would you be more happy not knowing what you now know? (page 7)

cofty

Ex-B - you claim to have based your rejection of evolution on a careful consideration of the evidence.

Please share which books that present the evidence FOR biological evolution you have read?

ExBethelitenowPIMA

No Zombie I agree 100% but try getting that through to Cofty.

ExBethelitenowPIMA

Cofty I have read both side and watched countless videos, it would take far too long to go through all me or you have studied over the last few decades.

IMO it’s all been debunked

cofty

You have not read even one single book that presents the scientific evidence for evolution have you?

Name just one.

it would take far too long to go through all me or you have studied over the last few decades.

I would have no problem sharing my library list.

no-zombie - biological evolution is accepted by the vast majority of Christians. It does not say anything about whether or not god exists. It is only rejected by fundamentalists, most of whom could not begin to explain it.

slimboyfat

Cofty are you still living out that ironic position, which I take to be an art form that you have distinctively perfected, of insisting that others need to read books in order to know what they are talking about, meanwhile condemning “Marxist postmodernists”, apparently not realising that Marxism and postmodernism are at odds with one another, and refusing to read an actual Marxist or postmodernist book yourself to find out where you got confused between the two.

Foucault was not a Marxist. A common critique of Foucault from a Marxist perspective is that his philosophy leads to inertia rather than class struggle, and therefore conservatism.

Jordan Peterson has apparently never read a book by a postmodernist or a Marxist either. He said he had a brief look at the Communist Manifesto in preparing for the “debate” but didn’t even finish that. (It’s a very short book, more like a pamphlet.)

https://youtu.be/oDOSOQLLO-U

no-zombie

Cofty ... while I acknowledged that many religious leaders have decided to accept the evolution theory, it actually only reinforces the fact that the evolution theory is philosophical tool for the masses, the masses of people who find it convenient to minimize their relationship with God.

Just like popular teaching of the plurality of genders (which have their own scientific experts and evidences), the evolution theory need faith to believe in it. Which you and everyone else are free to do so. However for me, I don't care about anyone's opinion. The Pope (and all the others like him) have abandoned Biblical teaching, in favor of trying to win over young people into their churches, which is only brings shame on them for wanting to be populists.

There are many things that confuse me about God and my faith in him, but the tether that keep pulling me back is the creation account and the REAL lack of detail in how the evolution theory works at the cellular level and how it can brake the first and second law of thermodynamics, spontaneously. How RNA and DNA strands can self aggregate vast strings of new fully functional genetic code, while other symbiotic organisms are co-evolving in separate phyla. And if people say 'random chance' ... then clearly they haven't considered the real numerical probability of it occurring.

ExBethelitenowPIMA

I’m still open to the possibility of chance as the origin of the universe. I’m PIMA and as everyone knows agnostic means not willing to commit either way.

While considering the possibility of chance as the start of everything because that has some advantages, I also hold to a hope of intelligent design and the Bibles promises maybe coming true.

You can’t force me into any box, I think this is the best way to be happy. Take what is most beneficial to you at the time and always consider the possibility a certain belief maybe true or maybe not.

when you really think about it that is what PIMI JWs believe anyway. They have the hope of a resurrection, or the hope that they will be part of their great crowd that the Bible says will survive Armageddon. This is just a hope not a certainty.

I also have this hope being agnostic. This is the advantage of believing in intelligence at the start of the universe.

The advantages of believing in chance as a possibility (still agnostic) is that you won’t feel you wasted so much time believing something that wasn’t true which can really break some people.

Plan B as it were.

Just in case the Bible is not right, I won’t have any regrets reading it everyday and going deep studying it because it’s so interesting and beneficial.

TonusOH

I don't find either account intuitively reasonable, at least with regards to the origins of the universe. But even with that, I'd have to admit that the people learning via the scientific method have a reliable pathway for understanding our world and universe. Ask religious people around the world about god and the universe, and you will get multitudes of explanations, many of which do not harmonize at all, even among those groups that claim to believe in the same god. They rely on guesswork, and without an agreed-upon method of learning what is true, each claim is as valid as any other.

Ask scientists around the world about the universe, and you will get a much tighter range of answers to any question, including quite a few admissions that there is much they have yet to discover. But what they have learned, they've done so through a rigid and agreed-upon method that helps --over the long term especially-- to weed out the kind of sloppy and biased approach that leaves religion with too many claims, and too few real answers. Speak with actual biologists, and you'll get a better understanding of how they got to where they are, and why they consider evolution to be so firmly established as to be beyond doubt. Do the same with astronomers, physicists, and so on, and you'll get the same response.

I have faith in that process. The same process that has brought us the endless stream of technological advancement that touches every aspect of our lives on such a level that we take it for granted these days. I cannot trust a process that has left the world divided into groups that cannot agree to a framework for determining who is right or who is wrong. Which uses the very same arguments to promote their religious beliefs, then ignores those same arguments to reject alternative religious beliefs.

ExBethelitenowPIMA

Tonis I do understand what you are saying but I think you are throwing in a lot of bad religious leaders in the same boat as the Bible when in fact they are in a complete different boat.

I know I sound like a PIMI JW but the more scientific discoveries there are the more science supports the Bible. They had no idea about DNA or bacteria when the Bible was written yet the Bible was right about these things long before modern discoveries show the Bible was way ahead of its time. You saw the embryo of me. In its book all my parts were down in writing this is DNA. All the laws about hygiene shows the Bible was right when they had no idea about these things for a long time maybe thousands of years after. As we know they believed the earth was flat on turtles and an elephant for a long after the Bible said it is a sphere hanging on nothing.

So Science and the Bible are in one boat and religion is in another. Personally I want to be in the boat with science and the Bible.

would you be more happy not knowing what you now know?

Share this