XPost: sci.psychology.psychotherapy, alt.consciousness, talk.origins
From: mightymartianca@hotmail.com
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 18:53:35 +0000 (UTC),
Uncle Davey wrote:
>
> Użytkownik "AC" napisał w wiadomości
> news:slrnck9ctt.3uo.mightymartianca@aaronclausen.alberni.net...
>> Now I know Christians have spent one helluva lot of energy trying to
> explain
>> why suffering exists, why some suffer more than others, but to an atheist,
>> this all smacks of apologism. I feel much more comfortable saying "I
> don't
>> know why that person survived." rather than wandering over to magical
>> explanations.
>
> You could put it, that the fact that we are here at all is amazing luck, we
> have the luck of having in every generation since microbial times parents
> that against all odds survived to parenthood and got to make the precise
> blend of atoms that make up ourselves.
I went to the store yesterday and bought a loaf of bread. Imagine the odds
of picking up that particular loaf of bread.
>And this in a tiny sphere of life
> only a few miles thick on a single tiny planet in an enormous universe. You
> get into believing the kinds of luck that are simply not feasible.
Well maybe you do. As for myself, the universe is a big place, and why not
Earth? For all I know there might be millions or billions of similar
planets in the cosmos. Even if there aren't, I'm firmly convinced that
there is no supernatural explanation, and that invoking one is to
essentially tear the heart out of centuries of scientific tradition and
progress, all in the name of propping up a religious belief. That is, after
all, why pseudoscientists, kooks and liars try to deny (by whatever ignorant
or dishonest means they can bring to bear) theories like evolution or the
Big Bang.
> There has
> to be a guiding hand.
Or not. I see no evidence of any guiding hand. Just natural forces working
as they work, mindlessly, sometimes randomly, but always within the
framework of the essential laws of the universe, none of which require
suspension to produce stars, planets, organic compounds, imperfectly
replicating molecules and ultimately me writing this on my computer. By the
same token, I accept that the universe can also destroy, and that perhaps
I'll be struck by lightning, and live or not live, depending purely on
whether the highly energetic particles streaming through my body take one
path or another, or whether they short out and burn out key areas in my
nervous system. As we now know, uncertainty often reigns here.
> That the guiding hand has also caused or allowed
> casualties along the way is something we cannot comprehend, and we say that
> we would envisage either a God and a perfect world, or no God, hence an
> imperfect world, and we understand its unfairnesses in terms of mechanisms
> that are working out against each other.
Ah yes, when all else fails, bow down to the notion of the holy mystery.
>
> What we do not seem to wish to understand is that even within a theistic
> system, a creating, sustaining and redeeming God, the tears are not yet
> wiped from our eyes. Sometimes some people seem to have all the luck and
> others don't. And sometimes the wicked prosper and the righteous don't. This
> is a major theme in the Psalms, and something that has always been a
> challenge to believers.
It isn't a challenge for me, because I simply don't accept your religious
beliefs. As I said, true believers have to pick an apologetic. I have no
such burden. I don't have to make excuses for a deity.
>
> I call the whole thing back to the reason why we are here in the first
> place. Remember in Colossians it says that the world is made by Christ, and
> not only BY Him but FOR Him.
You have to accept that. I don't.
>This is a tremendous piece of information,
> although Paul does not greatly enlarge on it. I am hesitant to take matters
> too far where Paul does not, but I am confident that we can say that
> understanding the world's issues can be made more easy when we remember that
> the world was actually made FOR Christ. The whole matter of Fall and
> Redemption, of sin (and all the surrounding casualties), and salvation, the
> range of Lucifer and the bounds on him and his latter end - it was all
> pre-ordained so that Christ could have unity and oneness with His people, in
> a way that the angels, who do have that perfect world you think a theistic
> world ought to be, can never have.
What do you want me to say, Davey? You seem to forget you're talking to an
atheist, who doesn't accept that Paul had any more wisdom on the subject
than an Islamic or Hindu apologist, or a small child or goat intestines for
that matter.
>
> You may say "I don't wanna worship a God like that. If he has power to make
> things right, why doesn't he do it? Why does everything revolve around him
> anyway? I'm not worshipping such a deity",
That's not what I say. I say I'm not worshipping a deity who I don't accept
the existence of, no matter how he is alleged to act or feel. I'm not an
atheist because I think God is a jerk, I'm an atheist because I disbelieve
the existence of God. I do not see any necessity for adding such an entity
to the equation, because all such a beliefe seems to do (in my humble
opinion) is horribly complicate things. Now suddenly, instead of having to
explain the origin of the universe in some manner that affords at least the
possibility of testing the explanation, an untestable being is inserted.
Now I have to start coming up with rationalizations to explain why the
universe still behaves as it does, even with such an entity pulling the
strings. Either I am forced to adopt a literalistic interpretation of all
those scriptures that say impossible things, or interpret them so that the
Bible no longer has literal truths in those cases, or adopt an omphalistic
belief system which essentially denies the veracity of knowledge we possess
or will ever possess.
I'm not trying to mock any theistic evolutionist here, or any religious
person at all. I'm merely stating that such positions are inherently
against the nature of who I am, and how I wish to look at the universe. I'm
not interested in the Apostle Paul's opinions on this, as I simply do not
accept that he has any more authority than any man or woman who has tried to
expound upon their religious beliefs. I have nothing personal against Paul
(though, frankly, he comes off as a pretty arrogant a**hole), I just don't
believe what he's saying any more than I believe the Vedas, Greek myths,
pagan Russian mythology or any other religious system I've come across.
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
