An Italian woman, Johanna Ganthaler, arrived late and missed her flight on Air France 447 on May 31st. The plane crashed into the Atlantic four hours later killing all 228 passengers.
Many would call this a miracle from God that her life was saved. Although I’d have to ask how 228 people perishing in a terrible plane crash was part of God’s plan.
After narrowly avoiding death, the woman and her husband took an alternate flight home the following day. A few days later she was killed in a serious car accident
Ms Ganthaler died when their car veered across a road in Kufstein, Austria, and swerved into an oncoming truck. Her husband was seriously injured.
God does work in mysterious ways.
Tags: 228, Air France, Atlantic, Car, Crash, Death, Died, Flight 447, God, Johanna Ganthaler, Miracle, Ocean, Plane
June 11, 2009 at 4:10 pm |
If only probability is being affected when God intervenes, which seems to be the case, then how could it be differentiated from chance events simply happening based on unaffected probabilities?
It seems to be that any time a miracle happens, it’s just something that has a low probability occurring, usually to the benefit of the observer.
When double-blind studies are conducted, they generally show that prayer does not have a statistical effect on an outcome. If God is just trying to stay hidden in this case, then what reason is there to believe that He is affecting any probabilities at all? Where does this assumption come from?
Surely, if there was something external acting upon chance events, there should be some form of quantifiable measurement.
June 11, 2009 at 4:27 pm |
“Surely, if there was something external acting upon chance events, there should be some form of quantifiable measurement.”
“when studying a natural phenomenon, the scientist must always assume there is a natural cause. That is because natural causes are the only kind its methodology can address.” Science by its nature cannot discern or test for supernatural causes … can those causes therefore not exist? This is where science attempts to enter the realm of philosophy … “The philosopher Alvin Plantinga responds: … {This} argument is like the drunk who insisted on looking for his lost keys only under the streetlight on the grounds that the light was better there. In fact, I would go the drunk one better: it would insist that because the keys would be hard to find in the dark, they MUST be under the light.”
June 11, 2009 at 4:33 pm |
I never said they couldn’t exist. Science never says that the supernatural can’t exist.
The real question, though, is that if there isn’t any observable effect of the supernatural on our existence, then is it even worth considering?
Further, if we can’t discern anything about a supernatural force of being, then how can we make any claims at all as to its nature?
This leads to the all-important question. How does the possibility of supernatural existence directly translate to the Juedo-Christian God described in the Bible? There’s a gap in logic there that is not being, and never has been, explained to me.
Prove to me that the idea of the God in the Bible is more valid than invisible unicorns.
June 11, 2009 at 4:41 pm |
prove to you how? using science?
“The real question, though, is that if there isn’t any observable effect of the supernatural on our existence, then is it even worth considering?” I can only answer this from the perspective of Alcoholics Anonymous. With respect to a Higher Power, with respect to Serenity … I can only say that YES … it is worth Considering
June 11, 2009 at 5:54 pm
You must have some reason why you believe in God, but not the Greek Pantheon. Anything that you can attribute to God that cannot also apply to any other supernatural construct is acceptable.
It’s funny that you mention AA, because they’re actually not a very successful program. While the numbers on their recidivism rate are rather scattered, it’s simply because AA does not publish those numbers. You would think that a group that is trying to help people would boast of their successes in order to increase membership.
In actuality, people are more likely to quit drugs and drinking on their own.
June 11, 2009 at 9:12 pm
I’ve lost count of the number of times that this “argument” has been posted up but I’ll give you that you’re just about the nicest among all of the religious folk I’ve seen here so far!
Right then, let’s say that I believe that there is a Supernatural china teapot that’s revolving around the Earth. If I were to add that the teapot was invisible and utterly undetectable by even the most sophisticated of our equipments, does it really balance out the probabilites of its existance and non-existance? No. In fact, anyone who answered “yes” seriously should slap themselves right now.
Just because something cannot be disproven doesn’t make it truer than it already is.
Your God is no different.
June 12, 2009 at 8:29 am |
Anne Marie: “when studying a natural phenomenon, the scientist must always assume there is a natural cause. That is because natural causes are the only kind its methodology can address.”
Not necessarily. (And since that’s apparently a direct quote, you ought to cite the source.) Look at the number of medical studies carried out to ascertain whether there is a medical benefit from intercessory prayer.
BTW, all the large, well-designed studies have found no positive effect from intercessory prayer, except two, which were fraudulent (Elisabeth Targ, and the Columbia prayer study.)
June 11, 2009 at 4:51 pm |
I actually haven’t seen much about there being miracles involved with this crash. Of course I avoid most of the more conservative news sites. Is it possible that people are actually figuring out that true miracles would be no lives lost on this type of crash? That the only miracles are the ones they create within their own minds.
June 14, 2009 at 4:12 am |
Surely, if “God” wanted to “miraculously” ensure that people`s lives were saved, He would just see to it that the disasters didn`t occur in the first place!! There is such a suspension of logical thought processes here that I almost despair! Similarly, when someone walks away unhurt from a serious car crash are they really “lucky” to have escaped injury, or actually “unlucky” that they had the crash? The media have to take much of the blame for the woolly thinking in society today, and I have thought for many years that logic lessons would not go amiss in our schools (something that the religious extremists would no doubt fight tooth and nail!).
June 11, 2009 at 6:04 pm |
Cosmic irony…
Mixter
June 11, 2009 at 6:34 pm |
Hi Janus! “Come, let us argue it out.” – Isaiah 1:18. My Christian faith provides me with a framework for seeking answers as an integrated human being. There certainly are holistic reasons why I believe in God – but I don’t attempt to address those reasons with science. Why address a philosophical question with science?
June 11, 2009 at 6:44 pm |
Why aren’t you a Muslim?
My guess is that you were born into a Christian family/culture. Not surprisingly, most Muslims were born into an Islamic family/culture.
Does it bother you a bit that the vast majority of religious people on this planet have their faith selected for them by the accident of birth?
June 11, 2009 at 6:51 pm |
Hi Paul! It absolutely DOES bother me, and I’ve given it great consideration
Can there be just ONE true religion?
Yes, I was born into the Christian tradition. As a Christian, and within Christian circles – these sorts of questions are absolutely discussed, addressed, pontificated – and not necessarily agreed upon philosophically/theologically … however, I am addressing what Janus described as the Real Question:
“The real question, though, is that if there isn’t any observable effect of the supernatural on our existence, then is it even worth considering?”
June 11, 2009 at 6:58 pm |
Three responses now, and not one of them explains why you feel God is more valid than any other deity or supernatural construct.
You will notice that I never mentioned that anyone had to prove God with science. Not once. I did mention that, scientifically, there is no way to prove that God does anything and, if God does nothing, then there’s no way to know He exists. However, I have asked you twice now to give me any evidence at all that your belief in God is more valid than someone else’s belief in a different deity. The lack of scientific evidence necessitates some other rationale on your part.
All I’m asking for is a reasonable rationale and, thus far, you have been unable or unwilling to provide one, opting instead to keep saying that you weren’t going to prove God with science.
Also, Isiah 1 is a terrible chapter. God is basically telling the Children of Israel that it’s His way or the highway. Yes, while God is apparently merciful, He will utterly destroy you if you don’t agree with Him in every way. Let’s even ignore the parts of these verses that deal with the bad people. God is threatening inordinate amounts of vengeance on people who are even trying to give offerings to Him, simply because their leaders, who they didn’t pick, are sinful?
1:13-15: Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.
1:20: But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.
1:28-29: And the destruction of the transgressors and of the sinners shall be together, and they that forsake the LORD shall be consumed. For they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired, and ye shall be confounded for the gardens that ye have chosen.
You know what, though, now that I think about this, it’s pretty accurate. What you’re telling me is that even though we can have different points of view, but God is going to punish me in the most horrible ways imaginable because of it.
That’s a real classy way to carry on a discussion.
June 11, 2009 at 7:41 pm |
God is infinite, He doesn’t think we do. whe humans are finite we
can only handle an amount of information. Would you ever consider
that was God who brought those people who died to Heaven.
June 11, 2009 at 7:53 pm
What about the vast minority of people who have ever existed that didn’t, don’t, and won’t believe in God?
According to the Bible, they’re going to suffer for eternity with no chance of redemption for not doing something they might not have even heard about. There is nothing in the Bible that says they will be saved. In fact, it says that only people who accept Jesus Christ as their savior go to heaven.
So if God isn’t even going to let almost everyone who ever lived into heaven, why would He care about a few hundred? Why would He even let these people die in such a horrible way?
Merciful beings don’t sentence their creations to horrible, painful deaths even though they could just as easily allow them to die peacefully. In fact, mercy, by definition is the property by which you forgive even those who have wronged you, without asking for anything in return.
So, if God is merciful, why doesn’t He forgive anyone without asking anything in return? Why does He condemn billions upon billions of people to eternal torment?
Would you ever consider that God is sadistic or doesn’t exist?
June 11, 2009 at 9:16 pm
I’m interested to know why God only allows a minority of the Homo Sapian species into this “beautiful” place that he calls Heaven while rejecting other species such as Pan troglodytes who share about 98% of our genetic make up.
The ARROGANCE of humans…
June 12, 2009 at 8:32 am
thevangelisthug: “Would you ever consider that was God who brought those people who died to Heaven.”
So only believers who are going to Heaven get killed? Would you ever consider that some of those people are not going to Heaven, and that by hastening their death, all-merciful God is hastening their entrance to an eternity of Hellish punishment?
June 12, 2009 at 8:15 am |
“…why you feel God is more valid than any other deity or supernatural construct.”
Regarding God and his validity — there are some verses in the Bible regarding Science that man could not have known before the last couple hundred of years had he not received the information from someone else (ie, God). Pretty neat stuff:
The Hydrologic Cycle:
“For He draws up the drops of water, They distill rain from the mist,
Which the clouds pour down, They drip upon man abundantly.”
– Job 36:27,28
“All the rivers flow into the sea, Yet the sea is not full. To the place where the rivers flow, There they flow again.”
– Ecclesiastes 1:7
Water in the Clouds:
“He wraps up the waters in His clouds, And the cloud does not burst under them”
– Job 26:8
“Also with moisture He loads the thick cloud; He disperses the cloud of His lightning.”
– Job 37:11
Weather Patterns:
“Blowing toward the south, Then turning toward the north, The wind continues swirling along; And on its circular courses the wind returns”
– Ecclesiastes 1:6
Ocean Currents:
“The birds of the heavens and the fish of the sea, Whatever passes through the paths of the seas.”
– Psalm 8:8
Springs at the Bottom of the Ocean:
“Have you entered into the springs of the sea Or walked in the recesses of the deep?”
– Job 38:16
Earth suspended in space:
“He stretches out the north over empty space And hangs the earth on nothing.”
– Job 26:7
I love Job 26:7 because it’s in stark contrast to “any other deity or supernatural construct” that we might think of: Romans thought Atlas was holding the earth up; others that the earth was held on the back of an Elephant or a large turtle.
Very interesting, these verses!
June 11, 2009 at 7:48 pm |
I guess I’m not sure how this women’s death proves there are no miracles. Are you saying that God intended to kill her in a car accident instead of a plane crash?
And you know this… how?
June 11, 2009 at 9:22 pm |
“I guess I’m not sure how this women’s death proves there are no miracles.”
For one thing, if I were God and had performed a miracle specifically so that Ms Ganthaler would not die from the plane crash, I would have kept her alive for a bit longer than a few days before allowing her to die in a car accident.
“Are you saying that God intended to kill her in a car accident instead of a plane crash?”
Someone explain to this dude the part about BEattitude’s atheism…
“And you know this… how?”
Because the Flying Spaghetti Monster told him in a dream. ;D
June 12, 2009 at 7:10 am |
I’m saying your God is imaginary. And I know this because I’ve deeply studied the book about this god and witnessed the how the world functions void of answered prayers or miracles. Plus the Spaghetti Monster told me.
June 12, 2009 at 10:42 am
Technically you believe it rather than “know” it, since knowing it would be impossible either way. But my point is, when God becomes a book, and is subject to a personal interpretation, all sorts of notions get mixed up.
Also I’m amused that the non-believers refer to God as “your God.” If there is a God he is yours too. Why would you try to negate that?
The idea that God intervenes and “saves” this one and lets that one perish is a rather old concept of the God who allows suffering. Since it conflicts with the idea of free choice by the human, perhaps it is this vision of God that needs adjusting. Perhaps, God doesn’t intervene either way because that’s part of the rules of life. ?
Treat the bible for what it is, and actually things make a good deal more sense. Or not, and enjoy badmouthing God. God I assure you can take it, and quite honestly loves you just the same. Or not. Since you see, I cannot prove God no more than you can disprove him. So we choose to believe or not. As we should, and as I suspect God prefers. You experience life your way, I’ll do it my way, and perhaps you’ll chose a different way next time. Who knows?
June 12, 2009 at 2:12 pm
You’re right, it is impossible for either of us to “know”. But I refer to God as “your god” because I have no reason to believe the Bible holds any truth. Thus he is your god. If there is a supreme creator out in space somewhere, I can’t begin to believe the silly Bible stories even begin to give a real description.
I do treat the Bible for what it is. Folklore, primitive laws, conflicting moral teaching and fictional historical accounts.
June 11, 2009 at 10:36 pm |
If any other theistic worldview besides Christianity were true, then “god” was either taken off guard by her death and there is no hope. But if Christ ordained it to happen for His own good purposes which we cannot fully know now, then there is hope. If Naturalism is true then her death is just the illusion of death and nothing happened but atoms banging around. If Christianity isn’t true, then you’re actually currently outraged by something other than Christianity.
June 12, 2009 at 7:13 am |
I would suggest none of those things are true and the entire story is just sad.
June 12, 2009 at 5:39 pm |
Wait, just a bunch of atoms banging around and nothing happening?
These are human beings. Saying there is no God doesn’t equate to nihilism. In fact, I feel like my life is more purposeful and precious than I did as a Christian.
Why? Because I’m the one responsible for my successes and failures. I’m the one I hold accountable for how my life is going. I don’t feel like I’m being tossed around every which way at the caprice of some other being that can do whatever it wants.
The Naturalistic world view isn’t that nothing has meaning. It’s quite the opposite, actually. This point of view is simply that everything has a rational cause and effect, uninfluenced by an outside supernatural force. Love, hope, goodwill, none of this is a direct result of belief in God. These are things that people appreciate regardless of what God or gods they believe, or even if they believe in God at all.
Besides, what you’re doing is the equivalent of saying that if Christianity is true, then you don’t care if anyone dies, because they actually live forever.
This is dishonest, because I know you care whether or not people die. Turning your belief into a watered down, simplified absurdity is insulting. It’s not your place to dictate my beliefs to me any more than it’s my place to tell you yours. All I’m saying is what I believe and why.
And you not only managed to do this with Naturalism, but with every other belief out there. There are other gods that are purported to be omniscient and omnipotent. If this is the case, and they’re the ones who caused this plane to crash, then they weren’t taken off guard by anything.
Seriously, what basis do you have for making that claim?
June 11, 2009 at 11:07 pm |
“Merciful beings don’t sentence their creations to horrible, painful deaths even though they could just as easily allow them to die peacefully.” … “The problem of tragedy, suffering, and injustice is a problem for everyone.” Believers and non-believers alike. {CS Lewis wrote extensively on this topic} “On what basis does the atheist judge the natural world to be horribly wrong, unfair, and unjust?” Suffering is addressed by ALL major religions in the world. It is a fundamental God question. Keep asking, keep seeking!
June 12, 2009 at 6:10 am |
You have answered nothing.
I’m pretty sure my questions are very simple and explicit, but you don’t seem to be capable of providing me with questions, so what, exactly, are you telling me to seek?
I have already asked the questions and neither you, nor anyone else, has really answered them adequately.
June 12, 2009 at 7:00 am |
Hi Janus! “Why does He condemn billions upon billions of people to eternal torment?” Don’t expect a pat answer on this one – it’s something to wrestle with. When you wrestle with the Scriptures, you may come out with a “broken hip” as in the story of Jacob’s ladder. I suppose the first thing to do would be to clarify “Hell.” The philosophical question is really, “How can a loving God send people to Hell.” Is that what you’re asking?
June 12, 2009 at 7:25 am
I’ve asked that question many times.
This invisible god of yours allows me to murder another human being as long as I say “I’m sorry” and ask for his forgiveness. But if I dare use rational thought and question his existence, I get to burn in torment for eternity.
That is the teaching of Christianity and the Bible. There are hundreds of theories and interpretation on what hell is and what it takes to go to heaven. But the fact is, the words of the Bible leave little interpretation of what hell is and why your god sends people there.
So remind me again why I should ignore all logic and reason to worship worship a cruel, illogical and impossible god?
June 12, 2009 at 8:02 am
I think the answer to this has to do with Free Will (which, if you are a debunker, we won’t get very far):
“How can a loving God send people to Hell?”
God has made a way to *not* be cast into the lake o’ fire at the End (via Jesus Christ), but saying “No” to Jesus Christ doesn’t leave many options. God will not overstep your choice to reject Christ. But, there are consequences, such as the lake o’ fire — when the world will be getting a reboot…
June 12, 2009 at 7:46 am |
Hi Janus! “the words of the Bible leave little interpretation of what hell is and why your god sends people there.” Be specific, let’s discuss. How can a God of Judgment be a God of Love? Divine judgement is one of Christianity’s most offensive doctrines. “Hell is simply one’s freely chosen identity apart from God on a trajectory into infinity. We see this process “writ small” in addictions to drugs, alcohol, gambling, and pornography.”
There is an excellent chapter in the book “The Reason for God” by Timothy Keller – How can a loving God send people to Hell. If you are REALLY looking for some answers – get a copy from the library. It will challenge your belief system!
June 12, 2009 at 7:54 am |
Was the woman a Christian?
June 12, 2009 at 8:04 am |
Your theory is God would have protected her if she was a Christian? Just like he protected the thousands of children molested by Catholic priests?
June 12, 2009 at 8:17 am |
Haha, easy BE — just a question. I didn’t see anything about her religion anywhere. Just curious.
It’s an interesting point, for sure.
June 12, 2009 at 8:21 am
The article didn’t really say if she was a Christian or not. Since so many people died, it obviously didn’t get the media spin that the “Miracle on the Hudson” did. Just a really bizarre story.
June 12, 2009 at 8:04 am |
Oh and I wanted to say about this: “question his existence” – do you imagine that Christians just don’t Ask the Big Questions? Do you think we are “sheep” that just kind of go along with it all? Are we of lesser intelligence? Are we cruel and illogical, along with our God?
Hopefully all of us, believers and non-believers alike are asking those Big Questions. They cannot be ignored!
Is it illogical, irrational to philosophically believe in God?
June 12, 2009 at 8:12 am |
I know several extremely intelligent Christians. So no, I’m not attempting to call Christians intellectually stupid. And I am not calling all Christians cruel. I’m only saying that we are exactly the same. Religious people do bad things and non religious people do bad things. The only difference is religious people blame the devil for the bad and give God credit for the good.
Logical and rational Christians believe is because they choose to have faith. An honest Christian knows there is reason to doubt, they are either too afraid or simply unwilling to let the doubt cause them to not believe.
June 12, 2009 at 10:50 am |
Well, some Christians undoubtedly do in a sense blame someone other than themselves, but most mature Christians see failings as their own fault. I can’t imagine arguing that the devil is responsible, since I don’t believe in such a being in the first place.
An honest and logical Christian has doubt. We live in the questions as it were. That is where the growth is. Anyone who needs a faith that is set in stone is living a dead faith. That is the excitement, frankly, contemplating the suffering, the lack of justice, all the mysteries that are inexplicable. Again, I see your responses as well meant, but so limited in their landscape. It is as if you had tunnel vision and cannot see the broad panorama of possibilities.
June 12, 2009 at 2:07 pm
If the devil isn’t real, who tempted Jesus in the desert and Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden?
June 12, 2009 at 8:10 am |
Come now, be kind. This is a rather cruel example, don’t you think? Well, perhaps not the example itself (for it is very interesting) but I do think you could have written this post in a slightly less “Ha ha, she’s dead now” way…
June 12, 2009 at 8:18 am |
How exactly did I say “ha, ha, she’s dead now”!?
This is an extremely sad story that I only post to illustrate how illogical it is for people to search for miracles in the midst of tragedy. Good and bad things happen to people every day without discretion or reason.
June 12, 2009 at 9:46 am |
With regards to Doubt – here is a quote from Rob Bell’s excellent book, Velvet Elvis:
“Questions are not scary. What is scary is when people don’t have any.
We sponsored a Doubt Night at our church awhile back. People were encouraged to write down whatever questions or doubts they had about God and Jesus and the Bible and faith and church.
I have page after page of questions on my desk. Heaven and hell and suicide and the devil and God and love and rape – some very personal, some angry, some desperate, some very deep and philosophical.
Most of my responses were about how we need others to carry our burdens and how our real needs in life are not for more information but for loving community with other people on the journey. But what was so powerful for those I spoke with was that they were free to voice what was deepest in their hearts and minds. Questions, doubts, struggles. It wasn’t the information that helped them – it was simply being in an environment in which they were free to voice what was inside.
Questions, no matter how shocking or blasphemous or arrogant or ignorant or raw, are rooted in humility. A humility that understands that I am not God. And there is more to know.
Questions bring freedom. Freedom that I don’t have to be God and I don’t have to pretend that I have it all figured out. I can let God be God.
Central to the Christian experience is the art of questioning God. Not belligerent, arrogant questions that have no respect for our maker, but naked, honest, vulnerable, raw questions, arising out of the awe that comes from engaging the living God.”
June 12, 2009 at 1:43 pm |
“Questions are not scary. What is scary is when people don’t have any.”
I’ve one right here: how is it possible for a man to develop with only 23 chromosomes?
“We sponsored a Doubt Night at our church awhile back. People were encouraged to write down whatever questions or doubts they had about God and Jesus and the Bible and faith and church.”
Did they receive answers? If yes, what sort of answers? If no, you should seriously kick yourself.
“I have page after page of questions on my desk. Heaven and hell and suicide and the devil and God and love and rape – some very personal, some angry, some desperate, some very deep and philosophical.”
Good. And I hope that among those questions is “Can God create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift?”
“Most of my responses were about how we need others to carry our burdens and how our real needs in life are not for more information but for loving community with other people on the journey.”
Ergo; you’re avoiding the question.
“But what was so powerful for those I spoke with was that they were free to voice what was deepest in their hearts and minds. Questions, doubts, struggles. It wasn’t the information that helped them – it was simply being in an environment in which they were free to voice what was inside.”
So, you’re telling me that there was a time when they weren’t free to voice their doubts and questions? That’s just vile…
“Questions, no matter how shocking or blasphemous or arrogant or ignorant or raw, are rooted in humility. A humility that understands that I am not God. And there is more to know.”
Is it really “humility” that drives the human mind to discover and venture into that which it does not know, or is it curiosity? Atheists do not believe in God but I doubt if any of us would dare proclaim to know everything. We have no God but we too are eager to learn more about this glorious world around us, why is that, I wonder?
“Central to the Christian experience is the art of questioning God. Not belligerent, arrogant questions that have no respect for our maker, but naked, honest, vulnerable, raw questions, arising out of the awe that comes from engaging the living God.”
I’m curious…are questions such as “Could God make a wall so strong that he cannot break it” or “Could God completely fill a rectangle with circles without overlapping?” considered “belligerent, arrogant questions that have no respect for our maker”?
June 12, 2009 at 10:00 am |
There are questions (specially those about suffering) that generate more questions if we put a god into the picture.
When we put god in any event (tragic or non tragic), then, things don’t make any sense. And, I am not pretending to be god.
June 12, 2009 at 10:53 am |
I do want to thank you BEattitude. In answering your “why I left Christianity”, I’m getting a good discussion going, and you have an excellent one here. No doubt my answers will not satisfy you, but it continues to be a fascinating conversation. Lurkers often benefit the most I find. Who knows who is listening?
June 12, 2009 at 4:25 pm |
“If the devil isn’t real, who tempted Jesus in the desert and Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden?”
You need not take it literally. We are all tempted to do that which our higher selves know is not helpful or good for us or others. It is a teaching on placing the right emphasis on what is truly important. Power, and such things are fleeting. It is a literary device to teach a lesson. Jesus was alone. Unless you posit that he told others of this, which is not reported in the bible, the writer could not possibly have known of it.
And you surely don’t believe in a literal Adam and Eve do you? Again these are literary devices to teach valuable lessons. Very few, except the fundamentalists believes them “real”.
June 12, 2009 at 5:03 pm |
When you say higher selves, are you talking about the souls?
June 12, 2009 at 6:06 pm |
I obviously don’t believe in Adam and Eve. But I’ve always had a hard time understanding how Christians justify calling it a metaphorical story to continue believing the Bible as “truth”.
Genesis 1-2 presents them as actual persons and even narrates the important events in their lives. They gave birth to literal children who did the same (Genesis 4-5). Old Testament chronologies place Adam at the beginning of the list (Gen. 5:1; 1 Chron. 1:1). The New Testament places Adam at the beginning of Jesus’ literal ancestors (Luke 2:38). Jesus referred to Adam & Eve as the first literal “male and female,” making their physical union the basis of marriage (Matt. 19:4). The comparison of Adam (the “first Adam”) with Christ (the “last Adam”) in 1 Corinthians 15:45 shows that Adam was understood as a literal, historical person.
The Apostle Paul further confirms the believed “truth” of the creation story in Romans 5:12-19 when he says the words “one man” over and over to describe the fall of man.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%205:12-19;&version=31;
The story of Adam and Eve is certainly a silly fictional story, but it was written as truth and believed to be so until science and rational thought proved otherwise.
June 13, 2009 at 4:53 pm |
This is more of out of interest than anything but do you believe literally in Noah’s Flood? Virgin birth? Rising from the dead? Turning water into wine? Raising the Red Sea?
Just interested to know…
Thanks!
June 12, 2009 at 5:13 pm |
Hi Butterfly! “If I were to add that the teapot was invisible and utterly undetectable by even the most sophisticated of our equipments, does it really balance out the probabilites of its existance and non-existance?”
You are assuming that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes and laws. “No supernatural cause for any natural phenomenon is possible.” Science, by it’s nature cannot discern for supernatural causes, so therefore those causes cannot exist?
What you are arguing is an illustration of “philosophical naturalism” – “the view that Everything has a natural cause” … “When science is turned into an All-encompassing Theory explaining absolutely everything we believe, feel and do, then we are not in the arena of science, but of philosophy.”
June 12, 2009 at 7:21 pm |
“You are assuming that all phenomena can be explained in terms of natural causes and laws.”
Yes, I am going to assume that until you could prove me wrong.
“No supernatural cause for any natural phenomenon is possible.”
No, because as scientists dig deeper and deeper into this “supernatural cause”, we would eventually understand it well enough to welcome it into the category of “natural laws.”
“Science, by it’s nature cannot discern for supernatural causes, so therefore those causes cannot exist?”
Why can’t science discern for supernatural causes though? I’ve heard of quite a few “prayer experiments” conducted by renowned scientific institutions. With the fact that they’ve all failed miserably aside, it is apparent that science COULD discern for “supernatural” causes. Either that, or you’re calling all those scientists involved in the prayer research stupid; pick one.
As I’ve previously said, if a “supernatural” cause is really discovered one day, it is only “supernatural” because we do not yet fully understand it. Primitive man used to consider thunderstorms the wrath of Gods; something that is supernatural. I doubt if you will today.
“What you are arguing is an illustration of “philosophical naturalism” – “the view that Everything has a natural cause” … “When science is turned into an All-encompassing Theory explaining absolutely everything we believe, feel and do, then we are not in the arena of science, but of philosophy.”
So…the study of chemical reactions in the brain when we experience “love” is philosophy?
June 13, 2009 at 10:22 am |
Hi Butterfly – what about stuff like Values? Morals? Right and wrong. How is that empirically measured?
June 13, 2009 at 4:50 pm
The thing about science is that it concerns itself not with what is right or wrong but more of the truth.
Science can’t tell you if abortion is right or wrong but it can tell you that an embryo is a cell with the capability to develop into a human being.
Science can’t tell you if nuking a city is right or wrong but it can tell you that the energy produced during the continuous nuclear fission reaction when the bomb hits something is enough to completely incinerate anything that it hits and virtually destroy the entire city.
Science can’t tell you if our morals and values are right or wrong but it can tell you how you got them.
You’re right, there are some things in this world that cannot be empirically measured. However, they could still be explained using science. They are still natural. No one with a sane mind would claim that love is a supernatural thing. It still has a natural cause although it cannot be measured.
I’m sorry but I don’t get what you’re trying to say here; something doesn’t have to be measured before it could be explained by science. Just because something can’t be measured doesn’t mean that it isn’t natural.
By the way, I’m interested to hear your views on the other parts of my post.
Mutate and Survive,
Butterfly
June 14, 2009 at 12:00 am |
[...] by The BEattitude from [...]