Our money is spent in areas of need. Science is not one of those areas because the greatest Scientist in existence has given us all the information we need as to how it all came about.
Scripture gives us no useful information about how the world works, yet you claim that that is all you need to know - nothing. Nevertheless, you use the scientific knowledge provided by man as you are right now at your computer. What message do you suppose that sends?
Our personal interaction with him allows us to trust in his statements rather that to trust the ones who are trying to destroy our hope and this planet along with it.
I don't believe that you have a personal relationship with a god. Nor do I believe that anybody is trying to destroy your hope or the planet.
Natural disasters, largely due to human impact on our environment by oh so clever humans threatens our very existence.
I'll bet that there were earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, tornadoes, mudslides and tsunamis long before man arrived on the scene.
You have absolutely nothing good to say about mankind, do you.?
What role have Christians played in development of atomic weapons......raping the earth of its natural resources and polluting the air, water and food that is supposed to keep us healthy?
What role have Christians played in those activities? I imagine that their role is proportional to their numbers. The US is about 70-75% Christian now, so they play the biggest role there.
How complicit is science when it comes to the real possibility of our mass extinction?
Not complicit at all. Scientists develop information about reality. Governments and industry decide how it will be used.
You also have nothing good to say about science.
My preferred hypothesis is that our universe is the product of a multiverse that creates uncounted universes of every type possible, the reason being that it is the more parsimonious of the two hypothesis that can address the fine tuning argument, the other being a god hypothesis. The multiverse can generate a universe stable enough for matter, life, and mind to arise in it without invoking a conscious agent. You've dropped that hypothesis from your list of candidate explanations for the universe based on nothing more than your will to believe a different hypothesis
That is incorrect. My list of candidate hypotheses for the source of the universe has three element, gods being one of them. I have told you multiple times that I have not ruled gods out because I can't, just as you cannot rule them in without committing the logical fallacies I recently enumerated for you. There is no observation, experiment, algorithm, or any other method that can rule gods in or out, so I don't. That would be a leap of faith, and you know my thoughts on faith.
Abiogenesis is no further forward in explaining how life spontaneously appeared on earth, today than it was 20 years ago.
That is incorrect. Quite a bit of progress has been made in abiogenesis research. I'd share some of it with you, but I know that you have no interest in the subject except to berate it. If you were interested, you'd already be aware of the progress
You have as much of a belief system as I do.
We come to our beliefs by radically different methods. My beliefs are justified by reason applied to evidence. Your most fundamental belief from which your worldview derives is faith based, that is, unjustified and based only on the will to believe.
Atheism is not agnosticism....is it? It is a definite belief that God does NOT exist.
Atheism does not require the belief that there are no gods, and its the minority of atheists that make that claim. Most are agnostic atheists like me - atheists because we answer "No" when asked if we believe in a god or gods, and agnostics if we answer "I don't know" when asked if a god or gods exist.
No Christian can kill anyone in a pre-meditated act.
Sure they can. How many times do you want to repeat that? You keep telling me how you define Christian, and I keep telling you that your definition is not mine.
Which is why they cannot even join the military....because training to kill shows intent....there can never be intent.
Yet they do. I was once a Christian in the American army. They even have chaplains in the military to tend to the needs of religious soldiers, Christians included..
It is true that individual JWs and sometimes individual congregations will provide aid to other JWs but the WTS doesn't provide them with money nor do they reimburse them.
That's what I've read. Yet in the States, they get tax deductions that charities get, and probably a parsonage allowance.
In fact, many JWs have reported that the WTS has contacted them when they have received help in rebuilding from local congregations advising them that they should forward any insurance proceeds they might receive directly to the WTS for their general fund even though the Society itself provided nothing.
That's disgusting. And Deeje goes on about how greedy everybody else is. She points at the medical profession quite frequently, alleging that it exists only to extract as much money from patients as possible, which is untrue, but might apply to her religion. Modern medicine saves lives, preserves or increases function, and provides relief from unpleasant symptoms. If it disappeared from the world, the results would be costly.
Can the same be said about the Jehovah's Witnesses?
I was a Baha’i for about 42 years before I thought much about God and what God was.
That's surprising.