Religious People are Not Stupid

[ecco]

They could deliberately never go to a library.

I wrote:

How can one willfully ignore that which could be known?​

I meant to write:

How can one willfully ignore that which could NOT be known?​

 

[ecco]

As far as that goes, very true. However the Bible is a different animal altogether than Shakespeare or Harry Potter.

How so? All were written by fallible humans.

​

A bold claim to be sure. I don't know of any other book that claims to be the power of almighty God. The scriptures are either foolishness or the power of God. It all depends on this thing called "being saved"

The key words being "claims to be the power of almighty God". That is an unsubstantiated claim.

In point of fact, many of the claims made in the OT are not only unsubstantiated, they have been proven false: Exodus, Great Flood, etc.

The NT gospels are written (sort of) as eye witness accounts. Matthew 5 begins:

And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:

2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,​

Matthew then quotes about 2000 words that he attributes to Jesus.
Who recorded the 2000 words that Matthew quotes Jesus as saying?

​

So unlike Harry Potter of Shakespeare, any understanding that comes from reading the Bible is very much dependent on the reader's attitude.

Attitude bears no relation to discerning between fact and fiction. One of the things required is an analysis of what is written and how the authors came upon the knowledge of their subjects.

ecco previously:
Why did omni-all god design them to fail to begin with?​

The same reason we don't tie our children to the bed for their entire life to prevent them from making mistakes. While such a tactic might work, it wouldn't be very loving. God gave us free will in the beginning

You are choosing to look at just the free will aspect. But God's design went beyond just giving man free will. God knew, long before creation, that with the conditions he set up, man would succumb to temptation. With His omniscience and omnipotence, he guaranteed it. He designed his creation to fail.

The analogy isn't tying kids to a bed. We don't know what will happen to kids given a range of circumstance. Omniscient god did know.

 

[ecco]

What do you mean following my body into the grave? My mind and body are one. There is no leading or following. When my mind stops working, my body stops working. I, like you, will cease to exist. That is reality. All your hopes and prayers cannot change the reality of nature. Ask yourself why you must deny this.

more like......

7billion copies of a learning device....
and they all end up as dust?

no continuance?

not one chance in billions?

Huh?

 

[rrobs]

Thank you. Although the observer or tester will affect the outcome of a specific quantum state, this is already factored into the math. I'm afraid Quantum Mechanics/Quantum Theory is not the best example I would have chosen to illustrate my point. Of all the established Theories in science, it would've been my last choice. The Theories and principles of Quantum Mechanics are the most accurate, and the most tested of all the Theories in science. In the quantum world we are talking about probabilities, wave mechanics, and the uncertainty principle. In classical physics(Newtonian), we are talking about Gravity, mass, and Relativity. Essentially classical physics is continuous, and quantum physics is discontinuous(photoelectric effect, wave intensity, uncertainty principle, black body, etc.).

I unfortunately must disagree with your train of logic. It is the at the Quantum level(not the Classical level) that proves why these miracles are impossible. We simply choose to rationalize our beliefs, and dismiss our logic, for the reasons I've mentioned in my post. We are not gullible or naive, we are just human.

I was just trying to say that reality is not completely objective, which I think is in line with QM. It's along the lines of, "we don't know what we don't know." Is the wave an absolute reality and we simple collapse it to see that cast in stone reality, or is the wave more fuzzy and we, the observer, give it a veneer of reality by our observation?

I understand QM is not the "final proof" of Biblical truth. To me, the Bible itself is all that is required for that.

Mark 11:23

For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.
​

That's a bold statement to make. What do we do with it? Simply pass it off as fantasy? There's certainly a lot at stake. Why is my life the way it is? According to this verse (and others) I am where I am because of what I have believed. Furthermore, I will be where I will be because of what I believe. If true, it certainly behooves me to be aware of what I believe. I have come to the conclusion that the things written in the Bible are my best shot at living a fulfilled life, both now and the future. I've not seen anything with more or better promises than the scriptures. But what if I'm wrong? Will that mean I somehow loose out on something better? I don't see very much of a possibility that I could end up worse off for believing the Bible over any other piece of literature, sacred of not.

On another note, I wasn't particularly using QM to prove miracles, although many have. But I've never heard that QM disproves miracles though. I may be wrong, but I think you even implied that classical physics offers a better proof for miracles. I'm very interested. Could you give me more info on that?

Take care...

 

[rrobs]

How so? All were written by fallible humans.
The key words being "claims to be the power of almighty God". That is an unsubstantiated claim.

In point of fact, many of the claims made in the OT are not only unsubstantiated, they have been proven false: Exodus, Great Flood, etc.

The NT gospels are written (sort of) as eye witness accounts. Matthew 5 begins:

And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him:

2 And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,​

Matthew then quotes about 2000 words that he attributes to Jesus.
Who recorded the 2000 words that Matthew quotes Jesus as saying?

Attitude bears no relation to discerning between fact and fiction. One of the things required is an analysis of what is written and how the authors came upon the knowledge of their subjects.

ecco previously: Why did omni-all god design them to fail to begin with?​

You are choosing to look at just the free will aspect. But God's design went beyond just giving man free will. God knew, long before creation, that with the conditions he set up, man would succumb to temptation. With His omniscience and omnipotence, he guaranteed it. He designed his creation to fail.

The analogy isn't tying kids to a bed. We don't know what will happen to kids given a range of circumstance. Omniscient god did know.

You have summarily pronounced God's design to be a failure, but how are you so sure of that? Has God told you, or is it just a feeling or sense that things must be that way? After all, the book itself says that God pronounced everything good right after He created it (Gen 1:31). So you and the Bible appear to be at odds. What is your source of knowledge that trumps the Bible?

You mentioned, and rightly so, that one of the things required is an analysis of what is written and how the authors came upon the knowledge of their subjects. I take that to mean that you yourself have done just that with the Bible, that you have studied it at some length. I'm not talking about what you've heard about the Bible, but what you yourself have seen in your own research of the book itself.

 

[PureX]

I wrote:

How can one willfully ignore that which could be known?​

I meant to write:

How can one willfully ignore that which could NOT be known?​

By pretending that they already know it all.

 

[ecco]

You have summarily pronounced God's design to be a failure, but how are you so sure of that? Has God told you, or is it just a feeling or sense that things must be that way? After all, the book itself says that God pronounced everything good right after He created it (Gen 1:31). So you and the Bible appear to be at odds. What is your source of knowledge that trumps the Bible?

The fact that all gods are the creation of man's imaginings. A fact that I'm sure you agree with in terms of all the gods other than yours.

I've already pointed out major errors in the OT and problems with the factuality of the NT.

Conversely, if we take the OT literally and accept that god is omniscient and omnipotent, then we can clearly see that God intentionally created A&E to fail.

You mentioned, and rightly so, that one of the things required is an analysis of what is written and how the authors came upon the knowledge of their subjects. I take that to mean that you yourself have done just that with the Bible, that you have studied it at some length. I'm not talking about what you've heard about the Bible, but what you yourself have seen in your own research of the book itself.

Again, I don't have to study the Harry Potter books to know they are fiction. I don't have to study the bible to know that there are no contemporaneous writings that support the bible.

I'm sure you have studied the bible more than me. Please tell me how the authors knew the things they wrote about. As just one example, the 2000 words of the Sermon on the Mount. Or, perhaps, tell me who the authors of the gospels are and how you know.

 

[ecco]

How can one willfully ignore that which could NOT be known?

By pretending that they already know it all.

That makes no sense whatsoever. One cannot willfully ignore something that cannot be know.

On the other hand, I do see many religious people, of all different religions, believing they know more than people of all other religions.

 

[PureX]

That makes no sense whatsoever. One cannot willfully ignore something that cannot be know.

Of course they can, by ignoring their OWN unknowing. By ignoring the fact that there is much about reality and existence that they DON'T know. People do this all the time. Especially atheists who have fallen for the philosophy of "scientism", and thereby imagine that all they need to know, to know that they are right and the theists are wrong, they already do know. And so they have no reason to investigate of consider any other possibilities.

On the other hand, I do see many religious people, of all different religions, believing they know more than people of all other religions.

Yup, there are plenty of people who do that, too.

 

[oldbadger]

Dark Matter and Dark energy make up over 95% of the total Universe..

Yes, and researchers are telling us that although the Universe is expanding there is no dilution or thinning out of dark energy and matter, its density is remaining constant.. This is clearly a supernatural condition, wouldn't you say?

 

[ecco]

Yes, and researchers are telling us that although the Universe is expanding there is no dilution or thinning out of dark energy and matter, its density is remaining constant.. This is clearly a supernatural condition, wouldn't you say?

You have just given a perfect example of why man created gods. Just because the reason/nature of something is not known, does not mean one must label it supernatural. You do what the creators of Thor did when they had no explanation for thunder. Back then it was acceptable, today it's just plain silly.

 

[ecco]

That makes no sense whatsoever. One cannot willfully ignore something that cannot be known.

Of course they can, by ignoring their OWN unknowing. By ignoring the fact that there is much about reality and existence that they DON'T know.

But we weren't talking about what people don't know. We were talking about things that are unknowable. If something cannot be known, then, by definition, one cannot be willfully ignorant of it.

The theory of evolution exists. I can refuse to learn anything about it. That makes me willfully ignorant. Hasdfiafa does not exist. There is no way to study it. That I don't study Hasdfiafa does not make me willfully ignorant of Hasdfiafa.

People do this all the time. Especially atheists who have fallen for the philosophy of "scientism", and thereby imagine that all they need to know, to know that they are right and the theists are wrong, they already do know. And so they have no reason to investigate of consider any other possibilities.

How many times must someone, atheist or Christian or Muslim or Hindu, who believes in "scientism" or just rationality, investigate levitation or telekinesis or the Nazca lines before the research and the results become redundant?

Rephrasing your comment:
People do this all the time. Especially fundamentalists who have fallen for the philosophy of "religion", and thereby imagine that all they need to know, to know that they are right and that others are wrong, they already do know. And so they have no reason to investigate of consider any other possibilities.

 

[PureX]

But we weren't talking about what people don't know. We were talking about things that are unknowable. If something cannot be known, then, by definition, one cannot be willfully ignorant of it.

We don't know what is knowable and what is not knowable until we seek the knowledge. So the unknown is one and the same to us, until we try. If we don't try, we'll never know. This is willful unknowing, as opposed to trying, and failing, which is imposed unknowing.

 

[oldbadger]

You have just given a perfect example of why man created gods. Just because the reason/nature of something is not known, does not mean one must label it supernatural. You do what the creators of Thor did when they had no explanation for thunder. Back then it was acceptable, today it's just plain silly.

Ah, so dark energy density remaining constant as it expands is just usual nature, eh?

Come on...... get yer scientific method onto that one.

 

[rrobs]

The fact that all gods are the creation of man's imaginings. A fact that I'm sure you agree with in terms of all the gods other than yours.

I've already pointed out major errors in the OT and problems with the factuality of the NT.

Conversely, if we take the OT literally and accept that god is omniscient and omnipotent, then we can clearly see that God intentionally created A&E to fail.

Again, I don't have to study the Harry Potter books to know they are fiction. I don't have to study the bible to know that there are no contemporaneous writings that support the bible.

I'm sure you have studied the bible more than me. Please tell me how the authors knew the things they wrote about. As just one example, the 2000 words of the Sermon on the Mount. Or, perhaps, tell me who the authors of the gospels are and how you know.

I honestly can't answer any of your points or questions. That's the hard cold fact of the matter. To get the answers, you would have to research the book for yourself. If you decided to do that, I'd be glad to help you get started.

In fact, I'll give you the first step right now: You must forget everything you think you know about God and the Bible. What you've heard from the churches about the Bible is way more often than not at odds with the Bible itself. After all, the basic tenets of God that we all "know" are those that arise from an institution that tortured and killed those who didn't agree with them. What good could come from that? Bottom line is, the only source for truth is God's word, not the churches.

It must have been hard for the person who discovered the earth was round to convince the rest of the people. A mind tends to be slow in letting go of ideas. I say that because I once thought exactly like you in matters of the Bible. So I know it from your side of the fence. But I also know it from the other side of the fence. At the risk of becoming an annoying braggart, I would have to say I am more qualified to orate on Biblical matters than yourself. You said as much yourself, so I'm just agreeing with you. It doesn't make me superior or anything like that. You and I simply have walked different paths. If I had walked in your shoes, I'd be exactly where you are. In other words, I'm not judging you because I think the Bible gives a good reason for not judging.

Rom 2:1,

Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
​

We're all in the same boat. We all do the same things. We don't like to admit it, but we do. It's called, "being human." You may ask, "why did God make us this way?" How about a more fundamental question, "did God make us this way?" Take care...

 

[rrobs]

Or, perhaps, tell me who the authors of the gospels are and how you know.

The Bible doesn't say, so I don't know.

The Bible claims it has everything we need to know about life and Godliness.

2Pet 1:3,

According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
​

Since the book is silent as to who wrote Matthew, I'd simply say it apparently doesn't matter. If it was important to life and godliness, it would have been in there somewhere.

And to think I didn't need Doctor of Divinity from Harvard to see that! They spend hours upon hours trying to come up with an answer to a question that needs no answer. That's man's wisdom for ya! A hallmark of God is simplicity. We've been tricked into thinking the Bible is complicated, but it's not.

 

[ecco]

We don't know what is knowable and what is not knowable until we seek the knowledge. So the unknown is one and the same to us, until we try. If we don't try, we'll never know. This is willful unknowing, as opposed to trying, and failing, which is imposed unknowing.

After all this, what's your point?

Everyone is willfully unknowing of many subjects. I have no desire to learn Mandarin or advanced biology or advanced aeronautical engineering. So what?

 

[Thief]

Yes, and researchers are telling us that although the Universe is expanding there is no dilution or thinning out of dark energy and matter, its density is remaining constant.. This is clearly a supernatural condition, wouldn't you say?

sounds good to me

 

[oldbadger]

sounds good to me

Yep......

And I'll bet that pseudo-scientists will pretend that they never saw this point, because it's clearly 'beyond' any condition which we call 'natural' ...... it's supernatural.

So let's stick up again for any true scientists to answer:-
.................... although the Universe is expanding there is no dilution or thinning out of dark energy and matter, its density is remaining constant.. This is clearly a supernatural condition........

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Yes, and researchers are telling us that although the Universe is expanding there is no dilution or thinning out of dark energy and matter, its density is remaining constant.. This is clearly a supernatural condition, wouldn't you say?

Thank you again. You must remember that all the energy and matter in the Universe is conserved. It doesn't matter how much new spacetime is being created during the Universe's expansion. The density ratio between matter and energy will always remain constant. Remember, energy is not a thing. It can't be diluted, thinned, created, or destroyed. Energy is a property of matter, it is not matter itself. Energy can only be converted from one form to another. Matter is simply one form of energy. Energy is not affected by Gravity, but matter is affected because of its mass. This process will always be conserved. So no, the density of matter(not energy), relative to the expansion of spacetime, would always remain constant. This also demonstrates that Dark Energy and Dark Matter are actually doing their jobs. These events are not supernatural, they are simply natural. This again demonstrates how our human need to believe in the supernatural, can sometimes supplant our natural intuitive sense of logic. Here is another example;

Suppose you were born on an Island, and grew up seeing cars and trucks on the roads. You grew up, and understand most of the technology that we see today. But, you have never seen a plane or a rocket ship. When it is explained to you that these inventions are only the extensions of the technology that you already understand and have already observed.. Do you think this young Islander would have any justifiable reason NOT to believe in the existence of planes and rocket ships? But, what if you were told by the elders of the Island that;

"The first living being was P’an Ku, who grew for 18,000 years inside of a cosmic egg. When he hatched, the shell above him became the sky while the piece below became the earth. The opposites in nature were also separated as male and female, wet and dry, light and dark, yin and yang, etc. Because of his efforts, P’an Ku literally fell to pieces and his features became the natural world. His limbs turned into mountains, his blood into rivers, his breath into the wind, his voice into the thunder, his hair into the grass, his sweat into the rain, etc. His left eye became the sun and his right eye became the moon. Some people say that the parasites on P’an Ku’s body became mankind. Others say that, many centuries after P’an Ku’s death, a lonely Goddess named Nu Wa saw her reflection in a pond and made some beings like herself out of the mud. These became the aristocrats. Creating these beings was hard work, though, so Nü Wa swung a muddy vine through the air and its droplets became the commoners. Years later, the heavens collapsed, creating holes in the earth through which waters rose to form a great flood. Nü Wa patched the earth, but became exhausted by her labors and died. Her body became yet more features of the world.".

Now, from what reference frame, experiences, evidence, or relevant examples can you draw from, to justify a rational belief in the stories validity? With no direct or indirect evidence at all, it is simply your choice based on your "needs priority". Yet we have no problems accepting and validating an even stranger story. Why? IMHO, I think that It is a combination of evolution, fear, ignorance, and cultural reinforcements. These may be the source of our unconscious justification of irrational beliefs.