The other word is the interpretation of theory as mere opinion so they can argue that the opinion that God does not exist is equivalent to the one that God does and neither can be proved. That is also a big difference. The opinion that there is a God is not based on reality but on pure speculation while a theory however, although perhaps not complete, is based on trying to explain observations and experimentation. When believers, because of cognitive dissonance hang on to these “misunderstandings”, debating is utterly useless
There are two words that believers deliberately misunderstand when they debate. The first one is “belief” when they mean “faith”. They argue that believing in God is equal to believing that God doesn’t exists and therefor Atheism or Agnosticism is just another religion. Not believing or doubting that God exist is an opinion while believing in God is faith! Big difference.
The other word is the interpretation of theory as mere opinion so they can argue that the opinion that God does not exist is equivalent to the one that God does and neither can be proved. That is also a big difference. The opinion that there is a God is not based on reality but on pure speculation while a theory however, although perhaps not complete, is based on trying to explain observations and experimentation. When believers, because of cognitive dissonance hang on to these “misunderstandings”, debating is utterly useless
1 Comment
When I read about another case of a child’s death because the parents relied on prayer instead of seeking medical attention, my blood boils. We CAN do something about that, If we all get together, so please read the whole post. It is a sign of progress that in some States the parents are charged with manslaughter or murder, such as Travis and Wenona Rossiter belonging to the Church of the First Born. The church rejects modern medicine, believing that those who are sick should be prayed over and anointed with oil. (James 5:14: Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord”).
Charging the parent is a start but that does not get at the root of the problem and is not enough of a deterrent to prevent reoccurrence. The main culprits are those religious leaders who preach these practices. They should be charged as accessories to these crimes. It is high time that “freedom of religion” as interpreted by some courts, not to include the “freedom” to advocate what amounts to criminal behavior in our society. In another post “Main Skeptic” wrote: Some religions can be completely corrupt, and even deadly, and the government won't hold them accountable. The IRS even had a policy, up until recently, that it wouldn't investigate complaints about churches. The Ninth District court decided a couple of years ago that human trafficking by the Church of Scientology was a protected sacrament”. Imagine that in some future case that Sharia Law was argued to be also a “protected sacrament” in the case of stoning to death an unfaithful woman. We must try to persuade our judicial system to pass laws that make it illegal to advocate practices that endanger one’s health and can lead to severe consequences, including death. This would discourage religious leaders and politicians to advocating practices such as prayers, withholding blood transfusions, and even alternative unproven medicines. Faith Healers should also be prevented from practicing unless they can pass a rigorous neutral examination of their “powers” by documenting the medical condition of a person before and after the “cure” for a suitable length for time to check the effectiveness of their “treatment”. Psychics should similarly be tested before being licensed to practice and if not licensed should be charged to prevent exploiting the gullible. To get back to the death of children because of the withholding proper medical procedures that could have prevented such tragedies, we must start to demand that anyone, including politicians, who advocate these practices are criminally charged as accessories. We MUST especially save the lives of the children where the decision is made by their caregivers. What can we do? We have nearly 10,000 members in this group. I don’t know if all of you get this post or agree with it, but if you do, “LIKE” and “SHARE” it, right now, with all your friends of any persuasion, it could snowball into a surge of public opinion and that could bring about a change in the attitude of law makers to tighten up the Laws to minimize future occurrences. If it saves one future life it will have been worth it. Please let’s start now! For those who believe that NDEs (Near Death Experiences) are proof that there is an afterlife, I want you to consider the following. NDEs are not only confined to Christians but are a natural occurrence in ALL people. The NDEs in other religions claim to see their God or prophet in Heaven or Nirvanna. The only conclusion, if you accept the belief that these hallucinations indicate there is an afterlife, is that ALL religions are correct. We can therefor conclude that using NDEs as “proof “ of the existence of an afterlife is untenable. The people declared dead and then are resurrected were not really dead. In my opinion, all these testimonies of "resurrected people are, as many neuro-scientist have expressed, are hallucinations and a function of the brain.
Wikipedia: "Dr. Rick Strassman, while conducting DMT research in the 1990s at the University of New Mexico, advanced the controversial hypothesis that a massive release of DMT from the pineal gland prior to death or near death was the cause of the near death experience (NDE) phenomenon. Several of his test subjects reported audio or visual hallucinations. His explanation for this was the possible lack of panic involved in the clinical setting and possible dosage differences between those administered and those encountered in actual NDE cases. Several subjects also reported contact with "other beings", alien like, insectoid or reptilian in nature, in highly advanced technological environments where the subjects were "carried", "probed", "tested", "manipulated", "dismembered", "taught", "loved" and "raped" by these "beings". Basing his reasoning on his belief that all the enzymatic material needed to produce DMT is found in the pineal gland, and moreover in substantially greater concentrations than in any other part of the body, Strassman has speculated that DMT is made in the pineal gland." Rawr. |
Ben Vande
|