Posted this on Facebook with the text "
I do find it ironic that the very short article even said that this is how life originated in our own system as well and yet she says that it couldn't happen without God. Anyone who believes the Bible cannot possibly "appreciate science." Argh.
I got a lady to, apparently, be chastised by her own Christian cronies over her statements to me on FB. She was caught acting like an ass in the name of Jesus. I didn't regret anything I had to say. Ok, well maybe I didn't need to say that I'd rather gouge out my own eyeballs than watch the blithering videos to which she gave me links, but that could happen to anybody!
People like that base their worldview on the surface belief that everything has a creator, but in fact they are saying that everything but one thing has a creator, that one exception being God. Their worldview is based on an exception.
People who criticize a science-based view of creation seem to caricature science as believing that the universe came out of nothing. This is a very naive and ignorant characterization of what the current view is. For one thing, not understanding what caused the universe isn't exactly the same thing as the positive assertion that "it came out of nothing."
Science seems to indicate that if you run the current expanding state of the universe backward in time, it will end up at something called a "singularity." How that singularity happened can, given our current state of knowledge, be a matter for speculation and not much more.
Believers in the age of science promote what some call "the god of the gaps." In other words, if something can't be explained, then God must be responsible there." Eventually, there won't be many gaps left, if any.
Ask them WHY God created some 30 billion trillion stars observable in our visible universe, not including planets? Surely he must have had SOME reason to create these objects that for the most part probably don't even exist anymore, and for us will forever be but a speck in a high powered telescope. Oh and not to forget the massive percentage of the universe we can't even observe...
The proper follow up questions are: Who made God? Because if everything must have been created, who created the creator?
Can you independently prove God exists without referencing a 1600 year old dusty tome?
If God did make everything, why did he put us on a planet that would kill us 95% of the time? Is he a sadist as well? 70% of the planet will drown you. For working in mysterious ways, he is mysteriously genocidal. (last bit taken from Neil deGrasse Tyson)
Strange how theists marvel at the beauty of the Universe that is revealed to us by science- which does not even consider any god as being an agent to cause these wonders. Yet when Science says Evolution is true or that the Earth is billions of years old these same theists will shake their bibles at them and do their best to associate Science with Atheism.
Actually that girl is wrong. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is the only reason why her god can even claim a tiny gap in the human psyche. The FSM uses its celestial noodly appendages to manipulate her god, like the finest puppet master conceivable by the human mind. Silly girl she is.
well i may be able to say my dumb 2 cents since in new to this sort of thing but:: ever since my early education i have always gone to a christian based school. for my elementary and junior high school i was at an evangelical school in which it taught that god just made everything out of nothing (sounds like evolution which is what i thought it was) and that evolution was non-extant. but now going to a catholic school they teach more of evolution as a part of god and that god made evolution. so with this i can only think that this person says "appreciate science" they mean that as god creating the science.
John Jon - here's a man who not only attended a Christian-based school, but went even further, toward a degree in theology - but that all changed:
William G. Dever is the son of a fundamentalist preacher. From a small Christian liberal arts college in Tennessee he went to a Protestant theological seminary that exposed him to "critical study" of the Bible, a study that at first he resisted. In 1960 it was on to Harvard and a doctorate in biblical theology. For thirty-five years he worked as an archaeologist, excavating in the Near East, and he is now professor of Near Eastern archaeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona. In his book What Did the Bible Writers Know and When Did They Know It he tells where scholarship regarding archaeology and the Bible has been in past decades and where it is now.
Dever writes that the central proposition of his book is very simple. "While the Hebrew Bible in its present, heavily edited form cannot be taken at face value as history in the modern sense, it nevertheless contains much history." He adds: "After a century of exhaustive investigation, all respectable archaeologists have given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob credible 'historical figures." He writes of archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as having been "discarded as a fruitless pursuit." He is not saying that he believes that the biblical Moses never existed. He is talking about what can be gathered from archaeological evidence.
About the historical Moses he writes:
…the overwhelming archaeological evidence today of largely indigenous origins for early Israel leaves no room for an exodus from Egypt or a 40-year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness. A Moses-like figure may have existed somewhere in southern Transjordan in the mid-late13th century B.C., where many scholars think the biblical traditions concerning the god Yahweh arose. But archaeology can do nothing to confirm such a figure as a historical personage, much less prove that he was the founder of later Israelite region.
About Leviticus and Numbers he writes that these are "clearly additions to the 'pre-history' by very late Priestly editorial hands, preoccupied with notions of ritual purity, themes of the 'promised land,' and other literary motifs that most modern readers will scarcely find edifying much less historical." Dever writes that "the whole 'Exodus-Conquest' cycle of stories must now be set aside as largely mythical, but in the proper sense of the term 'myth': perhaps 'historical fiction,' but tales told primarily to validate religious beliefs."
Just thought you might like to know that just because you were raised in it, doesn't mean you have to stay in it.
archaeopteryx- thanks for sharing. I still dont know if there is a god or not, still being in high school there is this stage in my life that i just want there to be a god to help me out but the realistic sense comes to mind that it is all a lie but stories like yours is very realistic and interesting to read about thanks for sharing
For what it's worth, JJ, I stood on a hilltop during a lightning storm at 13, and dared god to strike me dead. (Probably not the wisest thing I've ever done - standing on a hilltop in a lightning storm, god or no god, is STOOPID!)
"Me and you, Big Guy - give it your best shot!"
archaeopteryx: 1; god: 0 --
I'd either ignore her post or delete her post so I wouldn't have to look at it. Engaging with this type of person especially over a social network is typically unproductive. She's certainly not going to change her mind due to a Facebook conversation. If later she notices her post is gone I'd tell her that you'd prefer to keep your facebook page god free. Also, you could point out that she probably wouldn't like it if you started posting a bunch of stuff about atheism on her page.