• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

Wildswanderer

Veteran Member
Besides, we don't expect to see naturalisitic abiogenesis happen except in the laboratory. Why? Because abiogenesis occurs over eons, and probably requires a sterile environment, as other life would be consuming and disturbing the ingredients before they became cells.
Total speculation without a shred of evidence. Again it's your religion.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Explain the difference because unbelievers that see Paul and Jesus having a different message shows a lack of understanding of the Scriptures and the Gospel.
It is funny that most of the comments about God and the Scriptures from unbelievers are twisted.
Is that really the case or just your beliefs? I don't think you fully understand exegesis. You appear to make the mistake of assuming that your version of the Bible is the correct one and all that comes from that is confirmation bias. You never did define exegesis in your own terms.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Well we aren’t talking about that as you well know, I hope. Why aren’t we 100% in executing what we know is the right thing to do?

Because we have multiple different motivations, arising from different drives. We have the drive to be social, which can be good in making us inclined to help people, but bad in making us value social standing above other things. We can be hungry, which means we are more inclined to grasp at what we want even if it is unfair in other ways. We are fearful of instability, which makes us less likely to tolerate the freedoms of others. We have a goal to have and raise families, which can lead to competition and putting ourselves and loved ones above others who may be more deserving.

Is this not obvious?

What has this to do with deities?
 
Because we have multiple different motivations, arising from different drives. We have the drive to be social, which can be good in making us inclined to help people, but bad in making us value social standing above other things. We can be hungry, which means we are more inclined to grasp at what we want even if it is unfair in other ways. We are fearful of instability, which makes us less likely to tolerate the freedoms of others. We have a goal to have and raise families, which can lead to competition and putting ourselves and loved ones above others who may be more deserving.

Is this not obvious?

What has this to do with deities?
Has a lot to do with how the Bible explains what happened in the Garden, the curse and punishment we inherited and participated in rebelling against God. Explains why we cannot do the right thing sometimes even when we know we should. If it was natural selection you would think by now human beings would be able to do what we should 100% of the time.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Has a lot to do with how the Bible explains what happened in the Garden, the curse and punishment we inherited and participated in rebelling against God. Explains why we cannot do the right thing sometimes even when we know we should. If it was natural selection you would think by now human beings would be able to do what we should 100% of the time.

On the contrary, it is natural selection that gives us so many different drives, all of which have to be managed. Plus, the fact that some drives are beneficial now, while others were beneficial 200 years ago and still others were beneficial 1000 years ago. Natural selection is trying to hit a moving target.

Also don't forget that the types of society we now live in are quite different than those that existed 2000 years ago and those were quite different than those 10000 years ago and those were quite different than those 50000 years ago. We evolved in an environment that is quite different than the one in which we now live.
 
On the contrary, it is natural selection that gives us so many different drives, all of which have to be managed. Plus, the fact that some drives are beneficial now, while others were beneficial 200 years ago and still others were beneficial 1000 years ago. Natural selection is trying to hit a moving target.

Also don't forget that the types of society we now live in are quite different than those that existed 2000 years ago and those were quite different than those 10000 years ago and those were quite different than those 50000 years ago. We evolved in an environment that is quite different than the one in which we now live.
Then the other thing is our thought life and are you saying they all come from you?
Have to say natural selection hitting a moving target is funny, I thought it was in charge of the selection process and your wording is starting to sound like natural selection is somehow intelligent but not really a good shot.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Then the other thing is our thought life and are you saying they all come from you?

I could not make sense of this.

Have to say natural selection hitting a moving target is funny, I thought it was in charge of the selection process and your wording is starting to sound like natural selection is somehow intelligent but not really a good shot.

Actually, what happens is that the environment changes, meaning different mutations are beneficial, so the population changes.

Nothing is in charge' of which mutations will arise. And which will be beneficial or detrimental depends on the specifics of the environment. there is no intelligence 'selecting' other than simply what does and what does not survive.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Where do your thoughts come from? Are you saying they are all from you? Just chemical reactions

Well, *I* am a complex network of chemical reactions that collects and acts on information obtained from the environment via other chemical reactions.

My thoughts are the result of neural activity in my brain, but so is my sense of self. So, yes, we can say my thoughts come from me.

Saying they are 'just' chemical reactions tends to say they have no value, but value is one of the things that our brains evaluate. It is sort of like saying the Bible is 'just' a collection of words. This collection of chemical reactions has value *because* it is the sort of system that assigns value and it assigns value to itself and similar systems.
 
Last edited:
Top