ex.Brahma wrote:... oil, gas and other minerals took millions of years to formulate and materialise, and are not renewables. How would this fact match with the endless 5,000 year cycle?
I have often asked rational questions such as this, e.g. "
how do the burnt hydrocarbons of the oil and coal get removed from the atmosphere and trees where they now exist and replaced back under the soil to where they were found" or "
how does all the metal sent up in space exploration get returned to where it was?" ... but at the end of the day, the god of the BKs and its adherents have no answers. It's magic wand territory. Try and be logical and you are brushed aside sanctimoniously as being a buddhu (idiot) for asking. Blind faith and subservience to the BK Seniors are what count the most.
button slammer wrote:Big bang/evolution believes a random event approx 13.5 billion years ago led to another random event, of the creation of a simple cell/origin of life on earth. Is like saying the computer on your desk arranged itself out of myriads of components ... in perfect working order ... please.
It's a strange day when the 5,000 year Brahma Kumaris get into bed with the 6,000 year "stone intellect", "body conscious", "ignorant", "science proud", "incomplete", "Yadava" fundamentalist Christians to prove their point ... especially given that these Christians must only one or a few births old according to The Knowledge, given they have their own cult called "
Young Earth creationism". This specific individual is a Seventh Day Adventists.
Is it not "parmat" (worthless opinion of others) from lowly Kali Yugi souls?These individuals depend not on science for their theories but a literal interpretation of the chronology of the Jewish history within the Old Testament (Bible) which states God created the Earth, perfect and complete, in six 24-hour days. They then date that event backwards believing that men such as Adam who actually existed and died at the age of 930, 912 (Seth) 910 (Kenan), 895 (Mahalalel), 962 (Jared) and so on. And that they had children aged 130 years old etc ... all of which completely contradicts The Knowledge as it happened in the Copper Age less then 2,500 years ago according to the BKs.
How can the BKs use theories which completely contradict The Knowledge to support it?Aren't the BKs proving a different point from the Christians? The Christians want to prove the Bible is true and Jewish god waved a magic wand and brewed up the universe from his breath, whereas the BK god did none of that.
The god of the BKs, they claim, made nothing and did nothing physical. For the BKs Heaven on Earth is the beginning just magically existed. Full Stop.
In fact, BK creationism is even weirder and more mysterious than Christian creationism. Their god has no explanation at all for how the universe and evolution happened at all. He and the leaders of the cult leave the question entirely open to the speculations of the mainly male adherents. It's seen as a kind of "Brother's Maya" (illusion) because the superior Sisters don't question and just have "faith".
There is a rebuttal to many of the arguments of the Young Creationists,
here. Sorry to say it, bottom slammer, but as I suspect your post is just a 'hit and run' attack and you don't really want to discuss the issue, I am not going to get into the discussion of the facts ...
However, I am interested by the cultic techniques being used here.
Mainly it's the "
uncertainty tactic".
The victims of such arguments are usually entirely uneducated in science. They don't know how science works, they don't understand its language; frankly, they might even be frightened by it and egotistically intimidated by its practitioners. They start 99% from wanting to believe in whatever cockamanie they have been fed by their blind gurus. Whereas scientists are smart, intellectual and extremely rational; most religionists would be happier back in the Middle Ages or living in an imaginary Harry Potter Land.
All the proponents of cult religions have to do is seed doubts in their minds to win over the last 1%, e.g. "
Science was wrong before".
Then you have the "
false dichotomy"; the simplistic black and white world of cult adherence, a binary way of "right" and "wrong" thinking. Guru is "right" (and does not need to substantiate their claims because they are god and they say so); everyone else is "wrong" (and any hint of doubt or 'work in progress' is proof of that).
Then there is the "
Backfire effect", when, in the face of contradictory evidence, beliefs get stronger. They claim "scientists said so, so it must be true", ignoring that even people with a science degree can be loopy Christians and a science degree does not give you the authority to be an expert in all fields.
All the one million plus member, 75 year old, multi-million dollar funded Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual
University has to do is produce O-N-E peer reviewed scientific paper explaining their beliefs and proving them ... and I will eat this website, and believe them. It's funny who they have never done so.
If anyone is interested, there is a huge repository of responses to those supporting Biblical Creationism, here:
talkorigins.org.
For me, personally, the entire debate has no relevance to my daily life. It's a futile argument to get involved with a "believer". No common sense, logic or rational evidence is going to change a "believer" mindset. Common sense, logic or rational reasoning are antipathic (
a strong feeling of aversion or repugnance) for "believers". Ignorance is a badge of pride for them and to "disbelieve" in science is "proof" of their faith. The more they disbelieve in it, the more faith the have; they want more faith and so they must make effort to disbelief more.
Life is a highly random and wonderful miracle. Enjoy as much of it as you can whilst you can, you don't need a god to do so. Be thankful for it ... and please try and leave it as you found it so that others can enjoy it after you die.