Can Evolution Have a ‘Higher Purpose’?

Post by ozy » Fri, Dec 23, 2016, 8:34 AM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #128

ozy wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That's... pretty good evidence." No it is not. It is extremely weak evidence. Written by people who clearly had alternative motives. "This was written down for us by a guy who was in the room when it happened." It is extremely unlikely the author was in the room that day. Again, why did Stephen not even attempt to convince the Sanhedrin? "flashing neon sign" ... apparently it was not back in those days, let alone to…

You keep coming back to Stephen. You're so sure that he would have chosen the line of argument that you expect, that you're using that one data point to prove that all of it is false. But people choose different lines of argument for different reasons. Stephen clearly touched a nerve with the Sanhedrin; it's hard to say that his approach was ineffective (unless you define "effective" as "they agreed" instead of "it h…

Acts was written in greek, 50 years after those events, and that is being generous. This is the common understanding even by christian scholars, right?

Even if the bible is the most coherent book ever, makes sense at ever line and grand plot. And says to be an eye witness account of supernatural things. Still that would not count as proof of the supernatural. If it made testable predictions, or has information truly unknowable to those who wrote it, that would warrant further investigation.

So no, I do not talk about proof. However if "roman soldiers at the grave got scared" is the "evidence", then this is a nice contrast. If you cherry pick, put everything in the best possible light, and ignore other important things and contexts, then maybe it can come out looking this way.

Biased people writing a biased account of things long ago is a very likely explanation. As an exercise, write down why there were roman soldiers guarding the grave in the first place? Write it down twice, once in the best possible light from the christian perspective, and once in the best possible light from the other perspective.

The bible does make testable predictions, I wrote a few at the start of this thread, but may I suggest we put Mark 16:17-18 to the test. Are you volunteering? ("And these signs will accompany those who believe:[..] and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all [..]")

Post by ozy » Sat, Dec 24, 2016, 3:49 PM UTC

milesf wrote: post #122

ozy wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does Stephen proof that Jesus rose from the dead? And why does that evidence convince (or not) the Sanhedrin? Remember this is not long after it all happened and these are the same men who asked Pilatus for Jesus his execution. People are free to belief what they want. But people behave according to their beliefs. And sometimes when people think they know the truth, they feel justified in limiting other people th…

As a follow-up to what you're saying: Was Jesus a real person existed, likely. Agreed Did he rise from the dead, no. Disagree. If (and notice I'm using the 'if' proposition) there is a God, who created everything, it would be trivial for Him to raise Himself from the dead. Like I mentioned before, if Jesus did not rise from the dead, then Christianity is moot and should not be followed. This is the singular point in…

"God [..] it would be trivial for Him to raise Himself from the dead"

It would. But maybe he is crying for humanity as we slowly start yet another religion, costing us yet another two centuries to recover from. Why would a god even need a sacrifice? A very human notion I think.

"although this is generally covered in the Old Testament as well"

Jesus said pretty much the same thing, he says the golden rule is what the law of moses comes down to. But you don't have to look far to see that that is a bit too generous. I mean, stoning a woman if she is not a virgin at her wedding night? Stoning homosexuals? Allowing slaves? There is some horrible bronze age thinking codified in the old testament. Not to speak of the genocide and promise of more genocide in the future when Israel will rule and drink the blood of its enemies.

"The Holy Spirit is a person"

I would like to meet that person. Or watch him/her give a presentation on youtube. But I suppose you mean he is not flesh and blood, so not an actual person. Around 1900 there were many claiming to have an (heavier than air) airplane. You proof that by inviting the media and flying one. Not by handwaving or reasoning.

"Jesus died for our sins, and He gives us power to live new lives in freedom."

How? I mean that literally. How does he deliver you from sin? You mean here on earth? Or only in heaven? If it has an impact here on earth, then isn't that just an idea that delivers you from sin? The idea that you can be forgiven, and that others will forgive you? Just because we sin sometimes, doesn't make us sinners. If that were true, than doing good sometimes would make us all saints. It is a mix of both at the same time. And we can be forgiven, by others and by ourselves. Start over, learn, try to do better.

"Without meaning and significance life is a cruel joke!"

I understand the sentiment. But it is not about the destination, it is about the journey, it is about who you meet, what you learn, what you teach. We are connected to so many people, and in our connectedness, we are more then the sum of our individuality.

Some people are born in poverty, suffer for lack of food and health, and maybe abusive people around them. Their lives are short and brutal, like so many lives in the past. Will there be some cosmic justice? It is a nice idea but it is unlikely. The only faint flicker of hope is that they have ceased to exist, that their suffering is now over.

We should take their lives to heart, make sure it happens the least amount of times possible. By living the way Jesus told us, not because something supernatural exists, not because then you go to heaven, but because that ends cruel joke of life, and turns it into something worth living.

As to Pascals wager, he was a mathematician, and the chance is good he is spending eternity in hell. Around 2 against 1. Just not the christian hell, but the hell of any of the other religions.

Or maybe he is now in heaven, but it is hell to him, because by believing he signed his life away in the service of god and his army. And god is indeed this cruel dictator, the North Korea of the heavenly realms. An ending that fits the old testament much better ... a cruel joke indeed.

And that brings us full circle. How can you know the difference between bronze age thinking, dictatorial propaganda, or a loving god?

Re: Can Evolution Have a ‘Higher Purpose’?

Re: Can Evolution Have a ‘Higher Purpose’?