Response To A Great Post By Myatheistlife

Fellow blogger MyAtheistLife posted a really good series of religious questions earlier today. Although a decent number of them were directed towards monotheists (and perhaps Christians in particular) I thought I’d give answering them a shot. The post’s original questions are in bold, my responses are all italicized.

Here’s his blog, if you find such religious debates/questions interesting: http://myatheistlife.wordpress.com

1.If evolution is not true, why do mammals all share a common body plan – five digits, tube design, etc. Did the god run out of ideas or simply not have enough imagination to make more animals like the kangaroo and platypus.
As evolution is actually a scientific theory, and thus supported by numerous pieces of evidence including (but not limited to) the fossil record, DNA mapping, transitional forms, and the fact we can see it happen under strict laboratory conditions with bacteria and insects, there is little reason to not believe it to be true. Thus, I know evolution to be true based on the facts that the creationist hypothesis lacks.

2.I’ll ask about the flood myth but this goes for a lot of things. Why do believers have to invent their own ‘bible science’ which is in contention with very smart people that spend their entire lives dedicated to the science of understanding geology?  Why is it necessary for believers to understand the world in terms of their holy book? Can’t they simply join the rest of humanity in the search for answers and learn from what is discovered?
They have to invent biblical “science” because otherwise they wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. These people have a psychological need to believe in their religion, and often look to their spiritual texts for guidance. Well, if parts of these aforementioned texts can be proven false, then it stands to reason that other sections…perhaps ones that are more important to the core tenets of their faith…could also be incorrect. Should this happen enough times, it will punch enough holes through their scriptures that they’d be hard pressed to explain why anyone should follow this religion. However, by creating a “science” that doesn’t rely on proper use of things like radiocarbon dating, understanding the fossil record, or the scientific method, they can pretend to legitimize what their holy books say.

3.I have yet to hear a response to the Steve Project that makes sense. Does anyone have one?
Yes. The overwhelming majority of scientists believe in evolution rather than creationism because it has numerous proofs to back it up. The end.

4.Speaking of monotheism, if the god created everything where does evil come from? No, don’t bother with free will for the angels chose to disobey and they were not given free will. Which leads us to number 5.
Evil is the result of selfishness and a lack of empathy, which is always a possibility when dealing with sentient beings who have free will. One doesn’t need the Gods to have created it…we did pretty well on our own.

5.The god of Abraham has failed at the things he set out to do in spectacular fashion. On top of that, outside of natural disasters, every time he exacts punishment on humans it is done at the hands of other humans. How is this supportive of an omnipotent and omniscient god? Clearly all that foreknowledge has not helped the god of Abraham create anything that would succeed as far as we know. The god of Abraham is a failure… which leads us to number 6.
Agreed. If the god of the Jews, Christians, and Muslims actually does exist I’m frankly very unsure if said deity even has omniscient/omnipotent powers. Either than, or Abraham’s god is really inefficient at telling his followers what he actually means.

6.There are those that believe in gods. They have failed to provide credible evidence for their belief. What do you believe and how do you KNOW it to be true? If you can’t know it to be true why do you believe it. Those that believe the big bang created the universe are encouraged to explain their answer to this question.
If I want to be 100% honest here…I don’t know that the Goddess and God exist. As They would likely be supernatural in origin, there’s no way to use the laws and theories of the natural world to test Them. In this sense, I’m an agnostic theist.
As for why I’d believe in something I can’t  prove, I’m guessing it has a lot to do with my upbringing. Were I raised a strict Hindu, or Christian, or Muslim, etc. I’d probably believe in the “authority” of that faith. Instead, I was sent to a private Catholic school from kindergarten thru 5th grade, but had friends that were Jewish, Hindu, and Protestant. My family not only celebrated Christmas and Hanukkah or Easter and Purim, but my grandmothers had many Middle Eastern/Asian pieces of artwork and religious pictures around our home.
So, I was taught that my Hindu friend Rashmi was just as “correct” as my Jewish friend Matthew, who was in turn just as “correct” as me. The idea of a “one true god” was foreign to my house and to this day I believe there’s many paths to the divine…including not necessarily worshipping anyone at all. Thus it’s a bigger leap for me to go from believing to  not believing at all than it is to just accept numerous concepts of deity. And, as Matt Dillahunty constantly points out, one can’t really choose what to believe or not believe.

7.It appears that the human like for sweet tasting things is biological. Where do you derive your morality from? Why? What evidence do you have to show this was a correct decision?
Yup, as is our penchant for desiring fatty foods. It’s a remnant of our evolutionary past that aided us in searching out a high sugar/fat/protein diet. Obviously we no longer need to do this…someone should tell our bodies.
Morality is subjective, and subject to change per culture, era, community acceptance, etc. Hence why the bible condones things like lifelong slavery of non-Jews, forcing a woman to marry her rapist, wholesale slaughter of entire tribes including unborn fetuses, and many other actions we’d consider atrocious by today’s standards.
Personally, I derive my morality from a combination of my own ability to empathize with others, plus what I was taught as a child that has stood up to my adult scrutiny.

8.There are those that believe in an afterlife. Their world views hold that many will be tortured forever. How do you justify this belief? How do you justify the infinite torture of someone else? For those that do not believe in an afterlife, how do you justify not helping those in need? Well, even believers, how do you justify not helping those in need?
Ah…here’s where I’ll first truly disagree with Myatheistlife. Not everyone who believes in an afterlife thinks this way. I absolutely do not try to justify the infinite torture of someone else, and especially not for any finite crimes or “sins” they might have committed in their time on Earth. Instead, many Pagans (myself included) believe in reincarnation, particularly multispecies rebirth. After a sentient being dies, their soul goes to a place of reflection (known as the Summerland to some Pagans) to determine what still needs to be learned. Then the soul is reborn into a body that has a high probability of experiencing those lessons.
I also do not attempt to justify not helping those in need. The way I see it, I could be utterly wrong about my beliefs in reincarnation. This may very well be the only life we have. Ergo, it’s better to treat others as one wishes to be treated, and help others as much as possible since this life (at least) is a guarantee.

9.Have you thought your world view out to it’s logical end point? If you have, what is the meaning of existence? What purpose does this life serve? How do you reconcile your answer to this question with your answer to question 8?
Very easily. Life is meant to be lived. We experience joy and sadness, pain and pleasure, frustration and elation. It’s all a part of the cycle of growth we go through. Look around at the terrifying majesty of the natural world…Does it need more meaning than this?

10.What is you most favored music genre?
Soft rock.

11.How do you know that the world is real? How do you know that these questions are real? How do you know that your lover/spouse/SO is real? Given the answer to this question, how can you know if the Christian Jesus was real?
Much the same as I can’t know for certain that the Gods are real, I can’t know that Jesus was real. For that matter, I can’t 100% know that Tesla or Martin Luther King Jr or Joan of Arc were real. We can only trust the numerous historians who provide evidence for these people’s existence, which tends to be good. To clarify, I do believe that enough evidence supports the existence of a flesh-and-blood pseudo-progressive rabbi that we call Jesus who died on a cross as a political dissenter and possibly “rose from the dead” (aka awoke from a catatonic stupor caused by extreme physical and mental duress) and who likely migrated to a different area afterwards to prevent recapture. But this is as far as I’ll go.

12.Given the general nastiness of the gods of monotheism, why would you worship them? Why would you worship anything or anyone? What is worthy of your worship and dedication?
Lol, I wouldn’t. I gave up trying to believe in the Abrahamic religions nearly 2 decades ago. I give thanks to the Lord and Lady because I believe They are responsible for the big bang and abiogenesis. However, I’m fairly deist otherwise as I believe they used real, scientifically testable methods to create the universe and life, but not that they dabble in our everyday lives.
Truth be told, if the scientific community proved that the Gods (any/all of them) conclusively did not exist…well, I can’t say I’d be that upset.
I’m much more focused on being the best person I can realistically be, and helping my fellow sentient beings, human or not, to have decent lives. If Yahweh/Allah/Jehovah exists and this isn’t good enough come my “judgement time”, then I doubt this god is worth worshipping anyway.

Related Posts
https://tarnishedsophia.wordpress.com/2014/02/09/skyclad/

https://tarnishedsophia.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/and-this-is-why-wicca-isnt-taken-seriously/

And just for some language-explict fun:

Advertisements

62 thoughts on “Response To A Great Post By Myatheistlife

  1. Sorry, Sophia, but it looks to me like most of your answers seem to just simple agreement with the questions. Along the lines of…
    Q: “Isn’t X stupid because…and why do you do this?”
    A: “Yes, that is stupid because…and I don’t do that.”

    So I’m not terribly surprised the a person with the handle myatheistlife appreciates those types of answers.

    The moment a religious belief is “proven” scientifically (outside of historical context) it isn’t a belief based on faith, that’s something called a scientific fact. Faith ipso facto requires….faith. There are hundreds of events in my life that have been reaffirmational for me, but they are deeply personal and not a matter up for debate or discussion. I’m not trying to convince atheists to embrace my belief system.

    It is definitely evident from the rise and fall of civilizations (and neighborhoods, and households for that matter) that some value systems are better and more useful than others.

  2. Pushed the post button before finishing my thoughts above…
    It’s interesting to me that with the decline of traditional types of religion secular varieties have sprung up. Affirmations, for example, are all the rage these days. I see little difference between the concept of affirmations and what others might call “prayer” and “ritual”.

  3. People don’t worship “God.” They worship their accquired IDEAS about God.
    (Religion.) Religion was designed as a “control mechanism” to fill in the void of an
    empty (meaningless) life. To give an explaination of why life is so misrable and why
    certain “privildged” people are entitled to certain advantages you lack (material goods,
    plentiful sex, etc.)
    For example, in Islam the religious leader can have 40 wives, but the average man
    might barely afford to have one. The remedy? Tough it out and be “good” (Obey the
    religious leader) and you can have 72 virgins in Heaven. You can also drink alchohal
    there. “But I don’t want to wait that long. I want what you have NOW!” “Impossible son.
    But there IS a shortcut. You can strap on this bomb vest and blow up those invadels.
    You don’t have to live a misrable life until you are 70. Do it and you’ll have everything
    you want. Your family will be well provided for, and you will be a hero it your people.”
    In the Iran/Iraq war, children cleared minefields with keys to paradise hanging from
    their necks. The Iraqi machine gunners fired their guns until they smoked.
    The only PROOF of God’s existance is that life on earth still exists dispite competing
    ideals/obligations about God.

  4. There is a reason many Pagans and atheists get along pretty well in religious debates…many of our beliefs intersect, especially those of science. I wasn’t about to change my answers just so they’d be more conversation-starting, lol. 🙂

    I actually do wish a Christian or Jew (or member of any other faith, really) would answer these questions. So far, no other theist has, at least on his blog.

    So is it not desirable for matters of faith and science to come together?

    If an event occurs that reaffirms your beliefs, that’s awesome. Sometimes things happen that reaffirm my belief in a soul that resides in all sentient creatures (humans obviously included). However, they are up for debate. If someone shows me that a scientific explanation covers the event better than a supernatural one…I’ll either change my stance or modify it. That’s what you do when presented with clear, concise information.

    Haven’t heard of Affirmations before. I’ll have to do some research on this before giving an opinion.

  5. “Haven’t heard of Affirmations before.”
    Really? This is huge right now.
    The book, ‘The Secret’ is big on them (disclaimer, I’ve never read the book myself, but I am familiar with the subject of affirmations).
    The underlying point is….they actually seem to work (at least odds-wise).

    People who don’t believe in affirmations call it ‘magical thinking’. But, again, it seems to work for adherents and can result in the fruition of some incredibly unlikely goals/events. IN fact, some very deeply skeptical people believe in affirmations. No one is sure why they work, as (like faith) no one can point to a scientific reason for the result.

    Scott Adams is a believer in affirmations, and he says this: “For the record, I don’t believe in ESP or magic. But I do believe our perceptions are interpretations of a reality that is too complex for a human brain to process. And so sometimes when your brain tries to incorporate an inconsistency into its interpretation, the result can look like magic. And if you tell me that isn’t just as good as actual magic, we could have a long discussion. It’s like the difference between thinking you are happy versus being happy. I call that a tie.”

  6. “I actually do wish a Christian or Jew (or member of any other faith, really) would answer these questions. So far, no other theist has, at least on his blog.”

    I’m not surprised no one will answer those types of questions. They aren’t worded in a way that is conducive to thoughtful discussion.

  7. Ohhhh. I didn’t know that is what you were referring to.

    Yes, my mother is very much into this stuff. I think it’s a matter of self-fulfilling prophecy most of the time. You desire a particular outcome so much that your subconscious mind makes decisions you might not have made otherwise, and thus your goals are completed “miraculously”. Perhaps some examples don’t follow this, but the majority do.

  8. One more thing:
    “So is it not desirable for matters of faith and science to come together?”

    Again, faith is NOT science. Once something is proven faith isn’t required. It’s eliminated.

  9. But is that truly a bad thing?
    For example, if 5 years from now some scientists figure out a way that a man could walk on water using only methods available to ancient middle eastern peoples, is that so terrible? Or would you be happy to have a scientific explanation for a “miracle”?

  10. I’m quite certain that MAL knows his/her questions are loaded, Sophia. You don’t start a good faith (heh) initiation of discussion implying in the context of the question that those who disagree are ipso facto morons.

  11. I didn’t say (and I didn’t mean to imply, if I did) that ‘scientific proof’ is a bad thing. It’s simply a fact that once scientific proof is given, the need for faith is eliminated. If God showed up on a cloud tomorrow and smite (smote? whatevs..) the ‘evil’, we’d all be believers. There would be no need for choice, no need for faith whatsoever.

  12. Interesting to consider that humans are often happier when they are striving for answers, striving for improvement, than when they achieve their goals. For evidence, see what happens to lottery ticket winners. See what happens to rich kids raised in showbusiness with “everything” (on paper…but no faith). I don’t know why humans are programmed that way, but there seems ample evidence that we are.

  13. God is relevant only to people who think about god. Before the advent of the self-conscious universe (as exemplified by humanity) god did not exist. God did not create anything. The self-conscious universe created God. And then, in an act of almighty narcissism, the self-conscious universe ascribed the label “Creator” to this flight of their imagination.

  14. When the universe started to evolve the senses, it was starting the evolution of self-consciousness. So there’s no necessary god-quality in self-consciousness, either. It’s all a matter of spacetime. That’s it for me, complete. 🙂

  15. Cill Talks a Load of Old Bollocks, He Does (by Padawan, Poet Laureate 2014 – ?)

    So we go back, my other self,
    To consciousness’ totality,
    To evolution of the Psyche,
    Unversed Potentiality

    When I with you browsed the deep,
    Rocked on an ocean vast of rhyme,
    We the axis were, the seed,
    Unfolding in a cyclic time

    Around us whirled a multitude
    Of universes blown to song
    Conditioned by the need that turned
    Other universes gone

    Ours is the need to turn the wheel,
    We the god by one release
    Of consciousness’ totality
    Could turn a wheel spun on peace.

    So there 😛

  16. I generally prefer to avoid religious discussions anymore. I have little in common with most people when it comes to religious views. However, I’ll engage Liz since she’s the most reasonable and unflappable person responding to the OP. I have so little in common with Tarn and the others that discussion with them would be unproductive.

    @ Liz

    Liz, if you’re going to use the word “scientific”, please tell us what you mean by “science.” Do you included engineering, math, economics, sociology, etc. in your definition? On what basis do you exclude cooking, not to mention astrology?

    “Scientific” is just one of those words that rhetoricians love to use–atheists, theists, pagans, etc.

    “Faith”, in a biblical context, relies on testimonial evidence derived from careful questioning of witnesses and consideration of their statements about their empirical observations. This is basic mosaic procedure.

    When doing my physics research, I had to rely a lot on what other people communicated. This includes purity percentages of compounds, equipment manuals, calibration marks, tables in manuals, etc. This is very real faith in the sense of relying on what other people say.

    Publication of basic experimental research involves a lot of irrational stuff. Imagination. Politics. Salesmanship. Accidental discoveries. Intuition. Dreams. Daydreaming. Etc. Research is never purely rational. Irrational elements are often key in research.

  17. “I’ll engage Liz since she’s the most reasonable and unflappable person responding to the OP”

    The rest of us are dismissed from the classroom.

  18. Also, asdgamer…I noticed you put numbers or symbols in your curse words. I’m not such a stickler that I will ban someone for actually writing them. (Only exception is if they are mean to be cruel to a fellow commenter).

    Just letting you know.

  19. Liz, I agree with you. This doesn’t sound like honest inquiry. Sounds like ‘which argument can I use for this response’. I was the same way before epiphany, and I was a believer.

    Hey, if you don’t have a God shaped hole in your life, no worries. Keep in mind that others smarter than you did, and found something they thought was worth pursuing. And yes, a lot of people dumber than you did as well. Congrats.

    For those in earnest, it’s worth pursuing.

  20. I’m an atheist and pretty much with Tarn on this. And it seems to me that people that use the “tone” of the person asking questions as a reason to not respond are either incapable of answering or are afraid to. My 2 cents.

  21. “some value systems are better and more useful than others.”

    As a life long atheist born of a complete and fundamental lack of belief in any god whatsoever…I agree. And indeed, I would put Christianity in that positive light. But then I grew up in a pretty much post-religious country. There was religion, but you had to look for it, except for the meaningless mush uttered by pigeon chested milksops in fancy dress on Sunday morning on 2 out of the 3 tv channels of the day. That left me watching BB2’s Open University educational programmes…that worked out pretty well, cheers). The CofE remains, more or less, a lefty, PC, mush talking irrelevance. Only the number of tv channels has changed.

  22. Why on earth would you confuse religion with “God?”
    Religion is stale, dead, ideas and “programming.” God is a force (Spirit) Who you
    can personally experience. But you have to experience Him to KNOW He is REAL.
    Until you DO experience Him, you can never hope to understand Him.
    Zen says we must empty out our “cup” of “knowledge” to recieve the truth.
    It is our false accquired “KNOWLEDGE of dead, past, information that keeps us from
    experiencing God. The existence of God can never be argued from an intellectual
    base.

  23. theasdgamer: “Liz, if you’re going to use the word “scientific”, please tell us what you mean by “science.” Do you included engineering, math, economics, sociology, etc. in your definition? On what basis do you exclude cooking, not to mention astrology?

    “Scientific” is just one of those words that rhetoricians love to use–atheists, theists, pagans, etc.”

    I agree “science” is often used as a rhetorical device (often crutch, often by non-scientists in particular…just as people on the outside of medical practice sometimes cite the “medical community” as though it were one monolithic community of like-minded people, though this is hardly the case…medical people make the worst patients, for a reason).

    Now…I will say in response to the quesitons that I don’t actually know anyone who doesn’t believe in evolution at all. Evolution is simply “evolving” and it is demonstrated by fruit flies in a lab. The mutations needed for macroevolution, however, have never been observed.

    In this case, I’m refering to “science” as anything that can be proven via scientific method. Of course, if we define science as “truth” rather than that which can be proven experimentally, it’s far wider than that. Lots of truths in the physical world that cannot be reached by science, just as there are mathematical truths that cannot be reached by mathematical proof.

  24. Why on earth would you confuse religion with “God?”

    I don’t. I don’t believe in any god. I do see some use for some religions, as long as they’re not running the place.

  25. Liz, as regards the scientific method, I recommend reading Against Method by Paul Feyerabend. His writing is very readable–not at all dry. I like the postmodern critiques of modernism, but not their synthetic work.

    Against Method was misread by many philosophers as a positive advocacy of epistemic anarchism (“anything goes”) and the following link goes into that: http://www.galilean-library.org/site/index.php/page/index.html/_/essays/philosophyofscience/anything-goes-feyerabend-and-method-r76

    Ok, I’ll shut up again. Pardon my noise.

  26. “No one can come to me EXCEPT the Father CALL him, and I will raise him up on
    the last day.”
    There are two fundamental ways of viewing life: “Jewish” and “Greek.”
    The Apostle Paul said, “The Jews seek signs, and the Greeks seek knowledge. To
    the Jews, Christ is a stumbling block, and to the Greeks, Christ is foolishness.”
    The Jews expected a powerful miracle working Messiah. They constantly asked Christ
    for the signs to prove He was the Messiah. He refused. Christ said, “An evil and
    adultrous generation seekith after a sign, and none shall be given it except the sign
    of Jonah. Just has Jonah was in the body of a whale for 3 days, so shall the Son of
    Man be in the earth for 3 days and raise up.”
    Christ did perform many miracles, but the resserection was THE miracle to prove His
    credentials. He just didn’t behave in the way the Jews were expecting.
    The “Greek” way of viewing the world has to do with Logic, Rationality, Proveabilty,
    and “Science.”
    There was no way that the Greek mind could wrap itself around the claims that Christ
    made for Himself.
    Even today we have these diametrically opposed viewpoints. The “Religious” viewpoint,
    and the Scientific” viewpoint.

  27. I think on the question of what science is, the book “What is this thing called science” is pretty nice ( http://www.amazon.com/What-this-thing-called-Science/dp/0872204537 ) 🙂 Covers quite a lot of interesting subjects.

    About “The Secret”. I know lots of people like that book and they feel it works for them, but holy crap, it was so horrible for me. In my teens, I tried something similar (back then, there were other books suggesting the same type of magic). Well, one thing they tell you to do is restrain your negative emotions, or else bad things will happen. I have some tiny OCD tendency and this belief system made it so much worse. The last thing a person somewhat prone to anxiety and intrusive thoughts needs is to worry about worrying. So.. it’s not for everyone :/ To feel good all the time takes effort you could have used for something else.

  28. Repression IS bad. You just have to understand that the negative REACTION is
    in you and no where else. An adult can understand this, a child (Like someone in
    Tarnishes’ prior condition can’t.)
    The fact that Tarnished trimupthed over her challenges is on par with any Christmas
    miracle.

  29. It has been said that Man Made God In His Own Image, and image which portends a divine figure in the form of an ancient old white man with a long and flowing beard.

    To understand the true nature of that which we have named God requires the abandonment of faith and the renunciation of the ignorance which requires faith for belief.

    So what is the true nature of that which we humans have named God? It requires some knowledge of many sciences to appreciate what God really is. All of the attributes and abilities of the God Entity remain true to the scriptural descriptives EXCEPT for the anthropomorphic. Such anthropomorphic descriptives are an allegorical attempt to provide a child-like understanding to the weak-minded and uneducated, probably a near-universal characteristic of the client audience.

    Religion today is not about belief at all. It is about power and control of the masses for the benefit of a very select few. The sooner humanity understand that the religious beliefs which they are expected to follow under pain of death are bunk, and that true understanding is possible, the quicker much global strife withers and fades away. Humanity can only gain under that condition.

  30. Tarnished: Happy new year.

    Per your Dec.23,2014 8:16 AM: “I actually do wish a Christian or Jew (or member of any other faith, really) would answer these questions. So far, no other theist has, at least not on this blog.”

    “KC”: I believe I have thoroughly answered them, at least most of them, on my website http://www.wowedbytruth.com

    #4 is simply a mistake in that Christianity always taught that angels originally had free will and a testing period; I wouldn’t josh ya.

    And yes, I believe I’ve thought out my postulations to their logical conclusions. If any are illogical, please expose them.

    *****Here’s the big thing*****: Most of these questions reflect an assumption that Fundamentalism is the poster-child for Christianity. Now I utterly reject numerous conclusions that Fundamentalists arrive at, hence this renders some questions irrelevant as far as my faith goes.

    However, I ask you: Which question do you think is the toughest and most problematic for Christianity? If you answer this, I will regardless give a thorough answer ***right here***

    p.s. I hope you don’t think that either I or thatincel erased your fine post on his blog. I don’t have the technology to do that, and I highly doubt thatincel would; he even has a link to your blog.

  31. Hi, KC.
    It would probably be better for you to give an answer over on MAL’s blog. He’s the one who wrote the initial questions, and the one who is looking for theists to answer them in the first place.

    No, I don’t think you or thatincel did. It was likely an issue with WordPress themselves. However, a number of your points were delving into religious territory, and I’m not interested in being told that the Bible/Christian beliefs should have any hold over how I live my life. That’s perfectly fine for Christians, but I’m a Pagan and (no offense) don’t care what your book says I should or shouldn’t do. So talking about gender roles in a biblical context is irrelevant to me, which is where your conversation seemed to be heading.

  32. Tarn, Thanks for your prompt response.

    If MAL is truly being honest in that he’s looking for someone to answer his questions (instead of posing questions which he assumes people are unable to answer, too afraid to answer, or too lazy to answer), then I’ll answer them when I get time.

    I hear you about where you stand on my beliefs. But then you state “I wish a Christian would answer these theological questions about their faith; they’re not answering them.” But if I answer them, then I’ll get “This is not appropriate for this blog” or I’m not interested in the answers”.

    It seems like people are playing Heads they win, Tails I lose with me.

    Again, I hear you on where you stand. But I simply must clarify: I can answer ***every single possible question that anyone can pose*** , *** giving a completely thorough and detailed answer***, and ***always backing up what I say with logical thought processes. This is my career; this is my vocation.

  33. I am interested in the possible answers you have regarding his questions, but again, they’re *his* questions. I answered them on my blog here by turning my answers into a post and giving him the link to review. It seems odd that you’d want to answer his questions…but only on my blog? Why not do as I did, and create a response over at your blog then give him the corresponding link? Or even just post your answers over at his place?

    I’m just confused as to why you feel the need to only respond to someone else’s post via my blog’s comments field? It’s rather roundabout.

  34. The reason why Christians (or Jews) aren’t answering these questions is because they’re filled with incorrect assumptions about what Christians believe (or Christians other than a handful of American evangelicals believe). For anyone who has a sufficient understanding of Christian (or Jewish) theology, they could be interpreted as borderline trolling.

  35. You might be onto something there. As of today, no theist besides myself has taken the time to answer MAL’s questions. KC might though…we’ll have to see if he makes a new post.

  36. The problem is that for the vast majority of Christians and Jews the questions don’t accurately reflect what they believe by a wide margin. And not just rank and file believers either. For example, the Catholic Church says evolution is true, and everything else science says is true. In fact the Vatican has quite a few actual scientists working for it so as far as they’re concerned there is no need for such thing as “bible science”. A similar answer would apply to the Orthodox, the Church of England, and several other protestant churches. That alone covers the vast majority of Christians.

    It’s usually obvious to most people that American evangelical fundamentalists don’t represent the positions of most Christians or the doctrine of most Christian Churches. American evangelical fundamentalists didn’t even show up until around 1970 give or take because it was part of the culture wars and a reaction to the counter culture so they don’t even represent the beliefs of the vast majority of Christianity over the last 2000 years.

  37. Tarnished:

    You say “Why not do as I did, and create a response over at your blog?”

    Because *I do not have a blog* and I never did!!! My website is a book; that’s way different. People must wade through my book and fish for whatever answers I give. My book format is superior in other ways, however. Also, yours is where I first saw these questions.

    I already partially answered #4. Also, evil is the result of free will. To #10: What is your most favored music genre?: Punk rock.

    To questions #2, #5, and # 12, the same answer basically applies: I reject the Old Testament as an authority. I reject its largely fictional portrayal of God. I only take stock in the New Testament. Even then, I reject the idea of a God-authored book. Jesus only asks that we believe on Him alone.

    To question #1, my 6,700 word dissertation 4.A Third Option, answers the contentions of Evolutionary theorists. To #3, I’d respond to the Steve Project if I knew what it is.

    To #6, My chapters 3 and 7 thoroughly discuss what I believe about God and why. To #11: I think, therefore, I am. And my chapter 6 explains why Jesus is real.

    #9: Yes, I’ve thought out my world view to its logical end point. The purpose of this life is to love and serve God with our whole being. It is a testing period or proving ground for the next.

    #8: I denounce the idea of infinite torture. We can sometimes justify not helping “those in need” because many people are lazy and want to leech off society.

    #7: I derive my morality from what my parents and the Church taught me. My evidence that it is correct is that it works for the greater good of society.

    If there are any points which I did not adequately answer, I ask my fellow bloggers to let me know.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s