by NewChapter 71 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
That's too bad about the Europeans!
Seriously though (cuz I don't want to lose any friends) walk up to anyone and ask them unexpectedly how long it takes the earth to orbit the sun, and they might draw a blank. Most of us just don't think "sciency" on normal days.
NC
I think the whole "how long does the Earth take to orbit the sun" is a bit of a trick question.
Everyone knows it takes a year, but when asked most people will think there is an "intellectual" answer and start thinking beyond "common sense".
That's what I think.
I don't think Dawkins is trying to reach religious people with this book. It seems to me that he's trying to reach the young people who are growing up on Neil Gaiman and Philip Pullman while their minds are still open and willing to accept the idea that there is no scientific evidence for the supernatural, and as science explains more and more about the natural universe, the supernatural explanation becomes less and less necessary and convincing.
Most chapters start out with myths about the origins of whatever the topic is (the sun, rainbows, etc.). Then the rest of the chapter explains the science behind the topic. It is obvious to the reader which makes more sense.
Of course it's going to piss off religious people who suffer from a god delusion, because they are unwilling to entertain the possibility of being wrong. I think Dawkins would gladly welcome god into his home if only god could be bothered to show up. Would your typical fundamentalist welcome Richard Dawkins?
Would your typical fundamentalist welcome Richard Dawkins?
I don't see the Amish turing him away and you can't get more fundmentalist than them, can you?
But I know what you mean.
But I don't think that Dawkins would welcome God into his home, if God bothered to show up, simply because Dawkins' God would be the last person that Dawkins would want to meet and any other God just isn't feasable to Dawkins.
I'm learning here that religious people to accept science. What they believe beyond that is a matter of faith. But they aren't all creationists, which I have a hard time making sense out of. Because to me, if the book that tells you about a god proves to be false in large sections, then the entire book and the ideas behind it lose credibility. However others have been able to make peace with that. Talking to people like PS and Tec have taught me that, and I even joined the Christian Left because it's open to all and they are a wonderful, sensible group.
I don't think delusion is an appropriate term to use when discussing belief in god. Delusion suggests mental illness and that is just ridiculous. There are other things, culturally and emotionally going on here, and labeling people with a psychotic sypmptom does no good. But I think Dawkins has simply gone on the offense. I'm sure he has a long life of religious people who WOULD argue science with him and try to replace it with myths. But I'm not going to pour them all into the same bucket.
I'm not concerned about the PS's and Tec's of this world. They make religion work for the best it can offer and negate the horrible aspects. Science can be used in the same manner. The same science that can cure illness can manufacture biological weapons. So in the end it's how we apply anything. Even atheism falls into this. I, as an atheist, find life more precious than I ever did as a religious person. So I'm deeply affected by suffering and injustice, because I believe this is our only shot. But other atheists, particularly athiestic regimes, have turned it into an excuse to devalue life.
I'm more concerned with the Bachmanns and Perrys of this world that seek to keep our children in ignorance and force their moral code onto us through legislation. They seek an inequal system of power where their kind of Christian reigns at the top. They would suppress eveyone not like them and deny their civil rights. Their denial of science not only keeps American kids stupid on the world scene, it may also lead to catastrophe on the climate change front. Because they believe it is not in man's power to destroy this earth, they are free to ignore all warnings. This concerns me, and this is when my view of religion becomes particularly cynical. But I have PS and Tec and even Shelby at times, to balance me out.
NC
I think that many times people feel that their beliefs are what makes them THEM and a direct assualt on those beliefs is an assaoult on them and they will defend themselves, aggresively at times.
That is not how Our Lord taught us, but then again, we are simply human and imperfect and ALL trying to do our best.
I have a friend that is an atheist and a physicist and every time we discuss religion and another of our friends mentiones Dawkins or the like, he winces because, in his words, " everytime a militant atheist opens his mouth, another fundmentalist is born".
To which I answer that every time a militant religious person opens his mouth, another atheist is born.
We both agree with each other.
For personal reasons I don't think I can ever be an atheist, on the same token I accept that many atheists can never be believers based on the very same position, and I respect that.
I agree with many atheists on how unappelaing the religous right ( for lack of a better word) is and how they are for many, the stumbling blocks that Christ warned us NOT to be.
But free will is only free if we have the right to say YES to God and the right to say NO to God.
I believe in evolution because I see IT and understand it AND because I don't see a conflict between the fact that life changes to meet the demans imposed on it and the existence of a being that may have put all into motion billions of years ago, a being the loves us and wants us to discover HOW He did it and WHY He did it ( that is why God gave as a mind, so that we may KNOW HIM).
Those are very kind words you said NC and greatly appreciated :)
I am a simply guy, a guy that served his country and seen lots of crap, but also someone that considers himself educated ( I have degrees in Business and Mechanical Engineering and working on one in Theology) and open minded and most of the Christians I know are much like me, so to be called "ignorant" and "delusional" and even worse, well...it doesn't motivate me very much to hear what the person saying those things has to say.
Know what I mean?
Yep, I know what you mean. This board lit up and exploded when we were all called mentally diseased. I think we should all think about that before throwing around our own labels. I am guilty of it too. Sometimes my frustration spills over on the innocent.
NC
I think that many have serious scars from the misuse of religion against them and their hatred is well founded.
Not the likes of Dawkins and others, but peopel here that have and continute to suffer because of religion and because of that I tend to not be personally offended when someone tells me how I am a horrible father because I am teaching my children about God's love for them ( and yes, I have been called that) or someone calls believers ignorant, stupid and far worse.
As a believer I am "lumped into that" group, sometimes even by those here that I enjot discussing things with and those that I hold in high regard, Like you NC and Sabastious, Bohm, and so many others.
At times it hurts me to be called those names but I understand the pain that it is coming from and I accepted that people need to vent.
I wish that I could take away the pain, but I can't as much as I would like to.
We are only human and I am sure there are things I say that hurt people too and that is something I never want to do.
I don't judge people by what they think and although I shouldn't judge anyone at all, I do, and I judge them by the love that is in theri heart and I KNOW there is SO MUCH love here, it just sometimes gets "runned over" by the pain.
Intelligent design is like a puddle of water in a hole in the ground after a rain.
The I.D. argument would be: "Isn't it obvious that the hole was exactly desgined to fit the amount of water contained inside?"
The reasoning would follow: "What are the odds that the hole would just happen to have the precise proportions to accomodate the rain water?"
Ignoring the statistical fact that there can BE NO ODDS on anything that does not recur repeatedly and in the same way.
Why is it far less likely the Universe "just exists" and always has--while at the same time it a "given" God always existed?
Compare the premise of Evolution with the condition of nature at any time in history and what is obvious is that the strong survive by exploiting advantages. There is no basic "fairness". Humans impose their own sense of "fair" on unequal things and cry for "justice".
We have decided from our own point of view we are so special it cannot possbly be that we will die forever.
We are so wonderful we must have been designed by a Supreme Being who made us in his Almighty Genius image.
Interpreting is what we engage in with religious thinking. Things aren't allowed to BE what they are. Things must be interpreted as part of a grand design.
I see no Justice in blind nature. Large animals devour smaller ones.
I see no design in infestations of disease causing viruses. Rats with fleas carry bubonic plague. Our intestines are full of bacteria that causes farting.
Women bleed every month and have cramps. So, this requires a "punishment" reason on the part of Almighty God?
How infantile!
Rational thinking does not come easy. It is a discipline that requires constant vigilance.
Embracing superstition is no credit to anybody's intelligence and makes everything else you hold true highly suspect as well!
