Question: why is the senseless destruction of life so repugnant to us?
Are Faith-based assertions falsifiable?
by braincleaned 33 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
tootired2care
Question: why is the senseless destruction of life so repugnant to us?
Probably because of mellenia of religious fairy tales convincing us that there is a purpose to it all, authored by a benevolent and personal god who cares.
The life cycle of the ichneumon wasp is the basis of the movie "Alien." That would be interesting to see discussed in the Awake!
Interesting...I never made that connection before, great movies though.
-
jgnat
Sorry, I don't think we can blame cultural indoctrination for our reverence for life. I'll bet we find this repugnance crosses cultural barriers. There is something more.
-
tootired2care
Perhaps, but you could factor the question down even more.
Why are parts of natural occuring reality repugnant to us?
-
braincleaned
Question: why is the senseless destruction of life so repugnant to us?
Because we, and are children, are also victims of death, pain, and fear.
I would dare say the answer is in your question; senseless destruction IS repugnant. -
braincleaned
Actually, I don't think nature is repugnant. WAY too harsh of a word!!!
I just think it is cruel by its nature itself.
I had the most wonderful opportunity to live in the mountains for a couple years. I fell in love with the place instantly. The remoteness, the wildness, the mountain sentinels stolidly waging their silent battle with the clouds daily. It is one of the few places on earth where perhaps, nature holds sway over civilization.
I did too. However, a neighbor mother saw her baby be mauled to death by a bear close to where I used to live. The bear was doing nothing wrong in relation to its nature.
So yes — nature is not the reflection of a loving god.
That was my only point in the opening example; that faith (the claim that Creation proves that God is love) was falsifiable by the facts of nature. -
DNCall
I've been enjoying your posts, braincleaned.
One of the hardest to swallow for me is that Adamic sin accounts for "sin, sickness and death," violence in the animal kingdom, harmful bacteria, overpopulation and perhaps Hawaiian nose humming. I would think that this particular faith-based assertion is false, if not impossible, on its face (i.e., no need to prove it false). Yet, at one time, I and many others have believed it to be true.
-
jgnat
I think senseless destruction of life is repugnant because living is such a beautiful thing.
The Frank Slide would simply be an artful tumbling of blocks if it hadn't taken out a town.
-
tec
Faith based assertions are falsifiable, yes. (that doesn't mean that they are false; only that they are falsifiable... something, if it existed, could prove them false)
As to this particular statement... not everything in creation is from God. Not everything in creation listens TO God. Every living thing can praise God (glorify Him)... or not.
Not on a level that we understand, according to science, perhaps. And all of nature is subject to the sin and death in it and its flesh. So that we see animals give into their flesh (the desires/instinct? of the flesh - eat or be eaten; kill or be killed; survival of the fittest) perhaps more than man; though man is capable of terrible cruelties that animals do not commit.
But there are also animals that would give their lives to protect, who are sensitive to the sadness in others and will offer what comfort they are capable of offering. (there are some that are also little bullies with their siblings/fellow pets, lol)
This world, as it is, does not prove that God is love.
Because there are other things that are in this world, that come from man, from sin, from death... from 'another father'.
Peace,
tammy
But yes, of course faith based assertions are falsifiable. I agree.
Peace to you,
tammy
-
Island Man
A clever satire on Intelligent Design:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v83X9-oJ-w&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PL1DA0C8985FAE1C22