Tom Capuder#Theists:
Some of you think the evidence for #evolution is insufficient.
Where’s sufficient evidence for a #god
____________________
an #atheist vs #faith
myrmepropagandistI'm confused why anyone would want "evidence" for God. Isn't faith supposed to be an evidence-free activity?
Exactly, which is a good reason to oppose it.
For instance, in the case of evolution vs. creationism, evidence favors one side, and nothing but imagination is responsible for the other.
Faith is pretending to know things you don't know. And that's never a good basis for decision-making.
Evidence free activities have value. They can help us to understand how our ancestors may have seen the world. They can allow one to experiences a sense of mystery and feel a real connection to the religious traditions of the past.
It's just important to remember that they are "evidence free" and won't be able to really tell you anything useful in the empirical sense.
Why is it necessary to use evidence-free methods to understand how ancestors saw the world? We have enough evidence in writings and archeology to make informed judgements about ancestors' behavior.
I often experience "a sense of mystery" when I contemplate the world and universe. There's nothing wrong with not yet having answers to mysteries. It isn't advisable, however, to provide pat, soothing, imaginary "answers."
We've learned so much as a species that it's no longer necessary to revere religious traditions of the past, none of which have any place in the real world of today, IMO. They should be assigned to the dustheap of discarded mythologies.
Religions provide social cohesion. People like them. They are important to human history. They shouldn't be forgotten or treated as obsolete, but rather, like folk stories practiced and celebrated with awareness of their limitations.
Of course many people won't want anything to do with this, and that's fine too.
Nate Gaylinn@futurebird @tomcapuder I've struggled with this. As a rational materialist, I reject religious ideas that are incompatible with science. For a long time, I thought that meant rejecting all of religion, and that believing in a higher power required proof of a higher power. But I now see that's misguided.
For me, it's because I had a superficial understanding of religion. A naive, literal view of the Bible is deeply problematic, but great spiritual thinkers have struggled with that since at least the middle ages. They found much better ways of engaging with these ideas that don't require false beliefs. And, like you say, it's largely about embracing ambiguity and non-literal views of reality.
Heath Borders@heathborders @futurebird @tomcapuder Oh, I just mean using words to describe real experiences that don't literally correspond to something measurable. For me, "God" is just such an example. If you don't take that word to mean "man in the sky" but instead "whatever makes all this happen" then suddenly it's not contradicting science at all.
Sometimes religious terminology is helpful, even if it's not literal / precise / scientific.
@ngaylinn @futurebird @tomcapuder that's fine on an individual level. I think using metaphors for this stuff around people unable to think critically about media is likely to propagate anti-science views. 🤷🏻♂️
@heathborders @futurebird @tomcapuder Won't argue with that. I figure, each person has a responsibility to understand the ideas they build their life around. I'm deeply suspicious of any religious tradition that encourages folks not to critically examine core religious tenants.
That's why I so appreciate Judaism. Every teaching is a debate, involving many generations of rabbinic scholars and you. Every rule has exceptions, to be resolved with reason, common sense, and compassion. None of this blind faith nonsense.
@ngaylinn @heathborders @tomcapuder
It tends to get lost in the sauce but this is how being Baptist is supposed to work. A Baptist has a responsibility to read an interpret the Bible for themselves.
In practice, churches where this is really happening are scarce, and people are more attracted to mega-churches and the magical thinking of prosperity gospel which isn't based on anything from the bible at all.
Chuck@futurebird @ngaylinn @heathborders @tomcapuder Good Lord ma'am, You sound like Roger Williams himself.
Righteous Hazard@futurebird @ngaylinn @heathborders @tomcapuder I was raised in a southern baptist church, and when I was around 8, the old pastor (whose sermons I only remember as a soporific torment, with my mom sitting next to me, pinching me hard whenever I succumbed to sleep) was about to retire. So the local seminary sent out two young men to audition for 6 months before they graduated. They shared ministerial duties, and preached alternate Sundays.
One was your bog-standard preacher type: charismatic, but also dogmatic, I don’t recall any questions being asked of scripture, or of the flock, in his sermons.
The other, in my dad’s words, was a “Damned Hippy. His sermons I do remember. He hosted an inquiry up there. I recall one sermon in particular where the congregants were asked to examine their role in capital punishment, especially as Christians whose central story was the execution of an innocent. My dad groused all Sunday afternoon about that one, at one point literally yelling “It wasn’t me who kill Jesus, it was the Jews!”
The Damned Hippy didn’t stand a chance. Tho he was popular among the younger golks, the decision was in the hands of old men like my dad. The other guy was selected, he bolted for a position in his hometown three years later, young folks like me drifted away, and the church died and its property was sold off when I was off at college.
In my experience, ideologies like theism and atheism are as boring and dumb as an old sermon, but honest inquiry feeds the soul’s deepest hunger.
@bertwells @futurebird @heathborders @tomcapuder Very well said. And I'd like to meet that Damn Hippy, for sure. :)