by Peppermint 103 Replies latest jw friends
Everyone believes in of skyscrapers or the people that built them. Everyone believes in the existence of the universe.
Ok, you know who built the skyscrapers but you didn't say who built the universe, only that it exist. God has provided you the information that he made all things and gave you the ability to build skyscrapers. You reject this book...is that so? BUT you are willing to believe Dawkins and what he wrote in his book? That is my arguement.
Please show me the solid evidence you have for god. Someone writing in a book they spoke to him, etc., is not solid evidence, it is hear-say. Solid evidence should be of a level of reliability that would be accepted as beyond reasonable doubt by a court of law.
God is above man-made law....You know that!
Does a court of law except a theroy of evolution?
Just because there are lower creatures that divide doesn't prove evolution. My question is: Why didn't these creatures evolve into the different sexes already?
People do what they do and will it to be compatible with personal values by overriding their own smallness. By projecting a LARGER SELF and naming it "God" they let themselves off the hook.
Sometimes disturbed children create invisible friends to comfort them from their fears. Adults do this too and "God" pops out of their "ID".
You'll find very few persons who just come out and say they did something awful because they adore the AWFUL. There is always a RATIONALization attached to protect the ego.
People have become wary of RELIGION. In its place they have substituted another word which means the same sort of thing, only on a more personal level by using the term SPIRITUAL.
By giving themselves an ill-defined concept and replacing the personhood of GOD with it, at least, their is bit more owneship involved. A bit more responsibility.
It is safer to cringe and cower behind edicts from a personal GOD when going about one's daft acts.
It is that "otherness" of the guy in the sky which scapegots our irrationality to our consciousness.
I work in a bookstore and one of my sections I stock is the METAPHYSICS section.
I shelved a book yesterday which had me laughing uncontrollably: BEYOND REALITY it was called!
Reality is what is real and actual and has existence. Consequently, this book (by its very title) admits they have gone beyond what is real and actual and has existence!
IN OTHER WORDS: THEY MADE UP A FANTASY!!
Sigh....
It is that "otherness" of the guy in the sky which scapegots our irrationality to our consciousness.
If it makes one feel better to call God. "the guy in the sky"...Then by all means, do so. Hmmm, name calling? Isn't that what 5 years olds do?
However most people who believe in the God of the Bible, think of him as more than a guy in the sky.
Tophat, you clearly come across as someone who is uninterested in determining the truth. The truth is an objective and observable fact. The books and evidence for evolution are all around you, yet you refuse to look at the facts. All of the available evidence agrees with the theory of evolution - from the fossil record and even more convincingly, the DNA evidence, yet you show no interest in looking into an issue that contradicts the conjecture of creationism.
There is no evidence in favor of creationism, just opinion and misunderstanding. Whenever I read a creationist's argument, it reads very much like JW verbiage - phrases and words such as "it seems" and "it doesn't seem" and "i can't believe" and "there's no way."
Many (if not most) of us on this board were in the state of mind you are in today. We believed the creation argument hook, line, and sinker, either because our parents told us so, or the church told us so, or the society told us so. We believed it because we didn't know any better. My personal experience is that I was afraid to look into arguments which would disprove my belief in creation. But once the evidence and facts are understood, it's very hard to hold on to a belief in creation that has no factual basis or evidence. It's a satisfying intellectual experience that leads to a much better understanding of the world around us. Ours is a world based on rationality, not indeterminate invisible beings.
TopHat
I haven't read the book....I did read the Link you posted.....and I can't see where Dawkins proves anything as far as evolution.
God is above man-made law....You know that!
No, you SAY that. It has no greater independent reality outside of your head than a Papuan New Guinea shaman saying "Öga-wa-a'tuk is above man-made law". You would refuse to believe the shaman as he wouldn't be able to prove Öga-wa-a'tuk was above man-made law or even that Öga-wa-a'tuk existed, unless you accepetd him SAYING so was proof.
You can not prove your god is above man-made law or even exists unless someone take you SAYING it as proof. By all means provide proof the Creation myths you believe in (contained in the Bible) are more accurate than those in tribal lore, the Qu'ran, or the Book of Mormon. You have ASSUMED through your background they are true, but can you prove it to anyone?
No.
Does a court of law except a theroy of evolution?
Certainly courts in various countries accept that it is a valid enough theory to be taught in school, and there are court rulings from around the world that bar Creationism or Inteligent Design from being taught in schools as they are only hypotheses.
The difference between a theory and a hypothesis is essentaily that a theory has supporting evidence, whilst a hypothesis doesn't. For example;
"Christmas presents get there because parents put them there"
... is a theory. You can demonstrate the theory is valid by experimentation and show evidence to support the theory.
"Christmas presents are delivered by Santa Claus"
... is a hypothesis. You can not prove it experimentally or show evidence to support your theory. In additon the hypothesis can be shown to defy the laws of nature as any being delivering presents in the manner described in the Santa Claus hypothesis would be incinerated as they would need to move at a sizable portion of the speed of light to get all the deliveries done and would burn up due to atmospheric friction.
Just because there are lower creatures that divide doesn't prove evolution. My question is: Why didn't these creatures evolve into the different sexes already?
So you are saying sex IS or IS NOT a proof of creation? You made a atatement and now are dropping it as it doesn't support your argument. You don't strike me as particulary relaible or well-informed if you do that.
What about the theories relating to the development of gender as explained by evolution?
Do you know these? If you don't then I think you are being extremely arrogant to assume they are wrong without even knowing what they are.
If you have studied them I will be fascinated to know where you find them in error. But I think you are talking about a subject you know next to nothing about, and due to that are liable to make mistakes.
Of course, abandon, you believe what you WANT to believe...every word on evolution theory is gospel to you. You believe. I am not an expert on evolution or God, and don't claim to be. The very idea that our perfect human body evolved from primoral soup over billions of years is unconceivable to me. SOOOO I have to believe we have an Intelligent creator. Evolution is still ONLY a Theory and Santa Claus is a fairy tale. At least we agree on Santa.
BEYOND REALITY?? .....A new book a new gospel? Not for me Terry
If it makes one feel better to call God. "the guy in the sky"...Then by all means, do so. Hmmm, name calling? Isn't that what 5 years olds do?
However most people who believe in the God of the Bible, think of him as more than a guy in the sky.
Things (persons) either have existence or they do not.
The person asserted to be the most powerful and controlling of all truly existing things (i.e. "god") would tend to have more referential evidence than the droppings of a deer in a thick wood. But, embarassingly; that is all apologists can come up with! "Look! Wonders exist; consequently a "maker of" wonders does too." Not even a clever argument.
There is more evidence of fables constantly revised into coherence in the history of the Bible itself than there is of the personhood of the God asserted by those fables.
Most believers in God are just too damned complacent and mentally lazy to explore the history of the Bible because they are intellectually dishonest. First, with themselves, and; secondly with others.
Stop and think about this, will you?
The more primitive and ignorant man was in history, the more tales we have of God's miracles, wonders, conversations and cataclysms. As we approach modern times God simply evaporates into the irrational folktale category of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.
What can we make of this? Waaaaaay back in time God was interacting with man and now you can't find even a spoor?
About the time of the Macabees Jehovah went off on vacation; simply dried up and blew away.
Jesus purportedly comes along and begins "explaining" him. Then, Paul comes along and explains Jesus. Today, Christian apologists and best-selling authors explain all three of them!
Opinions about opinions about opinions about folk myths is all we have to go on.
For goodness sakes, wake up and enter the 21st Century; will you??
