They don't hate us, they love their God

I read the Wikipedia link, Joe, but I didn't see any data, or even speculation, about what caused the Big Bang. If I remember my high school science right, every effect must have a cause. Somebody or something had to provide a power source to ignite the initial expansion of the universe. How could a thing like that just start by happenstance? It seems to defy scientific law and certainly strains credulity in my admittedly weak, earthbound mind - as does the idea that the process evolved on it's own without any sort of guidance.

Maybe it started-up when the extraterrestrial scientist plugged his experiment into the wall. Smile

Maybe 13.7 billion years is a couple of weeks where he lives. In fact, the link suggested that all this may be part of some older, unknown universe - a subtle acknowledgement by the scientists, possibly, of the "cause and effect" puzzle that must intrigue them too.

Jack

0 Replies

Quote:

What is the probability that there is, in fact, a god?

Scientifically-speaking, probably pretty low. But we can say, with a high degree of confidence, that something had to cause it - pure chance just isn't tenable. But that's as far as we can go without entering the realm of faith - which is not an arguable subject because we have no way to confirm or verify anything.

My point here is that atheist and theist alike are both expressing faith-base positions. The only one who passes the logic test is the agnostic - who admits he simply doesn't know one way or the other.

Jack

0 Replies

Oh. So you are not going to do the math. Darn. I wanted to see what number you would come up with, or maybe just a --good, --pretty darn sure, -- or, my favorite from the answering 8 Ball -- the signs are not clear.

What is clear, and is the subject of this thread, is that believers in such things as gods, first causers and creators suffer from the same odd kind of mental malady. They are so sure that their version of the creation myths are the right and true ones that they are driven to doubt. Weird, isn't it? But there can't be many other explanations for the anxiety they show whenever any of these beliefs are challenged and the violence by which they respond in defending the indefensible.

If there was a virus that drove men as mad as religion does, all science would work day and night to find a vaccine.

So, go ahead and reassure yourself with whatever myths you need to provide yourself with some meaning in your life, just know that you are balancing on the same knife edge of surety and doubt as the rest of them who love their god so much they would chop your head off to prove it.

Joe(right here, right now, that's it. So get it right, right here, right now)Nation

0 Replies

Quote:

just know that you are balancing on the same knife edge of surety and doubt as the rest of them who love their god so much they would chop your head off to prove it.

Golly! I sure hope not, Joe!

Smile

Jack

0 Replies

I don't either, but it is where thinking that there is some connection between humanity and some extrahuman thing leads.

Joe(meanwhile life goes on)Nation

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

Oh. So you are not going to do the math. Darn. I wanted to see what . . . If there was a virus that drove men as mad as religion does, all science would work day and night to find a vaccine. . .

No virus, but how about patriotism? If you don't believe it, try publicly burning your country's flag.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Joe Nation wrote:
Oh. So you are not going to do the math. Darn. I wanted to see what . . . If there was a virus that drove men as mad as religion does, all science would work day and night to find a vaccine. . .
No virus, but how about patriotism? If you don't believe it, try publicly burning your country's flag.

As if there were a connection between patriotism and a stitched piece of cloth: for some symbolism is reality. The idiot burning a flag is just as wonky as the idiot objecting to him doing it. It's the same thing we are talking about (and around). There is a question going around wherein people ask 'why do they hate us?" when it doesn't have anything to do with them at all, they rage against us in order to worship, just as we raged against them in order to worship, to spread the word, to teach all nations.

So it goes.

Joe(raise your symbols high, careful not to let your robes get in the gore)Nation

0 Replies

I've seen otherwise gentle people become somewhat bloodthirsty when once the juices get flowing during religious arguments. Not doubt in my mind it's a base instinct, or at best an illness, to be that kind of religious.

0 Replies

And every sect blames some other for some transgression and absolves themselves from any guilt or harm they themselves have done in the name of whatever hoo-doo they've done it in.

And all of them suffer from the egotistical arrogance that somehow, from across the limitless miles of the universe, god choose their blessed little flock of humanity to receive the special words in a book.

Joe(and usually, how odd for someone who is purportedly creative, the god contained therein demands blood and bone)Nation

0 Replies

eltejano wrote:

I do understand agnosticism. It is understandable that a trained, scientific mind would not accept anything as fact without empirical evidence. But I remain at a loss to grasp the intellectual rationale of those who flatly deny even the possibility of a Creator - or, at least, some kind of guiding intelligence behind the physical world as we observe it.

Perhaps everything we see, from a bacteria to the farthest depths of the known universe, is nothing more than a small mold on a bowl of fruit on some giant's table - or a pet project in the lab of some extraterrestrial scientist. Even those are comparatively plausible hypotheses - but it seems to me that the odds against everything we perceive - in all it's incredible complexity, perfect order, and regulated adherence to physical laws - accidentally "happening" by pure chance have to be incalculably (if there is such a word) astronomical - maybe umpteen gadzillion to one!

You seem to equate belief in God with a belief in creationism. Where did that come from? Lots of people believe in God but don't believe in creationism.

Quote:

When highly educated, intelligent people accept such an unlikely scenario, and even present it as confirmed fact, I can only conclude that they are motivated, not by a quest for knowledge or truth, but rather by ideologically based hostility to organized religion and the myriad evils we all agree it has caused through the centuries - islamic terrorism being just the most recent. To deny the possibility, perhaps even the probability, of a universal, guiding intelligence, is something akin to believing that a tornado could tear through a junkyard and completely assemble a Boeing 747 ready to fly!

Once again, lots of people (me, for example) believe in God but have no interest in organized religion. I also believe that there is intelligence reflected in the laws of nature, and those laws have allowed life to evolve. You have equated atheism with belief in evolution. Wrong.

0 Replies

The problem is with belief, and what the putative basis for such belief is. Even the militant agnostics (oh yes, there certainly are militant agnostics) are offended by the refusal to believe. Such militant agnostics are eager to assert that all atheists "believe" that there is no god, because it is essential to their claim of their own intellectual and moral superiority to classify the atheist with the theist as someone who is possessed of a belief for which they have no certain knowledge.

Certainly there are atheists who are in fact religiously devoted to the proposition that there are no gods, and worship what passes for science in their estimation with the fervor of any other devotee of superstition. What you find if you do not make assumptions about belief, though, is that there is a small number of agnostics who prefer not to act upon belief which is no more than blind faith (certain types of "belief," which are predicated upon experience and/or high orders of probability are common to everyone, when such beliefs fall outside the range of ideology or religion). You will also find that there are many atheists who are not militant deniers of the existence of any gods, whose position is not one of believing that there are no gods, simply of not wishing to believe what has been alleged to them. Therefore, that position (along with the position of the passive, non-militant agnostics) is simply one of not believing, rather than one of maintaining an opposing belief to that of the theists.

That sort of a lack of belief is offensive both the the ideologue and to the religious or atheistic or agnostic perfervid believer.

0 Replies

eltejano wrote:

To deny the possibility, perhaps even the probability, of a universal, guiding intelligence, is something akin to believing that a tornado could tear through a junkyard and completely assemble a Boeing 747 ready to fly!

eltejano, If you are interested in understanding the fallacy of your "tornado in a junkyard" analogy you might find this post and thread of interest.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1583387#1583387

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Even the militant agnostics (oh yes, there certainly are militant agnostics).

Did you have a particular Frank in mind?

0 Replies

Quote:

And every sect blames some other for some transgression and absolves themselves from any guilt or harm they themselves have done in the name of whatever hoo-doo they've done it in.

Hi again, Joe.

This isn't always true. Sometimes we accept our sin and repent for it. I'm going to relate a story here which I realize may be culturally alien to you and others. It is true and sincere and I expect disagreement - but I hope y'all will have a little compassion and understanding and not be "mean and ugly" about it. My thanks in advance.

For 150 years, a false, contrived doctrine was preached from our pulpits in order to justify the institution of slavery and later Jim Crow. I won't bore these folks with the details, but it was fabricated from Chapter 9 of Genesis, where Noah gets drunk and curses his son, Ham. We believed it all those years because we wanted to and we were deeply in sin as a result.

Dr. ML King, himself a baptist preacher, showed us the error in our own Bible. He, along with Ralph Abernathy, a very young Jesse Jackson and others, fellow baptists all, were doing the Lord's work and we knew it. We never could have gotten through all that, without the violence in our neighboring states, had it not been for the faith we shared with our black brethren. We accepted our sin.

Over 30 years ago, I joined a group of other white, baptist men - a couple of them former KKK members - and publically repented on bended knee before the congregation of a large black church. There wasn't a dry eye in the house, my hand hurt for a week from all the shaking and hugging and a rousing chorus of Victory in Jesus reverberated through the woods for a mile around - all followed the best barbecued ribs you could imagine under the big oak trees out back.

My life had changed forever. A filthy spot had been cleansed from my soul
and I can't tell you how good it felt to have that awful burden of guilt lifted from my shoulders.

So, Joe, sometimes we do indeed accept our sin - although we always fight it and try to rationalize it, it always seems to come home to roost. But it's a removable stain for us - all we have to do is ask.

0 Replies

Absolutely right, eltejano. And good on you for asking.

(and welcome to A2K)

Now keep asking.

Hatred of the Jews, the reasons women ought to be subservient to men and the humanity of homosexuals are always good places for Bible readers to start asking.

Joe(pretty soon you start seeing others as human beings)Nation

0 Replies

Thank you for the link, Mesquite. I didn't know where the analogy came from. Our pastor quoted it one time in a sermon, without attribution, and I thought it was original with him. I'm a little embarrassed, having left the impression it was my own thought.

I read that thread and a couple of others. I may have wandered into the wrong place here. I seem to have entered a pretty tough neighborhood alone and lightly armed (educationally-speaking) Smile

I got tired and bored with forums where everyone thinks like I do. I wanted a little diversity - but perhaps I have bitten off more than I can chew! I'm just an old house painter with a high school education - these people are genuine intellectuals!

If I am intruding with unwelcome views, my apologies. I certainly don't want to meddle in stuff I don't understand. Thanks again for the reference - it will save me embarrassment in the future.

0 Replies

Don't sell yourself short.

Joe(we need more common sense here, and sometimes any sense at all)Nation

0 Replies

Hey Joe - thanks a million for the welcome! I was feeling very uncomfortable and out-of-place, but I feel MUCH better. Well, I've got one friend here anyway!

Okay - Jews! I love Jews and Israel - they are God's chosen people and, of course, are at the center of our faith and biblical prophesy. I can honestly say I have never had an antisemitic thought in my entire life and I do not understand that thinking at all. I do believe He wants them to accept Jesus as their messiah and He has obligated us to carry that message to them. Since there are, to my knowledge, no Jews around here I have not had that opportunity. I don't believe our denomination has ever taken any antisemitic positions.

Homosexuals - I have two levels of thought on this. I am admittedly inflicted with a kind of inherent, gut bigotry, culturally planted and nourished - what they call "homophobia". (remember, I'm 71 years-old) But in the Lord's eyes it's just a sin like any other - no different than premarital sex in the back seat of the my old my '55 chevy. I do support legal domestic partnerships, which is only fair - although somewhat emotionally distasteful because we are enshrining sinful behavior in the law - but I'll live with it like I must live with legal abortion. I am a democrat - both with a large and small "D".

What does irritate me, though, is the fact that many of them actually take pride in what, from our biblical perspective, is clearly carnal sin. We are not accustomed to people publically defending and advocating what -traditionally at least (please note my constant disclaimers) - has always been perceived as immoral behavior.

I have been married for 43 years to the same woman. What gays do is no worse or no better than what we did out in the woods before we were married (she doesn't use the internet and won't read this Laughing

- but, just in case, I won't relate any subsequent carnal sin Laughing

) But we didn't shout it from the rooftops or organize parades advocating adultery or premarital sex either. Most of the hostility that I hear among my brethren is related to that public image they want to create, not the actual sin itself. We are all sinners and no one sin is any worse than another (a baptist doctrine).

Thanks again, Joe, for you kind and tolerant reception. I hope I won't disappoint you.

Jack

0 Replies

I'd like to join with Joe in welcoming you to a2k eltejano

I dont share your religious convictions but you are clearly a kind and generous person, and there is no need to feel at a disadvantage being older and educated at the University of Life.

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Setanta wrote:
Even the militant agnostics (oh yes, there certainly are militant agnostics).

Did you have a particular Frank in mind?

Frank is perhaps the most noticeable example--but in fact, i first knew Frank at Abuzz, and never noticed his agnostic militancy when he posted there. I first encountered these types who touted their own moral and intellectual superiority long before i began to visit internet discussion boards. I first encountered militant agnosticism at this site when a member named Portal Star started a thread to claim that agnostics are morally and intellectually superior to theists and atheists--Frank, of course, jumped in with both feet.

In every case the militant agnostic is obliged to characterize atheism as being a belief equivalent to, but the polar opposite of theism. The militant agnostic thesis doesn't stand up well when an atheist simply states that there is no god because they don't believe it, and not because they assert that they know to a certainty that there is no god.

But it runs deeper than that--for the militant agnostic to maintain their position, they have to ignore any defintion of god as prime mover, because it would not require knowledge of a deity nor an assumption of an anthropomorphic deity. The militant agnostic must deny the claim of any theist that they have seen or spoken with the god; the militant agnostic is therefore placed in a compromised position by their own thesis, as that would require them to assert a knowledge which they could not demonstrate.

As with all such "ideologico-religious" certitude, the position of the militant agnostic is no stronger than that of the political fanatic, the fanatic theist or the fanatic atheist.

0 Replies

They don't hate us, they love their God

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know