So I’ve decided to bring the “Kathy” series to an end. However, we’ve had some fun in those threads when the conversation has gone off into interesting tangents, so I’d like to keep that part of it going for anyone who’s interested. These new threads will no longer focus on Kathy or the things we were discussing with her. So thanks for your time, Kathy! Take care.
There are no real rules for these threads. But to kick off the conversation, I’ll go back to the discussion on Paul that a few of us were having. Laurie views Deut 13 as a prophecy about Paul, so why don’t we take a quick look at it?
“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. 5 But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.
6 “If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which neither you nor your fathers have known, 7 some of the gods of the peoples who are around you, whether near you or far off from you, from the one end of the earth to the other, 8 you shall not yield to him or listen to him, nor shall your eye pity him, nor shall you spare him, nor shall you conceal him. 9 But you shall kill him. Your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. 10 You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 11 And all Israel shall hear and fear and never again do any such wickedness as this among you.
12 “If you hear in one of your cities, which the Lord your God is giving you to dwell there, 13 that certain worthless fellows have gone out among you and have drawn away the inhabitants of their city, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods,’ which you have not known, 14 then you shall inquire and make search and ask diligently. And behold, if it be true and certain that such an abomination has been done among you, 15 you shall surely put the inhabitants of that city to the sword, devoting it to destruction, all who are in it and its cattle, with the edge of the sword. 16 You shall gather all its spoil into the midst of its open square and burn the city and all its spoil with fire, as a whole burnt offering to the Lord your God. It shall be a heap forever. It shall not be built again. 17 None of the devoted things shall stick to your hand, that the Lord may turn from the fierceness of his anger and show you mercy and have compassion on you and multiply you, as he swore to your fathers, 18 if you obey the voice of the Lord your God, keeping all his commandments that I am commanding you today, and doing what is right in the sight of the Lord your God.
I can see how one could apply this to Paul. However, I can also see how Jews could have applied it to Jesus as well, especially if he was claiming divinity for himself. And I’m sure this could have applied to lots of people during Israel’s history. Why should we think it’s pointing to Paul specifically, and why wouldn’t it also apply to Jesus?
Finding Truth 
♫Hi-ho, hi-ho, it’s off to mow I go –♪
LikeLike
It’s the gray in the beard – why it almost made me gay.
LikeLike
lol, it made me gay the second i laid eyes on him,
LikeLike
LOL – oh paul.
LikeLike
“Wonder if Nate knew when he titled this ‘Open Conversation’ just where it would lead to …” – not sure, but I’m certainly enjoying hearing about his beautiful blue eyes – and here I thought his cute little chin-whiskers were his most attractive feature – what do I know –?
LikeLike
Nan,
“No, it is not more likely. The odds are, as you have yourself stated, 50/50. You prefer to believe it’s more likely, but that does not make it so from an evidence, reason, and logical point of view.”
The 50/50 odds are the very BEST odds atheists can have.. but they are not the odds I believe to be true.. it’s definitely far more in favor that we are created beings. Our complexity, the complexity of existence is the leading argument. The atheist’s argument that God is not required for all of this to happen is merely a “possibility”.. but no where near an “EQUAL” possibility. Again, I ask, just as I asked William and which he failed to address.. what is the evidence that equals or favors the claim that we are not created beings?? What’s the evidence Nan? You talk about “evidence, reason and logic” in refuting my claim, but it’s you who fails to provide anything to back that up.. I have backed up my claim.
LikeLike
““Especially the part where we evolved from pond scum.” – You keep repeating that, Kathy, despite the fact that we have repeatedly told you that no one ever said that. Where is your evidence that we evolved from pond scum? Please produce this for us –”
Oh, so you DON’T believe in evolution either? What’s left?? This should be interesting..
LikeLike
Kathy, YOU say the odds are more in favor that we are created beings, but you have nothing to back up that claim except your belief. In actuality, there’s no solid evidence on either side. It’s all BELIEF since none of us was present at the moment life was created
You ask: “what is the evidence that equals or favors the claim that we are not created beings??” And I ask, “what is the evidence that equals or favors the claim that we ARE created beings??”
Complexity is an interesting argument, but it’s based on the belief that we are now what we have always been. The theory of evolution disputes that. So we’re back to square one.
LikeLike
@Dave
Thanks, I appreciate this. It’s a pleasure talking to people like you and everyone else on here. I never fail to learn interesting things.
Yes. Although I did not notice being compelled at first, it wasn’t something that I wanted or would have been OK with. It started one day when I was thinking about historical arguments for Jesus’ resurrection, and I was persuaded. Sometime later I noticed that there were some flaws that I had overlooked and found myself in a dilemma. I decided to risk holding on for a while. Then, I had another “breakthrough moment” when I decided to just believe in God. I had tried for so long to be the most rational person, and for me it was an issue of pride. When I let go of this and decided to risk it, this burden was released. I was still confused about the whole process and went into deep thinking until I realized that I’m simply compelled, and I was relieved to find the New Testament writers speaking of this very thing: “My speech and my proclamation were not with plausible words of wisdom, but with a demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might rest not on human wisdom but on the power of God.” The way I see it, rationality can only probe to a certain extent mysteries like Jesus and the question of a creator deity. Also, what seems to have happened to me is consistent with the idea that faith itself is a gift from God, not something I could have earned with my efforts. That’s not to say that anyone should stop thinking, in fact it’s the opposite! I think self-examination is most important in developing our worldviews. So, that’s my reconversion story in a nutshell.
I would add one more thing about the idea of God programming us. I am persuaded by evolutionary psychology which suggests that religion is a natural phenomenon. So it does not surprise me that humans evolved the propensity to believe and create religions. When certain religious innovations are similar across cultures, this could be due to our brains being wired by evolution to find certain ideas compelling. On the other hand, there are vast differences among religions. So, there must be a balance between how we are wired and our cultural input. It’s very difficult to say how much our brains are wired for Christianity. There’s a story of a famous atheist who converted to Christianity after World War who wrote a book about his conversion. He had witnessed horrific evils and found within himself a longing for justice that pointed him towards Christianity. The question is, would he have converted without both his natural longing and the circumstance of war? I think there must be factors tugging us both ways, and God is in control of who gets the Spirit. I think one of these factors seems to be how our brains our wired.
This is actually a really difficult question! My opinion is, yes, but also as a former atheist I think that people who do search and reject the Christian faith do so for good reasons. It seems impossible for some seekers. At the same time I believe in a merciful God who will reward all who seek him, no matter what that seeking looks like. It may not end in conversion. In fact, in cultures not exposed to Christianity, it cannot end in conversion.
This is agreeable. I wouldn’t argue that we can know scripture is inspired, but I would at least argue that we cannot rule out the possibility that it is inspired. That’s a weak claim though. It’s not really extraordinary. At this stage in my thinking life, I’m not sure I’d be willing to make an extraordinary claim! I’ve been shot down many times, and would have bullets flying at me from all directions in this forum with these smart folk.
-Brandon
LikeLike
You ask: “what is the evidence that equals or favors the claim that we are not created beings??” And I ask, “what is the evidence that equals or favors the claim that we ARE created beings??”
The odds Nan. Occam’s razor favors a Creator.. that is the easiest explanation. For life this complex to have happened by chance, the odds are beyond astronomical.
Now, can you answer my question? What is the evidence or compelling argument that we are not created beings with a Creator??
LikeLike
I pose this question to everyone here.. what is the evidence or compelling argument that we are most likely NOT created beings with a Creator??
LikeLike
For one — no creator (intelligent engineer) would put an entertainment complex in the middle of a sewage system. 😉
LikeLike
I rather suspect Paul is looking for a father-figure —
LikeLike
lol… if you do it as intended.. it wouldn’t be an issue. But apparently, not even that stops people.
And Neil Tyson needs to stop getting high.. it’s not helping him at all.
He lists what he perceives as problems, but if everyone lived for ever and ever, he’d
be complaining about overpopulation. His rant was extremely silly.
LikeLike
And Neil Tyson needs to stop getting high.”
Kathy, that was hilarious, considering. 😉
LikeLike
🙂 Well, honestly, it is what I was thinking.
LikeLike
“The atheist’s argument that God is not required for all of this to happen is merely a “possibility”.. but no where near an “EQUAL” possibility.”
You’re absolutely right, Kathy, because there is zero evidence for your god. Even if anyone were to assume everything was “created” by magic, there is still the burden of proving which, of the thousands of gods that Humanity has created, did it.
Our evidence however is based on Darwin’s “Origin of Species,” the thousands upon thousands of fossils preserved in strata reaching back billions of years, as well as Richard Dawkins’ “The Ancestor’s Tale.”
So I would have to give your version of things a generous 1/10 of 1%, our position roughly 90%, with a 9.99% margin of error.
And before you trot out your now all-too-familiar “show me your evidence,” we will first need you to provide YOUR evidence that Darwin’s findings, and those of thousands of scientists, compiling thousands upon thousands of fossils over the past 150 years, is wrong.
Having done that, you will then need to provide evidence that a god did it, after which, evidence that it was YOUR god, and not another.
Do let us know when you’ve finished.
LikeLike
“Oh, so you DON’T believe in evolution either?” – Clearly you know so little about evolution, that you aren’t even aware that “pond scum” has nothing to do with the process. You’re a fool, Kathy – no wonder you’re alone.
LikeLike
The most compelling evidence is the fact that he’s nowhere to be seen. Where is he? Why doesn’t he speak to us? To borrow from Elijah, “is he on a long journey? Is he taking a nap?”
LikeLike
Hi Brandon,
I really appreciate these last few comments from you — I think I’m getting a fuller picture of how you see all this. Honestly, one of the things I’ve always loved about blogging is finding out all the various perspectives that people have on religion. I don’t think I’ve run across anyone yet who looks at it quite the way you’re describing, so I’m enjoying this quite a bit.
What I find refreshing about your view is that you already know the atheist position very well and even find it compelling. So you’ve thought through the problems with a God who isn’t very obvious but would condemn people for not believing in him. And you’ve considered the the various problems with miracles, religious texts, etc. You’re very upfront about your belief stemming from a “feeling” kind of position, rather than trying to “prove” it through apologetics, etc.
So while I don’t agree with you, I can at least acknowledge that you could very well be right. That’s not something I grant to more fundamentalist versions of Christianity — I think there are too many contradictions for them to overcome. But your version acknowledges the contradictions, but also posits a God who’s not overly concerned with what conclusions people come to — instead, he’s far more interested in their effort and character.
Of course, if I’m misunderstanding anything in your position, please let me know.
The only real question I have at this point is in relation to this statement that you made:
Are you saying that this feeling can’t be explained by emotion or peculiarities within the brain, or are you just saying that the person experiencing it doesn’t identify it as such?
LikeLike
I stand with Nate. How can you or anyone claim we are “created beings” when there is no evidence of the creator.
I also find Tyson’s arguments far more compelling than any Christian claims of a creative deity.
LikeLike
“So it does not surprise me that humans evolved the propensity to believe and create religions.”
Humans evolved the propensity to wonder why – religions were just one of the things minds with limited knowledge were able to conceive. Imagine the collective mind of Humanity echoing from Corinthians, “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”
LikeLike
“You’re absolutely right, Kathy, because there is zero evidence for your god. Even if anyone were to assume everything was “created” by magic, there is still the burden of proving which, of the thousands of gods that Humanity has created, did it.”
Wrong again.. existence is compelling evidence of a Creator. This is what’s known as logic and reason. 🙂
“Our evidence however is based on Darwin’s “Origin of Species,” the thousands upon thousands of fossils preserved in strata reaching back billions of years, as well as Richard Dawkins’ “The Ancestor’s Tale.”
None of that disproves a Creator.. but it does supposedly support your claim.. that you also deny.. that we evolved from pond scum. You make no sense as usual.
LikeLike
Occam’s razor favors that any god have a Creator.. that is the easiest explanation. For an entity that complex to have happened by chance, the odds are exponentially beyond astronomical.
LikeLike
“I pose this question to everyone here.. what is the evidence or compelling argument that we are most likely NOT created beings with a Creator??”
“The most compelling evidence is the fact that he’s nowhere to be seen. Where is he? Why doesn’t he speak to us? To borrow from Elijah, “is he on a long journey? Is he taking a nap?”
“absence” of evidence is not very compelling evidence.. the evidence FOR a Creator is much more compelling. Existence is evidence for a Creator since it’s the most reasonable explanation.. and again, your only “evidence” is “absence of evidence”.
And He did speak to us.. through the prophets/ the Bible. That you don’t “approve” of the way He chose to reveal Himself isn’t a valid reason to dismiss the evidence. The Bible is most definitely evidence.
So, again, I ask… what evidence do you all have that counters ALL the evidence that God does exist?? Absence of empirical evidence of God is a very weak answer.. we also lack empirical evidence of how existence began, so does that mean we don’t really exist?
LikeLike