THE ORIGIN OF RELIGION
  • HOME
  • BEN'S BLOG
  • About The Book
    • BookStore
  • Reviews
  • About The Origin of Religion
  • The origin of spirit
  • FINAL CONCLUSION
  • Contact

BEN'S  BLOG
Click on "Archives" for all blogs since November  2013

Bible Stories, fact or fiction

5/25/2016

0 Comments

 
Many believers like to point out that because, in archaeology, we find much evidence that the places mentioned in the Bible or Koran actually are found, these books are proved to be correct and should be taken as the word of God. Hold on, I will give you a more contemporary explanation why that is a false conclusion.
There is much evidence in the world that WWII actually took place. A writer using this factual evidence to write a fictional story about a war hero, is indeed correct that WWII took place but the story about the war hero is still fictional. One cannot claim that because of the first fact the second part of the story is also a fact. The same is also true of the ancient historic books. Even if it is about a real person the story would be colored by he opinion of the writer, a witness, or even by the memories of the person evolved. Memories are not reliable (another blog on that subject will follow later) and even testimonies are influenced by what the witness wants his/her audience to hear. The fact that we find the ruins of Jericho or the Tower of Babel does indeed prove that these places existed but it does not prove that the stories about them are correct. What made the walls of Jericho collapse? A trumpet call (supernatural interference) or an earthquake (a coincidental natural disaster during the siege)
The stories at that time were written by people with certain believes and opinions, just like what we experience in modern literature. We therefor conclude that although the historical background of these ancient books is proven to exist, it does not prove that the stories describing what happened at that time is the truth but is rather a fictional story woven into the narrative.

Picture
0 Comments

Prophesies are real?

5/22/2016

0 Comments

 
Prophesies are predictions of what will happen in the future. They are regularly vague and need interpretations, often cunningly distorted, to show that they actually were correct and then they are used to argue that prophesies actually are supernatural messages from God, Allah, or any other god. That being the case, future prophesies therefor must be believed and heeded.
Well, Jules Verne predicted submarines, airships, trips to the moon, all of which has come true, but we don’t call them “prophesies”, do we? Science Fiction writers have predicted many things, political situations, aliens, future wars and weapons. Some of them became true, some of them did not and some of them might still become true in some fashion or another. These are guesses, sometimes based on current knowledge, on speculative science or totally on fantasy. They are not prophesies. Predictions of calamities, natural disasters are also easily “fulfilled” since these are part of the natural world we live in. Biblical prophecies fall in the same category or are written after the fact to make it look some prophesies were fulfilled. To have actually predicted the future, as Jules Verne did for example, is not divinely inspired.
Nostradamus’ predictions of wars. disasters and political happenings, received torturous interpretations to fit some factual happenings since and therefor other ones are not to be taken serious as future predictions. Some guesses might be twisted to “prove” their accuracy but they are not divine revelation of a Deity. The Seers and Psychics of this world rely on the fact that when they accidentally guess something correctly, it gets remembered and advertised, and that all the failures of these “experts” are forgotten or ignored by their fans.
The conclusion is that prophesies are not divinely inspired. But are speculations on the future.
 

Picture
0 Comments

Proof there is no God?

5/6/2016

0 Comments

 
How often have we encountered the Theists, when you ask for proof that god exist demanding that you “prove” that God does not exist, and then get in a discussion who has the burden of proof instead of  answering the question directly. Very frustrating. Here is the answer to that dilemma. Take the agnostic approach and begin the discussion with a “I don’t know”, an answer they can not ask you to “prove” so they are still stuck with the burden of proof, before any other discussion takes place. Do not let them divert the debate, as they often do. Tell them repeatedly that no further discussion is possible until they prove their original claim. They will then quit or come up with some easily to defeat answers, such as “look out the window” ,“I had a vision” or “I feel it in my heart”

Picture
0 Comments

May 05th, 2016

5/5/2016

0 Comments

 
SKEPTICS vs DENIERS
 
I noticed that some deniers call themselves skeptics. There is a distinctive difference between these two concepts. Skeptics look at a claim, then evaluate the claim through scientific multiple testing and confirmed by many other investigators. If a claim is found wanting, the skeptic will indicate why the claim is partially or totally invalid.
In contrast. the denier is one who hangs on to his/her opinion in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I will illustrate this with a few examples.
  1. Climate Change. The evidence is, recognized by not only the great majority of the experts in the field but also many governments world wide, now established. Still there are many people, many non-experts or persons lacking the knowledge to judge the scientific research, as well as some scientists funded by organizations wanting to protect their businesses, and people with cognitive dissonance, who deny scientific facts, who call themselves skeptics. They are not
  2. Evolution vs Creationism. The skeptics of creationism rely on the overwhelming evidence supporting their theories, obtained in archaeology, anthropology and DNA research. The creationist, ignoring these findings and who declare that creationism is a reality, without any scientific proof is not a skeptic either but also a denier.
Picture
0 Comments

    Ben Vande       
    Weerdhof
    Andrews


    Retired Teacher
    Author
    Videographer






    Archives of
    previous Blogs

    October 2021
    August 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    February 2021
    December 2020
    October 2020
    August 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

    Click RSS feed for previous blogs

Ben's Blog

About Origin OF Religion

About THe Book

BooKStore

Contact

  • HOME
  • BEN'S BLOG
  • About The Book
    • BookStore
  • Reviews
  • About The Origin of Religion
  • The origin of spirit
  • FINAL CONCLUSION
  • Contact