Poll: How do we get them to see the truth?
This poll is closed.
Peacefull reasoning 69.23% 9 69.23%
Full attack of facts 30.77% 4 30.77%
Total 13 votes 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-06-2016, 09:55 AM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  However, to say that the extreme complexity we see in living systems today, occurring after 4.5 billion years on earth or 13.8 billion years in this universe came to fruition, without any guiding intelligence or design, is completely and totally non-sensible. The degree of specified complexity we are speaking of makes a 747 jumbo jet look like a joke in comparison to the operation of living systems. When I see a 747 flying, I quickly infer design, because I have a general idea of the man-hours it took to design and build such a complex machine and the amount of knowledge throughout the millenium which had to be gained to build that machine. Again, that sophisticated machine, the 747 jumbo jet, is a joke in comparison to the specified complexity of living systems.

This does not address the issue at all, for reasons I already stated and which you ignored. Your 747 analogy simply does not work because a junkyard full of metal parts in a tornado (the original analogy) do not behave in the same way as organic molecules do. When you see a 747 flying, you are right to infer design, because there are no known processes by which metal could organize that way; the same is not true for chemistry. When we perform chemistry, all we are doing is duplicating natural processes under controlled conditions, in order to get the molecules to stick together in the same way they do in nature under the same sort of conditions.

I'm sorry you think it is "non-sensible" that nature works as it does, but it does.

(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  The religion I follow says that first man was built from dust; as does science. It is now believed that every element of the body, including the iron in the blood, came from star dust from an explosion of a star in a supernova, eons ago. Inanimate to animate; miraculous!

The Bible says none of that. What the Bible says is that man was hand-formed out of the clay of the earth, which is similar to the origins-myths of many other religions, including the Egyptian and Babylonian (the neighbors of the Hebrews). It also says that woman was hand-made, or cloned if you prefer, out of the rib of man... which I suppose might have made sense to people who didn't know what X and Y chromosomes were.

(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  Some of the stories in the Bible are symbolic with hidden meanings; like many of the prophecies. There are keys in the Bible for the symbols which can help in decoding the prophetic meanings. I posted a link to those symbols in one of my posts above. Some stories are parables and are metaphoric and are deliberately that way to teach a lesson, typically. Then the remaining, approximately 90 percent or so, of the Bible is naturalistic.

We understand what metaphors and parables are. What we find hilarious is that you choose to leave in one of the most obviously mythic elements, the tale of creation, and treat it as if it is some sort of dictation taken by God's Secretary, instead of a magical origins myth like every other culture has, written by the primitive society that didn't know how science actually works.

(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  There are cases of unnatural phenomenon and miracles in the Bible as you point out. Regarding the talking serpent, the serpent was used as the agent of Satan to speak through. It is apparent in the Bible that Satan and his fallen angels can dwell in and speak through both humans and animals at times.

Yeah, really? It's Satan? Then why does it say that God punishes snakes for what Satan did through them, such as taking away their legs? It's a MYTH, "clearly" (as you put it), and a rather silly one.

(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  Also regarding miracles, like the hand of God writing on the wall in ancient Babylon, I believe the Lord designed this universe so he is free to manipulate the laws when he decides. That could explain some of the craziness we see in quantum mechanics as well. Subatomic particles react as if they know when they will be observed by a conscious observer. This is possible, I believe, since the Creator can manipulate the universe explaining the signs, wonders, and miracles. In quantum mechanics, particles can also exist in two places at one time entangled and reactive to each other, regardless of distance apart, instantly. Particles behaving as waves or particles depending on observation is also yet unexplained by science. This is how I believe God builds inside this universe from the ground up, instantaneously upon prayer and thought.

It's funny, then, that I can't even think of a leading-edge quantum physicist who believes that God does any of those things.

(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  The creation stories of the pagan religions are clearly myths. For instance, the Asatro (Norse) mythology is a pagan religion for worship of the sun and the moon represented by Sol and Mani. In the Norse religion, the origin of the cosmos is just a fabricated story, like a fairy tale. It goes like this, before there was soil or sky there was a gaping abyss. The chaos of perfect silence and darkness lay between the homeland of elemental fire, Muspelheim, and the homeland of elemental ice. Frost from the ice and flames collided together and the fire melted the ice. The drops from the melted ice then formed into godlike giants. Ymir was the first born giant which was a hermaphrodite which could produce asexually. When he sweated, more giants were born. As the frost continued to melt, a cow emerged from it and nourished Amir with her milk and she was nourished by salt-licks in the ice. Her licks eventually uncovered Buri, the first of the Aesir tribe of gods. Buri had a son named Bor, who married Bestla. Their half-god, half-giant children were Odin (Santa Clause and chief of the Aesir gods) and his two brothers, Vili and Ve. Odin and his brothers killed Ymir and constructed the world from his corpse. His blood became the oceans, the soil was his skin and muscles, vegetation from his hair, clouds from his brains, and sky from his skull. Four dwarves, corresponding to the four cardinal points, held Ymir's skull aloft above the earth. The gods eventually formed the first man and woman from two tree trunks and built a fence around their dwelling place to protect from giants. This is known as the Norse creation myth and is an obvious fairy tale fable. Other pagan religions tell similar fairy tale stories. They are almost straight out of a child's book.

Oh, I totally agree! Obvious myths. And almost as silly as thinking that there was a flood which God needed to use to drown the bad people on earth, rather than just snapping His Almighty Fingers™ and making all the bad people cease to exist. I can go on at great length about the obvious mythology of the Biblical stories, but I think you get the point.

(11-06-2016 05:51 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  Only Christianity and Judaism have a scientifically backed creation story. See the following chart for a breakdown of creation in the Bible compared to science; http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/day-age.html .

These are my theological beliefs which I was asked about or which were commented on. I was earlier falsely accused of starting this argument during a scientific conversation so I just want to be clear that I am only responding to your comments, as I was doing before.

There is absolutely nothing scientific about the Judeo-Christian origins myth. I'm well familiar with the claims made at that website, and it requires such a degree of word-twisting that I can't believe you Biblical apologists would stand for it. It is pretty clear that the Bible's authors believed the sun went around the earth, that the flat earth stood on pillars beneath a dome-like firmament, and that it was possible to see the whole planet if you just stood on a high enough hill. Regardless of whether you stretch the literal six-day creation to include day-ages, it still does not accurately describe what we know about how the universe was made, how the earth formed, and how life developed here. Indeed, if God was really the author of the Bible (instead of men making it up as they go along), we'd be delighted to read that the earth was incredibly ancient and was around for billions of years prior to the development of mankind, or that the sun was "a mass of incandescent gas, a giant nuclear furnace, where hydrogen is burned and helium release at millions of degrees Celsius" (in the words of They Might Be Giants) and the earth rotated around it each year, or that diseases were caused by germs rather than sins, or that blood is just an oxygen-carrier and not a source of atonement for sins. And so on.

The Bible is just as clearly a collection of silly myths from a primitive, Bronze/Iron-Age people. It may not be as silly as some, but is certainly more silly than others, and it is CERTAINLY not a science textbook. We pity those of you who have not grasped this, yet.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
11-06-2016, 03:28 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
Incidentally, if you read the article to which you cited, it agrees with evolution 100%. It simply refers to Bible verses that it claims allude to the process of evolution. One example:

Science tells us that the entire planet was covered in a global sea soon after its creation (3). In other verses, the Bible says that the earth is controlled by the heavens, refuting geocentrism (4). In Genesis 1:2, God was "hovering or brooding" over the seas of the newly formed earth (4.4-3.8 x 109 years ago, 5). We know from science this is where the first unicellular life forms first appeared (6).

Amusingly, the verse to which they cite to prove that the Bible is "refuting geocentrism" is "Do you know the ordinances of the heavens, or fix their rule over the earth?" (Job 38:33), which of course says nothing about geocentrism, and could just as easily be interpreted as a reference to astrology or simply a reference to the fact that the heavens are (ordered/ruled by God to be) above the earth.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-06-2016, 07:47 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 05:00 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 08:51 PM)Chas Wrote:  No one has claimed it is a random process - that is your straw man assertion.
Natural selection is not random.


That is not what he is saying. That is, what he is saying is not an answer to the question you are asking.

It is one possible answer to the question of where life began, that is all.

Not trying straw man. I despise that tactic. Creation of molecular machines are either happening by design or just dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options. Call it what you want; random, natural, materialistic means, I don't care, but those are the only two options for this universe and everything in it.

He did not have an answer for where the information bearing properties came from and did not want to look naive so he said maybe we were seeded here by aliens since it is so obvious that this information came from intelligence.

No, those are not the only two options.
The reality is natural selection which is not random. You do not understand what natural selection is or how it works.

Beneficial changes are retained, detrimental changes are eliminated. The positive change is cumulative - that is the antithesis of random.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
13-06-2016, 04:10 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 07:21 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(10-06-2016 08:46 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  Natural/random = Tomato/Tomahto

Natural and random are not the same thing. You will never understand evolution until you grasp the distinction. Natural processes proceed based on chemistry and physics. Which bits come into contact is random; what happens when they do is not.

(11-06-2016 05:56 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  Universe and living systems are either designed from intelligence or came from blind dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options.

"blind dumb luck random chance" is needed to explain why the specific result we see today exists but that is not really relevant unless you have a presupposition that we are a desired end result. You appear to be looking at it backwards. It would be like saying "I won the lottery against all odds so it must have been rigged in my favor". The process of natural selection takes extremely simple self-replicating molecules (which occur naturally through chemistry) and makes ever more efficient replicators. The specific result of the process is affected by random chance because there is no goal. We look back at it and say it is amazingly lucky that things worked in our favor but if things had proceeded differently something other life might be looking back amazed at how lucky it was that they had evolved. Since the process is still going on the distant descendants of current life may look back someday and be amazed at how lucky they are.

(11-06-2016 06:00 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  What I am saying is either the universe and livings systems are designed or all came about by some dumb luck random chance. Those are the only two options.
...
That is my argument and there is no straw man in that. I despise the straw man tactic, as well as all the other manipulative debate tactics.

Nobody is arguing that life arose through either intelligence or blind chance except you. Chance would only be important if we were arguing for a specific kind of life to have evolved and that is not the issue. You insist on a false dichotomy that misrepresents what others are claiming and that is a textbook strawman argument.

(11-06-2016 06:28 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  The Lord allowed pharaoh to harden his heart. 1 Samuel 6:6 provides insight into this.

That's a very convenient apologetic but it requires denying what the text of Exodus actually says. For a book supposedly inspired, if not authored, by an omnipotent being it certainly is very unclear in what it actually means. It's almost like it was written by people with very little understanding of how the world actually works and a hazy knowledge of their own history and various political and social agendas.... In the end, it's at least as much mythology as history so arguing interpretations is like arguing whether Scarlett O'Hara was justified in what she did (of course, unlike the Exodus, we have evidence that the US Civil War happened).

Read some Bart Ehrman or Richard Friedman on when this stuff was written, why, and how it was combined. Apologetic versions of the story will gloss over the truth.

Spin and twist. I have watched numerous debates on this topic and the atheist scientist will not touch specified complexity or irreducible complexity arguments regarding the living systems. The best they will try (when all other manipulative debate tactics are exhausted and they know their credentials as credible scientists are on the line) is panspermia; that we were seeded here by aliens. This then begs the question who designed the aliens since the entire universe is obviously designed as shown by it's extreme fine-tuning and the aliens would exist inside the boundaries of the universe. One constant of the twenty or more constants of the universe is so fine tuned that if you had a ruler the size of the universe (approx. 90 billion light years across) and you were to shift the constant value one-inch in either direction, life does not exist. That is one of twenty or more fine tuned constants.

Many of the atheist scientist will not even try the multi-verse argument because they secretly know it is nonsense, as Michael Shermer told Dr. Meyer on a train ride after a debate, that multi-verse argument is pretty stupid or something like that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2016, 04:18 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 07:23 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(11-06-2016 07:14 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  It could be that the Lord allowed you two to harden your hearts. I pray you repent and turn to the Lord for salvation.

I hope you one day realize how arrogant and self-righteous you're being and stop. My hopes aren't high though Drinking Beverage

That statement would only be arrogant and self-righteous if I meant it in a condescending way. I did not intend it that way. There are people on here who seem to have a hardened heart against the truth of scientific proof of design of living systems and the universe and also have a resentment toward the Lord. So I meant it, that it does appear that way, similar to as stated in the Scriptures.

I also meant it when I said I pray you repent and turn to the Lord for salvation. I am a believer in the Scriptures and this is very important based on my theological views so I really did pray for that immediately after writing this. I believe we have the same Creator and we are both his children so I care and pray for you, that you repent.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2016, 04:19 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 07:31 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  
(11-06-2016 07:14 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  It could be that the Lord allowed you two to harden your hearts. I pray you repent and turn to the Lord for salvation.

Don't hold your breath. Drinking Beverage

I won't. Holding the breath is practiced as part of meditation in some eastern religions. I will just continue to pray for you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2016, 04:23 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(11-06-2016 08:51 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(11-06-2016 07:14 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  It could be that the Lord allowed you two to harden your hearts. scientific evidence makes more sense than your mythology and you convince no one with your fairy tale.

I de-bullshitted your statement, you're welcome. Thumbsup

(11-06-2016 07:14 AM)CDF47 Wrote:  I pray you repent and turn to the Lord for salvation.

Bless your passive-aggressive heart. Facepalm

Not passive aggressive. Passive aggressive definition is, "of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials."

I am not here to avoid any confrontation but to speak the truth in absolute and direct confrontation to those that oppose these views with their nonsensical logic. At the same time, I will pray for them but I will not follow any of their illogical claims, lies, or manipulative debate tactics. I also will not pout or procrastinate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2016, 04:31 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
In my experience you can only offer people information and facts. Sometimes it's a matter of not wanting to see facts for what they are. Sometimes brainwashing and cult-like behavior are in play (yes, I consider Christianity and various sects of Christianity to be a cult and engage in cult-style behavior including brainwashing of members).

I also think many religions like to get children when they are young, when they don't have the full ability to reason and will often believe what their parents or other authoritative adults tell them is truth.

When someone is brainwashed it is very hard for them to hear facts because they are taught anyone who doubts is "of the devil," is angering God, is going to hell, has no morals, and has not fully welcomed Jesus into their hearts. Fear and ex-communication by family and friends and community are huge roadblocks in people wanting to see facts or reality.

Additionally, some people legitimately want to believe. When you are dealing with someone who wants to believe, facts are not a hindrance to them because they live in the "faith zone."

I think people who want to see the facts for what they are have an internal impetus to do so. They want to do it for themselves. Something has generally happened that is no longer shaping their religious worldview. For me, it was the church's treatment of anyone who was not exactly like them, it's treatment of women, same sex couples, etc. I also never read the Bible (surprisingly) as a Catholic. They only cherry picked the good passages in church.

I switched to Christianity later on and when I did that I actually read the Bible from front to back on my own, I was shocked at what I found. The God of the Bible was not an entity I wanted to worship, for one. And for two, the Bible read like a folktale, a collection of myths and stories made up by man. It's embarrassing to me that one of my degrees is in Sociology and I actually studied various religions in other cultures such as the cargo cults, but all the while believed in Jesus and never reading my own Bible. Facepalm

I think the best antidote for religion is encouraging religious folk to actually read the Bible--most have not read the entire thing and are only going by what the church tells them is true and are sadly taking that at face value.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-06-2016, 04:35 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(13-06-2016 04:23 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  
(11-06-2016 08:51 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  I de-bullshitted your statement, you're welcome. Thumbsup


Bless your passive-aggressive heart. Facepalm

Not passive aggressive. Passive aggressive definition is, "of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials."

I am not here to avoid any confrontation but to speak the truth in absolute and direct confrontation to those that oppose these views with their nonsensical logic. At the same time, I will pray for them but I will not follow any of their illogical claims, lies, or manipulative debate tactics. I also will not pout or procrastinate.

Bullshit, saying "I'll pray for you" is just another way of saying "I'm right, you're wrong" and then putting on a psuedo-christian mask over your stubborn refusal to accept evidence.

So since you've deigned to grace us with your presence again, maybe you'll answer questions this time.

Since you think viruses started mutating to get around vaccinations about the time Adam ate that fruit, then did this force of sin cause death, disease and suffering to enter the world?

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
13-06-2016, 04:44 PM
RE: Belief vs Facts in the programed religious mind.
(13-06-2016 04:10 PM)CDF47 Wrote:  Spin and twist. I have watched numerous debates on this topic and the atheist scientist will not touch specified complexity or irreducible complexity arguments regarding the living systems.

Bullshit.













Quote:The best they will try (when all other manipulative debate tactics are exhausted and they know their credentials as credible scientists are on the line) is panspermia;
that we were seeded here by aliens.

More bullshit. Panspermia has nothing to do with it.

Quote:This then begs the question who designed the aliens since the entire universe is obviously designed as shown by it's extreme fine-tuning and the aliens would exist inside the boundaries of the universe. One constant of the twenty or more constants of the universe is so fine tuned that if you had a ruler the size of the universe (approx. 90 billion light years across) and you were to shift the constant value one-inch in either direction, life does not exist. That is one of twenty or more fine tuned constants.

Even more bullshit. The 'fine tuning' argument is silly. We have exactly one example of a universe; there is no reason to believe that the physical laws could be anything other than they are.

Quote:Many of the atheist scientist will not even try the multi-verse argument because they secretly know it is nonsense, as Michael Shermer told Dr. Meyer on a train ride after a debate, that multi-verse argument is pretty stupid or something like that.

The multiverse hypothesis is an answer to a non-existent problem.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: