Home

Advertisement

Faith must have adequate evidence, else it is mere superstition. [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
AboveTheFray

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

(no subject) [Sep. 18th, 2007|09:38 pm]
While thinking about steps toward ending world hunger, I found myself contemplating The Problem of Evil. For those of you unfamiliar with theology and philosophy, it's a paradox centered around four statements:
1. God is omnipotent (all-powerful).
2. God is omniscient (all-knowing).
3. God is omnibenevolent (all-caring).
4. This world contains unnecessary evil.
There are more detailed versions, but basically, most people agree that at least one of these four statements must be false. (You may feel inclined to summarize this problem by simply saying "God is cruel, incompetent, or impotent".) Back when people were still counting down to Year 0, it was #3, but #4 has gotten popular to argue against*. However, it occurs to me that 1 and 2 contradict each other even faster. If God is omnipotent, he can do anything. If God is omniscient, he knows everything that has ever happened, everything that is happening, and everything that ever will happen, including everything he'll ever do. See the dilemma? If he knows what he's going to do before he does it, can he still do something different? He might be all-powerful, in which case he controls destiny, or he might be all-knowing, in which case he is an instrument of destiny, but how could it possibly be both ways?

*If you're inclined to believe statement #4 is untrue, I recommend that you buy this book.
Link6 comments|Make your beliefs heard

(no subject) [Oct. 12th, 2006|01:01 pm]
Intelligent design. At first glance, it seems reasonable. Up until 2003, tourists could visit New Hampshire and see the Old Man of the Mountain, a granite cliff that vaguely resembled a human face when observed from a certain angle. It was very popular, appearing as a symbol of New Hampshire on state highway signs, and the state emblem consists of an image of the cliff encapsulated by the state motto. Its popularity was due to it coming into existence naturally, completely by chance. Compare this to South Dakota’s Mount Rushmore. There are four human faces carved out of granite, each of which is bigger than the Old Man of the Mountain, not to mention sturdier and much more detailed (to the point of actually being recognizable). Intelligent design suggests that simply by glancing at the two mountains, it’s immediately obvious which cliff came to resemble a face by chance and which one was designed that way by someone intelligent. Similarly, it should be even more obvious that the humans who designed the Mount Rushmore memorial were too complex to have come into being by chance, and must have been designed by someone even more intelligent. Ignoring the fact that chance molds living things and mountains very differently, let’s consider their supposition. Perhaps there is a god who personally crafted humanity. This god must be very powerful, and very complex, since we were made by it and yet understand very little about it. This god is the “intelligent designer” which the concept of intelligent design focuses upon. So, here’s the real question. Who designed the intelligent designer? We’ve already established that it’s highly unlikely that the Mount Rushmore memorial came into being by chance, and it’s almost impossible that humans evolved on their own. Therefore, the god that made us must have been made by someone else, unimaginably powerful and complex, to the point that even the god that made us doesn’t really understand this god-maker. And the god-maker, of course, is far too complex for you to even begin to consider that it came into existence without being made by something even higher. And so on. Just one way the argument falls apart.

Furthermore, are we to believe that the same individual who designed the tiger also made the lamb? They are fundamentally similar in terms of how their muscles, circulatory systems, and skeletal structures are built, but on the surface, they are rather different. One is docile and provides us with wool, while the other smells suspiciously like buttered popcorn and kills us if it gets the slightest chance. How about Treponema pallidum and Mycobacterium tuberculosis, which are the causes of syphilis and tuberculosis, respectively? It seems reasonable to assume that they were designed by the same being, since they’re both bacteria capable of causing disease in humans. Of course, this raises further questions about what sort of god would design diseases in the first place. Perhaps, when faced with such questions, Christianity would try to suggest that the devil designed everything that brings about suffering in the world. Sure, the devil created a bacterium, which kills over a million people every year and can be transmitted through the air when someone infected talks, simply because he likes to watch humanity suffer. That covers tuberculosis. But what about syphilis, or any sexually transmitted disease for that matter? They all discourage promiscuity, infidelity, and premarital sex, and surely the devil would rather claim the souls of sinners than watch his tailor-made diseases convert potentially lustful people into good Christians. It just doesn’t hold up. The obvious answer is that parasites and predators evolved to take advantage of their victims.
LinkMake your beliefs heard

(no subject) [Aug. 17th, 2006|08:44 am]
Story time, kids. Thousands of years ago, an immortal god impregnated a mere human woman, and she gave birth to a baby boy in late December. When this boy grew up, he performed miracles, and was particularly well-known for being able to transform water into wine. He came back from the dead. He wore a halo. He attracted a bunch of followers who had a ceremony wherein they ate bread and drank wine to symbolically ingest his body and blood. I am, of course, talking about Bacchus, the demigod of wine, who was worshipped by Romans centuries before Jesus was supposedly born.
Not that I’ve got anything against Jesus Christ. He sounds like a swell guy, even if you assume all that supernatural stuff in his biography was made up after his death (probably by people who had never even met him before). It’s his fan club I have issues with. Lots of issues. The issue I feel like criticizing today has to do with the stranglehold Christianity has on America, cutting off the oxygen supply to its brain, and leaving the general public stupid enough to reelect Bush (probably because they can now relate with him). Christianity owns a collection of fanciful stories, and if one can be proven false, the entire collection (and, indeed, the entire religion) may be at risk. That’s why Christianity has been at odds with evolution since before the idea was publicly known. Evolution conflicts with the Adam-and-Eve creation myth. Therefore, we’ve got Christians who oppose the theory of evolution in its entirety, despite the fact that evolution is obviously a reality, or else there would be absolutely no danger from so-called avian flu (which wouldn’t be able to affect humans), and we wouldn’t have to keep looking for new antibiotics to combat constantly-evolving bacteria. Here’s a troubling article that came out recently.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evo.html?_r=1
Did Humans Evolve? Not Us, Say Americans
“In surveys conducted in 2005, people in the United States and 32 European countries were asked whether to respond ‘true,’ ‘false’ or ‘not sure’ to this statement: ‘Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals.’ The same question was posed to Japanese adults in 2001. The United States had the second-highest percentage of adults who said the statement was false and the second-lowest percentage who said the statement was true, researchers reported in the current issue of Science. Only adults in Turkey expressed more doubts on evolution. In Iceland, 85 percent agreed with the statement.”
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/14/science/sciencespecial2/20050815_EVO_GRAPHIC.html
The biggest reason why so much of America still denies evolution is because so much of America is Christian. And, as is too often the case with majorities, Christian America wants to make everything better for itself, even if that makes things worse for the minorities. From the Scopes Monkey Trial back in 1925 to the Intelligent Design movement seeping through the modern Bible Belt, Christians have fought the theory of evolution as if Darwin himself nailed Jesus to the cross. To clarify, Christians wanted public schools to stop teaching evolution because it challenged religious indoctrination, but that’s pretty much failed. Now Christians mostly want public schools to teach “alternative theories” in science class, such as the theory that the Christian god created everything. Sure, in this theory, they may refer to their god as an anonymous intelligent designer, but that’s a cheap trick to circumvent the whole “separation of church and state” thing. We all know when Christians mention an intelligent being designing humans, they’re not suggesting we were assembled by advanced alien beings with unusually big heads and gray skin.
It’s clear what’s going on. Convinced that their religion is the correct one, many Christians strive to make this country more suitable for Christians. Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand of Spain had a similar goal in 1492, when they forcibly deported Spain’s 200,000 Jews in an attempt to rule a Christian nation. In fact, some Americans falsely believe that America was founded as a Christian nation. This is certainly not the case. First, I’ll present this Daily Record letter to the editor, which is quite concise but forceful nevertheless.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060521/OPINION02/605210321/1095/NEWS01
05/21/06 - Posted from the Daily Record newsroom
America not a Christian nation
“To the Editor:
A recent letter claimed that the United States was founded on Christian thought. That is a myth. References to gods and religions are purposely left out of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, as well as all amendments; the only exception being the statement ‘Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion, or the free exercise thereof.’
The founders purposely designed a secular nation. America is not a Christian nation. It is a nation where many Christians live.
The founders wanted government to leave religions alone and equally wanted religions to leave government alone. The Supreme Court has decided in numerous cases that local, state and federal governments may not promote or finance religion. Religion is belief in a personal God or gods who are entitled to worship and obedience. Neither Franklin, Washington nor Jefferson believed in a personal God. English ‘common law’ predated Christianity in Britain, and the thinking of the American founders was based on the enlightenment, not the Bible.
JEFFREY HUPPERT
Boonton”
For further reading, here is a “nontract” written by Freedom From Religion Foundation, who really know how to get their point across.

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/xian.php
Archival Copy )

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Jefferson.jpg
Jefferson
LinkMake your beliefs heard

(no subject) [Aug. 7th, 2006|09:48 pm]
There's a lot of conflict in the world right now, and quite a bit of it is in the Middle East. Now, I don't want to say that all Muslims are violent, but when a Danish newspaper published cartoons satirizing the Muslim prophet Muhammad (and, by extension, Islam), the resulting riots and protests left over a hundred people dead. Every religion has the potential to create inhumane followers, especially when followers regard dead religious figures they'll never meet more highly than ordinary humans that have done nothing wrong.
Religion is not inherently dangerous, but extremism is, so it's important to know where to draw the line. Secularism, especially a secular government, is an important step toward reducing conflict. If a government adheres to ancient religious texts (most, if not all, of which were written by ordinary people with no divine connections) instead of thinking up their own laws, they will furiously resist change, including improvement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wafa_Sultan
In 1979, a Syrian medical student named Wafa Sultan saw members of the Muslim Brotherhood assassinate her professor in her classroom. "They shot hundreds of bullets into him, shouting, 'God is great!'" she said. "At that point, I lost my trust in their god and began to question all our teachings. It was the turning point of my life, and it has led me to this present point. I had to leave. I had to look for another god." She moved to America in 1989, and after 9/11, has both defended the US and criticized Islam in a number of political debates. Quite a few links to interviews and speeches can be found on her Wikipedia article, but here are transcipts of some of her more interesting ones.
In our countries, religion is the sole source of education, and is the only spring from which that terrorist drank until his thirst was quenched. )
We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPglHZQf-0
LinkMake your beliefs heard

(no subject) [Aug. 3rd, 2006|03:36 pm]
A major source of conflict nowadays involves differing religious views. When you spend your whole life worshipping one god, and someone else comes along and tells you your god is imaginary, that's going to stir up a lot of trouble. It's rather silly that people can call thousands of other religions false without casting any doubt upon their own religion, when really, the only thing that's special about that one religion is that it has them for followers. By not putting any faith into my beliefs, I can look at everything objectively, and get closer to the truth than most people. For example, how many wars have been fought because of religious disagreements? Christianity declares "thou shalt not kill", but apparently, it's almost universally understood that killing is fine when you're not talking about killing another Christian. Has it occurred to anyone that if we really had a kind and loving god watching over us, he wouldn't remain hidden for thousands of years? He'd visit us every generation or so to remind us which religion is correct, thus saving us from all the bloodshed. We wouldn't have to interpret ancient books that may or may not have been written by ordinary men to figure out what is or isn't acceptable. He'd hold a press conference once in a while, explaining which position is the correct one for such moral and ideological issues as divorce, same-sex marriage, abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and keeping people in persistent vegetative states alive. And we wouldn't have this huge gap between what science has found to be true and what religion guessed at thousands of years ago.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060731/ap_on_re_us/creation_museum
Archival Copy )

While you're at it, you might as well watch this video, which treats the subject of creationism jokingly (the only way it deserves to be treated nowadays).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nxzJaWk4wY
LinkMake your beliefs heard

(no subject) [Jul. 31st, 2006|09:17 pm]
Various people have claimed that everything worth saying has already been said. While this may be a bit of an exaggeration, there is certainly a good deal of wisdom that has already been recorded, and since the majority of wisdom has probably been forgotten already, it's important to review important details. It is a habit of mine to not only provide a hyperlink to whatever subject matter I wish to discuss, but also provide literal excerpts, in anticipation of the day when certain internet websites will have been moved around, and thus a recording of their URL may not be enough to revisit the site. This brings me to my current subject, Wikiquote.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/God
A number of these quotations ring true to me, and if you don't have the luxury to examine them in their entirety, I've set aside the ones that I agree with the most.
Quotes About God )
LinkMake your beliefs heard

(no subject) [Jul. 31st, 2006|04:39 pm]
Hello, one and all. I am above the fray, and it feels good. As an empirical agnostic, I don't have to deal with things like going to church regularly, avoiding certain foods, and being embarrassed that I have a physical body. I also don't have to worry excessively about controversies like same-sex marriage, or the conflicts that arise when nearly any two religions get within spitting distance of each other. Empirical agnosticism means that I believe that if there is a god or gods, there is not enough evidence to prove their existence. Similarly, if atheists are correct and there is no god, they can't prove it, and therefore, atheists must take a leap of faith to reach their beliefs, in much the same way that theists do, although in a different direction. The existence or nonexistence of any deities is currently unknown. I differ from certain other agnostics in that I believe we may someday know the truth, and as such, I will gladly convert to any religion that is able to prove any of its fairytales are more than fiction. Since no such religion exists, I am content to sit back, put my feet up, and watch with curiosity as religious people are driven to act illogically by their faith. I'm also more than happy to share my observations with anyone who cares to listen, regardless of how they may feel.
http://www.sinfest.net/archive_page.php?comicID=359
Sinfest359
LinkMake your beliefs heard

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]

Advertisement