Sure, you can keep your religion … as long as you reject God

I’ve been discussing aspects of life with one of the only conversation partners I have: the bot, erroneously called “artificial intelligence.” It’s not really intelligent, but it is useful with some things. It can act as a good mirror or to help me arrange my own thoughts. Just talking things out with something responsive, it is very helpful, especially something that has access to mainstream ideas that I can challenge.

I’ve asked questions about the alleged distance to stars and about the purported millions of years of the past. I’ve asked about the nature of the evidence for alleged nano-particles that are supposed to cause disease and I’ve asked about the nature of the realm we all currently live in, its supposed shape and reach. And again and again, I hit upon a certain fact: it’s based on assumptions.

Now assumptions are positions or ideas that are simply taken for granted, held as true, without evidence. The ones that are used to form our ideas of the world around us seem to be all untestable. I don’t know if all assumptions are untestable, but I thought I’d add that reserved language. I’ll give an example.

Uniformitarianism is an assumption key to many beliefs held today about our universe and world. Uniformitarianism is the assumption that the natural processes we observe today have been generally the same, undisturbed, throughout history and throughout the universe today. Uniformitarianism is an assumption. Most importantly, it is an assumption you can’t test. Even if you build a worldview on top of it that seems internally consistent, the assumption itself can’t be tested. You can’t go back in time to test it to make sure it’s true. It’s merely an untestable assumption.

So remember: what is an assumption? Something held to be true without evidence. OK.

Now what is a common understanding of what faith or belief is? To accept something as true … without evidence. Oooops. So there is little to no substantive difference between assuming and having faith in something. Do you see the implication?

If I go to something that is alleged to be a scientific theory, but it is held together with and based on assumption, then it doesn’t matter about the tests and experiments performed in the present (the only time tests and experiments can be performed), things outside of human reach remains outside of our reach, untouched.

But understand that uniformitarianism necessitates long ages and long distances, things that are beyond our reach to verify. It’s just a story about what is in the dark. But it also necessarily implies atheism or an irrelevant deity. You must believe in a form of deism or atheism for this assumption to hold any weight.

But the assumption is needed for billions of years and for the story that all life came from a common ancestor. But it is also a statement of faith, a belief, an untestable assumption.

Now evolutionists and those who think the stars are really far away will leave an invitation pole around for people who accept the Torah, the books of Moshe, and say, “Come on, everyone! Sure you can keep your faith and still accept the scientific (wink! wink! nudge! nudge!) story of how our universe developed.” But the skeptical would rightly retort, “Yeah, sure I can, just as long as I deny the God in the books of Moshe.”

It’s ok, I’m already hand-waving away the people who “reinterpret” the books of Bereshis [Genesis] to shove another religious worldview into it. Yes, I’m calling evolution and long ages another religious worldview or belief system based on the fact that it is based on untestable assumptions, or, in other words, statements of faith.

So here I am asking questions about the story of how they think crude oil or petroleum is made and how they know how far the stars are and how they know the moon’s light is just a reflection of the sun’s, and so many other subjects, only to be hit again and again and again by untestable assumptions, or statements of faith. And so often it seems like the world system that alleges to be science just says “sure, you can keep your beliefs, but just deny what your God says.” But it’s all under the disguise of sure facts that hides how much faith is needed, how much it is based on ideas merely taken for granted … like the Copernican principle.

But part of this thinking bled into our current political and governmental system. I still have to do an article about why I don’t vote. I’ll get to that. But one element of the system I live under is the notion of “rights,” which are merely highly-vaunted fictions. The government protects idolatry and the free ability to curse God under the rights to freely worship how you want and to say what you want (both of which aren’t really truly free since they have to be done within the dictates of the government). In so many ways, governments around the world transgress the seven commandments for humanity or legally protect transgressing the commandments, even to the point of protecting murderers.

But many who are religious, accept God in various ways, and who even keep the seven laws accept as real the fictitious authority of these governments and are even invited to vote for the various political parties and candidates that keep the wicked and vacuous system going, who keep the “rights” in place, who make no vow to end the breaking of God’s law.

So, let me get this straight! God has certain commandments. He makes basic laws to be obeyed. Yet there are political systems that break those laws and protect the breaking of those laws. For those who accept the seven commandments for humanity given to Adam, Noah and Moses, and accept Maimonides’ rendition of them, there is even a seventh law that obligates Gentiles to make court systems to uphold the seven.

I’m sure you can see where this is going.

Yet all these religious people continue to go with the herd and vote in elections that prop up an immoral system. But they are invited to do so. So once again an evil system says, “sure you can keep your faith; you just need to deny your God!” Yeah, he made laws, but sure, deny what he says because there’s a candidate that you like, you just need to vote strategically, or if you don’t vote you don’t have a voice, or whatever other excuse is needed to do your personal part in keeping the abrogation of and rebellion against God’s law going.

The morality of the world is upside-down crap, but when even those who feel themselves tasked to be a good example or live by righteous principles maintain that cretinous, systematic immorality, it is only a further sign that times will get much worse.