Banjo,
I agree with you that I think the world is real. I think Jonathan Sarfati put it quite succinctly, when speaking about certain essential features that make science possible, he said:

"The universe is real, because God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1). This sounds obvious, but many eastern philosophies believe that everything is an illusion (so is that belief an illusion as well?). There is no point in trying to investigate an illusion by experimenting on it."
JS.

Dear Banjo,

Seeing how long it takes and how difficult it is for people to quit smoking and drinking, gambling, drugs and all that, you can begin to appreciate how long and difficult it is to quit the whole world. We are addicts and kicking the habit usually takes several lifetimes of effort - this is what religion needs to deal with.

Understanding that the world is just an illusion is like understanding that "smoking is bad for you" - it's only a cerebral idea at this stage until it becomes a living reality, it's only the first step.

So long as we are still addicted to the world, we must keep our bodies and brains intact and as healthy as we can, because we use them to fight our addiction - if we shed our bodies earlier than our addiction, then our addiction would soon drive us to acquire a different body, there we will need to painstakingly re-acquire all the education we already got, so what's the use?

Once our addiction to the world is overcome and we experience the Reality of God, directly and 24/7/365, then and only then we may safely let go of our physical bodies.

---

Dear Dan,

"The universe is real, because God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1). This sounds obvious, but many eastern philosophies believe that everything is an illusion (so is that belief an illusion as well?). There is no point in trying to investigate an illusion by experimenting on it."

- But where does the bible state that the world is real? Illusions too can be created, in fact it's quite common.

.

Dear Yuyutsu,

.

As I wrote earlier, I am pleased to see that your religious beliefs are not causing you or anybody else any harm.

If, on the contrary, they do you some good and help you through life, that’s even better.

I wish you all the best.

.

Not sure I did, Dan S de Merengue.

>>I'm wondering about what you meant when talking about justification. You challenge me to justify my position, but then turn around and say that I don't have to justify my position to you.<<

I specifically stated that you do not have to justify your position to me. Or to anyone else, as far as I am concerned.

There is no "challenge". You must have imagined it.

I did ask Yuyutsu a little earlier...

"I would appreciate some more cogent supporting arguments, such that I could employ with, say, the young-earth creationists who pop up here every so often."

But that was before you dropped in. I have been very careful, from that point on, to reassure you that the very last thing I mean to do is "challenge" you to justify anything. I am only interested in the thought processes you adopt in order to allow yourself to ignore the vast amounts of well-researched evidence that is undoubtedly available to you, as it is to me, that show the earth to be several billion years old. You don't have to justify your logic, simply describe it.

Here's another excerpt from the Pluto expedition.

http://www.iflscience.com/space/first-photograph-plutos-surface-released

"The mountains are young and thought to have formed no more than 100 million years ago – which makes them very young when compared to the age of the Solar System. "

These folk have mountains (sorry!) of science behind their assertions. To me, it takes mental gymnastics of the most energetic kind to dismiss it all with an indulgent smile, and a dismissive "it is just another example of God's mysterious ways".

As I mentioned before, such a commitment to a few words from an ancient text, in the face of five hundred years of painstakingly-accumulated knowledge, is not an easy thing for me to understand. How do you do it?

Pericles, - "You continue to offer nothing by way of justification"

For someone who says you're not wanting me to 'justify' my conclusions, you sure have a strange way of expressing yourself. Justification was your word, not mine.

But in terms of imagining things, when did I ever talk about, 'God's mysterious ways'? It doesn't help you to try putting words in my mouth. The book of Genesis, in giving an account of the world's beginnings and human history is not so mysterious. It actually gives quite a bit of detail in its accounting. Perhaps you should look at it, or look at it again if you already have before. It may throw some light on the questions you are asking me.

It is impossible for a Christian to justify themselves before an atheist. As you have said of yourself, "I find it impossible to include the concept of a deity bringing our world into being ..." The atheist has made a commitment to view the world (the evidence) in a certain way. Your preconceptions leave no room for the possibility God. The atheist will not allow the possibility of a divine foot in the door.

You are guilty of the same thing you accuse me of, that is, limiting yourself to a certain line of thinking. And that's not such a bad thing. If we're conscious and explicit about our pre-commitments, then this can be helpful in making adjustments to our prescribed beliefs as the measured evidence is brought to focus.

A Christian will never be able to justify himself before an atheist. At the first turn, they have each taken a huge philosophical step in opposite directions. It's this gulf that must be addressed if the two are going to come to any understanding. The best a Christian can do is to remain true to his principles and demonstrate clear and consistent logic.

Let's look at that more closely, Dan S de Merengue.

>>For someone who says you're not wanting me to 'justify' my conclusions, you sure have a strange way of expressing yourself. Justification was your word, not mine.<<

The confusion arose as follows:

I said:

"You continue to offer nothing by way of justification (we're not talking "facts" here, as Yuyutsu helpfully points out) of your selected stance other than the blind adoption of the bible as your scientific baseline."

You countered:

>>Pericles, You ask me for justification for a biblical position on origins.<<

There's the misunderstanding, right there.

You thought that I was asking for justification of the "biblical position on origins", when what I was looking for was some explanation of the thought processes that led you to your intellectual stance, in the face of centuries of evidence that leads to different conclusions.

Do you consider that the vast body of knowledge that has arisen over the past five hundred years has been simply a series of egregious errors? What is it about the science involved that causes you to reject it out of hand? Do you see it as being poorly performed? Insufficiently explained? Corruptly presented to further some specific agenda?

I can explain my own thought processes that have led me to reject the bible as the source of all there is to know about the birth of the universe. It wasn't always that way, of course. Up until the age of eight, or thereabouts, I gave the origins of the universe very little thought, and accepted the Genesis story as a pretty reasonable explanation. However, as I learned more about the science involved, and the knowledge obtained through the various methodologies, I changed my view.

Do you have a similar story to tell?

>>A Christian will never be able to justify himself before an atheist<<

Forget about "justification of the biblical position on origins" for a moment, and help me understand how you are able to exclude science from your thinking, and instead rely upon one particular ancient text for your understanding of our universe.