Tired of the religious right putting down science

[matt0611]

That's a pretty bleak outlook.

It is isn't it? Until you get to the part about Jesus.

 

[nayjevin]

Reformed?

Into what?

Toxic's preferences.

 

[nayjevin]

The way I see it, you either accept the Bible as a literal piece of information or something open to interpretation. And if it's open to interpretation, then saying God is a certain way or that heaven definitely exists, is beyond illogical. There is no clear explanation in heaven, especially in the Old Testament, so that can clearly be open to interpretation, wouldn't you agree?

It's a way for people to get together and agree and believe in something. They enjoy it far as I can tell.

 

[jmdrake]

The scriptures never say the Earth is flat. Actually the Bible says nothing about the shape of the Earth at all.

Not exactly true.

Isaiah 40:21,22
21 Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?

22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:



The Bible says the earth is round, just like modern science. (Note that the Hebrew word for "circle" and "sphere" is the same. See: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c015.html)

So where do people get the idea that the Bible teaches the world is flat? Probably from Revelation talking about the angels at the "four corners of the earth" holding back the "four winds of strife". But the Greek word for "corner" can also be translated as "angle". So the Revelation can be translated at saying the "four angles of the earth". Hmmmmmm...there's a northern hemisphere, a southern hemisphere, an eastern hemisphere and a western hemisphere. So makes sense as well from a scientific point of view.

 

[Toxic]

Well I'm saying faith and logic go hand in hand based on presuppositions. If you accept for arguments sake that certain things are true you can derive logical conclusions from them. For instance, certain logical conclusions can be drawn from the assumptions that the Greek myths were true in whole or in part. (The city of Troy was found for instance). Now, if you refuse to accept my conclusions that's on you. I can't force you to accept anything. I can you the Dr. Who example (which you seem to have ignored) to point out that a being could have the power to intervene on a particular issue, then decide not to based on the long term consequences. Since you're stuck on the Holocaust I will use that as an example. The state of Israel would not exist as it does today but for the Holocaust. In fact prior to the Holocaust most Orthodox Jews were anti-Zionist. (Some still are). Is the existence of the state of Israel good or bad? That can be argued either way. That's what I meant when I said I don't have a "cosmic calculator". It's like the butterfly effect. According to at least one rendition of chaos theory, a butterfly flapping its wings can cause a hurricane on the other side of the world. True? I don't know.

If there is a loving god who intervenes and shapes history a certain way, I'm sure he could have allowed the state of Israel to be created without sitting back as six million Jews were slaughtered. And for that matter, he could have stepped in when the Romans were burning their lands and killing them as well.

You haven't seen that. There are prophecies from more recent times that possibly predicted certain events such as 9/11. And of course the skeptic can say "coincidence". But let's take the Noah's ark story. An unknown number of people died. Noah escaped. An intervention on the part of Noah but not for everybody else. Some people had seemingly miraculous escapes from Nazi Germany. Just dumb luck? Maybe. Maybe not. I was reading the book A Thousand Shall Fall about a Christian who was drafted into Hitler's army who didn't want to kill anyone. (Great book by the way). He managed to get through the entire war without having to kill. His family faced persecution from the Nazis at home, but there are times when things "just fell into place" for them. For instance his wife was called into see a Nazi official who just happened to be out sick and the person who replaced him just happened to have been helped by another Christian from one of her sister churches and he felt so grateful that he didn't punish her like the other official would have but instead helped her. Coincidence? Maybe. The story was by their daughter. Do you think it was just "made up"? Because I don't.

But you're cherry picking. It's almost as if God is playing some kind of butterfly effect game with us, like we're some form of amusement for him. "I'll help these people, and shit on those people. I'll allow this scenario and see what kind of wacky stuff comes of it." It's sadistic.

The book of Isaiah gives a pretty good description of heaven. (New heavens and a new earth being created. Lions lying down with lambs. Once a week on Sabbath and once a month everyone coming together to worship God.) But again, your logic fails you if you are stuck on arguing whether or not heaven exists. You're trying to say that God can't be a certain way. (Loving, with the ability to intervene, but not always intervening). I'm saying that if you accept the possibility of heaven existing as I imagine it, even if it's only a figment of my imagination, then you have to at least accept the possibility that in the grand scheme of things what happens in a 100 year trial run of life has little meaning if any compared to eternity. It would be no different than if I said "If Mt Olympus exists as described in the Greek myths then X, Y or Z".

If God wanted us to believe in Heaven, the existence of it would be clear. There is no description in the Old Testament to support what people think it is today. And the Old Testament is supposed to be the core of it all. With all the lessons and all the stories, there's no explanation of Heaven? How is it that this place emerged years after the Bible was written? Did God just step in and say, "Oh yeah, here's another major element I forgot to mention." It's not there. The idea of heaven and hell came way down the road when people wanted to manipulate societies into behaving in a more civilized manner. I get that. But let's accept it for what it is, man made manipulation.

 

[erowe1]

If God wanted us to believe in Heaven, the existence of it would be clear. There is no description in the Old Testament to support what people think it is today. And the Old Testament is supposed to be the core of it all. With all the lessons and all the stories, there's no explanation of Heaven? How is it that this place emerged years after the Bible was written? Did God just step in and say, "Oh yeah, here's another major element I forgot to mention." It's not there. The idea of heaven and hell came way down the road when people wanted to manipulate societies into behaving in a more civilized manner. I get that. But let's accept it for what it is, man made manipulation.

"Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt."
Daniel 12:2, Old Testament

 

[Toxic]

"Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt."
Daniel 12:2, Old Testament

That doesn't explain Heaven. Again, it's just one of those things that get's interpreted because the authors aren't around to explain it. This can also be interpreted as people physically coming back to life and living forever on earth. That would be a more literal view.

 

[Toxic]

No, science has explained nothing. What science ha shown is that when you experience a real physical feeling, part of what happens to you is a physical and chemical reaction. And well..... DUH! What kind of idiot wouldn't expect something like that when experience a physical action/emotion to something. Of course you're going to have chemical reactions in your brain when you physically feel something. But to cut it off there as answering everything is incredibly assumptive. And to rely upon that as "evidence" is just horrible science.

Not really. Scientists and doctors have studied these phenomenas. And although there are still many unanswered questions and not all experiences are the same, at least information has been gathered to support their theories. Within religious faith, it's Heaven, end of story, accept it. I'd like for society to get past such a simplistic mentality and accept the notion that well, maybe that's not the end of the story.

 

[Toxic]

See simply denying what you don't like. *shakes head* Horrible science.

I deny outrageous stories written by early man.

 

[erowe1]

That doesn't explain Heaven. Again, it's just one of those things that get's interpreted because the authors aren't around to explain it. This can also be interpreted as people physically coming back to life and living forever on earth. That would be a more literal view.

I don't think that eternal life on earth is outside of the range of normal Christian understandings of the afterlife, or what you keep calling "Heaven." And notice that there is a contrast between some who experience that everlasting life and others who will experience shame and everlasting contempt.

 

[Toxic]

It is isn't it? Until you get to the part about Jesus.

Still bleak. There is still way too much suffering in the world. Making excuses for it doesn't alleviate the pain.

 

[Toxic]

It's a way for people to get together and agree and believe in something. They enjoy it far as I can tell.

And that's their right.

 

[erowe1]

Still bleak. There is still way too much suffering in the world. Making excuses for it doesn't alleviate the pain.

"Way too much" according to what standard?

 

[Toxic]

I don't think that eternal life on earth is outside of the range of normal Christian understandings of the afterlife, or what you keep calling "Heaven." And notice that there is a contrast between some who experience that everlasting life and others who will experience shame and everlasting contempt.

It's not what I call "Heaven." It's what people have been calling it for centuries. A place your soul goes to when you've been good in life. A place where you'll be reunited with your friends and family." It's a fantasy used by people who fear our life on earth is the end of the road for us.

 

[Toxic]

"Way too much" according to what standard?

You wanna talk about standards when millions of people on Earth are suffering? Are you serious?

 

[erowe1]

It's not what I call "Heaven." It's what people have been calling it for centuries. A place your soul goes to when you've been good in life. A place where you'll be reunited with your friends and family." It's a fantasy used by people who fear our life on earth is the end of the road for us.

So some people fill in more details than others. But even for Daniel there was the potential for two different everlasting states in the resurrection, a good one, and a bad one. I don't see why the differences between that and some specific view of Heaven that you think someone else in history had matters to this discussion.

 

[erowe1]

You wanna talk about standards when millions of people on Earth are suffering? Are you serious?

You're the one who said it. If you're going to say that some amount of suffering is too much, you have to have a standard by which you can judge whether something is right or wrong. Where does a standard like that come from? Not the Higgs Boson.

 

[matt0611]

You're the one who said it. If you're going to say that some amount of suffering is too much, you have to have a standard by which you can judge whether something is right or wrong. Where does a standard like that come from? Not the Higgs Boson.

Exactly. He really should stop borrowing from our worldview to point to the "evil" or suffering in the world to argue against us. We're all just masses of bosons smashing around together in the universe without rhyme or reason after-all. Suffering is all in our minds. Why is he so appalled at it when it means nothing?

It really shows the inconsistency in the secular worldview IMO.

 

[matt0611]

Still bleak. There is still way too much suffering in the world. Making excuses for it doesn't alleviate the pain.

The pain and suffering is temporal. This world will not last forever.

 

[Toxic]

So some people fill in more details than others. But even for Daniel there was the potential for two different everlasting states in the resurrection, a good one, and a bad one. I don't see why the differences between that and some specific view of Heaven that you think someone else in history had matters to this discussion.

And that's my point, "some people fill in more details than others."

So in other words, there is no set rule or set facts. People interpret things differently. Also factor in that other religions have their own explanations as well, and no one religion is "more valid" than another. So with so many interpretations, you can't say, "Well, this is how it is." You don't know how it is anymore than I do. But what I can say is that we are getting more answers to questions through science than religion.