|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2519 days) Posts: 2965 From: Los Angeles, CA USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Alternative Creations | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
The vast number of creation myths that exist is the single best argument against both Christian creationism and Christianity itself. The sheer, mindless arrogance of Christians when they claim that their story which has no supporting evidence is true while all the others aren't is stunning.
Not one of them warrant study in a science classroom. None of them are science. They all warrant serious study in their own right, but none are science and none are of any greater value then any other. That is the simple fact that Christians, in their-self important assurance, always seem to miss. Exactly why is their belief any better then any other? Answer: It isn't. They are all equally factually false. They are also all equally true in the lessons they teach about what it is to be human and that is where their value lies. To actually believe any one and dismiss all the others is a classic case of not seeing the forest for the trees. I am sure that some Christian creationist posters will take issue with my position. To them I say in advance, give me reasons why your beliefs about your creation myth are better (or more factual) that go beyond the fact that they happen to be yours. Don't waste everyone's time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
In the history of science, no perspective that says "This is what clearly happened, now let's get started proving it!" has ever been effective. The more sciectific prespectives, the better. Accepting myth as fact and then trying to prove it is of no benefit.
Also, in my society it is a subset of Christians who are trying to force their beliefs on everyone, so it is them that I am concerned with. You also make the mistake of thinking that the scientific concepts of evolution are in some way an assumption. Each has been established by evidence over time, unlike any factual basis for any myth of creation. Also, the assumption that magical creation is in no way a priori. Over time, countless pieces of evidence have shown that these myths simply cannot be factual and the people who discovered these facts did not set out to disprove any creation myth. It was simply the inevitable occurence when the truth of how things work is pursued. Creationists, ID supporters, or any other kind of "creartion science" types are of course welcome to their veiws and can do everything they want to bolster them, but they have no right to expect anyone to support them or to be taken seriously as doing science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
Maybe the important thing is the belief that has been passed down for centuries in all cultures and traditions, is that this is a created world and we are created beings. So are you admitting Christianity has no lock on the truth? It seems you are.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
Is it not also possible that the lessons common to Buddha and Christ are simply the best common sense way to live in groups with other people?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
I would suggest that it seems like common sense because we have had written on our consciouness the concepts of right and wrong, and of good and evil. Or, if you remove personal bias, we know what works best for us as a species and we project that onto our imaginary deities. Why add the silly idea of an old man in the sky?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
Very well. I will restate.
Why add the silly idea of an infinite, eternal, all-knowing and all-powerful being?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
Yes, it is the case. A lot of Christians don't like to admit it, but it is true.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
You are admirably glib, however that is not really an answer. Given that there are myriad creation myths, none of which have any factual support, why believe in any of them?
Those who have faith do so because it makes them feel good. It does that in many ways, but to think that a comforting story is real simply because it is comforting is not the act og a reasonable mind. Think deeply. Why do you believe in a divine creation when the facts as they have been discovered do not support it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
I don't know why you think that the notion that there has been a worldwide flood would ever be conceived of as a comforting thought!!!! That's odd, because it seems plain to me. What lessons can we take from the flood... 1. If you obedient to God's laws, you may be spared in what is otherwise a worldwide disaster. 2. The big flood happened once, but God promised it will never happen again. There's two reasons.
It never ceases to amaze me how evolutionists always say they want proof, and when you show them writings all pointing to some event, in various degrees of accuracy, they poo poo it, then the next minute they are confidently espousings things that happened millions of years ago that nobody has ever witnessed...and they say creationists aren't being reasonable??? This is clear proof that you don't know what constitutes evidence. All the writings you refer to do not constitute evidence. They do corroborate each other in any real manner. The evidences for evolution are physical, studied in great detail by highly trained professionals. Simply, there is evidence for evolution. There is none for creation or a flood. Your lack of understanding of what evidence is, which I suspect will continue unabated, is what keeps you from seeing this very simple fact.
I think it's more a case of people finding comfort that there wont be any divine judgment for sin, the old 'I'm ok, You're ok' philosophy, that I think some folks are looking for comfort in evolutionary theory. The science of evolution is neither disturbing or comforting. It simply is. You should also beware of equating atheist with those who use reason rather then faith in their approach to this question, which you seem to be doing. The two are not the same. Also, atheists are hardly espousing their ideas as a way of rationalizing their sin. "Sin" is a religious concept and of no value, and atheists realize that. All this is interesting, but off topic. Again, Steve8, why do you believe in the fancies of Christianity instead of the fancies of the Norsemen, for instance?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
As I said, the common sense that comes from knowing right and wrong, good and evil, is written on our consciousness. Something that is written requires a writer. A nice turn of phrase, but hardly accurate. The social behaviors that you for some reason choose to believe came from on high are the result of an adaptable species living in groups and doing what works best in that situation. Also, the idea that something written requires a writer is nothing more than a simple restatement of the long discredited watchmaker argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6493 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
There is a difference between rallying together and living by a code of social norms for the common good as opposed to sensing that something is actually wrong or evil. What is that difference? Evolution also affects behavior. How else would an evolved behavior feel? Again, adding a deity is unneeded. Why do so?
Who says that the watchmaker argument is discredited? Anyone who has read it and knows logic. There are several reasons. 1. It implicitly requires design for complexity in it's premise and then asserts the opposite in it's conclusion. 2. Another is the the metaphor is a very poor one. I have seen watches, I can go somewhere and see other watches very like the one I found being manufactured while this is not possible with life. Also, watches have no mechanism for reproducing themselves, as can be ascertained from a brief examination, while life forms do (and more importantly pass on traits to their progeny). Those are just the easy ones.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024