial implication that real scientists are ignoring or are unaware of all of the facts. Nor does the response attempt to support the position that creation science is itself not guilty of purposely ignoring facts that do not support its pre-ordained conclusions.
4. I attempt to get you back on track (comment 11) and am supported in this effort by another comment (14).
5. Instead, we get more mumbo jumbo about your personal beliefs and more illustrations experiences that you attribute to a supreme being but could just as easily be attributed to human kindness. Nowhere in any of this is there an attempt to refute the criticisms of your original statement (I’ll remind you - scientists ignore are or unaware of some facts that you are apparently privy to) with any kind of fact based observation. Nor do you attempt to support creation science with anything resembling a rational argument.
I was sincerely hoping for an intelligent discussion. I was sincerely hoping for a conversation in which you would actually make an attempt to defend your position with some information other than personal experience and beliefs. The observation that you either can’t or won’t severely undercuts your credibility.
I’ll go back to lurking now. Burned again by a futile attempt to have a rational discussion.
David you said in 2,
“Of course not. Facts are innumerable. However, the cartoon is right on target in that science is about taking the facts and letting THEMtell US what is happening in the universe. If new facts are found that alter the currently held view, then scientists will adjust the conclusions accordingly. That is the ultimate strength of science, the ability to work toward the truth step by step using all of the facts available.”
You here agree that the so called facts might chnage. Therefore one could never be sure whether what we believe today is right or not. After all, it could be proved wrong tomorrow!
You again said, “Creationism, on the other hand, must discard/ignore whatever facts don’t fit into the preconceived conclusion.”
Yes, indeed, because what ever fact does not fit in would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual.
You blame me for narrating my personal experiences. I narrated those experiences to prove that one trusting the God of the Bible is never put to shame in real life. I do it to show you how the words of the Bible are trustworthy. I do not do it to run away from arguements.
wazza, You said,
“Empy, I think the greatest question is, if God loves you so, why did he decide to make you semi-paralyzed?
Yours is a valid question. Just imagine some one losing the ability to get up from bed at the age of 43. Unable to work, no bank balance, no estate income. no insurance! A large family to feed. Enormous medical expenses. If I did not know a God who cares and if I did not know how to pray what would have been my condition today after seventeen years? Joy in the midst of sorrow, peace in the midst of pain is the share of a believer here on earth.
@emphy:
You again said, “Creationism, on the other hand, must discard/ignore whatever facts don’t fit into the preconceived conclusion.”
Yes, indeed, because what ever fact does not fit in would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual.”
I can’t imagine a better statement to show just how ridiculous your argument is than that you have posted. Basically you are saying I don’t care what evidence you provide my view is a fact.
“You here agree that the so called facts might chnage. Therefore one could never be sure whether what we believe today is right or not. After all, it could be proved wrong tomorrow!”
I think you have things backwards here. The “facts” do not change - we merely add to the pile of them. The theory changes, because a theory is just an overarching framework that attempts to account for all the facts. When new facts are discovered, the theory may have to grow or be tweaked to accommodate them.
But the old facts do not go away. The theory must still account for them. So science is progressive - as new facts are discovered, out theories become more accurate and more reliable. The basic theories we have now will probably never be judged wrong, just incomplete.
At least you’ve answered David’s question - in a round about way. You have no new facts, you just insist that all facts be forced to fit your theories of the Bible. But understand, the most basic criteria of science is that theories have to account for the facts.
So what’s your criteria, empy? Surely you know that there have been hundreds of interpretations of the bible over the centuries. From the complex theologies of Augustine and the metaphorical interpretations of Origen to the parables of the modern “emerging church” movement and the false-literalistic interpretations of the Fundamentalists, there are countless ways to understand the words of the Bible. Perhaps those words are trustworthy, but how do you know what they’re saying? What criteria do you use to determine what each passage means?
Ahh, sucked back in….
empy,
Jabster and VorJack did an excellent job of saying what I would have said. Facts are facts. They exist. You can also think of them as ‘observations’. An observation is simply that. Something that we can all observe and agree on. The key there being that we can ALL observe it. We can all agree that, the sky appears blue. We can all agree that rocks fall to the ground when dropped from a height. Facts are not right or wrong. They are observations. Our interpretations of the facts can change but not the facts themselves. That is what science is all about. As VorJack said, “When new facts are discovered, the theory may have to grow or be tweaked to accommodate them.” We change our interpretation when new facts make the old interpretation inadequate.
That’s where creationists come in. Unlike scientists, they choose to ignore the facts that contradict their pre-established theory (that God is responsible for X). That’s against the rules in science. In science, we put together a theory (rational explanation) that can account for all of the facts (observations). Thus, “creation science” is a meaningless phrase. “Creation scientists” have already decided what the conclusion must be and therefore must exclude the observations that are counter to that conclusion.
You wrote, “Yes, indeed, because what ever fact does not fit in would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual.”
Instead, isn’t it the church that has had to change its interpretation? According the to “creator’s manual” the sun revolves around the earth. Has that been proved wrong? Or, when Jesus returns is he going to prove to all of us that geocentrism is indeed the rule.
According to the “creator’s manual” snakes can talk.
According to the “creator’s manual” man was created AFTER the other animals (Gen 1:25-27).
Also according to the “creator’s manual” man was created BEFORE the other animals (Gen 2:18-19). Which is it?
According to the “creator’s manual” genocide in the name of God is ok (Deut 7:1-2, Deut 20:16, Joshua, plus many other examples). Do we still agree with this?
Some manual.
“You blame me for narrating my personal experiences. I narrated those experiences to prove that one trusting the God of the Bible is never put to shame in real life. I do it to show you how the words of the Bible are trustworthy. I do not do it to run away from arguements.”
See above in reference to the “bible is trustworthy” comment.
I don’t “blame” you for narrating some personal experiences. The story was fascinating for several reasons. I simply pointed out that the stories are not relevant as far as supporting your original implication or refuting my criticisms. If you are going to make a crack about something (your initial post), support your arguments. Telling personal anecdotes about how people around you supported your efforts to build a building does not support your contention regarding scientists not having “ALL facts in place”. Nor does it refute my contention that creation science simply ignores the facts that don’t suit their preconceived conclusion.
Empy, your reply to me seems a little off. If god really loves you and is truly all-powerful, wouldn’t he have prevented your injury in the first place?
Your view is like saying it’s all right for a mother to cut off her child’s legs whenever she feels like it, so long as she still kisses it on the forehead and tells it she loves it every night.
Also, to back up the others, science’s facts very rarely change (sometimes we find new factors that allow us to modify original observations, but mostly they’re good). The theories do. If the facts change tomorrow, we’ll change the theory, because science isn’t the theories we develop but the technique used to develop them. If creationism were true, science would have led us to creationism, because at the time that evolution was developed, most people believed in creationism, the only problem was the evidence didn’t support it, and still doesn’t. Again, if god was all-powerful and perfectly good, why would he lie to us in the shape of his creation?
Hi friends, Let me make the following observations about the issue before us.
I do recognize the fact that as long as human race exists this debate about theism and atheism will continue.
I look at the Bible and Science from the standpoint of my knowledge and experiences in life as every one does. Since all of us have different experiences and knowledge, our conclusions would never be the same.
The Bible is an ancient book written in common-man’s language and tries to answer why man is on this planet earth. Its references to ‘how’ is not in focus and must not be understood literally . So when the Bible talks about the sun rising in the east, it is like we in the ultra modern age using the same phrase though we know that scientifically that is not right. Science does not address the question ‘why’ man is alive on earth.
Science is knowledge man has gained over the years based on observations of nature and things around him. Scientific language changes and new theories are proposed as new facts are brought to light. We are still learning and we may never know every thing about every thing.
Facts remain the same. Interpretations of facts change depending upon who is interpreting it and what is the knowledge and experience of the one who interprets. And interpretation of the Bible also must change when new facts are brought to light. Again the interpretation of the Bible changes based on the knowledge and experience of the one who interprets in the light of new available facts.
Science talks about the physical side of man’s existence.
The Bible talks about the metaphysical side of man’s experience.
Science has nothing to say about the metaphysical because it is not tangible or visible or can not be brought into a test tube for experiments.
To deny the metaphysical existence of man is to deny the experiences of millions of people from around the world.
Now coming to specifics. About the date of the universe the Bible simply says. “In the beginning.
Science has observed it to be around 4.5 billion years or so. We must agree with science till new facts come to light.
Both the Bible and science agree that there was a time when the universe was not in existence. No scientist believes that the universe is eternal. The Bible said it many years ago.
Scientists observed that the present universe reached its shape by a process and in different stages. The Bible said that thousands of years ago.
Scientists tell us that matter appeared first and then came life. The Bible said it long time back.
The Bible only talks about the modern civilized man. The Bible has nothing to say about the pre-Adamic races. We know that they could have been there possibly. The Bible does not talk about it as it is not Bible’s concern.
Several other things could be said along the same lines.
Conclusion. As some one living in the 21st century, I accept scientific observations and try to understand the Bible in the light of known facts. When there is apparent contradiction, I wait to see for further facts to be brought to light. The Bible is not a scientific book. All references to the physical world in the Bible is written in non-scientific language. The Bible talks about the metaphysical. To deny metaphysical is to deny the experiences of millions around the world.
speaking as a philosophy student, I find the idea that the bible is the last word in metaphysics slightly absurd. If that’s all the bible is for - dismissing for a moment its purpose as a quasi-historical record of the beliefs and history of the Jewish people - the bible isn’t worth much. The metaphysics contained therein are at roughly the same level that a first year student in my major could arrive at from first principles. Most would go further and be more concise than the bible is.
empy,
For the sake of my own sanity. I’ve taken that last post, broken it up, and responded to each section. If I missed anything important, let me know. Now that you are actually responding to criticisms, we might get somewhere. Here we go….
================================
Your earlier comment (24) - “Yes, indeed, because what ever fact does not fit in would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual.”
Comment 30 - “The Bible is an ancient book… and must not be understood literally” and “The interpretation of the Bible changes based on the knowledge and experience of the one who interprets in the light of new available facts.”
Do you not see the contradiction between your two statements? In the first, you say that the Bible is infallible and that our observations will eventually end up agreeing with it. In the second set you say that you can pick and choose what is to be taken as truth. Let’s pick a position and stick with it.
================================
You said “Science talks about the physical side of man’s existence. The Bible talks about the metaphysical side of man’s experience. Science has nothing to say about the metaphysical because it is not tangible or visible or can not be brought into a test tube for experiments.”
Correct me if I am wrong. This sounds like a “god of the gaps” argument. “Some things cannot be explained by current observations, therefore God did it.” Think about the implications. Our knowledge expands every day to fill the gaps in our ability to explain phenomena. Each time one of those gaps is filled, your god gets smaller and smaller. Are you sure you want to go down that road?
================================
“Now coming to specifics. About the date of the universe the Bible simply says. “In the beginning.”"
Now THAT is specific. Just as with horoscopes, statements can be written so that they fit any interpretation. What if the Bible had specifically said “5000 years ago”. You admit below that our current evidence suggests 4.5 billion years. Would the Bible still be the “creator’s manual”? Would you be willing to accept that it was wrong? I doubt it.
================================
“Science has observed it to be around 4.5 billion years or so. We must agree with science till new facts come to light. Both the Bible and science agree that there was a time when the universe was not in existence. No scientist believes that the universe is eternal. The Bible said it many years ago. Scientists observed that the present universe reached its shape by a process and in different stages. The Bible said that thousands of years ago. Scientists tell us that matter appeared first and then came life. The Bible said it long time back.”
Regarding all of the above to one degree or another, see the Koran, the 18 purANas of Hinduism, Norse mythology, Greek mythology, (heck, even the Silmarillion) etc. etc. etc. All of them can claim the same things. Why do you give the Bible precedence over them? Is it because you happened to be born into a Christian culture? What if you had been born in Syria? Would you still give such credence to the Bible? No knee jerk responses. Take some time to think about it. Would you?
================================
“The Bible only talks about the modern civilized man. The Bible has nothing to say about the pre-Adamic races. We know that they could have been there possibly. The Bible does not talk about it as it is not Bible’s concern.”
As the “creator’s manual”, how could this be outside of the bible’s concern? Seems like an important topic. If it really is a guide to how life was created and/or a guide to how to interpret our existence, it seems like a topic that should be brought up - not just swept under the rug by telling us that the human race began with two navel-less people. Can you support your statement that it isn’t the Bibles concern? Were Adam and Eve the first two people with true consciousness? Why not address their parents? Why make the statement that they were poofed into existence into dust. Old Testament man surely understood where babies came from.
================================
As some one living in the 21st century, I accept scientific observations and try to understand the Bible in the light of known facts.”
‘Splain the talking snake, please.
================================
“The Bible is not a scientific book.”
Thank you. This is one of the first things you have said that I agree with. What happened to the “creator’s manual”?
================================
“To deny metaphysical is to deny the experiences of millions around the world.”
If everyone believes that 2+2=5, does that make it true?
================================
Seriously, thank you for actually responding to the criticisms this time.
wazza,
Your comments are worth noting. But please tell me if I would have survived if I did not know this God and if I did not know how to pray.
You grade my philosophy of life a C- or even less. But please grade me for my practial living.
My illness has caused me and hundreds of others suffering like me to trust in God more than ever. Surely I would not have been alive to talk to you but for the faith which sustained me through troublous times.
Tell me the name of one book which has given more comfort to the sorrowing world than the Bible. Name another book which has been a hope to the hopeless. No wonder it is still one of the best sellers.
Your philosophy is useful as long as health and wealth are on your side. Do you have any guarantee they are going to be with you as long as you are alive?
If you are asking me to throw away the Bible from my life, it is like asking me to chop off my hands as well. Already I do not have normally functioing legs! Do you want me to chop off my hands as well?
The Bible not only gives me the stamina to face life today with all its troubles, it also gives me an eternal hope. You may not believe in it. Never mind. If I am wrong, I lose nothing as I am one of the happier people in the world of suffering today. But if you are wrong in your understanding of life and human existence, it is going to cost you rather dearly. An unknown eternity is waiting for you. Or could you be absolutely sure? Or do you think you have all facts in place? Have a great day!!
David, I am glad that you got hooked on once again! Thanks indeed.
Yes, the Bible is the maker’s manual with out a doubt. Seeming contradictions are there. But please do not expect standards of modern journalism in an ancient book as the Bible.
You talk about genocide in the name of God. Groups of people were removed from the face of the earth several times just so that human race would not go extinct. Imagine the 20th centuary epidemic (AIDS) hitting human race in those olden days. If you knew any thing about Sodom and Gommorah and the culture of the Cannanites in the Bible times you would agree with me.
Empy… ah, I haven’t really the heart to take away someone’s prop. But trust me, it’s possible to get through some genuinely awful times without god at all. Your accomplishments are your own, and it hurts me to see you handing them all off on a god who doesn’t exist.
The philosophy of the bible - which, with respect, you have transcended, as most believers do, the philosophy therein being of the most base and destructive sort except in a few places - has no effect on your practical living.
I won’t deny that the bible gives hope, but to me, science does the same thing. We can make the world a better place. Not in some distant afterlife, but right here. Right now.
You end your passage with a paraphrase of Pascal’s Wager. So I’ll give you one of the classic refutations: how can you be sure you’re worshiping the right god? What if Allah is angry at you for not recognising his final prophet? What if Cthulhu has decided that, for your unbelief, he will eat you last? Better to make no choice, a defensible position, and trust to the mercy of god if you are wrong, then make the wrong choice and really piss him off.
As for your comments on genocide, we’re not talking about Sodom and Gomorrah, though those cases are also interesting (hint: ancient Athens used to believe that pederasty was just fine, and also worshipped the wrong gods… Why weren’t they blasted, too?). The genocide referred to is the several cases where the Jews were told to kill a people, leaving only their young women and otherwise destroying everything, for no better reason than because they were on land YHWH intended for his Chosen People. And he never did explain why they were chosen, either.
@empy
wazza is right, the biblie is far from being the best metaphysical book. And you again did not refute the questions that we have made for you. You just avoid them by saying that the bible is not a scientific book (thing that we know very well).
You clearly say that the importance of the bible is to comfort the people. A doctor can tell to a patient that he will be good soon, just to comfort him. But this doesn’t change the fact that he will die very soon. Comfort words don’t mean to be true words.
I thing that he, and no one here is saying to you throw away your bible. It’s your life, and you do what you want. We are saying mainly to you really answer the questions. Please don’t come with those irrelevant histories to discussion, ok.
And just for curiosity, say how is the right way to interpretate the bible in the creationist method, like the parts said in the comment 28. Please begin with:
“According to the “creator’s manual” man was created AFTER the other animals (Gen 1:25-27).
Also according to the “creator’s manual” man was created BEFORE the other animals (Gen 2:18-19). Which is it?”
(Exodus 33:11) And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
(Exodus 33:20) And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
“According to the “creator’s manual” snakes can talk.”
@empy: Well two really basic mistakes that you’ve made. Just because believing in god may help people (all though the millions and millions slaughtered in its name may disagree) doesn’t alter the fact that the Christian god doesn’t exists. Are you claiming that the existence of a god is dependent on the help it gives people - if someone was driven to create a cure for cancer and wipe out world poverty in the name of Thor would you then say that Thor exists?
The second is that what have you got to lose and are us non-believers sure that god doesn’t exists arguments. Well the simple question is out of the thousands of gods that humans have invented how do you know you’ve backed the right one? If it comes down to a gamble (and with no evidence to prove any god exists) then the best choice is to worship no god. To put it another way if I said that I believed in a god whose only condition of worship was that you had to hop to work every day otherwise you would face a life in hell - would you do it and if not why not? Can you be absolutely sure, do you have all the facts in place. This could cost you rather dearly. Have a great day!!
well, Jabster, Empy wouldn’t hop to work, for a fairly obvious reason. Which is what I find interesting about this - an all-loving god has given his faithful servant a debilitating condition for no clear reason but, perhaps, to test his already unshaken faith.
Hi every one, I am very happy to see so much responces to my posts. Let me talk to David first since he has the longest list.
David,
Thank you for taking my statements and showing me the fallacies in it. I am referring to your post 32. To begin with you quote two of my statements from 24 and form 30. In 30 I said “what ever references are there in the Bible about ‘how’ this earth functions should not be taken literally”. Yes, Even today we talk about the sun rising in the east and we do not mean that sun really rises in the east though we use the same expression. The Bible also has several expressions like that which should not be taken literally.
In the next para you quoted me saying, “Science has nothing to say about the metaphysical”. I do stand by it. Please tell me what has science to tell us about love and hatred in human life. Scientific knowledge is increasing. But I can not imagine a time when science will reach a stage when it will handle morality. That is outside the preview of science. It is not a question of the “god of the gaps”. Should science ever reach that stage, I truly believe it will never contradict the Bible in essence.
The next para is about the age of the universe. By using the word ‘specific’ I meant ‘specific topic’ meaning age of the universe. If my wording confused you, I apologize for the same.
Then you said, “What if the Bible had specifically said ‘5000 years ago’”. That is exactly my whole point. The Bible did not assign a date for the universe because the date of the universe is not the agenda of the Bible. We can not expect any thing more than that from the Bible. If modern discoveries would assign another date for the universe, I would have no difficulty accepting it. What difference would it make in my life today if the universe existed a million years ago or a billion years ago?
Then you blame me that I believe in the Bible because I was born in a Christian culture. Yes, indeed, I believe that being born in a Christian culture is a great privilege. Other wise my chances of getting to know the Bible would have been diminished. No other book in the entire world talks about entering into a personal relationship with God the creator. I followed the instructions of the Bible and I enjoy a filial relationship with God. Now I call Him “Dad” and He treats me like his own child.
This is a real relationship which I cherish daily. Talking to Him. Fellowshipping with Him. Enjoying His company. Yea, I would have truly missed it, if I did not follow the instructions in the Bible. I enjoy life at its best. Hence my physical condition can not distract me!
Now the question of Adam and Eve. Pre-Adamic race was just like animals which do not have consciousness. None of us really know what happened in the past. Could science possibly tell us when and where the modern civilized man appeared on this earth? Surely there was a time when they were not found on this earth. They appeared at some time at some place. They marked a clear and distinct species different from all others which were there before them. From the time we have our written records, the basic characteristics of the present human race has not changed.
Talking snake. Well, it is a story conveying a moral/spiritual truth. Nothing more.
The Bible is not a scientific book. It is not dealing with the physical world. It is essentailly dealing with the moral/spiritual side of man’s existence.
At last you asked me if every one believed in something upsurd would it ever become a truth? It is not the question of believing at all. It is a question of genuine human experience. Just as we all experience pain and suffering, joy and sorrow, man has the ability to experience God and to be in talking terms with Him. You will never understand what I am talking about. Because you have totally left one whole area of your existence unexploited. I mean the spiritual realm of man’s existence. I say, there is great reward in pursuing that area of your life. Man is not merely a combination of minerals and chemicals producing electronic pulses. Man has a life principle within him which is capable of having links with the Almighty Spirit who is the Creator and sustainer of this universe. I enjoy it to the maximum. Any one could opt for that experience and enjoy life at its best. Man, you do not know what you are missing!
@Raphael:
“Comfort words don’t mean to be true words.”
Just came from Ray’s new site, xiantinhatcentral–sorry, I mean “athiest central” to find your serendipitous comment. I take great comfort in it ;-)
@Empy:
Science and the Bible are clearly in conflict. Otherwise why are we even having this discussion?
Atheists are motivated by the interference of what Orac at Respectful Insolence calls “woo“, in public life.
For example the recent Bush move to consider contraception equal to abortion. Because, presumably, life is sacred unless it’s in Iraq or jail.
Those pushing this godawful abuse of the law are primarily (not to say without exception) Bible-beliving Christians, most of ‘em born-agains.
If the Bible and science cover different areas of human existence, why do those who thump Bibles continually presume to make law as though they didn’t?
You whack our science with your Bible, we’ll whack your Bible with our science.
empy,
Your getting better. You actually responded to some of the criticisms and even admitted that you were inconsistent. That’s progress.
=============================
“Thank you for taking my statements and showing me the fallacies in it. I am referring to your post 32. To begin with you quote two of my statements from 24 and form 30. In 30 I said “what ever references are there in the Bible about ‘how’ this earth functions should not be taken literally”. Yes, Even today we talk about the sun rising in the east and we do not mean that sun really rises in the east though we use the same expression. The Bible also has several expressions like that which should not be taken literally.”
Yet, you earlier said that “…indeed, because what ever fact does not fit in [to what the Bible states] would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual.(#24)” Think about this. Based on our current understanding you reinterpret the Bible because we know a group of bronze-age people couldn’t possibly have known that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Yet, you suggest that I trust that same group of bronze-age people to give my one and only life to an omnipotent (and arbitrarily cruel) SOB who lives in the sky? Isn’t it more rational that we instead come to the same conclusion as before, i.e. that these people didn’t know what they were talking about?
=============================
“In the next para you quoted me saying, “Science has nothing to say about the metaphysical”. I do stand by it. Please tell me what has science to tell us about love and hatred in human life. Scientific knowledge is increasing. But I can not imagine a time when science will reach a stage when it will handle morality. That is outside the preview of science. It is not a question of the “god of the gaps”. Should science ever reach that stage, I truly believe it will never contradict the Bible in essence.”
I agree. Science can only deal with natural phenomena. I don’t want science to dictate morality any more than you do. The natural world is cruel and unforgiving. However, I also don’t want morality to be dictated by an imaginary sky fairy whose rules for living include wanton genocide in his hame, stoning of children who are disobedient, and whose rules were first written down by bronze-age people who had not the slightest concept of the wider world around them. Moral decisions should be determined via a combination of rational thought and the innate human concepts of morality which are widespread in most human cultures regardless of whether they have read the Bible or not. However, whether we agree or disagree on this is not particularly relevant.
==============================
“The next para is about the age of the universe. By using the word ‘specific’ I meant ‘specific topic’ meaning age of the universe. If my wording confused you, I apologize for the same.
Then you said, “What if the Bible had specifically said ‘5000 years ago’”. That is exactly my whole point. The Bible did not assign a date for the universe because the date of the universe is not the agenda of the Bible. We can not expect any thing more than that from the Bible.”
Read what you are saying. This Bible is supposed to be inerrant Word of God, right? Remember, you started this by implying that you had access to some ‘facts’ that we didn’t have ‘in place.’ Yet, you have just said that we can expect nothing more from the inerrant Word of God than vague references to ‘in the beginning’ or ’some time ago’ or that ‘the universe reached its shape by a process and in different stages’. If God is what he claims to be in the Bible, why not expect more? How long ago? Through what stages? Isn’t it convenient that these statements could be said by even a bronze-age shaman? It doesn’t take a god to come up with them. God claims to be all knowing and all powerful. Why not tell us what he knows? If God really wanted to impress me, he should have put something in the Bible about the structure of DNA or how to construct a TV. No, instead you want me to believe that he chose to be cryptic and to only say things that could just as easily have been said by any Joe-shmo living off of his herd of sheep.
By the way, you didn’t answer my question. Minor but important point, if the bible had said ‘5000 years ago’, would you believe it to be true? Or, would you accept the 4.5 billion year date that is currently accepted? This is important and you should consider your answer carefully.
==============================
“Then you blame me that I believe in the Bible because I was born in a Christian culture. Yes, indeed, I believe that being born in a Christian culture is a great privilege. Other wise my chances of getting to know the Bible would have been diminished. No other book in the entire world talks about entering into a personal relationship with God the creator. I followed the instructions of the Bible and I enjoy a filial relationship with God. Now I call Him “Dad” and He treats me like his own child.
This is a real relationship which I cherish daily. Talking to Him. Fellowshipping with Him. Enjoying His company. Yea, I would have truly missed it, if I did not follow the instructions in the Bible. I enjoy life at its best. Hence my physical condition can not distract me!”
There you go again. Please answer the questions. I will restate: Regarding all of the above [post 32] to one degree or another, see the Koran, the 18 purANas of Hinduism, Norse mythology, Greek mythology, (heck, even the Silmarillion) etc. etc. etc. All of them can claim the same things. Why do you give the Bible precedence over them? Is it because you happened to be born into a Christian culture? What if you had been born in Syria? Would you still give such credence to the Bible? No knee jerk responses. Take some time to think about it.
==============================
“Now the question of Adam and Eve. Pre-Adamic race was just like animals which do not have consciousness.”
And how do you know this? What evidence can you provide to support your statement?
“None of us really know what happened in the past. Could science possibly tell us when and where the modern civilized man appeared on this earth?”
Does the “creator’s manual”? See above - it would not be unreasonable for an all-knowing being to have that information.
“Surely there was a time when they were not found on this earth. They appeared at some time at some place. They marked a clear and distinct species different from all others which were there before them. From the time we have our written records, the basic characteristics of the present human race has not changed.”
Are you aware that you are corresponding with an professional evolutionary biologist? It just doesn’t work the way you describe and you are demonstrating your ignorance on the subject.
==============================
“Talking snake. Well, it is a story conveying a moral/spiritual truth. Nothing more.”
Where does the story end and the literal truth begin? Who decides? You? Me? The pastor down the road? If my holy book tells me something different and that snakes really do talk and that I should kill you if you don’t agree, am I wrong? Yours makes analogous claims in several passages.
“The Bible is not a scientific book. It is not dealing with the physical world. It is essentailly dealing with the moral/spiritual side of man’s existence.”
Remember, you said there were some facts that we didn’t have in place. By saying so, you implied that you had access to them. At first you claimed it was the Bible - “what ever fact does not fit in [to what the Bible states] would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual (#24)”. Is that no longer true? Please proceed to enlighten us.
==============================
At last you asked me if every one believed in something upsurd would it ever become a truth? It is not the question of believing at all. It is a question of genuine human experience. Just as we all experience pain and suffering, joy and sorrow, man has the ability to experience God and to be in talking terms with Him. You will never understand what I am talking about. Because you have totally left one whole area of your existence unexploited. I mean the spiritual realm of man’s existence. I say, there is great reward in pursuing that area of your life. Man is not merely a combination of minerals and chemicals producing electronic pulses. Man has a life principle within him which is capable of having links with the Almighty Spirit who is the Creator and sustainer of this universe. I enjoy it to the maximum. Any one could opt for that experience and enjoy life at its best. Man, you do not know what you are missing!
And what of all those people whose experiences cause them to believe something that YOU believe to be absurd? Do we give them credence just because they say so? That is what you are asking me to do for you. There is an objective reality. You simply refuse to see it and it is I who are sorry that you are missing out on it. The universe is vast and complex but you insist on making it small and simple. I am tempted to say more but you are again trying to get me off topic.
==============================
Does anyone else see the goalposts moving or is it just me?
Empy… your dad paralyzed you. I’ve seen loving families break up over less. I’ve seen front page screams over lesser incidents of familial violence.
Your other points… The bible does not assign a date, but it does assign a method, and that method does not accord with the evidence.
The bible tells us nothing at all about love and hate. Science tells us exactly what they are - developed forms of breeding and territorial instincts, developed to the point of being respectively the most wonderful and horrible aspects of human existence, but still able to be induced by slightly modifying the balance of chemicals in the brain.
Morality, also, is being examined by evolutionary psychologists, and they’re actually finding the basis of all morality. It’s really working, right now, and it’s one of the most exciting areas of science.
The characteristics of the human race has changed, despite our social structure preventing many of the evolutionary pressures from acting; mostly due to diet (hunter-gatherers were taller than us, but you’d hit your head on a doorframe from the middle ages), but there are also real pressures like various diseases, starvation… and they have had an effect.
You talk about god making your life better. To me, that’s like a man closing his eyes and putting pressure on his eyeballs - permanently - because he thinks the colours are so much prettier that way. There’s a real world out there, with real people and real things to discover and enjoy, but belief in gods prevents most people from opening their eyes and seeing it right in front of them.
Just heard this quote and would like empy’s take on it.
“The pulpit assures us that wherever we see suffering and sorrow, which we can relieve and do not do it, we sin heavily. There was never yet a case of suffering or sorrow, which God could not relieve. Does He sin then?” - Mark Twain
David,
I must thank you for your willingness to talk to me. I have never been a philosopher. I am never good at arguments. I am a Linguist by profession and all my active life I spent with a jungle tribe where I could not even see a news paper for months. My only contact with the world outside was a transistor radio. So you can imagine how limited I am. But you can give me some language data to be analyzed I would accept it as my cup of tea and do a good job at that. I am proud to be talking to an evolutionary biologist! Thanks for sparing your precious time for me. Kindly forgive my ignorance in your field of expertise.
In your post (41) you say in the first para that the Bible could not be trusted because it came from a primitive age when scientific advance was not there.
Yes, indeed, the Bible is an ancient book. But why should we belittle our ancestors? Is it not they who built the Pyramids? What about the Hanging Gardens of ancient Babylon? Could we imagine imitating them even with all our scientific advancement? Who among us would dare constructing a Hanging Garden now?
My point is that man is a limited being. Each person has limitations. You could not possibly be a Neuro-surgeon and a space astronomer at the same time. Jack of all trades is master of none. Different people have different interests and as one pursues in his area of interest he gets into heights where none has gone before.
Ancient men who were basically agriculturalists had plenty of time to delve into the unknown world of the spirits. As an evolutionary biologist you may deny the existence of a spirit world. I have no problem believing in the spirit world because of my experiences with evil spirits where I lived. (Read my post about ‘confrontation with evil spirits’ in my blog). Reading my blog, a Doctor Candidate from Ohio State University sent me the following email.
“I have for approximately 6 months been wracked with an evil spirit of some kind that will not day or night leave me alone. I need someone with your level of expertise to perform spiritual warfare on the spirit. It has such power that it is even able to touch others in plain view of me. Please help me I have become so desparate, even having to check myself into a psychiatric ward to obtain antipsychotic drugs- although helping I still feel it’s presence near.
”Thank you and please hurry I don’t know how much stronger I can be.”
After a few interactions with that candidate here is the last mail I received from that person. It had just one sentence sent to me on the 5th of May. And here is the quote.
“Your scripture got me through thank you so much”
Would you be able to convince this person that spirit world is not real. If it was simply a psychological thing, why couldn’t the psychiatrist help that person?
At the moment I am in correspondence with another person from a British University doing his research in oil production. It is the same problem of an evil spirit attacking him every now and then. Since he said the following, I am not quoting him here. He said,
“pls this mail is for you only .Thanks.”
Would you be able to convince these friends that evil spirits are not real and that there is no spirit world around us?
My point is, ancient men had plenty of time at hand and they were able to delve into the spirit world. Men who got into contact with good spirits and God who is Spirit wrote down their experiences in the Bible for us. AND IT WORKS even today where modern psychiatrists fail!
David, if you were to make yourself available to contact with the spirit world, I tell you, it is possible for any one. If you wish to contact God, the Bible is our guide. It is not just funny imagination. As I said in an earlier post, no other book than the Bible in the entire world talks about the possibility of entering into a filial relationship with God the creator. If you follow other religious books, you could reach their destination. I follow the Bible and I found life to be absolutely satisfying and rewarding in spite of all my physical ill being.
This discussion could go very long. Let me stop for the moment.
I would like your feed back on this, if you don’t mind. Please.
Raphael,
You have been following this discussion rather closely. Thanks indeed for your comments. You said,
“I thing that he, and no one here is saying to you throw away your bible. It’s your life, and you do what you want. We are saying mainly to you really answer the questions. Please don’t come with those irrelevant histories to discussion, ok.”
Your observation is right. The Bible is my life with out which I do not know whether I would have been alive to talk to you today.
Rapahael. we have been talking for now four or five days. Has any one said any thing new in our discussion which we did not know before. It is the same old arguements. Repeated in different words, that is all. But I brought my experiences to this board to give you evidence from personal experience that the Bible is reliable in spite of the many unanswered questions which even I have about it. I do not clearly undestand how human metabolism works. That does not prevent me from eating and enjoying a good meal and enjoying a healthy life. Would you wait to see all questions answered before you start eating? I bet, you would never be able to eat then.
You know, I take Bible as a guide to my spiritual existence on earth. To me the spirit world is as real as the physical world. If you do not see it, I suggest you change your goggles!
God bless!
the “Hanging Gardens” were actually a terraced building with gardens on all the steps - well within modern capabilities.
You say that the Ohioan was plagued by evil spirits, went to a psychiatrist and also asked you for help… but which solved his problem? If you were praying and the doctor was giving him psychoactive drugs too, which was having an effect? In other words, was this an evil spirit or one of the far better documented psycological problems, such as schizophrenia, which has the same appearance as demonic possession, and can convince others that things are happening in a different way to how they actually are, or even convince them of things that aren’t happening at all?
In my personal experience, I’ve spent a lot of time around christians. When I was 13 I opened my heart to god and gave him an opportunity to come in. I did this mostly in the spirit of inquiry, but if god wanted me, then would have been the time to take me; but nothing happened, and since that time I have learned a lot about psychology and altered states of mind, which has so much bearing on the subject of religion.
Ancient men and women had to work all the time. Ancient agriculture was incredibly labour-intensive and only provided enough food to barely prevent starvation. They had no time at all, apart from the aristocracy, whose primary aim was to control the populace. Through use of a primitive understanding of several psychological effects, it was possible to convince the people that gods could control the weather, and if you were on their good side you’d get rain and sun in the seasons you wanted them in. If the weather did not behave, it was easily excused by blaming it on the parishioners’ lack of true faith. Thus were the common people controlled, and thus was the priesthood born. Even into the 19th century, younger sons of the aristocracy provided most of the clerics of the christian church, convincing the labourers that life would be better in heaven, so long as they obeyed those favoured by god - the aristocracy.
Later popular churches coopted this ideal to drive populist reform, but the idea was the same one created by the aristocracy.
The spirit world might exist. But a far more likely explanation is that mental illnesses - which we know exist - take on a familiar form for believers.
42 wazza
You too have been actively commenting on my posts. Thanks indeed.
You said, “Empy… your dad paralyzed you. I’ve seen loving families break up over less. I’ve seen front page screams over lesser incidents of familial violence.”
Wonderful observation indeed!
You know, people have been blaiming me for talking about my expereinces in this discussion. But your comments more than once about my illness that it does not fit a loving God promt me to make the following comment. Every one else, please forgive. Thanks.
Wazza, six moths before I even became ill, there was a warning in my inner heart to wait for the 7th of July. I waited rather anxiously for that day. It was on that day that my legs becme paralyzed (More in my blog).[ By the way, I am not a Pentecostal or a Charismatic. I am a sober man in every respect. I can not see how Pentecostals can justigy their actions in the light of the Bible.]
Do you know some thing? Over the last seventeen years, NEVER even once in my life I felt that I was ill and that God does not care for me though I had to be carried back and forth from the hospital several times. I was almost bedridden for the first six months of my illness. But thanks to the treatments by various systems of medicines and being an answer to prayer now I am able to go to bathroom myself with out any one helping me. During all these years, I felt an ever-abiding presence of the Lord around me that news papers carried my story aroud as some one who is able to rejoice in the worst situation in life with the help of God. I could have become bitter in my life even after all my experiences with God. But it is purely His grace that I am not bitter or angry.
Let me tell you, God could have done it in my life with out Him informing me about it for six months! After all, we are clay in the hands of a ptter. It is He who decides what to make of us. Of course, He has given us freedom to choose Him or not. But it is He Who would decide where we would be born and what is our life’s status and what we are confronted with in daily life. Not a sparrow will fall to the ground with out Him.[ I know that all this talk would fall in strange ears. It is like me talking to some one who has never seen an automobile about shifting gears.]
The greatest thing about God is that He lets you choose what you want for your life here on earth. If you do not need Him, He will surely let you alone. He will never ever bother you. But if you askHim for His help, He is right there in all compassion to help you out in every situation (Ps.145:18).
If you choose against Him, He will let you go to a place in the universe where His presence is no longer available. That is the place prepared for Satan and his angels (Mt.25:41). No man needs to go there. But you will eventually fiund yourself there if you do not want God in your life. Choice is absolutely yours. This He does because He does not want to force any one to accept His ways
Well, please forgive me this blurb. I just wish to tell you that my illness has caused me to draw closer to God and I know that I am alive today BECAUSE HE CARES. God bless..
@empy
You’ve said
“we have been talking for now four or five days. Has any one said any thing new in our discussion which we did not know before. It is the same old arguements. Repeated in different words, that is all.”
Right. But this doesn’t mean they’re wrong. It’s supposed you to answer them. But, how David have said, “Take some time to think about it.”
You have not answered me about how to interpretate (in the creationist way) these parts:
“According to the “creator’s manual” man was created AFTER the other animals (Gen 1:25-27).
Also according to the “creator’s manual” man was created BEFORE the other animals (Gen 2:18-19). Which is it?”
(Exodus 33:11) And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.
(Exodus 33:20) And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
We can see they are contradictory, so how can this be if the bible is the inerrant word of god?
You’ve said
“But I brought my experiences to this board to give you evidence from personal experience that the Bible is reliable in spite of the many unanswered questions which even I have about it.”
What you don’t see is that this doesn’t help at all. Personal experiences doesn’t prove anything. And David have said this in this part (comment 41):
“And what of all those people whose experiences cause them to believe something that YOU believe to be absurd? Do we give them credence just because they say so? That is what you are asking me to do for you.”
And you are asking us to believe in the bible or god by your personal experiences, that can be explained without any supernatural stuff.
You’ve said
“I do not clearly undestand how human metabolism works. That does not prevent me from eating and enjoying a good meal and enjoying a healthy life. Would you wait to see all questions answered before you start eating? I bet, you would never be able to eat then.”
What do you mean? This has nothing to do with the subject of discussion. Reread that paragraph and you will see this part is an alien.
Of course we don’t need to understand everything to live. So, what’s the point?
Perhaps you mean that the bible doesn’t really explain anything to us, but we can follow it even this way. Is that what you mean?
You’ve said
“You know, I take Bible as a guide to my spiritual existence on earth. To me the spirit world is as real as the physical world. If you do not see it, I suggest you change your goggles”
You don’t need to come with this thing, I was a spiritual/religious (mainly spiritual) person all of my life. I’ve believed in the spiritual world, in god, etc. I know how this works very well.
Change my goggles: sure, indeed I have done this, and I’ve saw I’ve believed in lies. I’ve based my life in false truths. I was taught since I was a child, and I had no choice. So, when I wake to the truth, you expect me return to this irrational way of life. No, I just say sorry for you. And I hope you at least be happy in your life, even believing in this non-sense stuff.
Raphael,
Thank you for all your comments.
Truly, I am terrribly sorry that the faith that you were taught in your younger days did not work for you. By the way, will you thow away a Chemistry text book if you did not get the desired results? Would you not rather see why you are not getting desired results?
You compalin that I am not properly answering questions. May be I am not. Now, Let me ask you one question. Please be kind enough to answer me briefly. I am soubly sure that you will.
My question is “What would have happened to me seventeen years ago when I became ill if I did not know how to pray and get answers from God?” Please answer me this one question before you proceed further. Honestly I wish to know what you think about that question. Thank you for obliging.
David, in the second section of your post No41 you said this:
“I agree. Science can only deal with natural phenomena. I don’t want science to dictate morality any more than you do. The natural world is cruel and unforgiving. However, I also don’t want morality to be dictated by an imaginary sky fairy whose rules for living include wanton genocide in his hame, stoning of children who are disobedient, and whose rules were first written down by bronze-age people who had not the slightest concept of the wider world around them. Moral decisions should be determined via a combination of rational thought and the innate human concepts of morality which are widespread in most human cultures regardless of whether they have read the Bible or not.”
I am extremely glad that there is some thing on which we can agree at last. After all, we at least share the common humanness. Don’t we?
But you attribute the moral laws of the Bible to ‘an imaginary sky fairy’. That is where the disagreement comes. That there is a spirit world around is undeniable. (Irrespective of one’s faith in it. Recently I read about a guy who does not want to believe that man ever walked on the moon. His simple argument is that human technology has not progressed that level. He is very adamant as well. Any idea what to do with such people?). That the spiritual world is permanent and the physical is transitory is a truth we would only know if we are willing to accept the supernatural revelation. Since the spirit world is invisible it is not within the perview of science. Hence the need for a revelation form the divine.It is through this revelation that we know of a God who created this universe.
Don’t you know that no one ever practices the laws of the Old Testament today? Even Orthodox Jews do not do it. Old Testament is like the foundation of a building. A strong foundaton is required for any superstructure to stand on it. Our ultimate use is for the superstructure, the New Testament. Could any one around give us a better standard for humanity than the New Testament? The foundation stands burried under the earth. The Old Testament had such regulations which seem cruel and ugly to modern society. But we know that even the Code of Hammurabi does not come any where near the Old Testament when it comes to the value of human life. In the Old Testament if a life was to be destroyed, it was to prevent the whole human race from getting contaminated. It is like a doctor removing cancerous cells from a living human body. It is to preserve life and not to destroy it. It is like a farmer culling birds which are affected in order to preserve the farm.
If man was left to decide morality for himself, religion would have been like science, working with trial and error method. It would have taken thousands of years before the basic core of moral codes were to be discovered. That is why God had to reveal them to men who walked closed to Him. Moses was imbibing truths from the creator God for 40+40 days, all the while fasting, so that we the human race would get the code of conduct for our life here on earth. The ultimate code of conduct for all humanity is the New Testament (that is why it is translted into nearly 2000 languages) and the New Testament would not have been possible with out the Old which now serves as the inevitable foundation. Thank God for revealing His ultimate will for us in the New Testament.. Please tell me who would have codified such high standards of morality, some two thousand years ago, and that too some of the writers of which were ignorant fishermen, if they were not guided by God up in heaven?
“I must thank you for your willingness to talk to me.”
You are welcome. I find your apparent lack of ability to discuss this topic rationally fascinating.
=========================
“I have never been a philosopher. I am never good at arguments.”
I agree. You just seem happy to spout the same stories or types of stories over and over without ever attempting to back them up with any sort of rational discussion.
=========================
“I am a Linguist by profession… I am proud to be talking to an evolutionary biologist! Thanks for sparing your precious time for me. Kindly forgive my ignorance in your field of expertise.”
I am sure I would be out of my league attempting to discuss any sort of linquistic topic with you. However, I have no doubt that if I tried to learn the details I could. If you took the time to read and understand evolutionary theory, you could become an expert as well. It is not a mystery, just a field of inquiry as is any other.
=========================
“In your post (41) you say in the first para that the Bible could not be trusted because it came from a primitive age when scientific advance was not there. Yes, indeed, the Bible is an ancient book. But why should we belittle our ancestors? …. Who among us would dare constructing a Hanging Garden now?”
I’m just about ready to give up on this. Are you unwilling or unable to respond to rational arguments rationally? In no way did I belittle anyone. Is it unreasonable to mistrust the interpretations of the physical world when they were made by a group of people who had no understanding of atomic particles, the mechanistics behind lightning, the germ theory of disease? No. Does that mean they are stupid? No. It just means that their interpretations were based on a lack of knowledge and should be treated as such. Would you trust my three-year old son to tell you what lightning is? No, neither would I. He doesn’t have the knowledge to explain it. The ancient Isrealites had no understanding of electrical charges in the clouds either. Yet, you ask me to trust them when they tell me that a sky fairy is responsible for my well-being and/or damnation.
=========================
“My point is that man is a limited being.”
Yes, and you appear to be happy to remain that way by relying on the interpretations of the physical world provided by a group of bronze-age semi-nomads. I, on the other hand, am working to push back those limitations by investigating the world using methods that tell us what objective reality is all about.
=========================
“Each person has limitations….—more personal anecdotes lacking any relevance to the discussion— Would you be able to convince these friends that evil spirits are not real and that there is no spirit world around us?”
Only if they are willing to think rationally, actually THINK about what they believe, and investigate the possibility that they may be wrong. I have done this with regard to religion. I ask you to do it with regard to rationality. Investigate the rational explanations for what you and your friends have “experienced”. Read the what the scientific explanations for them may be. If you are not willing to do that, then I suggest you are not willing to see the world around you and that your faith is meaningless. Do not be afraid of where the search for truth may lead because it is a worthy exercise in itself. If it leads you back to your faith, so be it. But you must be honest in your search. Honest with yourself and others.
=========================
“My point is, ancient men had plenty of time at hand and they were able to delve into the spirit world. Men who got into contact with good spirits and God who is Spirit wrote down their experiences in the Bible for us. AND IT WORKS even today where modern psychiatrists fail!”
Bulls#!t. I defy you to come up with any evidence other than your “personal experiences” to support this statement. Personal experiences are just that - PERSONAL. An understanding of objective reality must be supported by experiences that we can ALL share and observe.
=========================
“David, if you were to make yourself available to contact with the spirit world, I tell you, it is possible for any one…. If you follow other religious books, you could reach their destination. I follow the Bible and I found life to be absolutely satisfying and rewarding in spite of all my physical ill being.”
That is great for you as long as you continue to delude yourself. Wait. Do you see what you just said? “If you follow other religious books, you could reach their destination.” So, are they just as valid as the Bible? Are they “manuals” to reach other gods? According to the Bible, there are no other gods. These books cannot all be true. If they cannot all be true, isn’t it reasonable that none of them may be true?
=========================
“This discussion could go very long. Let me stop for the moment.”
I disagree. This discussion should instead be very short. Your arguments consist solely of “personal experiences”. One personal experience is as good an any other. That is why I and others keep complaining when you bring them up. They are all the same argument or, more accurately, lack of argument. My points consist of well-supported scientific inquiry and I can point to statistically backed experiments THAT CAN BE REPEATED BY INDEPENDENT RESEARCHERS TO OBTAIN THE SAME RESULTS OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Thus, they must REFLECT AN OBJECTIVE REALITY that applies to all of us. Personal experiences are just that - personal. They belong to that one person and are not relevant to my experiences and observations. Do you see the difference?
David, in the second section of your post No 41 you said this:
“Read what you are saying. This Bible is supposed to be inerrant Word of God, right? Remember, you started this by implying that you had access to some ‘facts’ that we didn’t have ‘in place.’ Yet, you have just said that we can expect nothing more from the inerrant Word of God than vague references to ‘in the beginning’ or ’some time ago’ or that ‘the universe reached its shape by a process and in different stages’. If God is what he claims to be in the Bible, why not expect more? How long ago? Through what stages?”
Yes, You are right. Indeed I said that the Bible is the inerrent Word of God. Yes, I also did say that science does not have all facts in place as man is still discovering new things about the universe around us every now and then.
I also said you can not expect nothing more from the Bible about the date of the universe except a general reference to it. The Bible was NOT written to tell us about the age of the universe or how the universe functions. The Bible is written to tell us about the spiritual nature of man. The reference about the age of the universe is by the way. It is not in focus. Also one must remember the age of the universe is not particularly relevant when talking about the spiritual nature of man.
I said the Bible says very clearly that the universe reached its present shape thorugh a process and in different stages. To me that is the greatest strength of the Bible. Naturally what one would expect from a bronze-age book is that in a fraction of a second the whole universe came into its present shape. The Bible does not ever say that. In fact scientists are observing in our modern age what the Bible had said thousands of years ago. From an ancient book written about a totally different subject if you expect any thing more than that, I think you are demanding what even a modern University would not demand from one of its students. How long ago, and through what stages the univese came into being is NOT the issue discussed in the Bible. Any reference to such is done just along the way. So please do not expect more from the Bible about that issue. The Bible is inerrent in the spiritual truths it communicates to man. Surely since its author is also the creator of the universe, what ever passing references are there about the universe must also be correct. If science has some disagreement about some issue, science will correct itself later on as science has done in the past.
You again said,
“Isn’t it convenient that these statements could be said by even a bronze-age shaman? It doesn’t take a god to come up with them. God claims to be all knowing and all powerful. Why not tell us what he knows?”
Do you want to know what a bronze-age shaman would have written about the creation of the universe. I quote form Babylonian creation myth for you to read. It came from around the same time as the Bible story. It is usually dated as coming from the 12th centrury BC and the Bible story may be from around the same time as well.
Here is the quote:
“Marduk encircles Tiamat with his net, blows her up with his winds, and shoots “an arrow which pierced her belly, / Split her down the middle and slit her heart” (Dalley 253). After standing on Tiamat’s corpse, he easily defeats the rebel gods, capturing most of them and smashing their weapons. He ties the arms of the monsters and leads them away with nose-ropes. He grabs the Tablet of Destiny away from Kingu and fastens it to his own breast. Marduk then proceeds to create the universe from Tiamat’s body:
He sliced her in half like a fish for drying:
Half of her he put up to roof the sky,
Drew a bolt across and made a guard to hold it.
Her waters he arranged so they could not escape.” (Dalley 255)
I am sure any reader would really see the difference between man-made creation story and the God-inspired one, both coming from the bronze-age. The above material is the typical bronze-age man’s production. If some one does not see the difference between them, I am helpless.
Then you said, “If God really wanted to impress me, he should have put something in the Bible about the structure of DNA or how to construct a TV. No, instead you want me to believe that he chose to be cryptic and to only say things that could just as easily have been said by any Joe-shmo living off of his herd of sheep”
Do you mean to read about electronics in the Bible? I am sorry. You are in the wrong place. Or do you want to read about human physiology? I bet, you need to seek it else where. The Bible talks about the spiritual nature of man and about the moral standards God His creator expects from man for man’s happy survival on earth now and for the eternal status to which man will enter when he leaves this earth. Your demand to read about elctroics and human physilogy in the Bible is like me telling you that in your biology write up I can’nt see any reference to Logarithm and therefore, I will not accept your paper! What ever, as you say Genesis chapter 1 could not have been written by a man living in bronze-age all on his own.
Incidently, talking about DNA code, one of the IT gurus, Perry Marshall thinks that the greatest evidence for the existence of God is found in human DNA code.
Then you said, “By the way, you didn’t answer my question. Minor but important point, if the bible had said ‘5000 years ago’, would you believe it to be true? Or, would you accept the 4.5 billion year date that is currently accepted? This is important and you should consider your answer carefully.”
There is not question of “if the Bible had said” at all. I am absolutely sure you would never find such blatant blunders in the Bible. Should some one point out such, I would wait to see further evidence coming to light. Till then I would continue to trust the Bible. This I do in the light of my personal experiences with and through the Bible. If I am alive today, it is because of the Bible and my trust in its words. Should I throw away the Bible, I will throw away my life itself. It is as clear as that. May God bless you!
First, let me inform you that one of the reasons I entered this conversation was that I actually had some time on my hands. My wife and son had gone to visit family for a few days and I had some time to myself to devote to this discussion. They are coming back tomorrow. Because of that, I will return to devoting my at home time to them. To that end, I will likely stop responding after one more volley back and forth.
Now, just a couple of items from your last post to me:
“….That there is a spirit world around is undeniable.”
This is where you keep going. You make these broad statements with absolutely nothing to back them up. Over and over, throughout the history of mankind events that were originally attributed to the ’spirit world’ have subsequently been explained by physical and very understandable mechanisms. Disease was thought to be caused by impure spirits. Now we know that disease is due to microorganisms that were unknown to earlier societies. ‘Hearing voices’ is now known to be due to imbalances in neurotransmitters in the brain. Earlier man couldn’t have known about neurotransmitters so he attributed the phenomenon to the ‘demons’. I invite you to view the following: http://herebedragonsmovie.com/. While the entire video is interesting, all I am asking you to view is three minutes 20:20 to 22:50. I do not deny completely that anything may exist. The default position of any rational person is agnostic. I do however state that there is NO evidence to point to the existence of a ’spirit world’. On the contrary, there is evidence mounting every day to suggest that there are rational explanations for phenomena attributed to that world. Thus, the probability of there being a ’spirit world’ is very, very small. Small enough that the word ‘deny’ would be acceptable in casual conversation.
===============================
“(Irrespective of one’s faith in it. Recently I read about a guy who does not want to believe that man ever walked on the moon. His simple argument is that human technology has not progressed that level. He is very adamant as well. Any idea what to do with such people?).”
Do you truly not see that you ARE one of these people?
“That the spiritual world is permanent and the physical is transitory is a truth we would only know if we are willing to accept the supernatural revelation. Since the spirit world is invisible it is not within the perview of science. Hence the need for a revelation form the divine.It is through this revelation that we know of a God who created this universe.”
I’m still waiting to hear why you give precendence to the Bible over any of the other holy books out there.
===============================
“Don’t you know that no one ever practices the laws of the Old Testament today? Even Orthodox Jews do not do it. Old Testament is like the foundation of a building. A strong foundaton is required for any superstructure to stand on it. Our ultimate use is for the superstructure, the New Testament. Could any one around give us a better standard for humanity than the New Testament?”
Matthew 5:17-19 “Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
===============================
“The foundation stands burried under the earth. The Old Testament had such regulations which seem cruel and ugly to modern society. But we know that even the Code of Hammurabi does not come any where near the Old Testament when it comes to the value of human life. In the Old Testament if a life was to be destroyed, it was to prevent the whole human race from getting contaminated. It is like a doctor removing cancerous cells from a living human body. It is to preserve life and not to destroy it. It is like a farmer culling birds which are affected in order to preserve the farm.”
So, when God orderd the Isrealites to invade the lands of a people in order to take it for themselves, he was removing a ‘cancer’ that had the potential to destroy humanity? Where are you getting this crap? Show me some support for these statements. In what way were the Amalekites a threat to humanity when they were ordered destroyed (1 Samuel 15)? The only evidence I can find in the Bible is that they were guilty of war with the Isrealites hundreds of years before (Deuteronomy 25 and a few other passages). Where was this “value of human life” of which you speak when Joshua “utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded” (Joshua 10:40-41). Or when God “smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon” (Exodus 12:29-30). How can you tell me of God’s goodness and grace when I can quote from your own book what a cruel SOB he can be. Oh, I know “God works in mysterious ways.” Remember, this being is supposed to be all-knowing and all-powerful. Yet, he refuses to enlighten us as to his reasons in the great “creator’s manual”.
===============================
“If man was left to decide morality for himself, religion would have been like science, working with trial and error method. It would have taken thousands of years before the basic core of moral codes were to be discovered. ”
Maybe that is what the people you call the “pre-adamic races were doing all that time.
“Please tell me who would have codified such high standards of morality, some two thousand years ago, and that too some of the writers of which were ignorant fishermen, if they were not guided by God up in heaven?”
Oh, only every other culture in the world. We have yet to find a culture that does not have the same basic moral code as any other (of course there are minor differences but the basics are the same). This includes societies that have never heard of the Bible or Yahweh.
A summary of my discussions with empy before I go:
1. Never supported his initial implied claim that there were facts to which he had either access or information about that we scientists are either ignoring or are unaware of.
2. Never responded to: Regarding all of the above to one degree or another, see the Koran, the 18 purANas of Hinduism, Norse mythology, Greek mythology, (heck, even the Silmarillion) etc. etc. etc. All of them can claim the same things. Why do you give the Bible precedence over them?
3. Responded with metaphysical gobbledygook to: If everyone believes that 2+2=5, does that make it true?
4. Responded to my comment: “Isn’t it more rational that we instead come to the same conclusion as before, i.e. that these people didn’t know what they were talking about?” by implying that I belittled early man. When I was 3 months old, I couldn’t do simple math. Man, I was a moron.
5. Did not respond to the following exchange: “Now the question of Adam and Eve. Pre-Adamic race was just like animals which do not have consciousness.” And how do you know this? What evidence can you provide to support your statement?
6. Did not respond to the following exchange: “None of us really know what happened in the past. Could science possibly tell us when and where the modern civilized man appeared on this earth?” Does the “creator’s manual”? See above - it would not be unreasonable for an all-knowing being to have that information.
7. Did not respond to the following questions: “Where does the story end and the literal truth begin? Who decides? You? Me? The pastor down the road? If my holy book tells me something different and that snakes really do talk and that I should kill you if you don’t agree, am I wrong? Yours makes analogous claims in several passages.
8. Did not respond to the following exchange: “The Bible is not a scientific book. It is not dealing with the physical world. It is essentailly dealing with the moral/spiritual side of man’s existence.” Remember, you said there were some facts that we didn’t have in place. By saying so, you implied that you had access to them. At first you claimed it was the Bible - “what ever fact does not fit in [to what the Bible states] would surely be proved wrong tomorrow as the Bible is the creator’s manual (#24)”. Is that no longer true? Please proceed to enlighten us.
9. Did not respond: And what of all those people whose experiences cause them to believe something that YOU believe to be absurd? Do we give them credence just because they say so? That is what you are asking me to do for you.
10. Never responded: “According to the “creator’s manual” man was created AFTER the other animals (Gen 1:25-27). Also according to the “creator’s manual” man was created BEFORE the other animals (Gen 2:18-19). Which is it?”
This list is not complete and it does not include questions or comments from other posters.
Just one more volley and then I leave it to you all to continue.
===========================
Bunch of stuff with this gem in the middle…. “I think you are demanding what even a modern University would not demand from one of its students.”
No, I am asking it of a supposedly loving, caring, generous, all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful creator. He either refuses to provide it, is not capable (and is therefore not all-powerful) or does not exist.
===========================
“The above material is the typical bronze-age man’s production.”
And in what way is the biblical creation myth not typical of what a bronze-age man could produce on his own. Give me any statement from that shows some extraordinary knowledge that could not have been written to any man at the time? Be honest, critically analyze any text you choose. Ask yourself, “Could I have written this without divine influence?”
===========================
“I am helpless.”
I agree. But you do not need to be. Remove that book from in front of your face and consent to see the world around you. It is blinding you to reality.
===========================
“Should I throw away the Bible, I will throw away my life itself. It is as clear as that.”
And this, in my view, is the saddest you could have said.
For reasons stated previously, I go now to get some work done and to forward our progress in the ‘real’ world. I will read with interest. Have fun.
@empy
“Truly, I am terrribly sorry that the faith that you were taught in your younger days did not work for you. By the way, will you thow away a Chemistry text book if you did not get the desired results? Would you not rather see why you are not getting desired results?”
I would say that is more like believing in Santa Claus. Then you realize the people are lying to you, and there is no Santa Claus. You begin to analyze all the stories you know about him and you see they are contradictory, weird and even stupid. These histories doesn’t make any sense at all, and you see you was just blind. You’ve just believed in this and refused all your life to think deeply about it. All your life you’ve tried to justify your beliefs even if you did not understand them.
Chemistry is science, and it’s not supposed to “make my dreams come true”, it’s just to comprehend the natural world based in facts. Not in histories of old books. Your analogy is not good.
“You compalin that I am not properly answering questions. May be I am not. Now, Let me ask you one question. Please be kind enough to answer me briefly. I am soubly sure that you will.”
Do you realize that you again did no answer me?
“My question is “What would have happened to me seventeen years ago when I became ill if I did not know how to pray and get answers from God?” Please answer me this one question before you proceed further. Honestly I wish to know what you think about that question. Thank you for obliging.”
What do you think I am? An oracle. I can’t really know, and you know that. You just want me try to guess. Right. I will be so specific as you like (”in the beginning”):
You could have survived very well.
I think this it’s a pretty answer for a question you know I cannot respond. It’s like the bible or the horoscope answers.
The point here is that you’re again saying that the bible was a comfort in your life. No problem, it can be true. But like I’ve said before this doesn’t make it (bible) the true.
You are saying this: the bible was a comfort for you, so it’s true. By the same logic I can say: the “Santa Claus” bring happiness to the children, so he is real. Change Santa Claus for easter rabbit, unicorns, gnomes, etc.
In this logic I can say that the Koran is true cause it brings comfort to the muslin people. Answer me, does it make sense for you?
I have answered your question, so now answer me.
“I am sure any reader would really see the difference between man-made creation story and the God-inspired one, both coming from the bronze-age.”
What? Why? The Cherokee creation myth is also vastly different from the “Enuma Elish,” but no one has ever tried to convince me that it is Godly inspired.
Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel! Yes, many other myths have creation in stages. In fact, many other myths begin in the same way that Genesis does: a world of chaos represented by water. Many native american myths begin with animals or people coming down from heaven and creating land upon the faces of the water.
And yes, another common myth was the creation of the earth from a slain monster. But don’t think the Israelites were so far from that. The words for “Without form and void” have etymologies that tie them to Tiamat and Leviathan. Since these monsters frequently represented chaos and were said to live in “the deep,” you can start to see some obvious ties. What we have in Genesis is a priestly account; I’d bet the Israelite folk traditions told a bloodier story.
But let’s take a look at some more “passing references” that “must be correct”:
*the universe is filled with water - a common myth, but obviously not accurate. God makes the earth by dividing the waters, leaving water both over and under the earth.
* the earth is flat with a dome overhead - the Hebrew word that gets translated as “firmament” is “raqiya.” It comes from “riqqua,” meaning beaten out, like a sheet of metal. The sky, this “raqiya” was pictured as a great dome. As Elihu asks Job, (37:18) “Can you beat out [raqa] the vault of the skies, as he does, hard as a mirror of cast metal.” Anyway, also wrong.
* relative size of the celestial bodies - when your sky is a big metal bowl, obviously the sun has to be pretty small to fit inside and the stars must be tiny. Hence, Joshua could stop the sun, and the stars could fall to the earth. Again, wrong.
Tell me, which of these is correct? I’m sorry, but there’s nothing in the book of Genesis that could not have been written by priests of the era.
““Without form and void” have etymologies that tie them to Tiamat and Leviathan.”
Whoops, got that garbled. “without form and void,” in hebrew “tohu wa bohu”
Tohu relates to tehom (”the deep”), and also to Tiamat. Bohu relates to “behemoth,” not “Leviathan,” who’s a different character.
@empy
Wrong. I deny it categorically–see? If the spirit world exists, you need to prove it, logically and using evidence. Not truthiness, not “feelings,” irrespective of your faith in them.
Yeah. First you take him to an airport and show him aeroplanes. Then if required you drag the idiot through the Smithsonian to show him the technology. Then you put him on the ground, sit on him, and take his arguments apart one by one using (here’s the important bit) evidence.
If he persists in his delusion, you drag him over to Buzz Aldrin’s house and let him explain his delusions. Then after he gets his silly nose splinted, if teh silly persists, you take him for therapy.
If I tell you that aliens have visited and talked to me, it’s a ridiculous idea. And you would presumably ask for proof. Or dial the local laughing academy.
If I tell you that crystals can cure my disease, it’s a ridiculous idea. And you’d presumably try to direct me to an actual doctor.
But if I tell you that there’s an invisible being who made everything in the whole universe, that’s rational? Logical? And you’d go along with that?
You implied earlier that the questions seemed repetitious. They would be less so if you were offering answers to them.
If you’re going to insist, in the face of the evidence, that gods exist, then you have to back up your arguments with primary facts that you can build into a case.
Not feelings. Not legends. Not testimonials.
So do this for me: Start from the logical position, that there are no gods. Then take me from there to your god. Show me that chain of evidence.
I’m getting damn tired of asking the same questions of believers and continually getting the same useless answers.
Have your faith, by all means. But why expect anyone else to buy in without proof?
[One small note for Daniel--you might want to change the link formatting and make the link colour brighter.]
@Metro: They’re now underlined. I had them underlined in posts, but it didn’t carry over the comments. That’s now fixed.
David,
It was good talking to you. Before you left you said in 54 - the last but one section, “Remove that book from in front of your face and consent to see the world around you. It is blinding you to reality.”
Kindly look at my post ( 7) above and tell me how I would have survived to this day with out that book in front of me?
As every one, I have many unanswered questions about the world around us. But all my questions melt away when I see God answering prayers as I have found in my life. My life ALONE is answer to all my questions. I reiterate. I simply would not have survived to this day if God had not answered my prayers. This is simply an unalterable fact of my life.
I am leaving this discussion as well, confirming the fact that prayer has worked for me in the past and I simply survive even today by prayer. Good bye and God bless.
Empy, I’m sorry to divide your attention like this…
but you didn’t answer my point. I asked why god, the all-powerful, all-loving, and all-knowing, would paralyze you. You said “He just did it. But I felt his love all through the process.”
Here’s the thing. One of my friends told me about being in an abusive relationship, before she met me. She genuinely believed that her boyfriend loved her, and that when he hit her he was doing it out of love. But he was hurting her for his own selfish ends, and tricking her so that she wouldn’t leave him.
With your situation, it’s worse. You’re tricked into believing that god exists, and that he loves you, AND that he hurt you like that, and then you’re excusing him for being such a - excuse me - a bastard. Isn’t it possible that disease is just one of those things that happens and that no one is in control? Doesn’t that make things so much more comprehensible? No more need to excuse god for his inexcusable actions, because there is no god to excuse.
argh, got to read ALL comments before posting…
but this was, for me, a… I wouldn’t say a good experience. But a sobering one. It reaffirmed for me the amazing denial religious thought puts people in, and the way they can’t conceive of anything else but religion.
Props to everyone for keeping it civil.
@wazza
“It reaffirmed for me the amazing denial religious thought puts people in, and the way they can’t conceive of anything else but religion.”
This was expectable in his case. We know that his condition is really hard, and he was probably afraid to see his own beliefs going away, and get in desperate.
It’s sad, but the true would not comfort him, and he saw that. I think we can’t blame him, cause his life is not easy. But of course, this is far from being a reason to agree with him.
How to Make $250,000
You can find Dr. Hovind’s offer at:http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=250k
I think generally creationists ignore those pesky little things you like to call “facts”.
2 Trackbacks
Scientific vs creationist method…
……
[...] Thoughts | Tags: ayn rand, belief, john galt, objectivism, philosophy, religion | I stumbled on this today, and towards the end, a very serious Christian decided to use the comic strip as his soapbox [...]