Oh, I understood your other points, as well. You were not at all "elliptical". I simply did not take the time to address all your points--largely because (to me) they seemed self-evident. The nature of science ensures that, sooner or late, personal emotions and biases will give way to the rigorous application of experiment, research, and peer review.
Religious adherents tend to resist science more stridently than less invested individuals for the very reasons you suggest: Their fears of death, and their desires for answers--for certainty, for immortality--all these needs are deeply embedded in emotional layers of denial. And it is absolutely amazing the mental machinations and rationalizations such emotionally invested individuals will indulge in order to preserve their preferred "outcome", or their illusions. One need only observe how the Judaic creation story has been repeatedly altered by various Christian interpreters to 'harmonise' (NOT!) in some weak (yet completely inadequate) manner with Evolutionary Science. And the way they invent "explanations" for all the obviously tall tales in the bible makes one blush! The Exodus story, the Great Flood story, the Quail story, the story of Solomon's temple and his supposed world-wide fame! All these quaint stories have attracted trillions of words from those so personally invested that they will not accept any archeological conclusions--nor indeed any honest and cogent analysis from physicists, historians, or other disciplines.
Donkeys can't talk.
They can if God wants them to.
What makes you think God made the donkey talk?
Because He said so.
What evidence do you have that He said so?
It is in the bible which is Divine and is absolutely true to the word and full of miracles.
How do you know it is Divine and full of miracles?
Because it has talking snakes and talking donkeys.
But lots of books have talking animals in them.
Yes, but was Peter Rabbit written by God??? |
