Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

Views: 485

Comment by Dr. Bob on June 18, 2014 at 8:56pm

We aren't. Laws describe how things interact.

And therein is the assumption exactly. 

Nowadays within Western culture that assumption that the way "things" interact is governed by discernible natural law seems self-evident, just as the concept of zero or negative numbers seem self-evident.  None of those, however, were at all self-evident to historical humanity, nor even to communities within modern humanity.  Animism and most forms of polytheism in fact preclude notions of natural law, because the behaviors of things are governed by their own spirits or the capricious activities of various gods.   Even modern "New Age" animists necessarily abandon scientific thought.

Thus the development of belief in natural law and consequently the emergence of science were dependent on the development of Creator-Monotheism, and emerged in cultures where such belief was pervasive. 

We're talking about well over a thousand years of history with innumerable contributions across multitudinous cultures. 'Christian origins' is a gross over-simplification.

Yes, there is considerable complexity, and new ideas generally develop in complex ways.  Nonetheless, for the purposes of @S. Graham's reasoning as a Christian theist, he must accept the Christian fundamental belief in Natural Law which is the consequence of identifying God as Creator.  In turn, he must also accept that where his statements run contrary to Natural Law they are necessarily non-Christian and mistaken. 

Comment by S. Graham on June 19, 2014 at 9:34am

@fronkey farmer. You are wrong and quite mistaken. I have studied Evolution and was a very enthusiastic student of it for many years. It was through the process of studying it, that I found the conflicts that caused me to question things. I have never been one to just accept things as they are presented. So much for your presumptions.

Comment by Strega on June 19, 2014 at 9:42am
So you have studied Evolution yet you are under the impression that it argues that man descended from monkeys? Extraordinary. Where did you carry out your studies? I think you may have a case for demanding a refund from your teaching establishment.
Comment by Reg The Fronkey Farmer on June 19, 2014 at 4:20pm

@S. Graham – So you think it presumptuous of me to have assumed you have little or no knowledge of the workings of Evolution? When you asked “If science is right, and we evolved from monkeys and apes, then why are there still some monkeys and apes that didn't evolve??” you showed your level of knowledge of the subject. This is after you had been “a very enthusiastic student of it for many years”.

I do not believe you. It is comparable to someone asking “why does ice melt” and then claiming that they have studied Chemistry for many years.

If I am mistaken as you claim and you have expertise in this area then please furnish me with some of the reasons why you do not accept that Evolution is true. I assume (or again, presume) it is because you are a fundamentalist Christian or Muslim who gets their Science from one book only. I also assume that you accept “Intelligent Design” as a valid alternative “theory” and that you only do so, not because of any academic endeavours on your behalf, but because you were told what to believe and how to think by some self-appointed preacher.

If you have actually gone “through the process of studying it” would you care to share with us what conflicts you found that led you to question it. If you don’t I will continue to assume that I am not “wrong and quite mistaken”.

Comment by Reg The Fronkey Farmer on January 1, 2016 at 10:00am

@S. Graham - I "presume" you still have not found anything to explain why I am "wrong and quite mistaken"?

Comment by SteveInCO on January 1, 2016 at 12:13pm

Lots of luck with that, Reg.  I suspect he was a fly-by-night troll, posting a bit then never seen again.  And I agree with what Strega said too, though it may not be the "teaching establishment"'s fault.  Some people are fundamentally uninstructable.

Comment by Reg The Fronkey Farmer on January 1, 2016 at 4:05pm

I met two Catholics today that I used to regularly debate with until recently. They both became atheists while working on a criticism of my arguments over Christmas. So they got their best present ever this year….freedom from the mental enslavement of religious thinking. They even look more contented already. Maybe the dead weight of cognitive dissonance had distorted their faces.

I am not expecting a reply from S. Graham but I am not one to leave it alone :-) It once took me 7 years to get through the defences of a Jehovah Witness !!

Comment by SteveInCO on January 1, 2016 at 4:25pm

By all means point out their sudden (and then prolonged) silence to passers by.  Just don't expect said silence to end!

Comment by TJ on January 1, 2016 at 4:50pm

I just read this thread.

I'm now confused after the argument made by the grahm cracker...

If early Americans used to be Englishmen, why are there still Englishmen?

If cakes are made from flour, why is there still flour?

Is it because of god?




You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service