The Left Doesn’t Know If We’re Animals Or Not
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
When Donald Trump’s controversial “animals” tweet hit the news, I really had to wonder what the fuss was all about. Secularists have been calling everyone animals for a long time. Not every secularist, of course, but a lot of them, including some with considerable influence. It leaves room to wonder whether any of them really know what they’re talking about.
I had just started reading Richard Weikart’s book The Death of Humanity and the Case for Life at that time. One chapter deals with this humans-as-animals theme in depth. (Here are the articles he’s written for The Stream.)
It goes back a long, long way, as Weikart explains it. Following the 1859 publication of Darwin’s Origin of the Species, one of Darwin’s “leading German apostles” said Darwin had unveiled to us that humans “a natural product like any other creature.” Animals, in essence.
Evolution Means We Really Are Just Animals
It makes sense, really. If Darwin were right, and if we’re products of the same evolutionary processes as every other organism, what makes us any different from them? Nothing.
If you learned about “higher” evolved creatures in school, your science teacher taught you wrong. If evolution is a purely unguided natural process, then it isn’t progressing in any particular direction, not up, not down, not sideways or anything at all. It knows nothing about “higher.”
Humans have no right to claim we’re anything special. We’re animals. That’s straight evolutionary teaching.
So the transition from apes to humans wasn’t from lower to higher, just from one animal to another. Humans have no right to claim we’re anything special. We’re animals. That’s straight evolutionary teaching.
Some evolutionary thinkers have understood that. Unsurprisingly, most of them are atheists or secularists. Biblical thinking leads another direction, as we’ll see shortly.
Secularists Who Get It
Facebook Live Next Tuesday!
I’ll be interacting on this topic live by video next week on The Stream’s Facebook page — Tuesday, June 5, at 8 pm Eastern time, in the 6th edition of “Contentious Questions (Because some questions are just that way).”
Bring your questions, your comments, and your friends. Share this around social media. I’ll look forward to being with you there then.
Weikart tells of David Strauss, a mid-19th century German theologian famous for his highly influential writings — now discredited — undermining the gospel accounts of Jesus. An avid follower of Darwinism, Strauss “argued that humans were not distinct from animals.”
But we need not reach back so far into history. Princeton University philosopher Peter Singer said in a 2004 interview, “All we are doing is catching up with Darwin. He showed in the nineteenth century that we are simply animals.”
The London Zoo in August 2005 featured a four day exhibit of homo sapiens in its primate area. Weikart quotes a spokesperson: “Seeing people in a different environment, among other animals, teaches members of the public that the human is just another primate.” One of the “primates” on display was a 26 year-old chemist, who said, “A lot of people think humans are above other animals. When they see humans as animals here, it kind of reminds us that we’re not that special.”
The Copenhagen zoo had presented a similar exhibit 9 years earlier, and the Adelaide zoo followed with a month-long human exhibit in 2007.
Scientists at the Texas Academy of Science gave University of Texas, Austin evolutionary ecologist Eric Pianka a standing ovation for his 2006 speech suggesting it would be good for the world if something like the Ebola virus would wipe out 90 percent of humans. Humans are no better than bacteria, he said.
But When Trump Said It…
A lot of them objected when Trump said members of MS-13 were “animals.” They thought he was saying “These people are sub-human.” He said it only metaphorically, and it was to their political advantage to ignore that. Trump can’t get away with calling anyone an animal metaphorically, while secular thought leaders can — and do — call everyone literally animals.
Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »
Yet I find something heartening in their inconsistency. It shows they understand somewhere deep inside that we’re not mere animals after all; that we really can claim to be something higher. Evolution gives no basis for thinking that — yet we all know it’s true anyway.
Meanwhile we’ve got to hold on to humanness. That’s getting harder these days. The animal issue is only one piece of it. “Transhumanism” says we’re about to “evolve” into something else, and soon. The euthanasia movement denies the essential dignity of human life, making function or comfort the higher value.
Abortion proponents can’t deny that an unborn child is a unique human life, so they resort to saying that being human isn’t what matters; one has to be a “person,” which is apparently one step up from being human. Or down; since courts and legislatures around the world are now granting “human” rights to rivers and such.
Hold On to Humanness
Some secular people truly want to be genuinely human. There’s only one way we can hold on to humanness. Just one way. That’s knowing we’re specially created by God, in His image, for a special purpose given to no other animal.
Nature has no power to do that. But God can, and the Scriptures tell us clearly He has.
Tags
Who is online
64 visitors
“Scientists at the Texas Academy of Science gave University of Texas, Austin evolutionary ecologist Eric Pianka a standing ovation for his 2006 speech suggesting it would be good for the world if something like the Ebola virus would wipe out 90 percent of humans. Humans are no better than bacteria, he said.
But When Trump Said It…
A lot of them objected when Trump said members of MS-13 were “animals.” They thought he was saying “These people are sub-human.” He said it only metaphorically, and it was to their political advantage to ignore that. Trump can’t get away with calling anyone an animal metaphorically, while secular thought leaders can — and do — call everyone literally animals.
Yet I find something heartening in their inconsistency. It shows they understand somewhere deep inside that we’re not mere animals after all; that we really can claim to be something higher. Evolution gives no basis for thinking that — yet we all know it’s true anyway.
Meanwhile we’ve got to hold on to humanness. That’s getting harder these days. The animal issue is only one piece of it. “Transhumanism” says we’re about to “evolve” into something else, and soon. The euthanasia movement denies the essential dignity of human life, making function or comfort the higher value.
Abortion proponents can’t deny that an unborn child is a unique human life, so they resort to saying that being human isn’t what matters; one has to be a “person,” which is apparently one step up from being human. Or down; since courts and legislatures around the world are now granting “human” rights to rivers and such.
Hold On to Humanness
Some secular people truly want to be genuinely human.”
And she is right. He is an animal, just like me, you, Gordy, Lenny, etc.. Humans are ANIMALS....just like dogs, cats, moles, honey badgers, coyotes, bears.....etc...
They why did she condemn Trump for using the same term on MS-13?
@ AnaNavarro accuses President Trump of "dehumanizing people" by referring to "animals" during a discussion on immigration: "It's what the Nazis did. It's what slave owners did. It's not what Americans do," she says, advising him to "measure his words"
I get the impression we are talking about two different things here. You are trying to push the conversation towards a political discussion. I am talking about the literal definition of an animal, which is what ALL humans are.
Yes, we are according to biological classification part of the Animal Kingdom.
Claims that Trump was making a scientific statement in regards to human and animal life on the planet is moronic and dishonest.
Who made that claim? Why would you even imply that anyone did when clearly he did not. He was rightly saying that MS-13 were animals in their criminal behavior. I’m no longer a never Trump and I didn’t support Hillary when I was one.
Oh I have no doubt that Trump was not using the word animals in a scientific manner. I am absolutely positive he was using it in an insulting manner implying that a person is less than human.
Scientifically speaking, humans are animals. We're members of the animal kingdom, H. Sapiens. That's simple scientific fact. Of course, from a metaphorical or even emotional standpoint, calling people "animals" usually has the intent of insult or denigration behind it.
Usually yes, But when your partner says you're a tiger or a tigress in the bedroom I take it that's ok ?
Now that's when its ok to be called an animal.
good. I was correct then, I never considered it as an insult.
lol
I categorically deny the whole absurd theory that we in any way came from apes 🦍 or any other created creature. We were specially made in the image of our creator, the One in the Declaration of Independence says we are all equal before and who gave us our human rights.
I dont deny that anything is correct cause I dont know for sure BUT, I've always questioned total evolution. Some evolvement yes. Creatures "evolve" or adapt. But as far as I know what is here alive now was also mostly alive for thousands of years at least. If the one celled organism evolved, why do we still have them ? Are we still evolving ? If so sometimes I could use a few more hands.
Deny all you want. It doesn't make you right. It only makes you look foolish. Especially since no theory says we come from apes. Such a statement is just a demonstration of ignorance of a theory, or science in general. And prove your claim we were made in the image of some "creator!" While you're at it, prove there is such a thing as a "creator!"
Evolution typically involves timescales on the order of many thousands, if not millions of years, and in response to the environment. Evolution explains why there is such large biodiversity, from single cell organisms to more complex species like humans.
I know, But, to me it doesn't explain WHY everything works together and is needed for the overall good of the earth, the environment and ultimately us.
PS: I'm a deist. I believe in GOD "Whether that be a force, an entity, or a being" I believe GOD created.. "GOD arranged the atoms to be what everything is" I dont believe GOD wrote a "Rule Book" (the bible) or has "his hand" on any or every human's everyday life. I also believe organisms "evolve" and adapt.
Weird eh ?
Evolution doesn't deal with the environment itself. Only how an organism responds to an environment. Many organisms can tolerate and even thrive in environments that might otherwise be hostile to other organisms, and vice versa. Adaptation to the environment is what drives the evolutionary process.
I give !!! lol
Exactly. In a MUCH more simple explanation of that fact, "that's why polar bears have white fur".
You can deny it all you want, it doesn't make it any less true. The amount of DNA we share with other mammals is proven science.
Some percentages of DNA we share with other animals:
Chickens: 60%
Cats: 90%, (and strangely enough, cats only share 82% of their DNA with dogs)
Cows: 80%
The common fruit fly: 80%
Chimpanzees: ~97%, (the range is 96-98%, depending on how it's calculated)
Humans: Humans have a variance of .5% in the DNA when compared to other humans, but never more than .5%.
Because they've adapted to their niche. Evolution doesn't have an end goal - it's not trying to make more complex organisms. Mutations randomly occur. Some are harmful, some are neutral, and some are adaptive to whatever environment that species inhabits. Those which are adaptive get passed on. There is nothing that dictates that becoming more complex is always adaptive.
I'd say it does and that "End Goal" is survival.
That's called the teleological fallacy. Science specifically avoids the question, "why?" That's because it presupposes that there's a force or agent that's beyond testing or lacks "falsifiability" as the scientific term puts it.
Why ? Why then do organisms evolve or adapt ? to smell prettier ? lol
Adaptation or evolving seems to be a matter of survival by adaptation to a changing or changed environment or too adapt the species to better function within that environment. I'm not aware that things change or evolve to push the organism closer to death. it seems to be the other way around.
There is no motivation to adapt. They just do, as a result of chance. Some changes are actually harmful, and those organisms either don't survive, or don't pass on those mutations. Were they trying to go extinct? Or were they the losers in a game of chance?
You're anthropomorphizing evolution - giving it motive. It doesn't have one. It just is.
Exactly.
Adaptations are a totally random process and the successful ones are far outnumbered by the unsuccessful ones. The number of organisms that exist today is infinitessimally miniscule compared to all the ones which have come and gone over the past billion years.
That seems to suggest that a bacterium is thinking about its survival.
The need for survival may force random changes in an organism seeking to avoid extinction.
why would an organism need to think about survival to survive or evolve ? Does it need to think to reproduce as well ? Or does it need to think to consume what it need to survive at all ?
If they're forced by something, they're not random.
Also, some changes lead to extinction, not survival.
The "random" changes may be "options' "Experiments" or tries of adaptation, the ones that dont work may end in extinction of a species. The changes that do work propagate survival of that species.
Humans gave humans their rights, not "God".
You're implying either that organisms, or evolution, can consciously manipulate DNA. Organisms can't, and evolution is a process. It's inanimate, and has no consciousness nor intent.
I'm certainly not intending on implying anything like that. I believe organisms evolve or adapt by nature seeking life.
Then you have no rights. What a human can give you a human can take away.
I have the right to disagree with you. I have all the rights my secular society says I legally have. I have literally no idea what you are driving at here. If you can prove that "God" gave humans their rights, by all means, prove it.
For now but what happens if there is a change in society and it decides you no longer have that right?
What happens if an asteroid the size of Mt. Everest slams into the Earth? What happens if the sun explodes? What happens if the next plague wipes out every human on Earth? What happens if frogs develop wings?
I can do this all day.... But to answer your question? Will God swoop down from the heavens and establish that I DO have the right to disagree with you? Nope. Again, humans gave humans rights, not God. And like I said, prove otherwise. We'll wait.
Well, I would hope that we would be able to order frog wings at the bar for one thing.
true and human take away other humans "rights" daily. Imprisonment takes away almost all a persons rights. GOD doesn't interfere.
Personally if it is at all possible that's where I part company with the society (country).
Not according to our founding fathers or our national founding document. I’ll take their position on the issue of where our rights come from over yours.
Exactly!
human take away other humans "rights" daily. Imprisonment takes away almost all a person's rights. GOD doesn't interfere.
So does GOD give each of us rights and then allow the right of one human to remove the rights from another human ? yep
With that I agree.
IMO we have free will (rights) and if we so desire (will) many times in many ways we have the means to end the freedom of others free will.
Although the actions we take may end our own free will or rights of free will by yet other humans.
So our right to freewill is controlled by other humans to a degree. Given perhaps by God, controlled at least to a degree by humans.
In America at least you do not have a right to do whatever the hell ya want. We have laws governing it. Man made laws.
Most of the founding fathers were Deists, not Christians. Nice try. Can you prove that God gave humans rights? Yes or no? Not a tough question.
The fact that they penned, "freedom of religion", and nothing past that pretty much proves they didn't want religion in our government. If they believed that God spoke to them directly, you would think they would have developed a theocracy....but they didn't. Wonder why?
That comment was extremely painful to read.
That's a fundamental misunderstanding of how evolution works and you also misunderstand that evolution is about populations not individual creatures per se. Random genetic changes in an individual are the sort of thing which causes cancer and kills it. There's no "seeking" of anything and no intentionality involved.
Random genetic changes occur from one generation to the next, and perhaps in a very few cases mutations occur due to epigenetic expression in direct response to environmental pressure. But the end result is the same in that mutations which favor survival to the age of reproduction are more likely to persist in subsequent generations.....at least until the environmental pressures change again.
Organisum in my post is a single type of organism not an individual singular organism per se
Exactly right. We only have as many rights as we can secure for ourselves.
Got it.
The gaining of the knowledge to write it wasnt to pleasant either.
Now you're getting it. "Rights" is a societal development. Not some magical wish or spell.
Then we're screwed. Fortunately, people will often fight for rights.
While poetic, it's also meaningless unless said source of rights can be proven.
Yup i will fight if a man tries to take away my rights. My rights were not given to me by any man and no man may take them from me.
As the Declaration of Independence says my right are granted and given by my Creator (G o d)
As anyone would, or should.
You can keep believing that if it makes you feel better.
And if it said rights were granted by magical invisible fairies, you would believe that too? The DoI does not enumerate our rights. Neither does it state or specify "God."
Break the law, and you'll battle the cops to stop from being thrown in jail? Good luck with that one, let us know how it turns out.
Cops will be on my side.
Spicy hot wings too. Great with beer on game night. Perhas a side of nachos too.
Not exactly. Evolution is about adaptation to the environment. Survival is just the benefit of successful adaptation. The fossil record is replete with organisms and species that have gone extinct because they couldn't adapt.
So, the "goal" is adaptation to the environment ? And successful adaptation results in life where unsuccessful adaptation results in death. How is the ultimate goal then not survival of life ?
you may find a cop on your side when breaking a law to prove your point of "your rights" But personally, I wouldn't chance it.
The goal of a species is survival. Evolution is just a progress from successful adaptation to the environment.
................... Got ya. Understood. I agree.
Or from another standpoint, species like sharks which haven't changed much in hundreds of millions of years are optimally adapted to their environment and their environmental niche hasn't changed much in a very long time.
Or from another standpoint, species like sharks which haven't changed much in hundreds of millions of years are optimally adapted to their environment and their environmental niche hasn't changed much in a very long time.
..................................................
good points and nice example .
Question, wonder where we fit into this realization ?
Are we "optimally adapted to our environment" ?
I'd say humans have adapted the environment to us, not so much the other way around, for good or ill. But altering the environment may still spur evolutionary changes in humans. It will be interesting to see how we progress over the next several thousand years.
Good point After your initial statement that popped to mind. I agree.
It's kind of like a reverse evolutionary process (not to be confused with devolution). Normally, organisms evolve in response to natural environmental changes. With humans, we may evolve because we adapt the environment. Of course, this may affect other species as well. In other words, the environment changes organisms, but humans change the environment.
the environment changes organisms, but humans change the environment ... the environment changes humans and humans change the environment and it all changes organisms.
Regardless of how the environment changes, or is changed, the end result is the same.
How about super predators?
Do you have a point?
Prove that he doesn’t have one...
I Didnt say he didn't have a point. I asked what his point was. He's the one trying, I assume, to make a point. I'm still waiting for it. Or at the very least, a clarification would be nice. Besides, considering you can't even prove any of the BS claims you make, you're hardly in any position to demand proof of anything yourself.
It wasn't a point. It was a question.
Do you not understand what a question mark is?
The reference was to give you an example of where the term super predator was used just incase you didn't know.
The question was, do you have a point (I thought that was clear)? Especially since Hillary Clinton is not the topic of discussion.
You sure do have a hard time at understanding don't you.
I asked you if you felt the same way about someone calling a class of people super predators as you felt so offended that President Trump called gang members animals.
Hillary was the reference to the term being used not the subject.
Guess I'm done with you if you can't answer the question I posed to you but instead can only spin and sputter a bunch of nonsense.
Have a nice day.
Sometimes it’s best to just walk away rather than continue down a particular path.
I guess Strawman arguments is all you have to offer.
All life is interrelated. All life forms share a common ancestor. We have a common ancestor with vegetation let alone the other great apes. This is an undeniable fact, conclusively proven with modern genetic knowledge. The only way all life can share a common ancestor is if it all evolved from simple, early organisms.
Arguing against proven facts will do nothing but discredit any hypothesis you wish to espouse. Human beings are part of the earth's biosphere, like every other biological life form, we KNOW this. Just fit your god into the gaps like god believers have been doing for our entire human history.
Or if we were all formed by the same force, entity or being that could explain it as well.
I call it "Created by GOD". Many others do as well.
Did god kickstart life? Perhaps. Perhaps an actual being put the strands of RNA in the primordial oceans that morphed into the DNA that formed the first organisms. Congratulations Steve, you are properly fitting god into the gaps in our knowledge, but understand the history of doing this.
Throughout man's history, everything we did not understand has always been contributed to god. Early humans understood next to nothing about our planet, so hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, floods, droughts, pestilence, destructive fires, volcanoes, day, night, tides, EVERYTHING was attributed to a magical, angry being that we needed to placate with total subservience. As we gained knowledge, we discovered the real explanations behind these phenomena and god belief took one step back after another, again, and again, and again.
One of the latest steps back was over heliocentricity. Staunch god believers were the last to accept that the earth and planets orbited the sun, and no wonder, the bible describes the earth as flat, stationary, and supported on pillars. Today the fight is over evolution, and many religions are already accepting it, soon, all will have to in order to have any credibility at all, and god belief will step back yet again.
Does any of this 'prove' there is no god? Well, no, you can't really prove a negative, but after being so wrong, so many times, for so many centuries, you would think the god believers would just SHUT UP! Happy Sunday Stevo...
you can't really prove a negative true so I dont try to prove there is NO GOD. I also can not prove there is a GOD.
From what I observe and know, logically it appears the earth at least has an overall design of matter working together for the benefit of the whole. To me that signifies there just may be something beyond what we know and that something could be what I refer to as my GOD, My God is simple defined by whatever arranged to atoms to be what they are.
No more no less.
The same being that created the earth, the plants, trees, the birds and fish and all the mammals and reptiles also created us. The difference is He spoke the rest into being while He hand made us in his image and breathed life into us. Everything has being created by God in common. Only mankind though was created in His image.
The being you can't prove exists?
Sorry HA, but man created God in his own image, obviously.
says who ? The book written by men we call the bible ? I'd like to see their source(s) please. No, I'd actually prefer to see actual proof. Thanks.
And in order for me to accept any of that you must first demonstrate the existence of this god. Until you can perform that, most basic step, I will continue to disregard anything that follows.
Yep the same one we can't proof that it does.
What a bitch eh ? I agree.
So I dont try much, I'm secure in my beliefs and dont see much benefit of trying to convince others of them so why bother ?
Still waiting for you o prove that nonsense. No surprise that you can't and that you repeatedly dodge the challenge.
There won’t be any proof. People will believe by faith and be saved by grace or they won’t. We will all make a free will choice to believe by faith and be saved to eternal life or not believe and demand proof as a precondition of faith, thus having none and thus not be saved. .
Since you admit you can't prove anything, then your claims and statements lack all merit and you lack all credibility.
We will all find out on judgement day the truth of the matter.
'judgement day?' Really? And the 'judgement would be...…………………….just what exactly?
Mere absurd speculation based on nothing but personal belief. Epic fail as usual.
It is an unshakable personal belief based on faith. Some will believe. Some will not. All will hear the message before the end. All will believe or not, when the 2nd coming happens. For those demanding proof and chosing not to believe without it, that event will be the only proof they will receive and it will come after it’s too late to believe based on faith.
You have chosen not to believe and that is your right to make that choice. That being said, you are not the only one here, member or casual reader, so your non belief does not preclude believers reaching out to others who are open minded on whether God exists or not.
I didn't "choose" anything. I'm simply incapable of "believing" or accepting empty claims without evidence or proof. Especially when such claims are espoused as factual or true. To believe such nonsense without proof would be intellectually lazy, dishonest, irrational, and/or self delusional. While you may reach out to others who may be on the fence regarding god, I'll do the same and expose them to logic and reasoning over myth and superstition.
Still just dogmatic nonsense with no basis in fact or reality. You can believe whatever you want. But belief does not equal fact. It's quite irrational and dishonest to pretend it does, especially when you can't offer anything of substance to support it. And being unable to prove your brand of BS certainly doesn't make your statement compelling or worthy of any serious consideration.
Not everyone has the genetic defect which causes superstition.
You’ve undoubtedly read my thoughts on GOD what if I were to tell you I know more.
I don’t have any proof but I know for sure that GOD did (removed for content) and the only way to life after death was to (removed for content) would you believe me ? O and I’ll write it down for the whole world to see for ever more.
That’s how I feel about organized religion and the bible. I’ve read the bible, the Book of Mormon and parts of the Koran. Many good and moral stories and a whole bunch of men seemingly trying to manipulate each other in GOD’s name.
I asked myself, That’s GOD’s rule book to mankind ? When it created everything else ? It left that most important instrument showing the way to salvation in man hands ? Why ?
As you can see I don’t really know anymore than I previously stated I believe. But, I also don’t believe anyone alive does for sure. Including the men who wrote the religious books.
Respectfully, just my humble opinion. Thanks for reading it, Steve
PS: HA.. after writing this I dont know wether to delete it or post it. Honestly, it hit me as I was rereading it, I am not in the habit of doing anything to purposely ask anyone to question their faith, I just dont do that. Here I find myself doing it.
Considering it is already written and we have been sharing our beliefs for a time here and you are surely well set in what you believe I'm sure a few words from me isn't going to make a difference so.. I think I will make this exception.
Steve
Gordy, Do you know anyone who can prove why and/or how the earth and it's inhabitants are here without a shadow of a doubt ?
I sure dont.
I also dont see anywhere anyone can prove with out a shadow of a doubt most theories explaining it either. Including the theory of a force, an entity or a being arranging or "creating" everything.
Personally I really haven't ruled anything out positively because I simply do not know for sure.
However, to each their own.
We as a species are here because of evolution. That's not in doubt. Scientific theories like evolution doesn't seek to prove, but rather establish a degree of certainty. But establishing a degree of certainty is a far cry from baseless claims or belief, which has no established certainty.
The beauty of my GOD is, it still fits. Whatever (I call it GOD) arranged the atoms to be everything doesn't necessitate that all the atoms are or were all arranged at one time.
therefor evolution is not excluded
A "force" is included in the whatever, even. Whatever arranged the atoms = is what I call GOD.
For that matter evolution could be GOD, or GOD could be evolution. I dont know, I barely care.
I just believe and say, "Whatever arranged the atoms to be what everything is, is what I call GOD."
It may help to look at it like this, my GOD is not what most people consider GOD to be. I attach NO other "explanations" or knowledge beyond what I believe. No "rules" and NO misconceptions or expectations. Just
"Whatever arranged the atoms to be what everything is, is what I call GOD." period
And I move on to enjoy my life. Wrong or right.
Thanks for reading and the conversation. Thankfully we all have the right to believe whatever we choose.
to each their own. Somewhere out there is the reality of it all. Perhaps time will tell. Perhaps.. not.
Whether you as one devout atheist person gives serious consideration or cares what I believe is of no concern to me. I’m going to comment no matter what kind of contemptuous snark you put up in reply. You are clearly lost to us as a potential believer for now but many others are not. I don’t deny or hide that our beliefs are faith based and that those who demand hard proof as a condition of belief prior to the second coming will not get it. Of course the great deceiver will impersonate Jesus at the end times and many not knowing God before hand will believe that deception and become the greatest persecutors of actual believers since the inquisition.
Works both ways.
I never said you couldn't comment.
I was never a believer, potential or otherwise.
You can stick to belief and superstition. I'll stick to logic and facts.
Which is why neither I nor anyone else has any reason to take you or your claims seriously.
Such nonsense like that is another reason why you're not to be taken seriously too.
You can mock a believers beliefs to the end of time and it simply won’t matter. We will persist in them and express them to all willing to listen. You and others will be skeptics and deniers to the end of time.
I'll only be a skeptic or denier until you provide proof of your claims, especially those based on religion. Anyone who is intellecually honest or logical would. After all, if someone made an outrageous claim for something, you would want proof or evidence for it, right? So why should religious based claims or beliefs get a free pass in that regard?
In all fairness, that isn't likely to happen before the end of time, so HA is likely right, but more due to the weakness of his case than to our intransigence.
Oh I know it's not likely to happen, just as it's not likely to happen that I will rationally accept any if his claims at face value because he has no proof. Neither should anyone else if they're intellectually honest enough.
A faith based personal relationship with God is not an excercise in how much one knows. Lots of people have Book knowledge of God but no personal relationship with Him.
It's an exercise in irrationality and/or delusion. You can't even prove your god exists so the idea you can have a "relationship" is logically absurd. It's like a child saying they have a relationship with their imaginary friend. Yet no one takes such claims seriously and even thinks the child is being cute or silly. But when an adult does it, that's somehow different?
Oh ye of so little faith......
You act like faith without reason is a good thing.
It's not.
That's right! I prefer logic and reasoning over mere faith. Faith is just wishful thinking.
It is. I believe that there is enough circumstantial evidence out there to justify the having faith in religious belief and that there is a God as a reasonable option that people can logically follow.
Well, you have very low standards for what you consider evidence and logical, but since you don't need evidence, anyway.
There's an article about God speaking to a couple through a teddy bear. They appear to have great faith. Will you be making a pilgrimage?
You realize that you are not just questioning me here. You are challenging the intellectual honesty and emotional sanity of every believer of every theistic religion on the planet from Islamics to Hindu, to Jew to Christian. Even that of believers in the older pagan religions. Even that of your fellow progressives who happen to be observant Jews or liberal Protestant or Catholic.
As do you, when you reject their gods and prophets.
There is no evidence for any god. There's only belief for one. But belief does not equal fact. And there's nothing logical about wishful thinking like mere belief or thinking god/s exist, especially when there is no evidence for one.
So? That's just an argumentum ad populum. My statement still stands.
As does mine. Go ahead and question the intelligence and sanity of around 80% of the earths population.
As I said, yours is an argumentum ad populum, as is your following statement too.
Dam right I do! How can one not when so many irrationally believe in god/s they can't even prove exists.
True. We are animals. We just happen to be at the top of the food chain.
In the wild I'll bet there are some big bad wild animals who would disagree with that whom I wouldn't want to argue with about it. Some smaller ones as well, including some viruses and insects.
Of course. I am not suggesting that a human can go toe to toe with a 1,300 pound grizzly bear and win, nor would I suggest jumping in the ocean with a great white shark and 5 of his 2 ton buddies. But evolution has given us humans the ability to reason, rationalize and out think creatures many times our size. We have the ability to create too, as in weapons that more than level the playing field with regards to sharks and bears. It's though evolution that our intellect has become what it is today and what puts humans at the top of the food chain. And thank goodness for that because I bet life towards the bottom of the food chain SUCKS.
And that equalizing force is our intellect. Down and dirty example? Bee keepers. Wear clothing that is thick enough, or has small enough holes which prevent the bee's from stinging them.
when faced with an out of control bear in the wild I'd trade my intellect for a bear rifle anytime.
lol
What is goodness and where did it come from?
IMO: Goodness is a term describing a interpretation. We "classify' using terms like goodness, badness, horrible, great, all describing an interpretation of how the individual sees what they consider reality. Goodness it's a great day.
Where did it come from? mankind.
The rifle was created with human intellect, and requires human intellect to operate. That's kind of the whole point Steve, we even dominate animals much more powerful than ourselves. That's not to say we win in EVERY situation, but we rule.
true but I dont have time to "intellectually" instantly produce that protection equalizer. I'd better have one with me instead of just my intelect to "imagine" it.
We're splitting hair here and its been fun but I must run.
lol thanks
You seriously don't know the difference between the words, "good", and, "bad"?
Of course HA doesn't. By definition whatever his sky fairy does is "good" (like murdering all the innocent first-born sons of Egypt), and whatever it says is bad is therefor "bad" (like treating women with the same rights as men, or gays with the same rights as straights).
Of course I do. Good is from God and bad is the manifestation of the evil one, Satan.
That's nice. Prove it! Besides, what has Satan done that is so "bad," especially compared to the evils god has committed?
Prove it.
Human beings are a type of ape. I don't think a person even needs science to tell them this. Ever watched apes at the zoo, or video clips of apes in the wild, interacting with other apes and their children? It's startling how human-like they are.
We are a furless ape with weak upper bodies and huge heads that hold a highly developed brain. Humans have the most difficult childbirth of any animal, due to our huge heads. Let that sink in for a minute. We are not so intelligent because "god' created us, we are simply the animal with the most highly developed brain. The only reason we believe in a god and an afterlife is that we are able to conjure up these ideas in our minds. Other animals can just be.
Anyone who doubts the fact of evolution should read read "The Ancestors Tale" by Richard Dawkins. Life got going on Earth early on and has survived many extinction events.
Dawkins rocks, he is very good at explaining complex things in simple terms.
Clearly you have never met my brother.
Lol, my buddy Ken kind of casts doubt on that too!
Me too, that's why I shave daily...lol
My son, too. At 14, no less.
The reason I believe in GOD is I believe the universe, the earth and even everything on earth work together to integently and too well to be anything short of a "designed" world.
Whatever designed the earth and everything by arranging the atoms to be all that is, is what I consider to be what others call GOD. For me God is nothing more or less until proven to me to be otherwise. So far I see No proof of anything else and shaky proof of what I do believe of GOD at this point even at best.
But I dont see how the magnificence of organization and cooperation of the planet's nature and life is all just one big damn accident !
So I'm left with whatever "caused" earth and its inhabitants MAY have arranged it as well. right or wrong, that is what I call GOD.
Classic theistic argument that puts the cart before the horse. There is life on earth, BECAUSE the conditions happen to be right for it here.
So who or what made this "god"? And if it doesn't need a first cause why would the universe need one?
Good question. Another god question is why is there anything.
Good questions I dont pretend to know the answers to. Do you ?
Nope, I just know that the notion of a "god" needlessly adds a layer of inexplicable and unexamined complexity, much like postulating that the universe was created by a committee of invisible pink unicorns who used PowerPoint presentations to hammer out the details.
Nope to me it simplifies everything.
It certainly a simplistic explanation which literally explains nothing. It's all just magic performed by an invisible sky fairy but ultimately that's not a satisfying explanation for anyone with the intellectual curiosity to look behind the curtain and ask what's the mechanism to that "magic", how it interacts with matter, and who pays the magician's salary.
I dont know What it is that I call GOD. To me it is whatever, could be "a force" (of nature) (of mathematical equations) (of chances) it could be "an entity" without mass, it could be a "spirit" it could be "a being" with a physical body.. Hell I have NO idea ( "a sky fairy" ) well perhaps however surely not necessarily. BUT simply whatever arranged the atoms of the universe to be all it is is what I call GOD. No more,no less.
That to me seems logical and simple. Beyond that: I dont know and dont believe any one alive does either. so why worry or fight, I'm secure in what I believe if others choose not to be or question me that's not really my concern I'm not required to have the answers.
I share what I believe and try to be open to new knowledge that either supports or refutes it.
However, to the best of my knowledge NO ONE has all the answers.
I have no problem with anyone who wants to do all the looking they desire. I just am not that interested in the whys and what fores I have other interests. but, to each their own.
That's somewhat synonymous with Spinoza's "god" which was the "god" of the Enlightenment.
I came to those "believes" on my own. After I had read the old testament, the new testament, the Book of Mormon and parts of the Koran, I asked myself what I BELIEVED ABOUT GOD. That is what I came up with.
Everything is made of atoms, Whatever arranged the atoms to be all they are is what I call GOD.
period
other than that I dont believe anyone alive knows anything more for sure. I also believe that if GOD (who arranged everything to be what it is) had wanted us to have a "Rule Book" IT would have written IT and not left it up to falibal man to do so.
years later I discovered about the closest "Religion" I saw was diest. So I figure that's what I am.
To me the issue depends on the whys. Why would god create a person to have free will if all he wants is obedience. That makes no logical sense at all, unless this god entity is a small child playing with his toys. Even the idea of freewill is limited...Try willing yourself to sprout wings. Free will is a lie in that in order to have value to this god, one has to do what one is told. The map for eternal life is included. Seems ridiculously unnecessary to have any human have to prove themselves worthy when that entity is supposed to be all knowing and all powerful creator of said humans.
All in all the ID idea doesn't work for me either. That leads to all sorts of questions. Like why would we need to age or eat, sleep etc. An intelligent designer would most likely eliminate unnecessary functions or features like pain, humiliation, death. What do these features add to to the process of making people obey?
The older I get the more goofy the concept of god or intelligent design becomes to me. Religion seems to be a tool to keep people in line rather than to serve an all powerful entity.
Humans are animals, specifically we are apes.
And we're primates. Meet my cousin the Loris.
LOL Well freak everyone out will ya ? LOL
Here's a couple of untouched real pictures of the "beast" I had to go see....lol
Cute little venomous buggers, aren't they?
Yep until someone photo shops in a third eye then they are freaking looking as all get out. LOL That damn picture took me by surprise and my jaw probably even dropped. I had to check it out to see.. my minds going.... that cant be fuckin real... it wasn't. !!! LOL
lol woo thankfully, natures weird enough as I know it
You did get my attention that's for damn sure.....lol