Your first paragraph - I agree with you. I will just say that faith is required to believe in the creation, and faith is required to believe in chance, chaos and evolution.
Bone fragments found all over a region or ‘dig’ as it were - then for a specialized artist to put these fragments together along with an abundance of clay - to call these our ancestors is just humorous and I couldn’t care less how much latin, science and biology is thrown at it. But people eat it up.
As I told someone else, you can call me a simple guy....it is ok with me.
“Because the text in question (Genesis) was written by a pre-scientific people with no understanding of modern biology. They were trying to explain the world as best they could.”
Another fundamental difference between you and I. By stating “written by pre-scientific people”, you are, in my mind, including God since his word claims he gave those words to men to write to begin with. The faith I have in God says - God has a handle on science - BTW - he created it too!
“It will be very difficult to find any evidence that any being, humans included, has what you call a “soul”, no matter how hard I dig...given that there isn’t the slightest shred of scientific evidence that such a thing even exists.”
Ok ok - you are a see it touch it feel it evidence driven person (even though your faith is in chaos - an event...or chain of events you cannot prove).
You are correct -I cannot prove souls exist. I cannot see them or touch them, yet faith in God and his word tell me they most definately exist.
I say ‘most definately’ with the same amount of weight you place in chaos, evolution, etc.
We can cut to the chase at this point or call a truce in that there is NOTHING you are going to tell me that will provide PROOF or evidence that all things came from chance and/or chaos and/or nothing....and all for no reason whatsoever.
You in your obvious intelligence (no sarcasm), did not see chaos or chance or any instance of the process of evolution - yet you believe it. You cannot tell me where good and evil and morale came from - yet you know they exist. You have to tell me where the human ‘animal’ branched off and decided on its own to come up with good and evil. You are going to tell me it developed over time? Knowledge of good and evil did not develop from nothing. Convince me of the moment - or what occured to take an ape from being an animal with zero morals, to an ‘animal’ WITH morals. We both know you cannot take me there - yet you know they are present today and you believe in them to some degree.
“Since I’m not a Christian, what would be the point? Should I consider what the Koran says as well? Or for that matter the Book of Mormon, the Principia Discordia, the Vedas, Dianetics....?”
Read them all! Why not? Read them all 10 times! Then after that - read the historical documents on Joseph Smith and “Mohammed” and others before and during their early years - about the time they deemed themselves ‘prophets’. They all claim to be ‘prophets’ ‘just like Jesus’ or ‘in the line of Jesus’, yet none of them died for the church they established. None of theme claim to be the Son of God, none of them ‘rose from the dead’ and none of them claim that their blood took on all the sins of the entire world in order for us to have a direct relationship with God.
None of them even come close to these claims. Funny you’d mention the Koran and Book of Mormon.
You speak of these other books and sound as if you already KNOW there is a difference betweeen those books and the Bible!
Include ‘Lord of the Rings’ too! It contains a maze of morals, life struggles and priorities and what they all get us in the end! Study all the books you wish.
One stands alone. Don’t wait til then to find out which one it is....and I mean that in an fully nonthreatening way.
Again, humans are.....e)Unique! Final answer!
Faith is not required to make the observation that the theory of evolution is the best explanation for the changes that have occurred in various species for the last few billion years.
Bone fragments found all over a region or ‘dig’ as it were - then for a specialized artist to put these fragments together along with an abundance of clay - to call these our ancestors is just humorous and I couldn’t care less how much latin, science and biology is thrown at it. But people eat it up. As I told someone else, you can call me a simple guy....it is ok with me.
While I have no idea whether or not you're a simple guy, you are oversimplifying and mischaracterizing the science of paleontology to an absurd degree.
Another fundamental difference between you and I. By stating “written by pre-scientific people”, you are, in my mind, including God since his word claims he gave those words to men to write to begin with. The faith I have in God says - God has a handle on science - BTW - he created it too!
I'm no more including God as an author of Genesis than I think He/She/It wrote any other scripture, Biblical or otherwise. As for God creating science, the development of the scientific method and the process of scientific inquiry is well documented. It was created by human beings...there's no need to invoke the supernatural.
Ok ok - you are a see it touch it feel it evidence driven person
Certainly, with the caveat that there are plenty of evidential methods of scientific investigation that don't involve the traditional five senses.
(even though your faith is in chaos - an event...or chain of events you cannot prove).
I assume you're speaking of the evolution of life on Earth. This being the case, there's no need for faith on my part since the evidence for it is overwhelming. It takes no more faith to conclude that evolution provides the best explanation for biological diversity than it does to conclude that nuclear fusion is taking place in the interior of star.
You are correct -I cannot prove souls exist. I cannot see them or touch them, yet faith in God and his word tell me they most definately exist. I say ‘most definately’ with the same amount of weight you place in chaos, evolution, etc.
The difference being, of course, that my worldview isn't based upon faith, but instead upon reason and science.
We can cut to the chase at this point or call a truce in that there is NOTHING you are going to tell me that will provide PROOF or evidence that all things came from chance and/or chaos and/or nothing....and all for no reason whatsoever.
Waitaminute..."all" things? We've been talking about the Theory of Evolution. That has nothing to do with cosmogony! What's more, I haven't the faintest idea why the universe itself exists...there's insufficient information (at this time) to draw a conclusion. While the Big Bang theory is the cosmological model that's best supported by scientific evidence and observation, it doesn't address what happened before the Planck Epoch (that is, everything that happened before 10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang).
To put it another way, when asked why the universe exists and who or what (if anything) created it, my best answer is "I don't know at this time".
You in your obvious intelligence (no sarcasm), did not see chaos or chance or any instance of the process of evolution - yet you believe it.
I observe that evolution has occurred. No "belief" required.
You cannot tell me where good and evil and morale came from - yet you know they exist.
I can certainly tell you where good and evil and morality came from. Humans invented them, just as we invented all philosophical concepts.
You have to tell me where the human ‘animal’ branched off and decided on its own to come up with good and evil. You are going to tell me it developed over time? Knowledge of good and evil did not develop from nothing. Convince me of the moment - or what occured to take an ape from being an animal with zero morals, to an ‘animal’ WITH morals. We both know you cannot take me there - yet you know they are present today and you believe in them to some degree.
Apes of the genus Homo are the only animals (so far) to have developed sufficient intelligence to understand and invent the concept of morality, so why should it surprise you that no other animals have morals? It would be analogous to saying that the science of geology must divinely inspired because chimpanzees can't understand plate tectonics.
Should I consider what the Koran says as well? Or for that matter the Book of Mormon, the Principia Discordia, the Vedas, Dianetics....?”
Read them all! Why not?
Because my reading time is finite, and I find religious texts boring beyond words.
Read them all 10 times!
You know, there is a clause in the Constitution about cruel and unusual punishment.
Then after that - read the historical documents on Joseph Smith and “Mohammed” and others before and during their early years - about the time they deemed themselves ‘prophets’. They all claim to be ‘prophets’ ‘just like Jesus’ or ‘in the line of Jesus’, yet none of them died for the church they established. None of theme claim to be the Son of God, none of them ‘rose from the dead’ and none of them claim that their blood took on all the sins of the entire world in order for us to have a direct relationship with God.
I see no reason to believe in any of the purported claims and supernatural abilities of the people you mention above.
None of them even come close to these claims. Funny you’d mention the Koran and Book of Mormon.
The most popular religious affiliations in the United States, by rank (not including "none" or "unaffiliated"):
1) Protestant
2) Roman Catholic
3) Mormon
4) Jewish
5) Buddhist
6) Muslim
Given that, why in the world would it be odd that I'd mention the Koran and the Book of Mormon after discussing the Bible?
As for Principia Discordia, you're not cleared for that information. Fnord.
You speak of these other books and sound as if you already KNOW there is a difference betweeen those books and the Bible!
Sure there's a difference. They're newer and not nearly as popular.
Include ‘Lord of the Rings’ too! It contains a maze of morals, life struggles and priorities and what they all get us in the end!
Now that one I've read (more than once!). One of the most impressive examples of worldbuilding in fantasy literature, far superior to the overrated Narnia series by C. S. Lewis. Please note that I'm not agreeing with Phillip Pullman that Narnia is evil...far from it...but it simply doesn't compare to Tolkien.
Study all the books you wish.
I certainly do...at least those I find engaging and entertaining.
One stands alone. Don’t wait til then to find out which one it is....and I mean that in an fully nonthreatening way.
While I've never slogged my way through the Old Testament, I did read the New Testament for a course in comparative religions 30 years ago
Again, humans are.....e)Unique! Final answer!
Again, the you're being coy and evasive and refusing to answer the question because you think that answering it would either make you look foolish or undermine your argument. If it will help, I'll reduce it to a single question: Do you deny that humans are mammals?
Yes or No.
Really, it's not that hard.