My problem with Evangelical Atheism

[Hyena Dandy]

However, parental examples do not work as we do not have that sort of relationship with a Creator regardless of wishful thinking on our end. It is not guiding us nor telling us what to do. It is not interfering in any way as to ensure we are safe or healthy in times when we do not understand that we are undermining our own health or safety. If it is out there, then its letting us learn entirely by trial and error.

I think that the metaphor did apply to that circumstance. Because it wasn't about taking instructions, I think we were still on the topic of logic. Thus, the metaphor was

"It follows a logic that we don't understand, but it is sound"

Not that we do what God says because it's like parents.

[Gravekeeper]

"It follows a logic that we don't understand, but it is sound"

Not that we do what God says because it's like parents.

Both metaphor's involved direction communication with God and parental guidence from him. Its a poor metaphor for this. Also, in both cases, we would eventually understand, in short order, the reasoning behind God's logic. As we would make ourselves sick as pigs inside of a day. >.>

[SkullKing]

Than maybe a better analogy would be a lay person watching a rocket engine:

They have no way to comprehend it.

If they know what it is, and have some training, they may understand the purpose of parts of it. But even so the exact function and functioning of most of it would be beyond them.

[Gravekeeper]

If they know what it is, and have some training, they may understand the purpose of parts of it. But even so the exact function and functioning of most of it would be beyond them.

Its not that I don't understand the analogies you guys are trying to make, its just they don't quite fit. Because they all involve something we can directly interact with and examine and that operates with logical mechanisms we can discover. You may have no idea how a rocket engine works, but you know what it does and you can take a reasonable guess as to its functions based on common knowledge.

Which actually proves my point. The claim that was made counter to that is that God's methods and logic cannot be understood because he is so superior to us. This is false. We must be able to understand and eventually even observe either his work, the absence of his work or evidence that an absence has been created thus likewise indicating his presence.

This is why I repeatedly try to direct your attention to quantum physics. As it is essentially the last realm of knowledge whereby there are effects that have as of yet apparent cause. It is the very fabric of reality and a fittingly complex canvas by which a superior being could mold the entire universe. Rather than having to crudely interfere with the natural laws of the physical universe. An action which would leave either evidence or a suspicious lack of evidence which would also thus be evidence.

If you're going to play God of Gaps, aim for an actual gap. >.>

[siead_lietrathua]

If you're going to play God of Gaps, aim for an actual gap. >.>

what about say, a mouse trying to understand how a dolphin thinks and operates. diffrent species, living enviroments and levels of intelligence. and even if the mouse could fully understand the nature of the dolphin... it still can't breath underwater.
(oh, random stuff needs to not pop in my head. hehe mouse with a scubatank)

[Gravekeeper]

what about say, a mouse trying to understand how a dolphin thinks and operates. diffrent species, living enviroments and levels of intelligence. and even if the mouse could fully understand the nature of the dolphin... it still can't breath underwater.

Maybe we should just move on ;p

No analogy that involves two beings that exist in the same physical realm and can interact directly really works ( even if one drowns in the process -.- ). Else I'd be high fiving God right this moment for this awesome Internet thing. Which I would totally do.

[Panacea]

Which is actually a very unsettling thought as it means a Creator is intentionally shifting the course of human history to the benefit of people he likes.

Which brings me to my second problem: Miracles are favouritism. To accept miracles is to accept one of two scenarios: God is flawed or God is unfairly playing favourites and thus again, flawed. If God is directly interfering he is doing one of two things: Changing the direction of history on a micro or macro scale which means that the universe was not operating perfectly and he had to step in to make a correction. Thus he is flawed and not omnipotent. Or the universe was operating perfectly but he's introducing a flaw by playing favourites. In which case again, he is flawed, as things are not going according to plan and he feels the need to step in.

Secondly, the favourtism angle. Which is the most disturbing one. Miracles are largely the realm of Abrahamic religions. Which would suggest that God is indeed playing favourites and doing so in the most unfair way possible. In the time that the majority of miracles are said to have occurred, God was essentially playing favourites with a very small portion of the world's population which he apparently picked at random to be his team in a time period where technology severely limited the spread of the message. Meaning the rest of the world at the time was SOL. Something God would obviously know.

Which leaves you with one of two stances: Your religion is right and everyone else is wrong because God loves you best which is both unfair and arrogant or God must have repeated the same scenarios across the world and history using different names and methods to inspire every religion on the planet but every other race on the planet isn't as good at documentation as Christianity is ( and Christianity sucks at it >.> ).

I think we need to understand what miracles really are, and examine the point of view in both the Old and New Testament, for a minute.

In the Old Testament, miracles were God's way of showing His Chosen people that He was there to lead them and protect them. Remember, religion developed from tribal cultures that were by nature ethnocentric. The Old Testament is a combination of history and religious law for a tribal culture; it was a support mechanism for the culture. This is why you can't approach the Bible literally. What God did in Exodus is written from the Hebrew point of view, and we all know the old adage about history being written by the victor.

In the New Testament, miracles were used to show the divinity of Christ. There are distinct differences between the miracles shown in the Gospels, where the description of the miracles were designed to impart very important messages about the faith. In later chapters of the Bible, miracles were discussed to show the Power of God, and in particular that the person under discussion had God's favor and his opponents did not. This is another reason you have to approach the Bible with care.

It's also why you have to approach modern day claims of miracles with care, because they're often misguided or scams.

When I look at stories of miracles in the Bible, I think about, "what is the moral message God is trying to tell us through this story," and not "This really shows how great God is."

Unfortunately, when most people hear the word miracle, the latter is what they are thinking. They think miracles are meant to show the power of God, and that's really not true. However, that misconception has driven the faith down some pretty dark paths, unfortunately.

You can look at other religions and see things that could be classified as miracles, such as the story of Osiris being put back together after being torn apart . . . a sort of Resurrection story of its own, or the story of Bran, whose talking head was brought back to Britain. The Abrahamic religions do not corner the market on wondrous things.

[Hyena Dandy]

No analogy that involves two beings that exist in the same physical realm and can interact directly really works ( even if one drowns in the process -.- ).

But you do get what the analogy is TRYING to say, right?

'Cause then you're just kinda nitpicking an analogy when you already understand the meaning behind it. >_>

[Andara Bledin]

As it is essentially the last realm of knowledge whereby there are effects that have as of yet apparent cause.

Until we discover the next realm of knowledge that lies beyond quantum physics...

^-.-^

[Gravekeeper]

I think we need to understand what miracles really are, and examine the point of view in both the Old and New Testament, for a minute.

I don't think we do and if we do you're directing your examination at the wrong person. But, if you wish....

Miracles are largely the same set of cool stories being recycled over and over, just attached to each emerging new religion. Basically starting with the one everything that followed pillaged to begin with: Sumerian myth. So using any story of them having occurred as any sort of proof is pointless. Buddha for example, had all of Jesus's Superpowers(tm) hundreds of years before Jesus was even born. Buddha walked on water. He parted seas like Moses. He tamed wild beasts. Etc. Difference was it use to piss Buddha off when people came up to him and talked about miracles he supposedly performed. Heck, could have pissed Jesus off too as people were basically attributing what, at the time, would have been the equivalent of urban legends to him.

They are the same set of fables essentially being passed down through oral and written history because the stories are timeless and easy to learn morale lessons. The characters just get changed periodically as everyone adapts them to their particular favourite person, culture or religion. They come from many different authors and different time periods. Not God. Some are morale lessons, others were inspired by natural events we didn't understand at the time. Like Sodom and Gromorrah. No one at the time could have possible understood what happened to the original city that inspired Sodom. Because it was killed off by a low flying meteor. Seriously. Which at the time, would have been pretty HOLY SHIT to the locals and anyone living in the city would have been incinerated alive on the spot ( "Pillar of salt". Actually, ash. ).

Still, back to my original point, miracles are largely the selling point of Abrahamic religions. When you hear "miracle" you think "God/Jesus". You don't think Vishnu. Miracles are the "evidence" used that God/Jesus is the correct religion. Even though, ironically, they were quite likely added as a selling point to help Jesus pulled ahead of other religions in the region.

"Hey, have you heard about Jesus? He's this really wise dude!" didn't hold a candle to "Jupiter, KING OF THE GODS". -.-

The Abrahamic religions do not corner the market on wondrous things.

No, they do not, but they are the ones that embrace and sell themselves on wondrous things more so than any other belief system in history and the ones for which said advertising tactic has been the most successful. No other religion makes as many claims too or as extensively pushes those claims as the 3 Arabrahamic religions.

Until we discover the next realm of knowledge that lies beyond quantum physics...

...which will be a realm built on and discovered through quantum physics thus my point stands. -.-

[KabeRinnaul]

Secondly, the favourtism angle. Which is the most disturbing one. Miracles are largely the realm of Abrahamic religions. Which would suggest that God is indeed playing favourites and doing so in the most unfair way possible. In the time that the majority of miracles are said to have occurred, God was essentially playing favourites with a very small portion of the world's population which he apparently picked at random to be his team in a time period where technology severely limited the spread of the message. Meaning the rest of the world at the time was SOL. Something God would obviously know.

Maybe God was just playing a game of Civilization Ω as the Hebrews. Think about it - the change in personality between the Old and New Testaments is when he switched tactics upon deciding a military victory wasn't feasible, and His lack of presence for the past 2000 years is because he's been AFK.

[Gravekeeper]

Maybe God was just playing a game of Civilization Ω as the Hebrews. Think about it - the change in personality between the Old and New Testaments is when he switched tactics upon deciding a military victory wasn't feasible, and His lack of presence for the past 2000 years is because he's been AFK.

You may be on to something. It's not that he's AFK, its that after 200,000 years, the turns take forever to resolve.

.....we need to put that on a T-Shirt:

"God's Not Gone. He's Just Waiting For China To Finish Moving Its Units".

[Andara Bledin]

*snrk*

That would be epic.

^-.-^

[Panacea]

You may be on to something. It's not that he's AFK, its that after 200,000 years, the turns take forever to resolve.

.....we need to put that on a T-Shirt:

"God's Not Gone. He's Just Waiting For China To Finish Moving Its Units".

*snrk*

That would be epic.

It's been done. It's called Deism, or the Clockmaker Theory. The universe is a clock made by God. He wound it up, and walked away to let it run on its own.

Jefferson is believed to have been a Deist, though no one is really sure

But I'd buy a T Shirt like this

[HYHYBT]

Throwing everything out of alignment . . . direct and irreparable interference that could snowball into disastrous results . . . means that the universe was not operating perfectly and he had to step in to make a correction. Thus he is flawed and not omnipotent.

It seems to me that (the quoted parts, not what I skipped over) relies on assuming God is *not* omniscient. If he is, he can design the universe with the foreknowledge that he will be interfering at points x, y, and z, and for it to accommodate that.

Alternately, most miracles could be put down to providence rather than direct intervention, if you like. I remember reading someplace* that one of the places Moses might have parted the sea has an oddly-shaped sea floor, such that, if the water level were at the right point and an unusually strong wind blew in just the right direction (and perhaps a couple other conditions, some of which may no longer be possible), it would part enough to walk across until the wind stopped. Now, *if* that's true, then to me that the only recorded time it ever happened was so convenient is near enough miracle for it to still count… but you could hardly call it interference. Just timing.

The deaths of the firstborn is in some ways easier. People die every day, some apparently in good health. Normal illnesses (after all, nobody said none of them had been sick), hidden conditions (aneurisms and the like), accidents (falling of a ladder, a poisonous snake getting in your bed), even murder. Surely the Almighty could arrange a huge coincidence of timing… even in advance, without stepping in at that point to interfere.

But with quantum theory, enough coincidence can do just about anything

As for favoritism… you don't have to look for miracles for that. Our existence is blatantly unfair. Some are born healthy to good, stable families with enough resources to provide for them. Some are the opposite. Some are hit by disasters of one kind or another, and so on.

If you're going to play God of Gaps, aim for an actual gap.

And if we're *not* playing that?

Some people see new discoveries of how the world works and how it has progressed as evidence that God had nothing to do with at least that part. Gap filled, no room for God here, go stick him somewhere else if you insist on keeping him around at all. I do not. I see such discoveries as "oh, so THAT'S how he does it!"

*Yes, I know. I don't know how trustworthy that unremembered source is, I don't remember exactly how it was supposed to have worked, and I'm not even convinced of the existence of Moses. But it's the *idea* I'm interested in here.