Here is a response to a blog “10 Reasons Why I”‘m not a Christian”
This will be good for you to read and study. Here is a link to his blog: http://hessianwithteeth.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/10-reasons-why-im-not-a-christian/#comments
The title of this blog is revelatory. Why, not ten reasons I’m not a pumpkin? Why Christianity? There are lots of other philosophies and religions to assail. The question isn’t what you aren’t or don’t want to be ,but what you are and a defense for that position. Definition requires terms outline what you believe. Maybe this is a document, a manifesto stating “I believe in Science” like Esceleto (Estaphan) in Nacho Libre.
It requires no reason to be prejudiced against Christianity…just say “I desire something else. “That is better than a series of poorly thought out excuses.
1) ID isn’t a closed case. Yes, many would like to close the issue but science can’t and does answer the question did God create or does he exist. It explains how things work through discovery. When they reach the end of what can be tested they make approximations of what things might be. Science quickly devolves to philosophy.
But they can not answer why things are as they are as they are. This isn’t a condemnation of science but recognition of its limitation. Read David Berlinski, “The Devil Delusion,” which demonstrates that science and it’s voices over state their case on the existence of God and are using science as a bully pulpit to promote a cause “atheism” which is out of their realm of expertise.
2) Contradiction? You are parroting. You haven’t studied and it shows. By the way, science is full of contradictions: string theory, relativity, quantum theory, Big Bang….cha cha cha. It isn’t a problem for me that there are. It is a journey of discovery, we expect this. But acting like they have proved something there isn’t a Creator is stretching it past the breaking point.
3) You have never seen an electron or a photon of light or a black hole or photosynthesis… So “if you haven’t seen it, it doesn’t exist “is a poor argument.
You prefer the idea of there not being God, Christianity and the like and choose to hide behind science but the problem is that, I can see you naked Mother Science’s translucent skirt.
4) Science is always in disagreement…this is a funny article. In the church most agree on most things, especially on the main things…and yes there are differences in other areas which shows there is diversity and not some monolithic overlord in the temporal church; there is freedom of inquiry and thought.
5) Oh yes you do need God to be God good! If “you” define “good”, you will always be good even if you change your mind. Defining “good” is the problem. You aren’t good to a Muslim or potentially a conservative or liberal or pick any other culture or subgroup. It depends on who is defining good and judging. Now to be “God good” you need himfor the message, the forgiveness and power (I know I’m speaking outside your revelatio, but I’ll give this to you anyway)…yeah, you need God…Go try to live out Matthew chapter 5 through 7 and Mathew 25…good luck! It is easy to say you could do it and never try. I call bullshit! If you think you can without God, then “put up or shut up!”
6) This one is funny…I can tell that you are plagiarizing ideas. Are you a “Dawkins Man”? That is “ok” we are all plagiarizing to some degree. But it is still good to think. The idea of worthiness is irrelevant. If he exists you will worship.Here is a parable: A guy walks do a dark alley, 5 thugs come up with guns and knives kick the guy to the curb and beat him within an inch of his life. There will be reverence next time he walks their turf. It is about authority and power. You are no different, when faced by a real power, you know what to do, you acquiesce, your tail between your legs , roll to your side exposing your neck, trying not to pee and beg for mercy.
Or maybe you are some Rambo or a Navy Seal type character….I just think you haven’t thought much about this, but it is hard when basking in the glory of Dawkins chanting “I’m not worthy, I’m not worthy…
7) Again, you apparently have not thought deeply about this or studied much. Did you have a Comparative Religions course in college? It sounds like it. Here is a start to your studies. If we take each religion at face value, I mean we accept what they say about their origins we have the following: Three saw angels while alone with no corroborating evidence. One is from animism (they tried to figure it all out and came up with their ideas until they were generally accepted.)
One had a personal revelation. Christianity is a sect of Judaism, an extension of, verified by the resurrection of Jesus in Jerusalem, executed by the mandate of Rome, in public. He was a well know figure. Those who followed him spread the message at great cost, even unto death proclaiming they had witnessed his resurrection as had been prophesied for thousands of years. Huh, not different.?..study, study, study…think, think, think…
8) The pride you condemn is ever present in your writing. People are people and when they think they are right they can get a little snarky. But this isn’t a proof. Your line of reasoning wouldn’t work in court. If you were a lawyer your client would be in trouble. “Your honor, the witness is cocky so what he says can not be believed as true!” oops…you would probably get a comedic laugh from the judge and jury.
9) It doesn’t matter what you think when dealing with the truth. It is what it is. It is like says “Ebola can’t be true because I do not like it!” That is simply ludicrous!
10) But have drawn a conclusion without much thought, great bias, it is emotional, illogical and inconclusive yet you stand where you are making a judgement about truth and have made your mind to repose in your position as if there are more consequences for believing than not.
This applies to science also. Scientists, or many, contrive a conclusion when they haven’ enough information to reject all possible solutions ID and a Creator. Actually much points toward this conclusion but much like yourself they do not like where it leads: submission to the Creator.
Again, this is not a good argument.
This is the schematic is simple 1) We all die 2) No one knows what will happen, if anything after death.3) Some say they know 4) Since we do not know we are stuck trusting someone. It seems you have rested your trust on a poorly thought out reasons and are resting on men/women without knowledge about this called scientists. They may be smart and they may possess knowledge of all sorts but the existence of God and they afterlife they know no more than you.
The bottom line is you like doing your thing without restrictions and if you can build a weak argument that will suffice to support you like a crutch till we see each other on the other side. Read The Venerators. Good luck!