Simon Paynton

“it’s not a case of one-off interventions, or a magic wand that prevents disaster.  There’s no dispute that sickness, death and natural disaster happen to everyone.

It’s also not exclusive, since it is given to everyone unearned.  It’s a regenerative power that people can use to make the most of situations.”

– the situation described is “God h…[Read more]

@kyrani – I hope you are better now.

Your argument in favour of Intelligent Design, or Young Earth Creationism, is:  “I don’t know”, “I don’t fully understand it“, “one way or the other“.

Also, you seem to agree that the present situation makes it look as if evolution is true: “Maybe God thought to have a joke and plant a whole lot of foss…[Read more]

Do you believe that God made it look as if evolution is true, and as if we’re all descended from a common ancestor that existed billions of years ago, through planting fossils in the Earth, and creating genetic and other similarities between living and extinct species – but that really, this is just an elaborate deception on the part of God, to…[Read more]

@kyrani – if evolution isn’t true, then what is the alternative explanation for how all the animals and plants got here, and how the ground is full of fossils, which all link up into a family tree extending back from the present day, through geological history, getting generally simpler and simpler as we go backwards?

You’re not filling me in on…[Read more]

@kyrani – how do you account for all the present day species, and all the fossil species?  How do you account for the family tree of life?

What did God do?

@kyrani – so – Goddidit?

@_robert_ – it’s not a case of one-off interventions, or a magic wand that prevents disaster.  There’s no dispute that sickness, death and natural disaster happen to everyone.

It’s also not exclusive, since it is given to everyone unearned.  It’s a regenerative power that people can use to make the most of situations.  Presumably, the child wi…[Read more]

@David Boots – it’s unearned favour, which implies that everyone gets it regardless of anything else.  It’s not there to save people from car crashes or cave collapses – it’s not a superpower.  But it is a force for growth, regeneration, and redemption.

Naoki Higashida, in “Fall Down Seven Times, Get Up Eight”, says:

“A worthwhile existen…[Read more]

It ignores “grace”

@belle – which statement of Hitchens?

@Strega –

“That this creator then gave a shit about a tiny blue dot in its massive creation”

“regular communication with the primal force”

what I mean is that I agree with you that the Bible is not evidence or proof of anything on its own; but I can have some understanding of the sentiments or meaning – I do kind of get it.  It’s a good way to…[Read more]

@Strega – I don’t agree with it, obviously, since I’m a confirmed atheist.  I’m just saying that it’s consistent: if you want to be a Christian, or whatever, then these ideas don’t contradict.

@Kyrani – how does Intelligent Design account for cancer? Was that a smart move? What about the river worm that burrows into the back of people’s eyeballs? Why did God Design that? What does Intelligent Design amount to, apart from Goddidit? Presumably, its explanatory power, when you come to a new situation, is limited to Goddidit.

@Strega –

“That this creator then gave a shit about a tiny blue dot in its massive creation is highly questionable.”

“regular communication with the primal force”

– to be fair, I think these are reasonable propositions given the frame of reference.  It says in the Bible that God loves every little sparrow, and knows every hair on your head.

In other words, isn’t it a bit silly to claim that the Bible is a science textbook?

@Kyrani – you’re a “primate change denier”?  How is evolution incompatible with religion?  Why not just give this one up?  By this stage, it really looks medieval and backward.  If you love science so much, why is evolution rubbish?

This raises a larger point:  a lot can go wrong if the pressure to thrive is not managed properly.  We can end up “thriving” in ways that are destructive.

@Strega – we presume that the ancestors of the Homo family line were “social but not very cooperative”, i.e. mainly competitive: living in a dominance hierarchy based on fighting ability, because this is what all the other primates are like now, who live in similar habitats.

The Homo family were required to live cooperatively in order to survive…[Read more]

@caseydorman – I’m not talking about the process of evolutionary change over aeons.  I’m talking about the process of individual beings living their lives.  Each one experiences a pressure to thrive, survive and reproduce.  This arises from 1) the fact that DNA reproduces; 2) evolution and natural selection.  If we put these two together, then ove…[Read more]

@Reg – the religious people that caseydorman was talking to, defined spirituality as

“transcendental force”

“some belief in a force higher than oneself, which provided an insight into the the true nature of humans and the world they lived in“.

It’s easy to see why people think this refers to something that doesn’t exist, because until now, no…[Read more]