Why does there have to be some big plan?

[bhsmte]

One can be atheist and still have Christian values and moral intuitions. Look into Russia for a country that actively tried to purge those values and intuitions. The brutality has been seemingly stamped into the national character.

Most atheists in Europe subconsciously cling to Christian values because they have been taught that. They believe people have individual rights "just because".. Those ideas stem from a Christian patrimony. In other cultures those ideas are alien. People go along with the group or a strong man, the individual is subsumed into the collective.



Are those the only ways to measure human happiness? People in Mexico self-report being happier than people in northern Europe, yet Mexicans are much more religious than Europeans, despite being poorer. Perhaps you should not be judging people by strictly materialistic criteria.

Jumping through a lot of flaming hoops to tie it all back to Christianity, huh?

 

[juvenissun]

It is not knowledge, and they receive this knowledge from God? How does this happen? Do they read it in the bible?

And what about parasitic wasps? Does God instruct them on how to deposit their eggs inside of other insects so that their larvae can eat their victim from the inside out?

The highlighted shows your question has a naive logic error.

You tell me WHY do ants live the way they do. God does not need to "instruct" animals to do this or that. God creates them so. Science (evolution) can not provide any better answer than that.

 

[znr]

Quality of life is based on what criteria?

Really? Tell that to the countries with the highest amount of atheists who happen to have quality of life indexes higher than religious countries.

 

[durangodawood]

....I have absolutely no positive emotional inclination towards any particular scientific theory.

I am actually emotionally inclined toward evolution by natural selection.

Its so powerful an idea that its actually beautiful.

 

[Davian]

The highlighted shows your question has a naive logic error.

Of course it does, it is based on your posts, where you said "Animal does not have the idea of getting along", "Some animals do", "they know they SHOULD NOT eat their pups", and "It is not a knowledge.
They received it from God." Is that not what you wrote?

You tell me WHY do ants live the way they do.

I do not see how that is a valid question. Do they need a reason to live they way they do?

God does not need to "instruct" animals to do this or that. God creates them so.

So a wolf pack does not eat its pups because God did it? That is not an answer. It does not explain anything.

Science (evolution) can not provide any better answer than that.

Science would say that wolf packs (or their evolutionary predecessors) that ate their young, or in other ways did not get along, would not be as successful when in competition with animals that did get along, and did not eat their young.

"God did it" tells me nothing.

 

[KCfromNC]

Jumping through a lot of flaming hoops to tie it all back to Christianity, huh?

Well, some are ceremonial monarchies, and there is a Christian tradition of the divine right of Kings, so obviously they're really Christian countries even though no one knows it. Or something like that.

 

[juvenissun]

Science would say that wolf packs (or their evolutionary predecessors) that ate their young, or in other ways did not get along, would not be as successful when in competition with animals that did get along, and did not eat their young.

"God did it" tells me nothing.

You do not know what science is. Science is not able to say that. YOU said that.

 

[juvenissun]

Of course it does, it is based on your posts, where you said "Animal does not have the idea of getting along", "Some animals do", "they know they SHOULD NOT eat their pups", and "It is not a knowledge.
They received it from God." Is that not what you wrote?

I do not see how that is a valid question. Do they need a reason to live they way they do?

So a wolf pack does not eat its pups because God did it? That is not an answer. It does not explain anything.

Poor guy. Spend this amount of time to pull these together for nothing. I would never try to do that to you. It ain't worth it. It would be much much easier and better to just admit the error.

Some guy (you?) said some animals do not eat their pups and so it is an evidence which is against the implication that doing anything to survive is a working philosophy of evolution.

My argument is that we apply that philosophy because we can think. Animal don't because they do not think. Evolution is an alleged natural process. The philosophy of evolution is an application of that process to human behavior. I said, if we do that, it would be absolutely disastrous. In fact, it is known that we do eat our kids under some extreme circumstances.

Lesson: when you argue, don't get lost in your argument. It is not that hard to make it happen. You are obviously lost. I am pulling you back to it.

 

[juvenissun]

I am actually emotionally inclined toward evolution by natural selection.

Its so powerful an idea that its actually beautiful.

Survival of the fittest. So killing and murder take place.
Beautiful? Yes, it is beautiful and powerful when you see it among animals.

 

[Davian]

Poor guy. Spend this amount of time to pull these together for nothing. I would never try to do that to you. It ain't worth it. It would be much much easier and better to just admit the error.

Did I not write "Of course it does, it is based on your posts"?

Some guy (you?) said some animals do not eat their pups and so it is an evidence which is against the implication that doing anything to survive is a working philosophy of evolution.

Was it not you that responded?

My argument is that we apply that philosophy because we can think. Animal don't because they do not think.

Based on your responses, I would like additional evidence on the former.

Evolution is an alleged natural process. The philosophy of evolution is an application of that process to human behavior. I said, if we do that, it would be absolutely disastrous. In fact, it is known that we do eat our kids under some extreme circumstances.

The police should be notified. Where do you live?

Lesson: when you argue, don't get lost in your argument. It is not that hard to make it happen. You are obviously lost. I am pulling you back to it.

 

[Davian]

You do not know what science is. Science is not able to say that. YOU said that.

Yes, based on scientific methodology, which anyone can use.

On the other hand:

God creates them so.

You do not know what God is. You are only asserting that you do. You said that.

 

[juvenissun]

Yes, based on scientific methodology, which anyone can use.

On the other hand:

You do not know what God is. You are only asserting that you do. You said that.

You only respond to what I said. You are not arguing about the issue.

I take it as you don't have anything to say.

If that is the case, you do not need to respond.

 

[Ecowolf]

The Big Plan is a foundation of any organized religion. People want answers to questions that cant be easily be answered, if at all. They want easy answers.
When a concept is offered in a black and white manner, its easy to make a decision when there are only two choices. This makes the follower more comfortable with their choice. Offer a concept that is grey and more vague, then there is indecision. The follower then is uneasy about how to answer. Looking for answers, the follower turns to the Big Plan.

Its alot easier when the Big Plan has been wrote down and given by authority.
"Good" followers obey and do not question the authority.

 

[bhsmte]

The Big Plan is a foundation of any organized religion. People want answers to questions that cant be easily be answered, if at all. They want easy answers.
When a concept is offered in a black and white manner, its easy to make a decision when there are only two choices. This makes the follower more comfortable with their choice. Offer a concept that is grey and more vague, then there is indecision. The follower then is uneasy about how to answer. Looking for answers, the follower turns to the Big Plan.

Its alot easier when the Big Plan has been wrote down and given by authority.
"Good" followers obey and do not question the authority.

The "plan" makes it official and it sounds official.

Place it all in someone else's hands and follow the contradictory rules written by many unknown authors, 2000 years ago.

 

[juvenissun]

The Big Plan is a foundation of any organized religion. People want answers to questions that cant be easily be answered, if at all. They want easy answers.
When a concept is offered in a black and white manner, its easy to make a decision when there are only two choices. This makes the follower more comfortable with their choice. Offer a concept that is grey and more vague, then there is indecision. The follower then is uneasy about how to answer. Looking for answers, the follower turns to the Big Plan.

Its alot easier when the Big Plan has been wrote down and given by authority.
"Good" followers obey and do not question the authority.

There IS a Big Plan in Christianity. Black and white, no ambiguity. One may either accept or reject. No middle ground.

 

[Ecowolf]

There IS a Big Plan in Christianity. Black and white, no ambiguity. One may either accept or reject. No middle ground.

You are absolutely right!

 

[Davian]

You only respond to what I said. You are not arguing about the issue.

I take it as you don't have anything to say.

If that is the case, you do not need to respond.

I am responding to what you say. My response is that what you're saying is not coherent.

 

[juvenissun]

You are absolutely right!

If so, is Christianity a stupid religion?
If so, why would it want to be so stupid?
If so, are so many Christians are also so stupid?

Obviously, you have a big problem.

 

[Davian]

There IS a Big Plan in Christianity. Black and white, no ambiguity. One may either accept or reject. No middle ground.

Do you accept this:

Christian atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[juvenissun]

Do you accept this:

Christian atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These two words make Christianity gray in color.
I did not read the link. I don't need to. And I reject it.