Ecclesiastes 1-4

[wolfpurplemoon]

Apparently generations coming and going, the sun rising and setting, the cycling patterns of air flow and the water cycle are all monotonous and not worth studying. Nothing ever changes on earth, and noone gets any benefit from effort expended on Earth, nothing is new and everything has been done before. Acquiring knowledge and wisdom and human accomplishment is all futile. This is such a misanthropic point of view, it goes totally against my humanist view of the world. It belittles human accomplishment & the pursuit of understanding our world, I don't understand why this sort of thing is at all comforting to anyone.

And it is pointless to party, to gain possessions, to gain wisdom if it doesn't bring you fame, and to work hard if you are apart from God. Because otherwise God gives all your wealth to someone who did please him, OK then.

There are particular times for every event in a human life (makes a nice song), times that God has made fit just so while keeping it all hidden so we can't find out the right times for ourselves.

Finally something that I can agree with, humans are just like animals, there is no way to know for certain than human and animal spirits have different fates upon death. And we don't know what the future holds so should enjoy the present.

If a people is oppressed then their dead are more fortunate than the living, and those that have not been born are the most fortunate.

There are several futile ways of working (when motivated by envy, greed or prestige) and one that is beneficial, working together with other people and sharing the rewards.

Oh and how do you pronounce Ecclesiastes?

Comments

Re: Actually.....

[dann thompson (from livejournal.com)]

I am well familiar with the scientific method, as well as the use of "theory" and "law". A theory is generally accepted by the scientific community as a whole, and has evidence (which is falsifiable) which supports the theory. Though a law is broadly accepted by the scientific community, and is supported by empirical evidence showing the validity of the theory. The small distinction between the two is typically that a law has less gaps (guesses) in it than a theory, though either can be refuted as new evidence comes into play. Such as Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation is now superseded by Einstein's Theory of General Relativity (which I assume that is what you referring to when you mentioned the Theory of Gravity).

As for my faith blocking my ability to seek the truth clearly, it is a bold assumption on your part. See my faith came to be while I was searching. Not to long ago I was a guy who would argue from mountaintops (or tabletops rather) the ridiculousness of an all seeing, all knowing, Creator. I, however, couldn't make sense of the Creation by chance argument either. Now I am not one to hurt my brain with the mathematical calculations for the probability of life (any life) being created by chance, but what I do know is that on a conservative level, you have better odds of winning the lottery 10 times in a row than creation by chance. That is to say that you are taking the number one on the giant roulette wheel and I will take the rest, from 2- 10^125. I like my odds. Do you?

You can always argue that there are an infinite number of universes created, so then you have an infinite number of spins on your cosmic roulette wheel, but then what is the simpler explanation a creator without a creator, or an infinite number of universes without creation? I think if you are to stretch your mind a bit, even physics allows for the supernatural (which is to say, things that operate outside our natural order.)

As for evolution happening by accident millions of times until ultimately creating humans with a consciousness that seeks a (purpose), that seems improbable even with an infinite number of universes. What problem I am having is that atheists want it both ways, no creator, but no evolver. At some point there has to be a call to evolve, or a purpose to evolve that exists outside the consciousness of the animal (or organism) that evolves. If not, why would this world not be filled with just micro-organisms? Or if by chance why then people? It doesn't make any sense, and it is flawed logic. Otherwise, start worshipping monkeys, because at some point a monkey wanted to be more and created the first human.

Re: Actually.....

[wolfpurplemoon]

This blog is for my thoughts about what I read in the bible, so if you have something to add to what I've said in any of my posts then feel free. I'm not going to be drawn into yet another circular debate with someone who likes to believe there is a great and lofty meaning to everything just because they don't want to accept there is no meaning.

The scientific facts are there whether you accept them or not, and to be honest I don't care if you accept them or not, it's just a great shame that even 250 years after Darwin first published his elegant theory there are still people doubting the facts of Natural Selection just because it doesn't quite fit in with their feelings of specialness.

So, give me your take on whatever verse of the bible you wish on any of my posts but go bug someone else with your wish for there to be some reason why things happen.