View Full Version : Anti-Intellectual Atheism
jasonlfunk
08-04-2008, 17:17
There is an attitude that permeates pop culture especially in academia that any belief in the supernatural is ignorant, misguided, and irrational. I categorically disagree with this position and indeed would argue for the exact opposite. Let me state though - I am not saying that there are no people who have irrational, misguided, or ignorant beliefs in the religious/supernatural community, because there most certainly are. But this is not the claim in academia - the claim is that it is impossible to be rational/intellectual and believe in God or the supernatural.
The purpose of this thread is not to argue for the rational/intellectual basis for the supernatural - that will most likely be a later thread.
My contention is that it is the materialist and atheist whose views are ultimately irrational and whose positions are ultimately anti-intellectual.
My challenge to the materialists and atheists in the group: Give a rational, intellectual argument as to why Materialism and Atheism are to be preferred over alternative positions.
Atheism is as much a belief as anything else, I personally am an atheist and if there is a God I don't like him/her/it much so would much rather there not be one. I have no problem with people believing in God/s (I can see why people like the idea) I just disagree when the believers try to either shove it down your throat or try to show their "proof" and call it science. Religion is by definition not science as it is reliant on faith.
Edit: I know not giving an answer to your question, I'll have a think.
Arguing on Atheists behalf as a practicing Catholic:
Since the beginning of time, all humans were born atheists. The idea of God (or the lack of one) is given to us by our parents or those who raise us.
Point 1. contradiction
The three Abrahamic faiths believe relatively in the same God yet, all 3 contradict themselves. Christians believe that Jesus is the savior of the world and the son of God; Jews believe just as strongly that he is not. Muslims believe that the Qur'an was inspired by God, while Jews and Christians do not.
Point 2. All loving god hating?
"Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?" — Epicurus. Why would such a loving God bring evil to the world, knowing what it would cause.
Point 3. Omniscience.
If God is all-powerful, then by right he could create a being more infinitely more powerful then himself, if so, does this no longer make him God? If humans have at every given moment the free will to choose, then how does God know the future. Are we slaves to his plans? A benevolent God would not have slaves.
Edit: missed the last part of your question. so I'm writing it now
You argue that Atheism is anti-intellectual yet is belief in something that cannot be proven just as irrational and anti-intellectual.
Would simply living a life of morals without the nonsense of God be the best thing to do?
ranger2112
08-04-2008, 18:01
there is a distinct difference between being religious, spiritual and morality.
Being religious is belief in a god and then going to a building on your chosen god's sabbath and worshiping him/her/it with fellow believers
being spiritual is LIVING your life as god intends, regardless of your affiliation or denomination
being moral is doing the right things for the right reasons regardless of doctrine. not because you are scared of a nasty place you may go to if you do not, but because you choose to make that decision.
having said that, i believe athiesm is like any other group of people in the religious community. you have some stronger and some so-so. a hard core athiest will argue and show his "proof" that there is no god while hoping he/she is right. an ultra-religious person does the same. it is your other groups that i believe have more reasonable arguments. no one should have anyone else's beliefs shoved in their faces, however, should be comfortable in their own skin and beliefs that they can have an intellectual conversation with diametric views and stay calm and civilized. I have found those with religious views tend to rely on "faith" as their cornerstone that they build their arguments with, while athiest attempt to use historical fact to back theirs up. i personally think its the agnostics that have the advantage. they believe there is a power greater than them that have helped to mold our universe from galaxies to grains of sand without being an ecclesiastical being who requires worship and head bowing, cash and the occassional sacrifice along the way in order to please him/her/it.
i personally think its the agnostics that have the advantage. they believe there is a power greater than them that have helped to mold our universe from galaxies to grains of sand without being an ecclesiastical being who requires worship and head bowing, cash and the occassional sacrifice along the way in order to please him/her/it.
That's not what agnostics believe... I like the rest of your post though :thumbup:
El Mestizo
08-04-2008, 20:08
To discuss the rationality of atheism we would have to discuss the rationality of theism.
Theism, in nature, is irrational and even slightly delusional. It is not a rational thought to believe a woman could conceive as a virgin. Neither is it rational to believe a man was picked up by a chariot of fire and brought up to a city above the clouds. To call atheism is irrational is, well, irrational. It is a belief grounded in science. While most of the beliefs that an atheist would consider fact are actually theories, such as the Big Bang Theory and Evolution, there is much more backing these beliefs than faith alone.
Now are there atheists who are not what some would consider "intellectuals" (AKA dumbasses!)? Of course! Just like there are many intellectuals within the theistic community.
But to call atheism irrational or anti-intellectual defies logic.
Jason is correct... I believe that organized religion is the most dangerous force on earth... perhaps not by its own choosing, by because of how humanity uses it.
belief in supernatural is the same as belief in God.
The only thing we need to agree on to make sense of all this is:
FAITH = BELIEVING IN SOMETHING YOU CAN NOT PROVE
THERE ARE THINGS THAT SCIENCE HAS NOT YET EXPLAINED
to believe in god is just as foolish or wise as to believe in aliens, or magic.
when it comes to spirituality, faith is a personal thing.
Z
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 09:23
Arguing on Atheists behalf as a practicing Catholic:
Since the beginning of time, all humans were born atheists. The idea of God (or the lack of one) is given to us by our parents or those who raise us.
Really? What reasons do you have for thinking this?
Point 1. contradiction
The three Abrahamic faiths believe relatively in the same God yet, all 3 contradict themselves. Christians believe that Jesus is the savior of the world and the son of God; Jews believe just as strongly that he is not. Muslims believe that the Qur'an was inspired by God, while Jews and Christians do not.
Disagreements between people who believe in a God does not therefore mean that there is no God. If I thought you had blonde hair and my brother thought you had black hair - does that mean you do not exist? No - simply that one (or both) of us are wrong. We both agree that you exist. (And when 2/3 of the world is made up of the three you mentioned - it seems unwise just to dismiss the belief entirely)
Point 2. All loving god hating?
"Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?" — Epicurus. Why would such a loving God bring evil to the world, knowing what it would cause.
This is the only "good" argument against God that I know of.
Point 3. Omniscience.
If God is all-powerful, then by right he could create a being more infinitely more powerful then himself, if so, does this no longer make him God? If humans have at every given moment the free will to choose, then how does God know the future. Are we slaves to his plans? A benevolent God would not have slaves.
Omnipotence does not mean "can do anything" - it means "can do anything logically possible". Therefore it doesn't violate omnipotence to say taht God cannot create a more powerful being then himself or that he cannot create a rock that he cannot lift, or microwave a burrito so hot that he cannot himself eat it.
The second question is one that has been highly debated by theists for millennium - how does human free will interact with divine knowledge/sovereignty. It's a tough question - I'm pretty sure that the answer has something to do with time.
Edit: missed the last part of your question. so I'm writing it now
You argue that Atheism is anti-intellectual yet is belief in something that cannot be proven just as irrational and anti-intellectual.
I disagree with you that God cannot be rationally argued for. My contention is that the atheist has far more unproved presuppositions than the theist and even then his belief does not explain the world nearly as well as the theist.
Would simply living a life of morals without the nonsense of God be the best thing to do?
Explain to me what living a life of morals means outside of the context of God.
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 09:29
Theism, in nature, is irrational and even slightly delusional. It is not a rational thought to believe a woman could conceive as a virgin. Neither is it rational to believe a man was picked up by a chariot of fire and brought up to a city above the clouds.
Given your unquestioned presupposition of naturalism, these things are irrational. In the context of a supernatural universe - these things are completely possible and rational.
To call atheism is irrational is, well, irrational. It is a belief grounded in science. While most of the beliefs that an atheist would consider fact are actually theories, such as the Big Bang Theory and Evolution, there is much more backing these beliefs than faith alone.
Science does not equal atheism. Atheism has grabbed hold of science as it's love child which is completely not valid. Science has a scope of study that includes the natural world. It is a logical fallacy to then say - since science cannot tell us anything about the supernatural, it must not exist. Theories like Evolution and the Big Bang Theory do little for the case of atheism. God is bigger than you give him credit for.
Explain to me what living a life of morals means outside of the context of God.
Even in animal systems you can see morals, do they have a God that has told them these?
Explain to me why not all the "morals" in the bible are abided by. Why is it ok to pick and choose which of God's words to follow, why can some bits be taken seriously and other bits as sarcasm, or written for thousands of years ago and not for today's world, if God wanted the rules to change wouldn't he have told you.
What does living a life of morals mean in the context of a God? Following the rules of something which you have never seen seem pretty irrational to me. Morals can simply be seen as values by which to live life to reduce the suffering of people.
And what of the people that believe there is a God but not the one written about in the Bible or any other Holy Scripture, they still live their life with "morals" but haven't received them from their God.
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 11:04
Morals can simply be seen as values by which to live life to reduce the suffering of people.
Why should I reduce the suffering of other people?
Each time that anyone attempts (with great futility) to argue the existence of any "god", that person is giving the rest of us more reason to doubt that such a thing exists.
If there is "god";
then one can only have faith in her existence, attempting to "prove" or argue the existence of "god" only serves to destroy faith itself.
Jason faith is a special thing please do not try to destroy it.
G. W. Bush. and a bunch of pedophile priests have done enough over the years to diminish faith in America.
Please have some faith in your own religion (if you are a believer) and keep it.
Z
Why should I reduce the suffering of other people?
because you are a human being, hopefully capable of empathy.
Being a "god" means being a machine without emotion, (emotion dictates rational thought, and reason)
Z
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 11:27
Each time that anyone attempts (with great futility) to argue the existence of any "god", that person is giving the rest of us more reason to doubt that such a thing exists.
If there is "god";
then one can only have faith in her existence, attempting to "prove" or argue the existence of "god" only serves to destroy faith itself.
Jason faith is a special thing please do not try to destroy it.
G. W. Bush. and a bunch of pedophile priests have done enough over the years to diminish faith in America.
Please have some faith in your own religion (if you are a believer) and keep it.
Z
No where in Christianity is there a requirement to have faith that God exists. Faith means trust. Trust that someone is telling the truth. Trust that someone is able to provide. Trust that someone will come through on their promises. This is what faith is. When a Christian says that they have faith in God - it does NOT mean that they are bullheadedly believing that God exists beyond all reason. It means that they trust God to come through on the promises that he has made. They trust that the blood of Jesus will cleanse them from their sins. They trust that God's commands are true and benieftial. This is what faith is.
You have a non-biblical view of what faith actually is.
Giving reasons for God's existence does not destroy faith.
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 11:28
because you are a human being, hopefully capable of empathy.
Being a "god" means being a machine without emotion, (emotion dictates rational thought, and reason)
Z
Why should I be empathetic? Why should I care what others think and feel?
Why should I be empathetic? Why should I care what others think and feel?
the same reason that you would hope others care about what you feel.
Z
************************No where in Christianity is there a requirement to have faith that God exists.******************************************* ******* Faith means trust. Trust that someone is telling the truth. Trust that someone is able to provide. Trust that someone will come through on their promises. This is what faith is. When a Christian says that they have faith in God - it does NOT mean that they are bullheadedly believing that God exists beyond all reason. It means that they trust God to come through on the promises that he has made. They trust that the blood of Jesus will cleanse them from their sins. They trust that God's commands are true and benieftial. This is what faith is.
You have a non-biblical view of what faith actually is.
Giving reasons for God's existence does not destroy faith.
and yes attempting in any way to convince anyone of the existence of "god" works against the very concept of god. If she exists she requires no proof. it is faith itself that makes religion a special thing.
LMAO trust and faith are not the same.
i have a weird disposition that is not traditional.
I believe in god, but in a way that most do not.
I pay close attention to the history of events that factually happened. Unfortunately what is written in the bible is not even close to reality. The bible is littered with fairytales, fables and stories of moral guidelines. Understanding that fact in itself sets me apart from most christians. Fact is that most of the stuff in the bible is not true, and one person arbitrarily selected the writings of particular "gosples" to be included and arbitrarily refused the writing of other gosples. The bible was a planned series of stories and events in order to control and empire divided by two major religeon. I mean that is what history deplicts.
The other funny thing is that I do believe in god, but not in ghosts... Doesnt make much sense when you say it like that does it, but that is what I believe.
I guess in the end I try to have a more realistic approach to my beliefs and I am not some babling christian idiot.
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 11:38
the same reason that you would hope others care about what you feel.
Z
I don't care what other people think about me - why should I care what they think?
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 11:40
and yes attempting in any way to convince anyone of the existence of "god" works against the very concept of god. If she exists she requires no proof. it is faith itself that makes religion a special thing.
LMAO trust and faith are not the same.
Oxford English Dictionary:
I. Belief, trust, confidence.
1. a. Confidence, reliance, trust (in the ability, goodness, etc., of a person; in the efficacy or worth of a thing; or in the truth of a statement or doctrine)
Dictionary.com:
1. confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
Websters:
1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religio
Hmmm.....:closedeyes:
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 11:42
Unfortunately what is written in the bible is not even close to reality. The bible is littered with fairytales, fables and stories of moral guidelines. Understanding that fact in itself sets me apart from most christians. Fact is that most of the stuff in the bible is not true, and one person arbitrarily selected the writings of particular "gosples" to be included and arbitrarily refused the writing of other gosples. The bible was a planned series of stories and events in order to control and empire divided by two major religeon. I mean that is what history deplicts.
You are quite wrong on this. Every single place that history has been tested against the historical record in the bible are dead on.
What are your reasons for disbelieving the historical record of scripture?
I don't care what other people think about me - why should I care what they think?
because what other people think can lead to good or bad happenings;
ie: Hitler, G. W. Bush,
or: Nelson Mandela, Galileo
The church punished Galileo for attempting to show the worlds population that the earth was round (not flat, as the church said it was).
there are plenty of more examples of this type thing.
Z
You are quite wrong on this. Every single place that history has been tested against the historical record in the bible are dead on.
What are your reasons for disbelieving the historical record of scripture?
Jason u are wrong.
whats next 1+1=3?
comon man, Maggio is 100% correct.
go find god or somthing man.
Z
i have a weird disposition that is not traditional.
I believe in god, but in a way that most do not.
I pay close attention to the history of events that factually happened. Unfortunately what is written in the bible is not even close to reality. The bible is littered with fairytales, fables and stories of moral guidelines. Understanding that fact in itself sets me apart from most christians. Fact is that most of the stuff in the bible is not true, and one person arbitrarily selected the writings of particular "gosples" to be included and arbitrarily refused the writing of other gosples. The bible was a planned series of stories and events in order to control and empire divided by two major religeon. I mean that is what history deplicts.
The other funny thing is that I do believe in god, but not in ghosts... Doesnt make much sense when you say it like that does it, but that is what I believe.
I guess in the end I try to have a more realistic approach to my beliefs and I am not some babling christian idiot.
Maggio you are very much correct here.
espesially about the creation of the bible.
I do not label myself a "christian" because Its more socially acceptable to be a terrorist these days.
i believe in god... but a loving one, accepting, one that requires nothing of a person but to live and love.
essentially Life and Love is God. Spirit. Its kind of a hard thing to explain. But to beleive that there is nothing that we humans are not capable of understanding is foolish.
Z
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 12:11
Jason u are wrong.
whats next 1+1=3?
comon man, Maggio is 100% correct.
go find god or somthing man.
Z
This is what I was talking about originally. If you ask for reasons or facts to back up anti-religious statements you just get called ignorant and irrational. Is justified belief too much to ask for?
Where is the proof that Jesus actually performed his miracles? I don't think Maggio is doubting that a person called Jesus existed or that Bethlehem exists.
Where is the evidence that mediums are really talking to the other side? Derren Brown managed to create the same effect but he openly admits to not being one, horoscopes are so broad that each one can be attributed to anyone.
As for why should you care about the suffering of others, if no-one cared the human race would've torn itself apart by now.
rain for 40days and 40nights and the only survivors are on an arch? proven wrong.
adam and eve? proven wrong
divided the red sea? proven wrong.
water into wine? proven wrong.
and list goes on. Did something like this happen and when the stories are told certain parts are exaggerated in order to make a specif point or relivance sure, but did these things actually happen, most have been proven wrong.
here is an example of what I like to call camp fire stories because basically that is what they are.
joe's father got a new gun one person tells to another.
then that person tells someone
"joe's father has an arsonal in his house"
then that person tells someone
"joe's father has an arsonal and he hates George Bush"
then that person tells someone
"joe's father is getting together a militia and they plan on overthrowing the government"
then that person tells someone something and so on. Next thing you know Joe's house gets raided by the FBI and they throw Joe in a boys home, and send his father and mother to prison until they can figure things out. By that time everyone has long their jobs, and defaulted on their mortgage, and car payments and the family is in ruins and can never recover all because of "rumors". that is right RUMORS! It is how a story grows and grows until it contains some un-earthly facts like two of each animal and a family were the only ones to survive a massive 40 day flood.
Come on think about it. Do you know much food you would need to feed said animals for forty days. Did you know that there is like a million species of animals, plants, and insects, birds etc.... Not only could you not gather them, but you could not build a vessel in those times to support the weight, or capaicity. that is were science and history comes into play.
You would need something much larger then the pyramids to hold all of that and it would have to float in hundreds of feet of water during the worlds worst storm etc... etc... and history tells us that the most advanced structure ever before moderization is the pyramids which were build with basic/complicated means of geomitry etc....
I mean is that detailed enough for you, or do you still believe that noah did it all?
Well, I have hesitateed from replying to this thread because many ppl take this subject very seriously and also verypersonally, so, I will be very careful how I post my opinion. I look at organized religion to e somewhat like a social club with its own rules and guidelines that one would have to follow in order to belong to that particular religion. Now, saying that, I will qualifymy comments from the standpoint ofmy having been raised catholic. I see that religion as being necessary as a moral compass, Iknow that some ppl will debate that withme, but, I see it as without the moral guidelines laid out by religious beliefs, our society would be somewhere near anarchy.
We have seen what happens when there is no moral guideline set out as in what happened in WWII with hitler and the jews, Witht he Japanese treatment of their prisoners, etc etc. Although, I know that Christianity has itls dark poeriods as well, ie, the Crusades, I am not saying that any of those instances I gave as an example are right, quite the opposite, I see them as part of the problem.
With any religioin or system of beliefs there are going to be redical members of any sect or society, but, with out the basic moral guidelines that have been established by the religions of the world I don't see whare man would stand a chance of surviving for very long as I do believe that the most powerful would rule, much as it is now, but with no checks and balances or "compass" to go by. There is a lot more that could be said on this but I wil wait till I read something more for me to respond to.
ranger2112
08-05-2008, 15:29
most of the bible is closely related to Aesop's fables. stories written by men and what they interpreted in their dreams. there is a God or a being or an entity or a force that is greater than we are.....but the bible is a good read to scare little children and nothing more. having a good heart and trying to do the right thing in many cases is enough not how much you tithe or how many hail marys you say. live your life right and all will be right.
ranger2112
08-05-2008, 15:31
Well, I have hesitateed from replying to this thread because many ppl take this subject very seriously and also verypersonally, so, I will be very careful how I post my opinion. I look at organized religion to e somewhat like a social club with its own rules and guidelines that one would have to follow in order to belong to that particular religion. Now, saying that, I will qualifymy comments from the standpoint ofmy having been raised catholic. I see that religion as being necessary as a moral compass, Iknow that some ppl will debate that withme, but, I see it as without the moral guidelines laid out by religious beliefs, our society would be somewhere near anarchy.
We have seen what happens when there is no moral guideline set out as in what happened in WWII with hitler and the jews, Witht he Japanese treatment of their prisoners, etc etc. Although, I know that Christianity has itls dark poeriods as well, ie, the Crusades, I am not saying that any of those instances I gave as an example are right, quite the opposite, I see them as part of the problem.
With any religioin or system of beliefs there are going to be redical members of any sect or society, but, with out the basic moral guidelines that have been established by the religions of the world I don't see whare man would stand a chance of surviving for very long as I do believe that the most powerful would rule, much as it is now, but with no checks and balances or "compass" to go by. There is a lot more that could be said on this but I wil wait till I read something more for me to respond to.
to an extent i agree, Dogma. just like the sign saying dont run around the pool...most listen with the few bad asses running and messing things up for others.
jasonlfunk
08-05-2008, 15:47
rain for 40days and 40nights and the only survivors are on an arch? proven wrong.
adam and eve? proven wrong
divided the red sea? proven wrong.
water into wine? proven wrong.
and list goes on. Did something like this happen and when the stories are told certain parts are exaggerated in order to make a specif point or relivance sure, but did these things actually happen, most have been proven wrong.
here is an example of what I like to call camp fire stories because basically that is what they are.
joe's father got a new gun one person tells to another.
then that person tells someone
"joe's father has an arsonal in his house"
then that person tells someone
"joe's father has an arsonal and he hates George Bush"
then that person tells someone
"joe's father is getting together a militia and they plan on overthrowing the government"
then that person tells someone something and so on. Next thing you know Joe's house gets raided by the FBI and they throw Joe in a boys home, and send his father and mother to prison until they can figure things out. By that time everyone has long their jobs, and defaulted on their mortgage, and car payments and the family is in ruins and can never recover all because of "rumors". that is right RUMORS! It is how a story grows and grows until it contains some un-earthly facts like two of each animal and a family were the only ones to survive a massive 40 day flood.
Come on think about it. Do you know much food you would need to feed said animals for forty days. Did you know that there is like a million species of animals, plants, and insects, birds etc.... Not only could you not gather them, but you could not build a vessel in those times to support the weight, or capaicity. that is were science and history comes into play.
You would need something much larger then the pyramids to hold all of that and it would have to float in hundreds of feet of water during the worlds worst storm etc... etc... and history tells us that the most advanced structure ever before moderization is the pyramids which were build with basic/complicated means of geomitry etc....
I mean is that detailed enough for you, or do you still believe that noah did it all?
Ignoring Genesis 1-6 which could be myth easily and is the most controversial part of the bible - the rest you have a large burden to show it is unhistorical. With any historical document- you ought to give it the benefit of the doubt of truthfulness. How has parting of the red sea been disproved? How has turning water into wine been disproved? I'd like to see this evidence.
Where is the proof that Jesus actually performed his miracles?
We have the historical records from reliable sources (much more reliable then any other historical record of the time or earlier). And there are no good reasons to not take the records as historical.
What specific reasons do you have to doubting the historical records as outlined in the bible?
With any historical document- you ought to give it the benefit of the doubt of truthfulness. How has parting of the red sea been disproved? How has turning water into wine been disproved? I'd like to see this evidence.
We have the historical records from reliable sources (much more reliable then any other historical record of the time or earlier). And there are no good reasons to not take the records as historical.
What specific reasons do you have to doubting the historical records as outlined in the bible?
You ask us for the evidence yet make your statements without it. Its the benefit of the doubt bit I don't like, I'm meant to give benefit of the doubt to people who believed that Jesus was the one and that they were writing God's word, I like my history from less biased views.
I saw Criss Angel remove a burger from an advert take a bite and out it back, I think Jesus might have enough trickery to change water into wine, nice little bit of magic.
Ignoring Genesis 1-6 which could be myth easily and is the most controversial part of the bible - the rest you have a large burden to show it is unhistorical. With any historical document- you ought to give it the benefit of the doubt of truthfulness. How has parting of the red sea been disproved? How has turning water into wine been disproved? I'd like to see this evidence.
We have the historical records from reliable sources (much more reliable then any other historical record of the time or earlier). And there are no good reasons to not take the records as historical.
What specific reasons do you have to doubting the historical records as outlined in the bible?
I think it hilarious to give us the burdon of proof when you have no proof of the events yourself. not only do you have no proof, but you did just say above that some of gen 1-6 could strongly be untrue. So what your saying is that the only proof that you have that these things did happen, is a book of half truths? Did i get that right?:thumbdown:
I think common sense clears up alot of this.
I also do not go to church or confession, but yet still believe in Jesus, and God on a reasonable level and have the intellegence to know the difference between what the message is and what the message is there for.
There is alot of symbolizism in christian writings like the bible. "forbidden fruit" is a perfect example. The "serpant" is another. I mean we all know that every snake is not the devil or a demon, and that if we eat apples we are going to hell right?
Using this common sense we can quickly apply it to many other stories in the bible and realize that when it is all said and done, that the bible is simply a really good book of cool stories that are well written to encourage high moral values. But not every word is true, and those that hang on every word of the bible and insist that every single thing in the bible is fact are the one who give religeons like christianity a bad name.
Oh and lets not even bring up the fact that religeon is the number one cause of death in the history of man kind. (meaning wars, crusades, witch hunts, genocide etc...) All those idiots who after reading their little book and determined that they had the only correct interpretation of what the book was talking about had to go and just cause the deaths of millions upon millions of people.
Let me really steam some sheets.
I say "negro". How do you interprite that?
I say "black". Hoe do you interprite that?
Well I guess I ruined it because I said negro before I said black so know all you think I am talking about is a race of people.
But I did some research before posting. Negro and Black are the exact same word in different laungauges.
Negro litterally mean black in spanish and portugese. Like the bear negro modelo or negra modelo which is mexican beer that literally translate into black (the color) and modelo which is the same manufacture of corona.
Now if I said noir which is french for black, or nero which is italian for black you wouldnt give two ****s, but because you or most people initially would have thought I was a rascist and should be banned, or worse yet praised it is a fine example how people get crazy mis interprite things and cause problems.
I say nice book. Some may say OMG the bible said this and that and look at what you are doing and your going to hell. Well that is a prime example why i think religion is a private matter, shouldnt be discussed in public and shouldnt be practiced in groups.:mad:
I just hope that some religeos fanatic ******* doesnt read this and blow up my car tonight while I am sleeping! Sorry I am not living my life by "YOUR" instruction manual!
Which is exactly why I waited to post my opinion and willnot post again. As I said some people take it very personally, and I agree it is not a discussion that normally can be had without someone being offended or someone else trying to force thier views on someone else. There is no right or wrong answer to this question and there never will be untill we all meet our end and then who are we gonna prove it to?
If it was suddenly revealed in some lost book of the bible that Jesus had a small penis, would it still be that wonderful to have a huge penis? Or would you rather be hung like Jesus?
Jason, please as a fellow NW player, I am begging you to stop now, and maintain a small portion of your dignity.
I was raised catholic, and My mother and father taught me real morals.\
We do not need to look to a book for what is right and wrong.
Look in your heart, and look around.
If religion has not taken it from you.
God is Love, and god is real.
Now stop this blasphemy Mr. Funky.
\Z/
this remeinds me of a thread in the old wow forums that went on for days. same arguements just the names are different, well, some of them anyway.
Max Logan
08-05-2008, 17:48
Ignoring Genesis 1-6 which could be myth easily and is the most controversial part of the bible - the rest you have a large burden to show it is unhistorical. With any historical document- you ought to give it the benefit of the doubt of truthfulness. How has parting of the red sea been disproved? How has turning water into wine been disproved? I'd like to see this evidence.
We have the historical records from reliable sources (much more reliable then any other historical record of the time or earlier). And there are no good reasons to not take the records as historical.
What specific reasons do you have to doubting the historical records as outlined in the bible?
I don`t believe in rising dead! I mean thats blasphemy according to God. So is he allowed to make exceptions? No wait, he`s almighty, his actions are true and we don`t question it, cuz it just is.
Turning water into wine...lmao! Ever heard of folk legends? We had quite a few running around the town!
What would you do if you would want a group of people to follow a person, to convert them to your belief? I don`t know, some supernatural, some cult person, some divine being, what else is there? Oh yeah, the classic END OF THE WORLD!
You got ANY evidence that proves that Bible contains more truth the old Indian or Homeric writings? Or is it just cuz its Bible, and it just HAS to be that way, as God came down and told you to its right? Now where have I hear this before? :rolleyes:
Christianity is alright, but to take it to the level of fanaticism is just stupid, excuse me for the word. I`m Catholic, but not cuz I believe in God and heaven and hell, retribution, apocalypse, judgement day... Its becouse I believe in the meaning of it. Compasion, peace, understanding and all that rubbish! And not becouse of some crack pot wannabe something that creates things left and right :rolleyes:
Blackwater
08-05-2008, 18:10
Each time that anyone attempts (with great futility) to argue the existence of any "god", that person is giving the rest of us more reason to doubt that such a thing exists.
If there is "god";
then one can only have faith in her existence, attempting to "prove" or argue the existence of "god" only serves to destroy faith itself.
Jason faith is a special thing please do not try to destroy it.
G. W. Bush. and a bunch of pedophile priests have done enough over the years to diminish faith in America.
Please have some faith in your own religion (if you are a believer) and keep it.
Z
because what other people think can lead to good or bad happenings;
ie: Hitler, G. W. Bush,
or: Nelson Mandela, Galileo
The church punished Galileo for attempting to show the worlds population that the earth was round (not flat, as the church said it was).
there are plenty of more examples of this type thing.
Z
Comparing GWB to Hitler...come on now. Stay on topic and keep politics out of this please.
Comparing GWB to Hitler...come on now. Stay on topic and keep politics out of this please.
I was just giving examples of why it matters what people think.
But I do understand, hehe, I just dont like GWB much.
sry.
Now Max I agree with you, I was raised Catholic, and I consider myself a good person, I do not hurt people.
Thats all that matters. The God I know and love, that lives in all of us, all life itself, she cares not for prayer.
only for Love.
Z
I was just giving examples of why it matters what people think.
But I do understand, hehe, I just dont like GWB much.
sry.
Now Max I agree with you, I was raised Catholic, and I consider myself a good person, I do not hurt people.
Thats all that matters. The God I know and love, that lives in all of us, all life itself, she cares not for prayer.
only for Love.
Z
Pretty close to them same thing I feel, nicely put, Z.:dblthumbup:
Mr President
08-05-2008, 19:35
I was just giving examples of why it matters what people think.
But I do understand, hehe, I just dont like GWB much.
sry.
Now Max I agree with you, I was raised Catholic, and I consider myself a good person, I do not hurt people.
Thats all that matters. The God I know and love, that lives in all of us, all life itself, she cares not for prayer.
only for Love.
Z
You keep referring to god as a "she"... Just curious about this.
You keep referring to god as a "she"... Just curious about this.
Well, I god has no sex obviously.
I just like the reference, to level it out a bit, god has been mentioned as male by many.
Historically the males of humanity seem to be more ... wrong.
u know what I mean?
The feminine role just seems more fitting to me.
God is not a major part of my life. I mean she did not put me here to pay homage to her. (or I could say "it")
God does not care if I ever even think of her, or believe that she exists, she does not care if I may ever have contemplated her existance.
She only cares that I am a "good" person. and by that I mean causing as little harm as possible.
Z
Jesus's life as a living person can be disproven by the fact that Paul seemed unaware of Jesus's life despite writing shortly after Jesus was supposed to have died, with Jesus's biography first provided by the Gospels of Mark, John, Matthew, and Luke, written around the end of the first century A.D. The film suggests that modern Christians aren't taught about early history of their religion because doing so would call the historicity of Jesus into question.
God's demand that people believe in him or be ****ed to eternity in hell as essentially mind control. Flemming is appalled that Jesus will forgive murder, theft, and any other sin but will not tolerate one doubting in God's existence. Because Jesus knows peoples' innermost thoughts, and that therefore one must police one's thoughts to avoid any doubt, Flemming summarizes this idea with the statement that the greatest sin in Christianity is "to think."
Z
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 10:30
You ask us for the evidence yet make your statements without it. Its the benefit of the doubt bit I don't like, I'm meant to give benefit of the doubt to people who believed that Jesus was the one and that they were writing God's word, I like my history from less biased views.
I saw Criss Angel remove a burger from an advert take a bite and out it back, I think Jesus might have enough trickery to change water into wine, nice little bit of magic.
YOU providing evidence was the purpose of this thread. The atheist/materialist constantly makes unfounded claims without evidence and when the Christian asks for reasons for the atheists beliefs, he gets called ignorant, etc etc. The very point of your thread. Materialism/Atheism is a positive belief with positive claims that require evidence. It is not the default position. I ask for reasons for your beliefs. It doesn't matter what I believe right now. I just want to know WHY you believe what you believe. And when I ask for more evidence for your beliefs - it isn't an attack on your beliefs - it is merely asking for more evidence - more reasons. I don't want you to have beliefs that aren't backed up. I have lots of evidence and reasons for believing what I believe. But me giving that evidence is not the point. If you cannot positively and justifiable back up your beliefs without resorting to attacking opposing beliefs - you have irrational beliefs. Simple as that. So my question is simply - Why do you believe what you believe? (And when I ask follow up questions - do not resort to attacking another view, the best defense is not a good offense in this case)
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 10:32
Jesus's life as a living person can be disproven by the fact that Paul seemed unaware of Jesus's life despite writing shortly after Jesus was supposed to have died, with Jesus's biography first provided by the Gospels of Mark, John, Matthew, and Luke, written around the end of the first century A.D.
What specifically in Paul's writings indicate that he was unaware of Jesus' life?
ranger2112
08-06-2008, 10:49
You keep referring to god as a "she"... Just curious about this.
cuz men are more logical and women are more emotional. a god that loves unconditionally as long as they are the only one loved...no one berfore them...u mess up and they take everything away...etc etc. HAS TO BE A WOMAN
Max Logan
08-06-2008, 11:40
YOU providing evidence was the purpose of this thread. The atheist/materialist constantly makes unfounded claims without evidence and when the Christian asks for reasons for the atheists beliefs, he gets called ignorant, etc etc. The very point of your thread. Materialism/Atheism is a positive belief with positive claims that require evidence. It is not the default position. I ask for reasons for your beliefs. It doesn't matter what I believe right now. I just want to know WHY you believe what you believe. And when I ask for more evidence for your beliefs - it isn't an attack on your beliefs - it is merely asking for more evidence - more reasons. I don't want you to have beliefs that aren't backed up. I have lots of evidence and reasons for believing what I believe. But me giving that evidence is not the point. If you cannot positively and justifiable back up your beliefs without resorting to attacking opposing beliefs - you have irrational beliefs. Simple as that. So my question is simply - Why do you believe what you believe? (And when I ask follow up questions - do not resort to attacking another view, the best defense is not a good offense in this case)
I could ask you the same question, but rephrase it a little- why do you believe, that your belief is right?
Its a grave mistake not to question your beliefs.
And as Z said, through out the history the Church always tried to keep people from THINKING! Its obvious they were not telling the truth, hiding something! Maybe they didn`t want people to understand the concepts of the world and the religion, to follow without questioning. At a point, some people took religion as a buisness and would do anything to protect it. Examples- indulgence, 'releasing' sin, blessing, witch hunt, banning of science.
Question for you jason...
Why do you believe what you believe? Can you show me prove of your god?
Now back to why you believe is most likely because thats the way you were raised, i was raised catholic but all religion is corrupted as men are. So how can you base your beliefs off a book wrote by many men of so called "gods word" yet when the new testiment was made the emperor of Rome had a convention to decide what would be put in and what scripture wouldnt be? (this is me assuming your christian)
Don't get me wrong im not a complete atheist but i have no faith in religion
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 13:07
Question for you jason...
Why do you believe what you believe? Can you show me prove of your god?
Now back to why you believe is most likely because thats the way you were raised, i was raised catholic but all religion is corrupted as men are. So how can you base your beliefs off a book wrote by many men of so called "gods word" yet when the new testiment was made the emperor of Rome had a convention to decide what would be put in and what scripture wouldnt be? (this is me assuming your christian)
Don't get me wrong im not a complete atheist but i have no faith in religion
I have lots of evidence and good reasons for believing what I believe - but that isn't the subject of this thread. I want to know why You (atheists/materialists) believe what they believe. Why atheism/materialism is rational and believable on it own merits.
I want to know why You (atheists/materialists) believe what they believe. Why atheism/materialism is rational and believable on it own merits.
Well we don't believe everything that is spoon fed to us. I guess its just our way of thinking that makes us question what were told, and smell bullsh*t a mile a way. Religion was made to control people and it worked on you but not me.
Well we don't believe everything that is spoon fed to us. I guess its just our way of thinking that makes us question what were told, and smell bullsh*t a mile a way. Religion was made to control people and it worked on you but not me.
OK, a very serious response to this thread, since people probably complained about my Jesus penis comment.
Who's to say what is bull****? Ice cream is comforting to many people, but if you don't like ice cream, it doesn't make ice cream bull****. Religion is very comforting to many many people. Whether it be fiction, lies, or the absolute truth, the fact is many people enjoy it, and put alot of effort into it. A lot of people believe, when they die, that's it, they are dead, there is nothing more. I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. I guess my beliefs are a little different, in that I believe that whatever you sincerely believe will happen to you after this life, will. Whether it be reincarnation, heaven, or just nothing. This is probably some mystical bull**** way of thinking, maybe too simplistic. But I don't accept that hindu's will go to hell because they don't believe in Jesus, or that Christians will become cockroaches in the next life because they don't believe in reincarnation. All we really have in this life is our beliefs. Whether we believe in working, money, a good marriage, religion, or just enjoying nice cold beer. The things we believe in work for us, as individuals, and we put time and effort into these things. Anything worthy of putting alot of time and effort into is not a lie, in my opinion.
OK, a very serious response to this thread, since people probably complained about my Jesus penis comment.
Who's to say what is bull****? Ice cream is comforting to many people, but if you don't like ice cream, it doesn't make ice cream bull****. Religion is very comforting to many many people. Whether it be fiction, lies, or the absolute truth, the fact is many people enjoy it, and put alot of effort into it. A lot of people believe, when they die, that's it, they are dead, there is nothing more. I don't think there's anything wrong with that either. I guess my beliefs are a little different, in that I believe that whatever you sincerely believe will happen to you after this life, will. Whether it be reincarnation, heaven, or just nothing. This is probably some mystical bull**** way of thinking, maybe too simplistic. But I don't accept that hindu's will go to hell because they don't believe in Jesus, or that Christians will become cockroaches in the next life because they don't believe in reincarnation. All we really have in this life is our beliefs. Whether we believe in working, money, a good marriage, religion, or just enjoying nice cold beer. The things we believe in work for us, as individuals, and we put time and effort into these things. Anything worthy of putting alot of time and effort into is not a lie, in my opinion.
im talking about bs that religion pulls. Ie the inquisition, the crusades, the belief that if muslim declares gihad and blows me or fellow troops up he will go to heaven and be awarded 72 virgins
im sorry im just not buying it
the bible was written by fishermen and we all know that fishermen exxagerate quite a bit... Jason your asking the atheists a question yet you dodge when they ask you a question... now thats not nice you expect and answer from them so in return they want an answer from you
Jesus is coming... Open your mouth
im talking about bs that religion pulls. Ie the inquisition, the crusades, the belief that if muslim declares gihad and blows me or fellow troops up he will go to heaven and be awarded 72 virgins
im sorry im just not buying it
That is one thing that has always bothered me about religions. If people want me to respect their religion, they shouldn't push it on me. I feel that when people push religion on me, it is as disrespectful as me putting down their religion. It works both ways I think. I don't think you should have to accept, or believe what religious people believe, but at the same time, religious people should be tolerant of you not buying into their beliefs. Hopefully no one is asking you to buy any of it, but at the same time, I don't think you should call their beliefs bull**** because it works for them. Non religious people do some pretty ****ed up things too.
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 15:39
Well we don't believe everything that is spoon fed to us. I guess its just our way of thinking that makes us question what were told, and smell bullsh*t a mile a way. Religion was made to control people and it worked on you but not me.
I completely disagree with you. Materialism and naturalism are spoon fed to you all of the time and you do not realize it.
If you have reasons for your beliefs - I really would like to hear them. Why do you believe what you believe?
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 15:42
Jason your asking the atheists a question yet you dodge when they ask you a question... now thats not nice you expect and answer from them so in return they want an answer from you
For one - I started to thread, I originally asked the question - is it too much to expect an answer? Challenging my beliefs is not an answer to the question "What reasons do you have for your beliefs?"
The point of the thread was to present a defense for Materialism/Atheism/Naturalism - not to defend Supernaturalism/Religion.
I'm not dodging the question because I don't have answers - I have the answers. But me answering the question will only distract from the original question - which I have yet to get an answer for. Are there no atheists/materialists/naturalists here that have justified beliefs?
Are there no atheists/materialists/naturalists here that have justified beliefs?
Are you asking because you want to argue that they are wrong? Or are you asking to try to have an informed discussion and maybe understand another point of view? If you're asking to try to better prove your point of view, that, to me, is a little like trying to push religion on someone. However, if you think you can gain knowledge, or perhaps better understand someone else's point of view, then by all means, continue.
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 18:17
Are you asking because you want to argue that they are wrong? Or are you asking to try to have an informed discussion and maybe understand another point of view? If you're asking to try to better prove your point of view, that, to me, is a little like trying to push religion on someone. However, if you think you can gain knowledge, or perhaps better understand someone else's point of view, then by all means, continue.
I think the point of view is wrong so I will discuss and try to poke holes in their views and arguments for multiple reasons:
1) Any view/belief that cannot stand under critism is not worth having
2) All people are entitled to rational thought and justified belief. This is best achieved through debate
3) It's fun. :)
Are people really weak minded enough for someone to "push" a point of view on them? It isn't like stealing or beating them up - you alone have the ability to decide what you think is true. If you change your mind in the process of discussion - good for you. Otherwise you aren't pursuaded and that is it. I am not concerned about pushing my religion on people.
I think the point of view is wrong so I will discuss and try to poke holes in their views and arguments for multiple reasons:
1) Any view/belief that cannot stand under critism is not worth having
2) All people are entitled to rational thought and justified belief. This is best achieved through debate
3) It's fun. :)
Are people really weak minded enough for someone to "push" a point of view on them? It isn't like stealing or beating them up - you alone have the ability to decide what you think is true. If you change your mind in the process of discussion - good for you. Otherwise you aren't pursuaded and that is it. I am not concerned about pushing my religion on people.
Seems to be alot of the same reasons I post some of the things I do. Although I'm usually accused of being confrontational, or off topic, rather than having fun, or criticizing usefully. I'm really glad you posted that, rep for you.
I think the point of view is wrong so I will discuss and try to poke holes in their views and arguments for multiple reasons:
1) Any view/belief that cannot stand under critism is not worth having
2) All people are entitled to rational thought and justified belief. This is best achieved through debate
3) It's fun. :)
Are people really weak minded enough for someone to "push" a point of view on them? It isn't like stealing or beating them up - you alone have the ability to decide what you think is true. If you change your mind in the process of discussion - good for you. Otherwise you aren't pursuaded and that is it. I am not concerned about pushing my religion on people.ok so what your saying is you wanna hear what an atheist believes so you can poke holes in it... well tell us what you believe and what proof you have in those beliefs and i or someone else will reciprocate... until then dont bother wasting your time since all you wanna do is poke holes in our beliefs give us a chance to poke holes in yours as well its only fair isnt it
I agree that we are all entitled to our opinions and debate is good.
but I does that mean that I should make a thread titled:
Flying Elephants, the reality of them.
Then continue to argue that elephants once flew and that there is undeniable proof that elephants once flew.
One can argue anything, but why attempt to argue something that science has proven to be untrue?
rhetoric has no place in real debate.
Religion is a personal thing, faith is personal, what you believe is what you believe, anyone can believe whatever they are foolish or wise enough to believe.
I enjoy debating about religion, because I find the arguments from zealots comical.
But some people (scientists) do not find it funny that people believe in certain things that they have proven to be untrue.
Religion has caused alot of pain and suffering, and is the most dangerous force on earth.
perhaps in the future science will surpass religion as the most deadly force.
Z
hmm well first and formost i am not christian. I have respect for Christians, but i have no respect for Christianity as a religion what so ever. I am a Greek Pagan and when i see a church, i see blood, skulls, lies and bones from all the horrors that Christanity has brought to this planet: The 4 Crusades, Inquisition, The Burning times, the destruction of other religions temples and history. Christians for hundreds of years have killed, hung, tortured, burnt on the stake, and raped any one of other beliefs many times over.
Now you can look at the bible, a book writing by man with no proof of any thing happening in it. The whole Moses thing, if i remember correctly, the eygptians, who where nortious at keeping records have none of an hebrew uprising. And why would God pick one people of everyone in the world to speak to? On top of that the symbols and such that the hebrews have would not have the same meaning for everyone. as in for me, thumbs up could mean good job but for you it could mean fark off.
As for turning wine to water or another things like that. Jesus isnt teh only one, their has been many Magi and magicans in the world that have done magic.
If we are created in the image of God, where did he get the idea of a Women from?
And if God exist whos his wife? and if there is only one God, how can Jesus be God? Why did the Catholics convert Pagan holidays into Christian ones and why did they convert pagan Gods into Saints?
I dont have beliefs of the Gods, i know of there existence through personal experiences. I do believe in reincarnation and an afterlife, but i cant prove them and i can not say they are true from my own experience so far, but astral travel and seeing auras is fun.
Another thing, why would u believe in the devil? an entity of PURE EVIL. can u understand or comprehend that? thats just farkin wrong. and imposible to exist, like an entity of PURE GOOD. which is why i like my Greek Gods, they are like us, with all the good, the bad, and the flaws, but immortal and powerful :D They dont demand worship or sacrifice, but its a choice. We are free people not slaves to no man or no god.
As for following a Polytheistic religion... If their is so many of us, why not of the Gods. Do you think they don't get it on and enjoy one of the most intimate things there is?
A very ice post Smart.
I'm glad that you respect christian people that are good people.
I respect all people that do not corrupt.
You make some good points, and Paganism is one religion that I can identify with. if I was forced to choose one pagan would be it with perhaps buddhism a close 2nd, even tho i was raised catholic.
like i said before, love a mutual respect is my religion and my god.
The men that ran christian churches choose to convert pagan holidays into christian ones so that they might have better luck assimilating that religion into christianity.
Z
yup assilmation... its the BORG lol.. but yah love heals, love is powerful... anyone that follows a path of love is good
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 23:01
I agree that we are all entitled to our opinions and debate is good.
but I does that mean that I should make a thread titled:
Flying Elephants, the reality of them.
Then continue to argue that elephants once flew and that there is undeniable proof that elephants once flew.
One can argue anything, but why attempt to argue something that science has proven to be untrue?
rhetoric has no place in real debate.
Religion is a personal thing, faith is personal, what you believe is what you believe, anyone can believe whatever they are foolish or wise enough to believe.
I enjoy debating about religion, because I find the arguments from zealots comical.
But some people (scientists) do not find it funny that people believe in certain things that they have proven to be untrue.
Religion has caused alot of pain and suffering, and is the most dangerous force on earth.
perhaps in the future science will surpass religion as the most deadly force.
Z
Good - you are almost getting close to a rational response to why you believe what you believe. You have reasons buried within your attempted rebute. Try to rephrase it :)
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 23:02
ok so what your saying is you wanna hear what an atheist believes so you can poke holes in it... well tell us what you believe and what proof you have in those beliefs and i or someone else will reciprocate... until then dont bother wasting your time since all you wanna do is poke holes in our beliefs give us a chance to poke holes in yours as well its only fair isnt it
I asked first - get your own thread :)
The funny part of this is that what l like to call christians with a "realistic" point of view are argueing against what I like to call a holy rolling christian fanatic, that very few points have been made by aithiests etc...
And every time we back Jfunk in a corner he quickly reminds us that we are off topic and he doesnt have to defend even though he created this thread and should have known better and been more prepared, but then again we are arguiing wiht a person that believes everything he reads in the great book of fairy tales.... Opps did I say that I guess im going to hell, oh that is right if I jsut ask for forgiveness all is forgotten.
jasonlfunk
08-06-2008, 23:20
Good post SmarT - Rep for you.
Now you can look at the bible, a book writing by man with no proof of any thing happening in it. The whole Moses thing, if i remember correctly, the eygptians, who where nortious at keeping records have none of an hebrew uprising. And why would God pick one people of everyone in the world to speak to? On top of that the symbols and such that the hebrews have would not have the same meaning for everyone. as in for me, thumbs up could mean good job but for you it could mean fark off.
It isn't true that there is no evidence of anything that happened in the bible is true. You must remember as well that some of the stories - the only evidence that could be asked for is a record of the event happening, which is percisely what we have in the bible. The Old Testament especially is not a religious book - it is the written history of the hebrew people.
As for turning wine to water or another things like that. Jesus isnt teh only one, their has been many Magi and magicans in the world that have done magic.
Sure, they may have been other people who could have done something similar. But don't you count it odd that Jesus is the only one that has 2 billion followers 2000 years later. There seems to be something different with this guy...
If we are created in the image of God, where did he get the idea of a Women from?
Usually image of God does not mean bodily image - more like rational.
And if God exist whos his wife?
Why does God need a wife?
and if there is only one God, how can Jesus be God?
The trinity is a funny thing like that. :)
Why did the Catholics convert Pagan holidays into Christian ones and why did they convert pagan Gods into Saints?
I dunno and which pagan Gods did they turn to saints?
Another thing, why would u believe in the devil? an entity of PURE EVIL. can u understand or comprehend that? thats just farkin wrong. and imposible to exist, like an entity of PURE GOOD. which is why i like my Greek Gods, they are like us, with all the good, the bad, and the flaws, but immortal and powerful :D They dont demand worship or sacrifice, but its a choice. We are free people not slaves to no man or no god.
In Christian theology, Satan is not an entity of pure evil, equal to God. He was created good by God and satan rebelled and fell. He is a broken angel - not an evil God.
As for following a Polytheistic religion... If their is so many of us, why not of the Gods. Do you think they don't get it on and enjoy one of the most intimate things there is?
Intresting question. The answer does have something to do with the image of God. The great "I AM". As for the sex thing - that's a good question too.
good questions and reasons.
yes maggio we gonna burn in hell.... i got some cigs... got a light?
lets debate on the Jesus Myth thread Jason.
Z
I understand Jason... i was taught the same thing. fear...
i was taught that my mission was to do battle with the secular world.
That the only way to salvation was to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
Or I would go to Hell (a real place)
so as a CHILD, I was given these options.
Jesus was cool, Jesus was a nice guy... it was just that little matter, of if I wasnt his best friend, I was eternally damded....?
Luke 12:10 - Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not b forgiven.
Mark 3:29 - Whosoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.
hmmm...
I got to thinking...
by the time I was 16 I decided to stop attending church on a regular basis.
Jason do u worship? You mention the holy trinity, and so u must be Catholic, unless the church is just paying people to argue these days.
And why do u never address any of the specific points I make?
I am waiting on the other thread to begin a real debate.
Z
Point 1. contradiction
The three Abrahamic faiths believe relatively in the same God yet, all 3 contradict themselves. Christians believe that Jesus is the savior of the world and the son of God; Jews believe just as strongly that he is not. Muslims believe that the Qur'an was inspired by God, while Jews and Christians do not.
This is true, but nowhere does God say that God is the only god. In fact, God states in the bible that he's jealous when people worship other gods. Frontline missionary work is full of stories of people fighting other supernatural forces. It's just Jews and Christians believe they worship the strongest God.
Point 2. All loving god hating?
"Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world?" — Epicurus. Why would such a loving God bring evil to the world, knowing what it would cause.
Ah--the age old question of Evil. I could write 20 pages on this question, but there are smarter people than I who cannot come up with a good answer. All I will direct you to is 1st Corinthians 12:13. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
Meaning=any good Christian will realize that they cannot know some things in full, and we only see a vague reflection of truth and reality. There is no good answer for Evil--only that we should act in opposite to it.
Point 3. Omniscience.
If God is all-powerful, then by right he could create a being more infinitely more powerful then himself, if so, does this no longer make him God? If humans have at every given moment the free will to choose, then how does God know the future. Are we slaves to his plans? A benevolent God would not have slaves.
Or can God make a square circle? Can God make a stone so heavy he can't lift it? Perhaps, Omniscience should be reviewed as to whether we are following the correct definition. I believe God is omniscient in that God can do everything that is possible. Isn't that all-powerful? Or does omniscient mean that God can do anything my mind can conjure up? Or does omniscient mean that God can do anything that God's mind can conjure up?
Fact is that most of the stuff in the bible is not true, and one person arbitrarily selected the writings of particular "gosples" to be included and arbitrarily refused the writing of other gosples. The bible was a planned series of stories and events in order to control and empire divided by two major religeon. I mean that is what history deplicts.
Mmm--not so much Maggio. There was a large group of people in the 4th Century who sat down and selected which books to put in the bible and which to not put in. They based it on Apostolic history and origination from primary sources.
The bible was not a planned series of stories and events for people to use to create a kingdom. The bible was used by people for that cause. Subtle argument, but dramatic difference.
rain for 40days and 40nights and the only survivors are on an arch? proven wrong.
adam and eve? proven wrong
divided the red sea? proven wrong.
water into wine? proven wrong.
and list goes on. Did something like this happen and when the stories are told certain parts are exaggerated in order to make a specif point or relivance sure, but did these things actually happen, most have been proven wrong.
I'm just gonna lump this into one large counter-statement. THE BIBLE WAS NOT A HISTORY BOOK. Some parts of it were history. Other parts were ways for the Jews to describe what they saw around them. For instance, Adam and Eve could be true. It also could not be true. But the fact is, it's a story of how Sin originated in this world (Which we see quite clearly is still here) and also of God's plan for a world w/o sin. I'm pretty sure every religion has a similar story.
As for Noah--Christianity is not the only religion with this kind of story. See the story of Gilgamesh, which was a man who him and his family survived a world-wide flood. Written in Ancient Times, for a different religion. Perhaps the Jews wanted to copy that story, or perhaps there had indeed been a large flood that had wiped out the known world. Remember--the time of Noah, people only knew about the small world around them, which was probably the size of modern day Israel. A flood covering the world wouldn't take that much water. You've got to stop reading the bible from the modern day perspective and reach back into the Ancient times and the audience it was written to then.
Using this common sense we can quickly apply it to many other stories in the bible and realize that when it is all said and done, that the bible is simply a really good book of cool stories that are well written to encourage high moral values. But not every word is true, and those that hang on every word of the bible and insist that every single thing in the bible is fact are the one who give religeons like christianity a bad name.
Your claim is pretty close to reality. Close. Every moral code in the Bible can be traced to other religions/socities/groups of people. Self-sacrifice--see Japanese culture. Helping Neighbors--see most cultures. Not eating certain foods--see most cultures. etc...etc...etc
However, the Bible does provide one unique thing--and that is the idea of saved by Grace. You won't find this in any other people group in any other place in the world, and certainly not through the manifestation of an ultimate human/divine being.
We do not need to look to a book for what is right and wrong.
Kudos to you Z. You hit the nail on the head. The Bible as we know it wasn't formed until the 4th century, 300 years after Jesus. 300 years where we saw the greatest amount of growth in Christianity. There's absolutely something more to this Christian thing than a book.
You keep referring to god as a "she"... Just curious about this.
Most any theologian will tell you that God is neither Female nor male. Does God have a penis? Does God have a vagina? Does God have sexual intercourse, the reason for different genders? I think it is more important to realize that God is and should be the embodiment of both male and female qualities. The only reason that we see so many male references in the Bible is because it was written by Men who saw manly things as good things. In Isaiah you will find references to God being a mother.
Jesus's life as a living person can be disproven by the fact that Paul seemed unaware of Jesus's life despite writing shortly after Jesus was supposed to have died, with Jesus's biography first provided by the Gospels of Mark, John, Matthew, and Luke, written around the end of the first century A.D.
Don't know what source you cited this from, but it is one view of things. Let me say this--Paul never met Jesus until the road to Damascus, which was well after Jesus had died. I think that would make him unaware of intricacies involved in the Gospels. Also--you must understand that Paul wrote his letters around 40 AD-whenever he died. I think around 55 or 60 AD. Mark was written around 68 AD, and was the first Gospel to be recorded. Up until Mark being written down, everything about Jesus was word of mouth by the disciples who followed him.
God's demand that people believe in him or be ****ed to eternity in hell as essentially mind control. Flemming is appalled that Jesus will forgive murder, theft, and any other sin but will not tolerate one doubting in God's existence. Because Jesus knows peoples' innermost thoughts, and that therefore one must police one's thoughts to avoid any doubt, Flemming summarizes this idea with the statement that the greatest sin in Christianity is "to think."
Not so much Z. Again, I don't know where you're citing this from, but Jesus was not tolerant of people sinning. He told people to repent from their sin, which is different than being tolerant of it.
As for not thinking, the greatest Sin in Christianity is to not use all of your heart, mind, soul, and body to seek after God.
why do you believe, that your belief is right?
Its a grave mistake not to question your beliefs.
Hey Max! Great question, and here's my response, which might not be like every other person's response. I don't believe in God because of what I read in a book, or what other people have told me. I believe in God because God has changed my life. There is a transformation within my soul and body that can only be attributed to something outside of me. I believe this transformational power comes from Jesus Christ. I cannot prove this to you, the only thing I can possibly do is ask God to reveal Him/Her self to you the same way that God revealed him/herself to me. Only then will you be able to understand my belief.
So how can you base your beliefs off a book wrote by many men of so called "gods word" yet when the new testiment was made the emperor of Rome had a convention to decide what would be put in and what scripture wouldnt be?
Seriously, if you're going to be the leader of my nation, at least let me correct your spelling and grammar:P.
The New Testament was "made" when Jesus was alive (Gospels), and the beginning founding of the Church (Acts and Pauline Letters). It was 300 years later when Constantine came around and made Christianity the religion of the Empire. They did have a convention for which books would be canonized (which books would be a part of the bible), however, it was done by a group of 300ish Christians from all parts of the world. There was much debate on it, and it lasted for months. It all came down to looking at history of the church and which letters fit the Church history, which letters came from Congregations that stemmed from the Apostles, and which letters everyone agreed were revelations from God.
the bible was written by fishermen
Not so much. Authors of the Gospels were scribes who translated straight from the Apostles, who had left their fishermen lifestyles 20 years previous. Paul was an elite Jewish leader, but converted. He amounts for about 1/2 of the NT. The OT was written by many, many different authors.
why attempt to argue something that science has proven to be untrue?
What, like the world is flat...that black people have less intellect than White people...that AIDS comes from Gay people?
Science is far from exact, and any good scientist will say that all of science can be disproven with the next discovery. My Bachelors degree in Biology taught me that lol.
hmm well first and formost i am not christian. I have respect for Christians, but i have no respect for Christianity as a religion what so ever. I am a Greek Pagan and when i see a church, i see blood, skulls, lies and bones from all the horrors that Christanity has brought to this planet: The 4 Crusades, Inquisition, The Burning times, the destruction of other religions temples and history. Christians for hundreds of years have killed, hung, tortured, burnt on the stake, and raped any one of other beliefs many times over.
Christianity is good. Christians mess it up a LOT though. Try not to link the two. Even Pagan's have their fair share of bloodshed in their past.
The whole Moses thing, if i remember correctly, the eygptians, who where nortious at keeping records have none of an hebrew uprising.
That we've found...
However, Ramses II (I believe he was Pharoah at the time) was notoriously prideful and didn't have ANY bad things happen during his reign according to what we've found in the Egyptian records. Seems to me that a Hebrew uprising, all of the slaves leaving town, and his army being routed by slaves with no weapons might be something he'd keep on the DL. Interesting lil twist to your argument no doubt.
As for turning wine to water or another things like that. Jesus isnt teh only one, their has been many Magi and magicans in the world that have done magic.
True. Although there are some other things Jesus did that Magi and Magician can't claim.
If we are created in the image of God, where did he get the idea of a Women from?
See above point about the Gender of God.
Another thing, why would u believe in the devil? an entity of PURE EVIL.
Show me in the Bible where it says that the Devil is pure evil. I bet you might have a lil trouble:D. The Devil is evil, however. Remember that Satan was an angel before the fall, and only became the nemesis of God when Satan wanted to be greater than God. It seems that greed and pride are what drives Satan, and not being Evil.
Let me say one final thing. I will be the first to admit that I may be wrong on some of the things I say. There is nothing rock solid about my logic or reasoning. However, I do believe in the end because of what I have seen within my own life. I cannot rationally explain this to you, nor can I show you through my words. Only if you have encountered the same thing can you understand.
Sorry for long post. Just entered in conversation and was putting in my two cents on everything lol.
Sure, they may have been other people who could have done something similar. But don't you count it odd that Jesus is the only one that has 2 billion followers 2000 years later. There seems to be something different with this guy...
Please tell me you do know how christianity became to be so dominate?
Constantine on his death bed converted to to Christianity to keep his empire together, after being a life long pagan. This in turn forced the entire roman empire " the largest empire in the world at the time" to convert to Christianity. The romans went on to conquer and impose Christianity upon its the people they conquered. Well Europe being the most sophisticated continent in these times was pretty much Christian even after the roman empire crumbled. European countries established colonies and took new lands in far away places in far away continents and forced their religion down the natives.
Christianity was Forced upon the world and after a while of conforming to the beliefs that were forced upon them now become the only beliefs they know. And this gets passed on from generation to generation till now. Where people are more educated and question things because they can.
and there are others who like you who close your mind and live in your "save zone" where you don't question your beliefs because your too afraid of what might happen if you do start to question your beliefs, the universe and life in general
No where in the bible U say Pron?
Deuteronomy 4:39 Know therefore today, and take it to your heart, that the LORD, He is God in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other.
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man.
Isaiah 44:24 the LORD created the heavens alone and created the earth by Himself.
Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism
Z
Please tell me you do know how christianity became to be so dominate?
Constantine on his death bed converted to to Christianity to keep his empire together, after being a life long pagan. This in turn forced the entire roman empire " the largest empire in the world at the time" to convert to Christianity. The romans went on to conquer and impose Christianity upon its the people they conquered. Well Europe being the most sophisticated continent in these times was pretty much Christian even after the roman empire crumbled. European countries established colonies and took new lands in far away places in far away continents and forced their religion down the natives.
Christianity was Forced upon the world and after a while of conforming to the beliefs that were forced upon them now become the only beliefs they know. And this gets passed on from generation to generation till now. Where people are more educated and question things because they can.
and there are others who like you who close your mind and live in your "save zone" where you don't question your beliefs because your too afraid of what might happen if you do start to question your beliefs, the universe and life in general
Well said
The inquisition is a fine example of christian doctrine played out as the bible would have it:
"Those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them - bring them here and kill them in front of me. - Jesus (Luke 19:27)
the inquisition was not a perversion of christian doctrine. It was an expression of it.
Z
Now that we are in an age where information is so free,
people no longer require dogmas,
people are thinking.
And in the developed world, religion is fading at a quicker rate than ever.
The reason that Islam will surpass Christianity as the most popular religion in the next decade is that it is bigger in the thirds worlds.
Z
No where in the bible U say Pron?
I may have exaggerated:P
Deuteronomy 4:39 Know therefore today, and take it to your heart, that the LORD, He is God in heaven above and on the earth below; there is no other.
Deuteronomy 8:19
"If you ever forget the Lord your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them..."
Deuteronomy 11:16
"Be careful, or you will be enticed to turn away and worship other gods and bow down to them."
Deuteronomy 11:28
"the curse if you disobey the commands of the LORD your God and turn from the way that I command you to day by following other gods, which you have not known.
I think there might be more of a precedent through which there are other Gods, and your verse could be taken as "there is no other".
I might be wrong though.
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
Understand this passage in it's context. In verse 13, God says "He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free." This is pointing to the time will God will again dwell among his people. For the Christian, this is Jesus' second coming. For the Jew's, it is when the Messiah comes and restores Israel. Then the passage continues, with God saying "I am the LORD; and there is no other." In the timeline of things, this is a futuristic saying, when God again dwells among His people, and all the other Gods have been swept away.
I guess we'd have to go into what is a "god" in the Bible. The Bible sees "gods" as divine principalities that people then promote into God. An idol is something someone puts in the place of God. So, people see Creation as a god. People see water as a god. People see the Sun as a god. However, monotheism in the ancient cultures was simply saying "One God that ruled over them all". Lord of the Rings style. Even the original Hebrew talks of a "council" through which God spoke.
BTW--whenever you read LORD God, in the original Hebrew, it said "GOD god". A good translation would be "The God" or the "The God of Gods". Head honcho of sorts.
Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man.
Never said he didn't. What were you contending?
Isaiah 44:24 the LORD created the heavens alone and created the earth by Himself.
Agreed. the LORD can create these things without the help of the other gods.
Isaiah 45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.
See previous post about Isaiah 45. I believe this still applies.
Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Same scenario as Isaiah 45. This book of prophecy has God talking about the future, when he sets creation straight and removes all these gods that his people could worship.
Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Seems to me like he's saying there's only one God that we need. Especially if you read 1st Corinthians 8:5
"For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords")
Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism
Z
Same guy that wrote 1st Corinthians 8:5-6.
Same guy who wrote 2nd Corinthians 6:15. "What harmony is there between Christ and Belial?" Belial being the name of a god.
2nd Corinthians 11:4. "For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit (Bold added) from the one you received..."
Same guy who wrote Romans 8:38. "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor heavenly rulers, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers..." Seems like he's talking about gods.
You can also look outside the bible at historical context and writings to further understand that monotheism isn't a "one God" but rather a religion that worshiped only one God instead of multiple gods.
Well said
The inquisition is a fine example of christian doctrine played out as the bible would have it:
"Those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them - bring them here and kill them in front of me. - Jesus (Luke 19:27)
the inquisition was not a perversion of christian doctrine. It was an expression of it.
Z
Whoa--way off on your interpretation of that passage. And the people that used it to justify the inquisition were way off when they used it also. This is not an expression of Christian doctrine--it's an expression of a doctrine that Christians used to pervert Christianity.
This is the last line in a parable. You have to read the whole parable. Start in verse 11 and end at 27. You can't take verse 27 out of it's context.
This parable is talking about when a person goes away and becomes king, and he gives his followers money to "put to work" until he comes back. Two servants did the right thing. The third servant hid the money and only returned what was given him by the king, even calling the king a thief for taking money that he didn't earn. Then the king calls this man an enemy because he didn't want a king over him.
Interpretation--when Christ is resurrected and becomes King, he will entrust the church to his followers. His followers must expand the church. Those that hide what God has given them and don't expand the church will be seen as an enemy. Those people will be judged when the King returns.
This parable is about kingdom workers and them being judged when Jesus returns based on what they do in this life. NOT on judging others who sin.
The inquisition is still a perversion of Christian Doctrine.
I may have exaggerated:P
Deuteronomy 8:19
"If you ever forget the Lord your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them..."
Deuteronomy 11:16
"Be careful, or you will be enticed to turn away and worship other gods and bow down to them."
Deuteronomy 11:28
"the curse if you disobey the commands of the LORD your God and turn from the way that I command you to day by following other gods, which you have not known.
I think there might be more of a precedent through which there are other Gods, and your verse could be taken as "there is no other".
I might be wrong though.
Understand this passage in it's context. In verse 13, God says "He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free." This is pointing to the time will God will again dwell among his people. For the Christian, this is Jesus' second coming. For the Jew's, it is when the Messiah comes and restores Israel. Then the passage continues, with God saying "I am the LORD; and there is no other." In the timeline of things, this is a futuristic saying, when God again dwells among His people, and all the other Gods have been swept away.
I guess we'd have to go into what is a "god" in the Bible. The Bible sees "gods" as divine principalities that people then promote into God. An idol is something someone puts in the place of God. So, people see Creation as a god. People see water as a god. People see the Sun as a god. However, monotheism in the ancient cultures was simply saying "One God that ruled over them all". Lord of the Rings style. Even the original Hebrew talks of a "council" through which God spoke.
BTW--whenever you read LORD God, in the original Hebrew, it said "GOD god". A good translation would be "The God" or the "The God of Gods". Head honcho of sorts.
Never said he didn't. What were you contending?
Agreed. the LORD can create these things without the help of the other gods.
See previous post about Isaiah 45. I believe this still applies.
Same scenario as Isaiah 45. This book of prophecy has God talking about the future, when he sets creation straight and removes all these gods that his people could worship.
Seems to me like he's saying there's only one God that we need. Especially if you read 1st Corinthians 8:5
"For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords")
Same guy that wrote 1st Corinthians 8:5-6.
Same guy who wrote 2nd Corinthians 6:15. "What harmony is there between Christ and Belial?" Belial being the name of a god.
2nd Corinthians 11:4. "For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit (Bold added) from the one you received..."
Same guy who wrote Romans 8:38. "For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor heavenly rulers, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers..." Seems like he's talking about gods.
You can also look outside the bible at historical context and writings to further understand that monotheism isn't a "one God" but rather a religion that worshiped only one God instead of multiple gods.
The quotes that spoke of "the god" or "the LORD"
by stating those I only meant to show that The and LORD are singular.
If there are other gods what are their purpose?
I have never heard a christian speak of other gods... do they govern other worlds?
Z
The quotes that spoke of "the god" or "the LORD"
by stating those I only meant to show that The and LORD are singular.
If there are other gods what are their purpose?
I have never heard a christian speak of other gods... do they govern other worlds?
Z
Right, they're singular in English, but the OT was written in Hebrew and some of the flavor of the original language is lost in translation.
See a Japanese person ordering a "Gay meal" from McDonalds.
The other "god's purpose" was their original intent when God created them. God created the Sun. The Sun was supposed to warm the earth, make plants live, and some cool astrophysics stuff that is beyond me. However, people came along, said "WOW that Sun is AWESOME! Let's worship it!", thereby turning the Sun into a god. Is the Sun more "powerful" than a person? I might concede that it is. Does that make it a "power"? I think so. Anything seen as more powerful than a person, can be seen as a God. Especially to a superstitious people--like the ones that lived in ancient days.
That's one form of OT god. Another form is actually divine powers. When Satan fell from Heaven, he took with him fallen angels. Satan and these fallen angels have power that manifests itself in this world. People started worshiping this manifest power, giving it names, like "baal" or "belial". And many more. There are also good angels that have power manifest in this world. They can also be worshipped by people, and then become "god". That is why someone can idolize something good. It doesn't always have to be a demon that you mistakenly worship.
We see this type of power manifest when Pharoah's magicians combat with Moses in Exodus. We also see these powers in today's world too, although in modern areas we have to look much harder. Money, fame, fortune, power, greed, and love all act as "powers" or "gods" within our world. We also hear constantly from missionary work about villages where the local shaman and the missionary essentially lock into spiritual battle, or of a 3 year drought where removing a person from the village who was practicing witchcraft ended the drought immediately.
I wrote like, a 12 page paper on this stuff, but I can't find the silly thing right now lol. Anyways, that's a little fuller picture of "gods" in the Bible.
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 09:34
I understand Jason... i was taught the same thing. fear...
i was taught that my mission was to do battle with the secular world.
That the only way to salvation was to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
Or I would go to Hell (a real place)
so as a CHILD, I was given these options.
Jesus was cool, Jesus was a nice guy... it was just that little matter, of if I wasnt his best friend, I was eternally damded....?
Luke 12:10 - Everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not b forgiven.
Mark 3:29 - Whosoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.
hmmm...
I got to thinking...
by the time I was 16 I decided to stop attending church on a regular basis.
Jason do u worship? You mention the holy trinity, and so u must be Catholic, unless the church is just paying people to argue these days.
And why do u never address any of the specific points I make?
I am waiting on the other thread to begin a real debate.
Z
1) I am not battling against the secular world
2) I am not doing anything out of fear
3) The whole purpose of this thread was not to debate what I believe. The only conclusion that I can leave this thread with is that you have no positive reasons for your beliefs and the only way you can defend your beliefs is to attack other beliefs. That sir is irrational belief. There are reasons and rational for thinking atheism and materialism are true. I think they are wrong - but you can at least draft an argument. You have not done that - after multiple attempts on my part to draw it out of you. The only conclusion that I can come to is that you do not have justification for your beliefs. Attacking my beliefs is not justification for your beliefs. This is exactly what I meant in my first post. Religious people are always being accused of "believing without evidence" yet when you ask for evidence for materialism/naturalism - you get nothing. Regardless of what you think - you are the one with irrational beliefs here because you cannot back them up. If you can back them up, please do. Otherwise you will probably want to go read up on what you believe as to be intellectually fulfilled. It is worth it.
1) I am not battling against the secular world
2) I am not doing anything out of fear
3) The whole purpose of this thread was not to debate what I believe. The only conclusion that I can leave this thread with is that you have no positive reasons for your beliefs and the only way you can defend your beliefs is to attack other beliefs. That sir is irrational belief. There are reasons and rational for thinking atheism and materialism are true. I think they are wrong - but you can at least draft an argument. You have not done that - after multiple attempts on my part to draw it out of you. The only conclusion that I can come to is that you do not have justification for your beliefs. Attacking my beliefs is not justification for your beliefs. This is exactly what I meant in my first post. Religious people are always being accused of "believing without evidence" yet when you ask for evidence for materialism/naturalism - you get nothing. Regardless of what you think - you are the one with irrational beliefs here because you cannot back them up. If you can back them up, please do. Otherwise you will probably want to go read up on what you believe as to be intellectually fulfilled. It is worth it.
my beliefs are irrational?
believing in magic and jesus seems irrational.
I believe in love, life and energy. (like I have mentioned many times)
and you say that's irrational.
how about you stop for a minute and think of your own free will
You are hilarious "sir" Jason.
I am not attacking your beliefs, I am attacking a Dogma that was fed to me as a child and caused me harm.
Its not right to lie to children.
ITS WRONG.
Z
stop posting about what the thread is supposed to be, and start posting about what the thread has become. From post #2 your off topic Jfunk, stop spamming...lol.
Right, they're singular in English, but the OT was written in Hebrew and some of the flavor of the original language is lost in translation.
See a Japanese person ordering a "Gay meal" from McDonalds.
The other "god's purpose" was their original intent when God created them. God created the Sun. The Sun was supposed to warm the earth, make plants live, and some cool astrophysics stuff that is beyond me. However, people came along, said "WOW that Sun is AWESOME! Let's worship it!", thereby turning the Sun into a god. Is the Sun more "powerful" than a person? I might concede that it is. Does that make it a "power"? I think so. Anything seen as more powerful than a person, can be seen as a God. Especially to a superstitious people--like the ones that lived in ancient days.
That's one form of OT god. Another form is actually divine powers. When Satan fell from Heaven, he took with him fallen angels. Satan and these fallen angels have power that manifests itself in this world. People started worshiping this manifest power, giving it names, like "baal" or "belial". And many more. There are also good angels that have power manifest in this world. They can also be worshipped by people, and then become "god". That is why someone can idolize something good. It doesn't always have to be a demon that you mistakenly worship.
We see this type of power manifest when Pharoah's magicians combat with Moses in Exodus. We also see these powers in today's world too, although in modern areas we have to look much harder. Money, fame, fortune, power, greed, and love all act as "powers" or "gods" within our world. We also hear constantly from missionary work about villages where the local shaman and the missionary essentially lock into spiritual battle, or of a 3 year drought where removing a person from the village who was practicing witchcraft ended the drought immediately.
I wrote like, a 12 page paper on this stuff, but I can't find the silly thing right now lol. Anyways, that's a little fuller picture of "gods" in the Bible.
hmmmm
it seems to me that just because something is assumed to be a god by humans doesn't mean it is.
Does that mean that Humans are gods to cats and dogs?
and that dogs are gods to mice?
or do these other forms of life not contain spirit, is it only humans that do?
I believe all forms of life contain spirit, and are all connected.
God is life itself, energy, love, creation.
god is not hate.
u do not have to pray to god.
U know what would be hell to me?
If I had to go to heaven, and spend an eternity there, knowing that Billions of human beings were SUFFERING in HELL, for eternity, only because they did not accept the holy trinity.
some of my friends are great people that have helped me out a lot.
they would be there.
any god that discriminates like this,
that god is ****, that god is immoral and sick.
spending eternity in heaven while good people suffered.
that is true hell.
Z
i will speak on magic and witchcraft since i do use magic and have practice witchcraft. Magic first and foremost is using your mind and will to manipulate the natural energy around us. A good understanding of quantum physics is helpful when looking at magic but i am not gonna go down that rabbit hole. Now magic is not parlor tricks or **** u see in movies. It can be used to help you get a job, pay raise, cleanse your body, find friends, just about anything that doesn't effect freewill.
Now magic can be worked with 2 things. Either positive magic or negative magic, Love or hate. so that is where you get white and black magic since what you use is what you get. Now if you do dig deep you can use various things for protection (sigils) and many other things. Also many things can boost your magic since everything on earth has different energy patterns and vibrate on different levels. Which is why gems are used for "supernatural" things. It was why salt can be used to keep negative things out and other stuff.
Now as for witchcraft, which actual is translated as The Craft of The Wise. It is always thrown around when something bad happens or what not. which is not true of witchcraft. As someone who knows witches and has practiced, in order to be considered a witch and follow witchcraft, one must use Positive magic IE LOVE. Anyone that uses negative magic is not practicing witchcraft.
Now as i said. I HAVE practiced witchcraft and i have friends that are practicing witches. So please dont argue with me on this issue. Do not judge it from the context of your religion.
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 13:58
stop posting about what the thread is supposed to be, and start posting about what the thread has become. From post #2 your off topic Jfunk, stop spamming...lol.
That's silly. I just want my question answered :)
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 13:59
my beliefs are irrational?
believing in magic and jesus seems irrational.
I believe in love, life and energy. (like I have mentioned many times)
and you say that's irrational.
how about you stop for a minute and think of your own free will
You are hilarious "sir" Jason.
I am not attacking your beliefs, I am attacking a Dogma that was fed to me as a child and caused me harm.
Its not right to lie to children.
ITS WRONG.
Z
You're beliefs are irrational until you can provide justification for them.
lol well love can be proved... even falling in love with a girl? life can be proved.. are you alive right now? Engery can be proved, study quantum physics
You're beliefs are irrational until you can provide justification for them.
as are yours. Just because billions believe the similar ideas still doesn't make it irrational.
You're beliefs are irrational until you can provide justification for them.
I believe in love because I feel it.
I believe in life because I see it.
I believe in energy because I use it.
Jason exactly what are your beliefs and why do they exist?
Z
I believe in what I see, I don't see a God, I see humans, alone in the known universe, which we can track back to a single point (don't start on that point that we can only "see" to microseconds after the beginning). This to me makes much more sense than a God. While we may not understand what was before that moment we at leasthave some sort of tangible start point.
You ask why atheism is not seen as irrational, this is because the alternative is much more irrational.
Long live the flying spaghetti monster!
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 15:34
I believe in love because I feel it.
I believe in life because I see it.
I believe in energy because I use it.
Jason exactly what are your beliefs and why do they exist?
Z
Good - you are getting closer to articulating the reasons for your beliefs. It isn't that hard is it. :) Keep going. You may get it soon.
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 15:34
as are yours. Just because billions believe the similar ideas still doesn't make it irrational.
I completely agree. If I didn't have justifications for my beliefs then they would be irrational. :thumbup:
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 15:38
I believe in what I see, I don't see a God, I see humans, alone in the known universe, which we can track back to a single point (don't start on that point that we can only "see" to microseconds after the beginning).
So there was nothing, then there was something. And something happen without a reason. Doesn't it make sense that Something then caused the single point to begin?
So there was nothing, then there was something. And something happen without a reason. Doesn't it make sense that Something then caused the single point to begin?
Energy.
There was allways somthing.
God = energy.
Z
I don't believe so, all the time anti-matter and matter are formed but destroy each other at the same time maybe there is an anti-universe somewhere. Who says there was nothing? There is a good chance we are in a bouncing universe. Also time is only something relative to the universe we are in, who knows what is outside? (don't answer God :p).
Where did your something come from? Does it make sense that he/she/it/imaginary friend just exists...? Biggest flaw in intelligent design, that which "designed" us would better than us where did the creator come from?
I don't believe so, all the time anti-matter and matter are formed but destroy each other at the same time maybe there is an anti-universe somewhere. Who says there was nothing? There is a good chance we are in a bouncing universe. Also time is only something relative to the universe we are in, who knows what is outside? (don't answer God :p).
Where did your something come from? Does it make sense that he/she/it/imaginary friend just exists...? Biggest flaw in intelligent design, that which "designed" us would better than us where did the creator come from?
indeed... who created the creator
...
Z
indeed... who created the creator
...
Z
The chicken...
Max Logan
08-07-2008, 17:48
I completely disagree with you. Materialism and naturalism are spoon fed to you all of the time and you do not realize it.
If you have reasons for your beliefs - I really would like to hear them. Why do you believe what you believe?
how come you always avoid questions asked to you, by commenting how you disagree? Got no answer?
And no, I don`t believe whatever is told to me. If I believe in something, then becouse there are strong claims in favor of it, and still, i tend to question it, becouse there is no universal truth and there can`t be one. I belive that Earth is not the center of universe, thats proven. I don`t believe in divine beings or a single Creator, as by definition God is supposed to be flawless and so his creation, but as we see, its far from that!
I do believe that God and Jesus are the most succesful brand ever created by mankind. Words, persons, myths and religion have always been the most powerful weapons. Shamans, Prophets, Monks, Bishops, Popes. People with power, people who`ll do, say and write ANYTHING in order to maintain their status.
And as said before, Christianity was lucky to be born in Europe, as European countries have proven to be the more versatile of all. Always looking for new lands and places to gain profit. Why is it that The Church wanted to Christianize the world so much? Gather them under one banner? Giant network covering the entire world. Think of the power.
That is why I believe what I believe. Becouse I look at things my way and not the way I`m forced to. If you don`t keep your mind open, you`re just a fanatic, or simply arrogant
Max Logan
08-07-2008, 17:50
indeed... who created the creator
...
Z
I think i still remember Jason answer to this, let me try:
God is omnipotent, he has no begining, he`s all powerful! And yeah, it just is!
Now thats a quality answer to a very productive debate
P.S. Space, time, anyone? :p
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 18:20
I think i still remember Jason answer to this, let me try:
God is omnipotent, he has no begining, he`s all powerful! And yeah, it just is!
Now thats a quality answer to a very productive debate
P.S. Space, time, anyone? :p
Close - you are appoarching it from the wrong direction though. The point is in order to have any second causes (which our universe is full of)- there must be a first cause. If there is no first cause there can be no second causes. You cannot have an infinite regression of second causes. So - whatever the first cause is- we call God. It makes no sense to say "What caused the first cause?" It's an illogcal statement. It's like asking what color is darker than black.
So - unforentually - this isn't a stick my head in the sand, ignorant answer. Sorry.
jasonlfunk
08-07-2008, 18:23
how come you always avoid questions asked to you, by commenting how you disagree? Got no answer?
And no, I don`t believe whatever is told to me. If I believe in something, then becouse there are strong claims in favor of it, and still, i tend to question it, becouse there is no universal truth and there can`t be one. I belive that Earth is not the center of universe, thats proven. I don`t believe in divine beings or a single Creator, as by definition God is supposed to be flawless and so his creation, but as we see, its far from that!
I do believe that God and Jesus are the most succesful brand ever created by mankind. Words, persons, myths and religion have always been the most powerful weapons. Shamans, Prophets, Monks, Bishops, Popes. People with power, people who`ll do, say and write ANYTHING in order to maintain their status.
And as said before, Christianity was lucky to be born in Europe, as European countries have proven to be the more versatile of all. Always looking for new lands and places to gain profit. Why is it that The Church wanted to Christianize the world so much? Gather them under one banner? Giant network covering the entire world. Think of the power.
That is why I believe what I believe. Becouse I look at things my way and not the way I`m forced to. If you don`t keep your mind open, you`re just a fanatic, or simply arrogant
It's not that I am avoiding answering questions. I like answering questions- but I also like getting answers to my questions. And I know they will never get answered unless I keep asking them.
You did answer my question. Thank you.
I agree that people in power tend to do whatever they can to stay in power - but this was not the origins of Christainity. It started with fishermen, carpenters, and tax collectors who truly believed that Jesus was the Messiah of Judiasm and preached his death/burial/ressurection - a claim to anything else is not being true to history.
I think i still remember Jason answer to this, let me try:
God is omnipotent, he has no begining, he`s all powerful! And yeah, it just is!
Now thats a quality answer to a very productive debate
P.S. Space, time, anyone? :p
max your previous post is very accurate.
Jason Max has a point. You are a fanatic.
I am sure if Islam was born in Europe you would be on the phone with Osama right now, praising him.
I'm not going to ask you to open up and think, for your own sake or others... I do not want to offend you...
Personally I will not be blinded.
its pretty simple, a god that is not rational and loving to all good men, is not one I want to be saved by.
Z
Mr President
08-07-2008, 20:19
I must admit i was very hesitant on leaving this thread open... But let me say i am impressed with the knowledge you all have on your beliefs. yes they may differ from everyone else's, but the quotes from the bible and other things are impressive.. Especially in an age where organized religion is fading quickly.
kudos to all of you!! And please keep this going. I am enjoying this thread a lot.
I must admit i was very hesitant on leaving this thread open... But let me say i am impressed with the knowledge you all have on your beliefs. yes they may differ from everyone else's, but the quotes from the bible and other things are impressive.. Especially in an age where organized religion is fading quickly.
kudos to all of you!! And please keep this going. I am enjoying this thread a lot.
I think its a good thing that organized religion is fading. I hope that individual spiritualism is replacing it.
I feel now like it doesn't seem to matter what I say...
maybe we should discuss a certain part of spirituality/religion, so we can be more specific, and perhaps come to some actual conclusions.
Z
I must admit i was very hesitant on leaving this thread open... But let me say i am impressed with the knowledge you all have on your beliefs. yes they may differ from everyone else's, but the quotes from the bible and other things are impressive.. Especially in an age where organized religion is fading quickly.
kudos to all of you!! And please keep this going. I am enjoying this thread a lot.
Interesting you would point out organized religion fading. This must be why many people who still are religious feel the obligation to push it on everyone. I didn't rush out and buy a Yugo when they were fading, and I'm not going to start buying into religion now. But please continue because alot of you are really easy to make fun of.
I completely agree. If I didn't have justifications for my beliefs then they would be irrational. :thumbup:
now do you have any justifications besides faith?
it seems to me that just because something is assumed to be a god by humans doesn't mean it is.
Does that mean that Humans are gods to cats and dogs?
and that dogs are gods to mice?
Are you assuming that animals are capable of higher order thinking that Humans have? Can Cats and Dogs create things as Humans can?
I'd suppose we'd have to have a conversation with one someday and find out :D
u do not have to pray to god.
Indeed. But I want to :D
If I had to go to heaven, and spend an eternity there, knowing that Billions of human beings were SUFFERING in HELL, for eternity, only because they did not accept the holy trinity.
I too wrestle with this problem. Again, I go back to the idea that I cannot fully fathom this with my ability. Perhaps you won't even know a Hell exists when you die. Perhaps there isn't even a Hell. There is too much mystery of the other side of this life for me to give you a good answer on this point.
i will speak on magic and witchcraft since i do use magic and have practice witchcraft. Magic first and foremost is using your mind and will to manipulate the natural energy around us. A good understanding of quantum physics is helpful when looking at magic but i am not gonna go down that rabbit hole. Now magic is not parlor tricks or **** u see in movies. It can be used to help you get a job, pay raise, cleanse your body, find friends, just about anything that doesn't effect freewill.
Now magic can be worked with 2 things. Either positive magic or negative magic, Love or hate. so that is where you get white and black magic since what you use is what you get. Now if you do dig deep you can use various things for protection (sigils) and many other things. Also many things can boost your magic since everything on earth has different energy patterns and vibrate on different levels. Which is why gems are used for "supernatural" things. It was why salt can be used to keep negative things out and other stuff.
Now as for witchcraft, which actual is translated as The Craft of The Wise. It is always thrown around when something bad happens or what not. which is not true of witchcraft. As someone who knows witches and has practiced, in order to be considered a witch and follow witchcraft, one must use Positive magic IE LOVE. Anyone that uses negative magic is not practicing witchcraft.
Now as i said. I HAVE practiced witchcraft and i have friends that are practicing witches. So please dont argue with me on this issue. Do not judge it from the context of your religion.
I never said that magic wasn't real. In fact, I've said that it does exist. I've even said your gods exist. I just don't attribute them to be God. I suppose we'll probably continue to disagree on this point though.
I believe in what I see, I don't see a God, I see humans, alone in the known universe, which we can track back to a single point (don't start on that point that we can only "see" to microseconds after the beginning). This to me makes much more sense than a God. While we may not understand what was before that moment we at leasthave some sort of tangible start point.
You ask why atheism is not seen as irrational, this is because the alternative is much more irrational.
And who's to say that God didn't create the Universe through the Big Bang. I would concede the point that the story of Adam and Eve could be myth. The entire creation account could be myth as well. However, the basic point of God creating the world I believe to be true (even if the Jews didn't know how it first happened). Knowing how the world was created doesn't destroy the fact that God created it. It just calls in to question the story of Creation in the Bible.
Long live the flying spaghetti monster!
lol
I don't believe so, all the time anti-matter and matter are formed but destroy each other at the same time maybe there is an anti-universe somewhere. Who says there was nothing? There is a good chance we are in a bouncing universe. Also time is only something relative to the universe we are in, who knows what is outside? (don't answer God ).
Where did your something come from? Does it make sense that he/she/it/imaginary friend just exists...? Biggest flaw in intelligent design, that which "designed" us would better than us where did the creator come from?
This is an inane argument. I'm not calling you inane. Just your argument. Physicists right now believe, through Quantum Physics String Theory, that there are a possible 14 dimensions. That's what they think right now. Our brains can't even comprehend outside of 3. It's inane to think that we can comprehend what is outside of our reality. That's why I offer no solutions to the things that happen after we die. We all need to have humility when it comes to speaking about things we don't know for sure.
indeed... who created the creator
See above argument.
how come you always avoid questions asked to you, by commenting how you disagree? Got no answer?
How come you have no answers to my answers? How come only Z has replied to things I've said in this post? It's much easier to ask questions than to give answers. You seem good at this.
And as said before, Christianity was lucky to be born in Europe,
Christianity was born in the Middle East...
Why is it that The Church wanted to Christianize the world so much? Gather them under one banner? Giant network covering the entire world. Think of the power.
Indeed, this was a dark day for Christians. However, don't accept that the Church in it's actions = What Christ wants. Wherever Man goes, it corrupts.
I am sure if Islam was born in Europe you would be on the phone with Osama right now, praising him.
I'm certainly not on the phone praising people who bomb abortion clinics in the name of Christ, and if I was a Muslim, I would not be praising Osama. You should really stop doing personal attacks Z. I'm sure Jason is not a fanatic who condones violence.
maybe we should discuss a certain part of spirituality/religion, so we can be more specific, and perhaps come to some actual conclusions.
Ask away :D
I think its a good thing that organized religion is fading.
Organized religion isn't fading lol. People are creating a backlash against fundamentalism for sure, and are seeking something besides Dogma and Theology, but that doesn't mean Organized Religion is fading. Maybe you really want it to, and the circles you run in it's fading, but in my circles, we're seeing growth.
And who's to say that God didn't create the Universe through the Big Bang. I would concede the point that the story of Adam and Eve could be myth. The entire creation account could be myth as well. However, the basic point of God creating the world I believe to be true (even if the Jews didn't know how it first happened). Knowing how the world was created doesn't destroy the fact that God created it. It just calls in to question the story of Creation in the Bible.
This is an inane argument. I'm not calling you inane. Just your argument. Physicists right now believe, through Quantum Physics String Theory, that there are a possible 14 dimensions. That's what they think right now. Our brains can't even comprehend outside of 3. It's inane to think that we can comprehend what is outside of our reality. That's why I offer no solutions to the things that happen after we die. We all need to have humility when it comes to speaking about things we don't know for sure.
String theory can't decide on one number, it was 26 dimensions in 2006, also we ca comprehend 4, time is seen as a dimension. Then how can there be a belief in God? Surely that is inane too? I was just answering jason's question as he kept asking me to; if there was a God his presence would be noticeable, but where is it? In the minds of some people, that's not realy proof now is it? The onus is on religion to proove itself, not the other way round, lack of God is as good as no God.
But saying God created the universe is in contradiction to saying he created the world, both of these cannot be true if you are going to use the science arguement for your cause. All you have done is call anything we don't understand an act of God. Not so long ago the weather was an act of God, but now its been proven otherwise that all changes.
God is needed by many people, to help them make sense of the world around them, to give them a purpose, without religion many people would be at a loss of what to do, I would much prefer if they took Z's point of view, where he just personifies the good in the world under the banner of his God.
Sort've. Let me define my position better.
if there was a God his presence would be noticeable, but where is it?
Ok, aside from the whole burning bush, divine presence in the Temple during Israel's hayday in BC times, and Jesus--I'm assuming you're asking about today? And where is God in today's time?
There are many different points to this topic, and we could debate for about...10 years on it. If God was "noticeable" in everybody's life, and what point would we not be able to resist God? If God was manifest in every moment in our life, would there be any other choice? And if there is no other choice, we would be nothing more than mindless slaves. That, to me, is not freedom. Or free will. Or loving.
In the minds of some people, that's not realy proof now is it?
Actually, it can be. Some people have greater understanding of things than others. Take for instance any great scientist. Is everyone able to say they can understand things as Albert Einstein could? Or is the fact that he understood things in the Universe, but most people couldn't, make those things false? Just because we have trouble proving things, doesn't make them false. Just means we have to wait til we can prove them. I've said this before in this thread.
The onus is on religion to proove itself, not the other way round, lack of God is as good as no God.
Yet, in this same paragraph, we both conceded that Science can't really prove itself right now either, and any scientist will tell you that it's mostly theory, and that at any point the next big discovery will change which theories are "true". Does that make Science as good as no science also?
But saying God created the universe is in contradiction to saying he created the world, both of these cannot be true if you are going to use the science arguement for your cause.
I will concede that it is entirely possible that God didn't create the Universe and that God didn't create the world. I could be wrong.
However, it's also entirely possible that I'm right. It is possible that God could create this universe and this world through the laws of the Universe that God created. Is it not possible that God could have created the properties of Physics, and then used them to shape this universe?
Science could be the discovery of the processes that God used to create this world. The two do not have to be in direct conflict. Only fundamentalists and extremists would concede that they have to be in opposition to each other.
All you have done is call anything we don't understand an act of God.
All you've done is called anything we don't understand "science we're waiting to understand". You have just as much faith as I do. It's just in something else.
Not so long ago the weather was an act of God, but now its been proven otherwise that all changes.
Just because we've proven that weather is not God opening up the heavens as the Israelites thought, doesn't mean that it's not God working through the physical properties of this Universe. It also doesn't mean that God doesn't exist just because water accumulates in the sky to form clouds and when it becomes more dense than the air around it, it falls to the earth. I've already conceded that the creation story in the Bible could be wrong. I also know that it wasn't written to be a cosmology, it was written to describe the way that Man came to be how it is.
God is needed by many people, to help them make sense of the world around them, to give them a purpose, without religion many people would be at a loss of what to do, I would much prefer if they took Z's point of view, where he just personifies the good in the world under the banner of his God.
God is needed by many people. I'll agree with that :D.
And Z's points are good. I agree with a lot of what Z says. However, there is more to God than just goodness and Love. Those may be two of the largest qualities, but God is so much richer in character than those. The question becomes, for me, can we define Love in it's entirety? Is not Discipline a part of Love? Is not Justice a part of Love?
I also agree on personifying Love, but I believe there's only one person who has nailed down what it means to personify Love. If every Christian were to act like him, well...it would be Utopian :D.
I will be the first to tell you that I can't use Science to prove God. And I haven't tried to do that. All I've called into question is whether or not Science is "right" and whether or not we can understand this universe through science as we have it today. If you can concede that point, then it will open up the possibility that I might be right to trust God in this Universe.
Max Logan
08-08-2008, 13:36
Close - you are appoarching it from the wrong direction though. The point is in order to have any second causes (which our universe is full of)- there must be a first cause. If there is no first cause there can be no second causes. You cannot have an infinite regression of second causes. So - whatever the first cause is- we call God. It makes no sense to say "What caused the first cause?" It's an illogcal statement. It's like asking what color is darker than black.
So - unforentually - this isn't a stick my head in the sand, ignorant answer. Sorry.
How come God qualifies as a first cause and universe does not? That does sound like your`re just sticking your head in the sand
Order:
First came the chicken.
The chicken made an egg
The egg hatched another chicken which became God and killed the first chicken
God created the universe
God created chickens
Chickens laid more eggs, which created more chickens
Max Logan
08-08-2008, 13:40
It's not that I am avoiding answering questions. I like answering questions- but I also like getting answers to my questions. And I know they will never get answered unless I keep asking them.
You did answer my question. Thank you.
I agree that people in power tend to do whatever they can to stay in power - but this was not the origins of Christainity. It started with fishermen, carpenters, and tax collectors who truly believed that Jesus was the Messiah of Judiasm and preached his death/burial/ressurection - a claim to anything else is not being true to history.
Jesus might have/was a historical person, theres no doubt. And there is no doubt he was a charismatic person at that. But there is NO proof he was of divine origin! He was a simple person, ok, not simple, who convinced people to join his cause. He was good at PR and so were his disciples!
Max Logan
08-08-2008, 13:42
I think its a good thing that organized religion is fading. I hope that individual spiritualism is replacing it.
I feel now like it doesn't seem to matter what I say...
maybe we should discuss a certain part of spirituality/religion, so we can be more specific, and perhaps come to some actual conclusions.
Z
Its probably not a very tolerant thing to say but: Organized religion has always been the biggest crime syndicates in the history
jasonlfunk
08-08-2008, 16:58
How come God qualifies as a first cause and universe does not? That does sound like your`re just sticking your head in the sand
Because the universe started. Anything that starts must be started by something. The first cause necessarily has to be something that did not begin.
jasonlfunk
08-08-2008, 17:01
Jesus might have/was a historical person, theres no doubt. And there is no doubt he was a charismatic person at that. But there is NO proof he was of divine origin! He was a simple person, ok, not simple, who convinced people to join his cause. He was good at PR and so were his disciples!
All the evidence that you would use to prove that Jesus was a historical person also says he was much more than that. You cannot say this piece of the document is historical and this piece isn't based on what you feel should be true. You cannot just cut out the pieces that you don't like.
jasonlfunk
08-08-2008, 17:03
if there was a God his presence would be noticeable, but where is it?
C.S. Lewis wrote his greatest novel about that very question - Till We Have Faces.
"Why must holy places be dark places?"
His answer: We can't see God face to face, until we have faces.
jasonlfunk
08-08-2008, 17:11
now do you have any justifications besides faith?
I have never claimed that faith was the justification for my beliefs. That was Z.
My justifications are both empirical (scientific, historical) and personal (experiential).
I tried to explain this before - faith means trust. There are certian things in Christianity that are matters of Faith:
The trinity
That Jesus's death forgives our sins
Some things about God's nature
These are things that it is impossible for us to know unless God tells us. He tells us that he is triune, and we believe him. That is faith. Simple as that. Any other meaning of faith and spiritualistization of it is not true to the orginial meaning of the word.
I have never claimed that faith was the justification for my beliefs. That was Z.
My justifications are both empirical (scientific, historical) and personal (experiential).
I tried to explain this before - faith means trust. There are certian things in Christianity that are matters of Faith:
The trinity
That Jesus's death forgives our sins
Some things about God's nature
These are things that it is impossible for us to know unless God tells us. He tells us that he is triune, and we believe him. That is faith. Simple as that. Any other meaning of faith and spiritualistization of it is not true to the orginial meaning of the word.
I will allow the last word to the irrational fanatic, since any attempts to dispute it will inevitably be met with more irrational responses.
Z
I will allow the last word to the irrational fanatic, since any attempts to dispute it will inevitably be met with more irrational responses.
Z
And yet a rational person is ignored in the forums :P
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 11:28
All the evidence that you would use to prove that Jesus was a historical person also says he was much more than that. You cannot say this piece of the document is historical and this piece isn't based on what you feel should be true. You cannot just cut out the pieces that you don't like.
But Bible isn`t entirely a historical document. Its religious fiction too. Too many flowers in it, to believe everything thats said in it.
Cut out pieces you don`t like? So according to you, I can write whatever I want, as long as I have some truth in it and you can`t turn it down, as I have written atleast something that can be historically proven.
Oh Dan Brown is gonna love that statement!
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 11:30
Because the universe started. Anything that starts must be started by something. The first cause necessarily has to be something that did not begin.
the universe was always there. there no first cause there. the big bang had a cause, yes, but the universe itself was always there
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 11:32
C.S. Lewis wrote his greatest novel about that very question - Till We Have Faces.
"Why must holy places be dark places?"
His answer: We can't see God face to face, until we have faces.
And what does God to do with that book? :blink:
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 11:34
I have never claimed that faith was the justification for my beliefs. That was Z.
My justifications are both empirical (scientific, historical) and personal (experiential).
I tried to explain this before - faith means trust. There are certian things in Christianity that are matters of Faith:
The trinity
That Jesus's death forgives our sins
Some things about God's nature
These are things that it is impossible for us to know unless God tells us. He tells us that he is triune, and we believe him. That is faith. Simple as that. Any other meaning of faith and spiritualistization of it is not true to the orginial meaning of the word.
And here is your answer- faith!
And as we know, faith and belief have no relevance to truth. And God does not tell us, men do. The bible is written by men and not by God, there was no divine interference, no angles come down to tell the story, men wrote it according to their belief and faith, not to the truth. Its purely subjective, the greatest book in history is just a BOOK
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 14:43
But Bible isn`t entirely a historical document. Its religious fiction too. Too many flowers in it, to believe everything thats said in it.
Cut out pieces you don`t like? So according to you, I can write whatever I want, as long as I have some truth in it and you can`t turn it down, as I have written atleast something that can be historically proven.
Oh Dan Brown is gonna love that statement!
What are your reasons for calling the bible "religious fiction"? What indicators are in the book that tells you when it is history and when it is fiction? What motivations did the authors have (and what is your evidence to support the authors having those motivations) to intermingle fiction and fact?
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 14:44
the universe was always there. there no first cause there. the big bang had a cause, yes, but the universe itself was always there
As far as science can and has told us, the big bang was the beginning of the universe.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 14:45
And what does God to do with that book? :blink:
Lewis wrote the book as his answer to the question that nosejam asked.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 14:51
And here is your answer- faith!
And as we know, faith and belief have no relevance to truth. And God does not tell us, men do. The bible is written by men and not by God, there was no divine interference, no angles come down to tell the story, men wrote it according to their belief and faith, not to the truth. Its purely subjective, the greatest book in history is just a BOOK
Faith is the answer for some of the "why" questions. But not all of them - only those that can't possibly be known through human reason.
The bible was written by men who were inspired by God. What would a book that was inspired by God look like and how does this book differ from the bible?
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 20:05
What are your reasons for calling the bible "religious fiction"? What indicators are in the book that tells you when it is history and when it is fiction? What motivations did the authors have (and what is your evidence to support the authors having those motivations) to intermingle fiction and fact?
Motivation? Its obvious- so that people like you would fallow Christianity without questioning, very much like Koran. Its the basis of every religion- books that 'reveal the words of Gods'.
The basic idea of Bible is to brainwash people into obidient servants of The Lord (read- Church)
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 20:06
Lewis wrote the book as his answer to the question that nosejam asked.
it not about God...
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 20:08
As far as science can and has told us, the big bang was the beginning of the universe.
no, the science says that Big bang was created out of mass of gases, meaning from the elements of Universe.
So I can freely say Universe was always there. You can say that about God. So what makes either of us right? And how can you claim you have the only true answer? Thats biased
Max Logan
08-09-2008, 20:10
Faith is the answer for some of the "why" questions. But not all of them - only those that can't possibly be known through human reason.
The bible was written by men who were inspired by God. What would a book that was inspired by God look like and how does this book differ from the bible?
Inspired? You mean like muses inspire artists? A symbolic expression of a sudden burst of idea. Thats it, all there is to be. Its just A BOOK. Like millions of other around there, the difference being, Bible caused a greater impact, but thats it, its just A BOOK
Mwahahahaha
08-09-2008, 21:02
Why do you need religion to tell you right from wrong?
A sane human being already knows. I don't give a rats *** about what some people wrote down a couple of thousand years ago. Live your life the way you believe you should, in the end, if there happened to be a god up there to judge you for it, I'm sure he would forgive you for not worshiping him. If not, he wouldn't be worth worshiping anyway. Using religion as an excuse for your actions is weak. Be a man and stand for your own choices yourself and don't hide behind god.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 23:18
Motivation? Its obvious- so that people like you would fallow Christianity without questioning, very much like Koran. Its the basis of every religion- books that 'reveal the words of Gods'.
The basic idea of Bible is to brainwash people into obidient servants of The Lord (read- Church)
What evidence do you have that that was the motivation of the authors? Think about it - they were devout Jews, in a Jewish society. They had no intention of starting a new religion. They thought that Jesus was the Jewish messiah. There is no evidence anywhere that they were trying to achieve power, prestige, influence... anything that is considered worthwhile. All that they received as punishment, torture and death. The only logical explanation is that they believed what they were preaching - that Jesus Christ rose from the dead to save mankind from their sins.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 23:18
it not about God...
It is all about God... have you read it?
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 23:22
no, the science says that Big bang was created out of mass of gases, meaning from the elements of Universe.
So I can freely say Universe was always there. You can say that about God. So what makes either of us right? And how can you claim you have the only true answer? Thats biased
Umm.. no. I'm pretty sure that isn't true. Maybe someone else can confirm or deny this - but the Big Bang model of the universe is that all the universe was in an infinitely dense singularity (which actually means nothing - for an infinite mass is only possible in a 0 volume and something with 0 volume is actually nothing). Not gases.
I will freely admit that if the universe has been around forever then it could be the first cause. But besides the science (which I'm nearly positive favors a finite aged universe) there are also philosophical reasons for thinking that the universe could not have existed forever - specifically that of the impossibility of transversing an infinite.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 23:24
Inspired? You mean like muses inspire artists? A symbolic expression of a sudden burst of idea. Thats it, all there is to be. Its just A BOOK. Like millions of other around there, the difference being, Bible caused a greater impact, but thats it, its just A BOOK
No - what I mean by inspired is that God is literally writing through man. Perhaps my question is doesn't even make sense to you - but I'll ask it again. If such a book exists as what Christian's claim that the bible is - what would it look like and how would it differ from what we have?
El Mestizo
08-09-2008, 23:27
Stop asking for hard evidence because you yourself have not laid any down. This entire conversation is purely theoretical. This is all opinions, your opinion that atheists don't think straight and our opinion that you're crazy. Not that I'm an atheist. But I still think you're crazy or at the very least misled.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 23:30
Why do you need religion to tell you right from wrong?
A sane human being already knows. I don't give a rats *** about what some people wrote down a couple of thousand years ago. Live your life the way you believe you should, in the end, if there happened to be a god up there to judge you for it, I'm sure he would forgive you for not worshiping him. If not, he wouldn't be worth worshiping anyway. Using religion as an excuse for your actions is weak. Be a man and stand for your own choices yourself and don't hide behind god.
I agree with you that every sane human being already knows the difference between right and wrong. The question that has to be asked is why? If right and wrong are real things that every knows - what is that based in? Why ought I be moral? What makes an action moral or immoral? The Christian claims that morality is ultimately rooted in the very nature of God - the only objective basis that can exist. Any other basis will collapse under the weight of morality. Society cannot account for it, nature cannot account for it, evolution cannot account for it. Of all these groundings for morality you will ultimately get to a point where the question "Why ought I do this?" has no answer. Only with God as the foundation can you make sense of this objective moral knowledge that all men have.
It's not that I hide behind God - indeed I stand upon God. Everyone has a foundation - the question is how sturdy is your foundation.
jasonlfunk
08-09-2008, 23:32
Stop asking for hard evidence because you yourself have not laid any down. This entire conversation is purely theoretical. This is all opinions, your opinion that atheists don't think straight and our opinion that you're crazy. Not that I'm an atheist. But I still think you're crazy or at the very least misled.
They make statements - I ask for evidence to support those statements. You will notice that every time I ask for evidence (at least in the last few pages) it is specifically in reply to a unjustified statement. If someone says the gospel stories are myth - I will ask for evidence to support that specific claim.
What is crazy about not being satisfied with unjustified claims?
El Mestizo
08-10-2008, 00:03
I agree with you that every sane human being already knows the difference between right and wrong. The question that has to be asked is why? If right and wrong are real things that every knows - what is that based in? Why ought I be moral? What makes an action moral or immoral? The Christian claims that morality is ultimately rooted in the very nature of God - the only objective basis that can exist. Any other basis will collapse under the weight of morality. Society cannot account for it, nature cannot account for it, evolution cannot account for it. Of all these groundings for morality you will ultimately get to a point where the question "Why ought I do this?" has no answer. Only with God as the foundation can you make sense of this objective moral knowledge that all men have.
It's not that I hide behind God - indeed I stand upon God. Everyone has a foundation - the question is how sturdy is your foundation.No no. These things do account for morality. As humans, our nature to develop communities in order to survive acts as a moral foundation. Evolution has made it so we have advanced from small communities, such as nomadic clans, to larger communities, i.e. civilization as we know it. Society has accounted for the immorality of the individual by creating laws to help facilitate cooperation between mankind. All of this was done by humans!
One huge problem I have with certain religions, Christianity being the main one, is that the focus is on the evil in man. There isn't enough credit given to human beings for their righteousness. I think this topic of morality with or without God deserves its own thread tho.
jasonlfunk
08-10-2008, 00:13
No no. These things do account for morality. As humans, our nature to develop communities in order to survive acts as a moral foundation. Evolution has made it so we have advanced from small communities, such as nomadic clans, to larger communities, i.e. civilization as we know it. Society has accounted for the immorality of the individual by creating laws to help facilitate cooperation between mankind. All of this was done by humans!
One huge problem I have with certain religions, Christianity being the main one, is that the focus is on the evil in man. There isn't enough credit given to human beings for their righteousness. I think this topic of morality with or without God deserves its own thread tho.
Yes, morality is hard to talk about in person - how much more so on the internet. Anyways - evolution/society cannot account for morality. Morality is an ought. You ought to behave in a certain way is a moral statement. This cannot be derived from an "is". Another way of saying this: You cannot derive what you ought to be happening, from what is happening. Just because I have biological tendencies to act in a certain way does not mean that I ought to act in that way. Just because evolution accidentally wired us to be societal, does not mean we ought be societal. If we find in us this "oughtness" it must have arrived from somewhere else - something above nature that has the ability and right to place commands upon us. Though, you could deny that these oughts exist at all - but that seem fairly silly to me.
Motivation? Its obvious- so that people like you would fallow Christianity without questioning, very much like Koran. Its the basis of every religion- books that 'reveal the words of Gods'.
The basic idea of Bible is to brainwash people into obidient servants of The Lord (read- Church)
lol
This couldn't be farther from the truth, but I find it's useless to debate with Max.
El Mestizo
08-10-2008, 01:27
Yes, morality is hard to talk about in person - how much more so on the internet. Anyways - evolution/society cannot account for morality. Morality is an ought. You ought to behave in a certain way is a moral statement. This cannot be derived from an "is". Another way of saying this: You cannot derive what you ought to be happening, from what is happening. Just because I have biological tendencies to act in a certain way does not mean that I ought to act in that way. Just because evolution accidentally wired us to be societal, does not mean we ought be societal. If we find in us this "oughtness" it must have arrived from somewhere else - something above nature that has the ability and right to place commands upon us. Though, you could deny that these oughts exist at all - but that seem fairly silly to me.You're just playing with words now. I could just as easily say we ought to do something because something is. Killing is wrong so you ought to not kill. Stealing is immoral so you ought not to steal. But its not as simple as biological tendencies. It is that coupled with human logic that can give us ethics. Ethics, being synonymous with morals, is an invention of man.
Max Logan
08-10-2008, 05:18
What evidence do you have that that was the motivation of the authors? Think about it - they were devout Jews, in a Jewish society. They had no intention of starting a new religion. They thought that Jesus was the Jewish messiah. There is no evidence anywhere that they were trying to achieve power, prestige, influence... anything that is considered worthwhile. All that they received as punishment, torture and death. The only logical explanation is that they believed what they were preaching - that Jesus Christ rose from the dead to save mankind from their sins.
what evidence you have God inspired it? lemme guess, none. Or its gona be like- how could man know the laws of god, etc, etc...
thats a rather weak evidence.
and if you can`t see the motivation for having power and control over people, you`re really a sad and blind follower!
Max Logan
08-10-2008, 05:21
Umm.. no. I'm pretty sure that isn't true. Maybe someone else can confirm or deny this - but the Big Bang model of the universe is that all the universe was in an infinitely dense singularity (which actually means nothing - for an infinite mass is only possible in a 0 volume and something with 0 volume is actually nothing). Not gases.
I will freely admit that if the universe has been around forever then it could be the first cause. But besides the science (which I'm nearly positive favors a finite aged universe) there are also philosophical reasons for thinking that the universe could not have existed forever - specifically that of the impossibility of transversing an infinite.
so man in age when science was still far from anything made up a symbolic figure - God - to explain the creation of life. With that action they also won the trust of men, becouse simple farmers could never understand anything as complicated as that. They needed something supernatural and thats why they brought in Gods, Demons, Devils and the rest of the crew.
See where I`m getting? Mythology. Thats why you put Christianity in mythology books and not scientific ones
Max Logan
08-10-2008, 05:31
No - what I mean by inspired is that God is literally writing through man. Perhaps my question is doesn't even make sense to you - but I'll ask it again. If such a book exists as what Christian's claim that the bible is - what would it look like and how would it differ from what we have?
Ok, now thats even more messed up then being whispered in the ear!
You can`t claim one book written 2k years ago in a age of no rationalisms, written to convert people to christian belief.
A jewish religion interpretend to fit a whole new religion- Christianity.
A person wise enough to use the canon Bible writings to his own agenda.
Simple put- Christianity was made out of a jewish sect which converted into something more massive. The romans did not convert to Christianity becouse of belief and faith, they did it out of fear! Their empire was already crubmling! And to withstand masses of religious who believe you`re a blasphemer...
No divine inspire, no Godly intervention, just men! People, Humans!
And so you finnaly get the basic motivation for every form of organization ever created on the planet- POWER!
Only sometimes, people like you get into it to deep and can`t even see the true shape of it!
Max Logan
08-10-2008, 05:33
lol
This couldn't be farther from the truth, but I find it's useless to debate with Max.
your personal dislike for me is just hilarious! you can`t even coperhand what I`m writting, so beat it and leave this to Jason, you`re embarasing this thread!
jasonlfunk
08-10-2008, 17:52
You're just playing with words now. I could just as easily say we ought to do something because something is. Killing is wrong so you ought to not kill. Stealing is immoral so you ought not to steal. But its not as simple as biological tendencies. It is that coupled with human logic that can give us ethics. Ethics, being synonymous with morals, is an invention of man.
It's not just word play because words have meaning. Just because something is a certain way - does not mean it ought to be that way. Think of a house - a house has a way that it ought to be, namely the way it is designed in the blueprints. The blueprints are the "moral code" for the house - how it ought to be. Yet, the builders may have messed up when they were building the house - maybe the floor isn't quite level. If you walk into the house, you cannot say that because the floor is at an incline - that the house ought to be on an incline. The way the house ought to be cannot be discovered in the way the house is.
Apply this analogy to a person - we have the way people act (due to evolution/society/etc) but there is also this other thing we find in addition to the way people act. We find this ideal, or oughtness, about the way they should be acting. This oughtness cannot be derived from the way people are. "Ought"s cannot be derived from "is"s.
Does that clear up what I am saying at all? :confused:
jasonlfunk
08-10-2008, 17:58
what evidence you have God inspired it? lemme guess, none. Or its gona be like- how could man know the laws of god, etc, etc...
thats a rather weak evidence.
and if you can`t see the motivation for having power and control over people, you`re really a sad and blind follower!
The inspiration of the bible is confirmed by the miracles/signs/and wonders that accompanied the authors. The authors claimed to be speaking for God and would do things that only God could do (heal the sick, raise the dead, etc) to back it up - to prove that God was with them.
These claims are backed up by the historical record of scripture - for which there is no good reason to dispute.
And I can clearly understand that a lot of people in general do want power and control - but there are other motivations that people have besides these. And these other motives - trying to explain what they believe to be true because they think it is important - fits the evidence that we have fair better then wanting power and control.
Answer me this: What reasons do you have for thinking that the original authors wrote the New Testament in order to gain control over people as opposed to writing in order to share what they believed to be true - namely that Jesus Christ died and rose from the dead for the forgiveness of sins?
jasonlfunk
08-10-2008, 18:09
Ok, now thats even more messed up then being whispered in the ear!
You can`t claim one book written 2k years ago in a age of no rationalisms, written to convert people to christian belief.
A jewish religion interpretend to fit a whole new religion- Christianity.
A person wise enough to use the canon Bible writings to his own agenda.
Simple put- Christianity was made out of a jewish sect which converted into something more massive. The romans did not convert to Christianity becouse of belief and faith, they did it out of fear! Their empire was already crubmling! And to withstand masses of religious who believe you`re a blasphemer...
No divine inspire, no Godly intervention, just men! People, Humans!
And so you finnaly get the basic motivation for every form of organization ever created on the planet- POWER!
Only sometimes, people like you get into it to deep and can`t even see the true shape of it!
It is important to keep in mind that if we are discussing the truth of Christianity, we need to talk about the doctrines and the core truth of Christianity. What the Romans did or did not do, is irrelevant to whether or not Christianity is true or not. What Europe did with Christianity is irrelevant to whether or not Christianity is true or not.
The only thing that matters in deciding whether Christianity is true or not is whether Jesus Christ lived, died, and rose from the dead according to the scriptures. The truthfulness of Christianity is not dependent on the followers.
jasonlfunk
08-10-2008, 18:09
your personal dislike for me is just hilarious! you can`t even coperhand what I`m writting, so beat it and leave this to Jason, you`re embarasing this thread!
Give him some credit - I'm pretty sure he understands what you are saying... :thumbup:
El Mestizo
08-10-2008, 18:57
It's not just word play because words have meaning. Just because something is a certain way - does not mean it ought to be that way. Think of a house - a house has a way that it ought to be, namely the way it is designed in the blueprints. The blueprints are the "moral code" for the house - how it ought to be. Yet, the builders may have messed up when they were building the house - maybe the floor isn't quite level. If you walk into the house, you cannot say that because the floor is at an incline - that the house ought to be on an incline. The way the house ought to be cannot be discovered in the way the house is.
Apply this analogy to a person - we have the way people act (due to evolution/society/etc) but there is also this other thing we find in addition to the way people act. We find this ideal, or oughtness, about the way they should be acting. This oughtness cannot be derived from the way people are. "Ought"s cannot be derived from "is"s.
Does that clear up what I am saying at all? :confused:Weak dude. This is still just word play. Houses are made with roofs so this house ought to be made with a roof.
While religion can be ONE of the guides for ethical behavior it is most certainly not the only guide. Your religion may drill the idea of humans being inherently evil into your head so that all you can turn to is their guidance. But my god created me with enough sense to know between right and wrong. I know what I like to have happen to me and what I dislike to have happen to me. I hate being punched in the face so I don't go around punching niggas in the mouth.
I guess my main point is, there were plenty of altruistic people living before Jesus began teaching or Moses came down with the 10 commandments. The world wasn't filled with godless scumbags before then. Maybe some, but goodness is in all of us. It doesn't come from a book.
jasonlfunk
08-10-2008, 19:31
Weak dude. This is still just word play. Houses are made with roofs so this house ought to be made with a roof.
While religion can be ONE of the guides for ethical behavior it is most certainly not the only guide. Your religion may drill the idea of humans being inherently evil into your head so that all you can turn to is their guidance. But my god created me with enough sense to know between right and wrong. I know what I like to have happen to me and what I dislike to have happen to me. I hate being punched in the face so I don't go around punching niggas in the mouth.
I guess my main point is, there were plenty of altruistic people living before Jesus began teaching or Moses came down with the 10 commandments. The world wasn't filled with godless scumbags before then. Maybe some, but goodness is in all of us. It doesn't come from a book.
It is not just word play. Do a little research on the issue. Google "is ought".
Your example doesn't quite answer the problem because built into the word "house" is a structure with a roof - therefore anything that is called a house will have a roof. A better analogy is to use something that is not built into the definition of the word. For examples:
This house does have a table in it - therefore this house ought to have a table in it.
This house does have a pet live in it - therefore this house ought to have a pet in it.
This house is on fire - therefore this house ought to be on fire.
These statements do not follow. Or some examples with mankind:
This man is beating his child - therefore this man ought to be beating his child.
This man is stealing from his work - therefore this man ought to be stealing from his work.
These statements do not follow either. Now let's get a little more complex.
This man is wired biologically to care for his fellow people - therefore this man ought to care for this fellow people.
This man was raised to not think stealing is wrong - therefore this man ought to think that stealing is wrong.
This man evolved to live inside of a society - therefore this man ought to live inside of a society.
I hope you are beginning to see this distinction and why it isn't just word play. If there are such things as morals, which are oughts - then they cannot have arisen from nature.
And I think you agree with me. You say "But my god created me with enough sense to know between right and wrong." God is the objective grounding for morality. He is the ultimate source. They do not make sense outside of him. But we do not have to know that in order to know right and wrong. I know my car will move when I push the gas peddle, even if I don't know how an internal combustion engine works. I know that it is wrong to hurt other people, even if I don't know that it is because of the nature of God himself.
Christians do not believe that you have to be a christian in order to be moral or a good person. The bible clearly teaches that even those who do not have the bible/law still know and follow the law:
12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14(Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)
The whole question of whether man is inherently good or bad is a different one than that of knowledge which I don't want to get into. But I agree with you that all men do have this knowledge of right and wrong- apart from Christianity. I apologize if I was misunderstood in that way.
your personal dislike for me is just hilarious! you can`t even coperhand what I`m writting, so beat it and leave this to Jason, you`re embarasing this thread!
Says the guy that can't argue any of the points I've already made in this thread lol.
Max Logan
08-11-2008, 17:17
The inspiration of the bible is confirmed by the miracles/signs/and wonders that accompanied the authors. The authors claimed to be speaking for God and would do things that only God could do (heal the sick, raise the dead, etc) to back it up - to prove that God was with them.
These claims are backed up by the historical record of scripture - for which there is no good reason to dispute.
And I can clearly understand that a lot of people in general do want power and control - but there are other motivations that people have besides these. And these other motives - trying to explain what they believe to be true because they think it is important - fits the evidence that we have fair better then wanting power and control.
Answer me this: What reasons do you have for thinking that the original authors wrote the New Testament in order to gain control over people as opposed to writing in order to share what they believed to be true - namely that Jesus Christ died and rose from the dead for the forgiveness of sins?
They CLAIM! Everyone can claim whatever they wish! It doesn`t make them right, it doesn`t say they`re telling the truth. Again you try to get away with presenting a few people claim as a valid evidence! Sorry, it doesn`t work that way!
I claim there is no God, my claim is backed by thousands of people each having his evidence and arguments. Sorry, we say there is no God, therefor he doesn`t exist. Period?
The evidence fits as long as you can adjust the truth to fit it. And about Jesus as miracle man, its called suggestion. In other words, brain wash.
Becouse its bilogically proven that dead don`t raise. Also Church itself has proven to use any mean to gain control. A few people writing few pages of what they want us to believe doesn`t make all people believers. If you look at it rational you can see the bottom line- they WANT you to believe. Belief is a strong mean of control and influence
Max Logan
08-11-2008, 17:20
It is important to keep in mind that if we are discussing the truth of Christianity, we need to talk about the doctrines and the core truth of Christianity. What the Romans did or did not do, is irrelevant to whether or not Christianity is true or not. What Europe did with Christianity is irrelevant to whether or not Christianity is true or not.
The only thing that matters in deciding whether Christianity is true or not is whether Jesus Christ lived, died, and rose from the dead according to the scriptures. The truthfulness of Christianity is not dependent on the followers.
Jesus died and stayed dead. period.
So Christianity as basis is flawed. period.
And yes, it id dependant. Why do you think in age of science and discoveries people suddenly started to see the true nature of Church? Its becouse they started to think for themselves instead of allowing someone to say what they ought to believe
Max Logan
08-11-2008, 17:21
Says the guy that can't argue any of the points I've already made in this thread lol.
becouse you have no clue what you`re talking about.
you`re just a band wagon jumper and have always been like that! so just stay low
Jesus died and stayed dead. period.
So Christianity as basis is flawed. period.
And yes, it id dependant. Why do you think in age of science and discoveries people suddenly started to see the true nature of Church? Its becouse they started to think for themselves instead of allowing someone to say what they ought to believe
Max's arguments are logical by any rational beings logic.
Prons words also seem to me to be fairly logical, perhaps at odds with what I think, but at least Pron doesnt seem to be trying to mislead or hurt anyone.
Organized religion maybe in the future if rebuilt in a different way could be a great thing.
I think we can all agree that it has been the most destructive and harmful forces ever.
Z
Faith is a personal thing.
Z
jasonlfunk
08-11-2008, 18:13
They CLAIM! Everyone can claim whatever they wish! It doesn`t make them right, it doesn`t say they`re telling the truth. Again you try to get away with presenting a few people claim as a valid evidence! Sorry, it doesn`t work that way!
I claim there is no God, my claim is backed by thousands of people each having his evidence and arguments. Sorry, we say there is no God, therefor he doesn`t exist. Period?
The evidence fits as long as you can adjust the truth to fit it. And about Jesus as miracle man, its called suggestion. In other words, brain wash.
Becouse its bilogically proven that dead don`t raise. Also Church itself has proven to use any mean to gain control. A few people writing few pages of what they want us to believe doesn`t make all people believers. If you look at it rational you can see the bottom line- they WANT you to believe. Belief is a strong mean of control and influence
Did you read the entire post? I said they claimed to be speaking for God and then backed it up with signs/wonders and miracles. Reread what I wrote.
It is only biologically proven that dead people do not raise naturally. Biology says nothing of the supernatural. And again - what the church has done by no means validates or invalidates its truth claims. People have used science to gain power and try to control people - that doesn't mean that science is wrong. People have used everything to gain power -that doesn't mean everything is wrong. Claims have to be evaluated on the own grounds - not on the grounds of the actions of those who believe them.
jasonlfunk
08-11-2008, 18:19
Jesus died and stayed dead. period.
This is a statement about history that you have to provide evidance for. Since this is a negative claim about history you have to show that all the evidence that backs up the claim is false. This is going to be hard to do - as we have multiple, reliable eyewitnesses - who wrote in the context of other eyewitnesses and they were not refuted at the time. Besides that, the fact that Jesus rose from the dead has the greatest explanatory scope and power of all the events that followed which are also well documented. There are no valid reasons to deny the historicity of the new testament. If you think you have some - feel free to share.
I am much more inclined to believe the words of someone who was there then someone was born 2000 years later. Unless you have good evidence for your claim (or in this case - good reasons for dismissing all of the evidence for the counter-claim) - I'm going to have to dismiss it.
(And to try to inticipate your response - if you say that they made up the story in order to gain power/respect/control - you better well have good evidence to back it up.)
jasonlfunk
08-11-2008, 18:25
And yes, it id dependant. Why do you think in age of science and discoveries people suddenly started to see the true nature of Church? Its becouse they started to think for themselves instead of allowing someone to say what they ought to believe
The truthfullness of Christianity is not dependent on the actions of the church.
Example:
Suppose in the name of evolution - I declare that a certain subset of people are inferior and due to natural selection, they should be eliminated. I gain a large support base and start killing those who disagree. I then effectively wipe out an entire race of people, becuase I belive that it is the next step in the evolutionary process.
If this were to happen - would you have any reason to deny the truthfullness of evolution? Of course not - what I do with my beliefs about evolution are compeletly seperate from the truth claims of evolution. But it is exactly the same with Christianity. If people abuse the beliefs of Christianity - it does not render them false. It means the people suck and are wrong - not neccessarily the beliefs.
Evolution is true if and only if the way life developed is actually what happened in history.
Christianity is true if and only if Jesus was born,died, and rose again according to the scriptures.
Make sense? Z, do you agree with this?
jasonlfunk
08-11-2008, 18:28
Max's arguments are logical by any rational beings logic.
Prons words also seem to me to be fairly logical, perhaps at odds with what I think, but at least Pron doesnt seem to be trying to mislead or hurt anyone.
Organized religion maybe in the future if rebuilt in a different way could be a great thing.
I think we can all agree that it has been the most destructive and harmful forces ever.
Z
Faith is a personal thing.
Z
Actually, Max didn't make any arguments - he made statements. An argument neccessarily has permises, evidence and a conculsion. He just stated his conculsions - therefore they were neither rational or irrational.
Actually, Max didn't make any arguments - he made statements. An argument neccessarily has permises, evidence and a conculsion. He just stated his conculsions - therefore they were neither rational or irrational.
Yea--Max's statements alone make no logical sense, only when used in your backround of understanding do they make logical sense. IE--if Max were the only person posting in this thread against Jason and I, he would have no conclusive logic or reasoning--merely statements that he believes are true and statements that others may believe are true, but these statements have not been proven in this thread.
But anyways--let's have a little fun with Max's arguments since he seems to be staying with the thread. We'll just have to see how he responds to my responses :D
so man in age when science was still far from anything made up a symbolic figure - God - to explain the creation of life. With that action they also won the trust of men, becouse simple farmers could never understand anything as complicated as that. They needed something supernatural and thats why they brought in Gods, Demons, Devils and the rest of the crew.
This would imply that all men would have been brain washed before the time of scientific reason, but this simply is not the case. There were dissenters at the time who did not believe in a God. If it were true that the Scientific Age gave man the ability to disprove God, then there would not have been any dissenters before the Scientific age. What's more likely is that Mankind felt the presence of God in ways that they tried to explain. When science came along, it may have disproved some of Man's claims. This doesn't disprove God however.
You can`t claim one book written 2k years ago in a age of no rationalisms, written to convert people to christian belief.
There was plenty of rationalism in that time. See every single great philosopher over which every great scientist will conclude was a rational human being.
Of which I'm finding you're not.
The romans did not convert to Christianity becouse of belief and faith, they did it out of fear!
Quite wrong, most of the Christians from the 1st-4th Century, a time of growth and power for the Roman Empire, converted because of Faith and Belief. If people converted out of fear, then certainly there would be no Christians because of the fear caused by becoming a Christian due to Torture and widespread persecution.
And so you finnaly get the basic motivation for every form of organization ever created on the planet- POWER!
Or perhaps people could come along and use an already existing organization to create power for themselves. Again, if you'd actually read any of the posts I posted before, the Church's actions can reside outside of what God wants. Christianity abhors power and lording authority over people. Christianity abhors judging others. Yet, when people (who are corrupt), come along and do this, you equate their actions with Christianity's actions. That's not logical or rational.
I claim there is no God, my claim is backed by thousands of people each having his evidence and arguments.
Of which their claims and arguments have further been disproven by non-Christian sources. Of course, if you'd actually claim specific examples instead of broad generalizations, this would be a much more productive discussion. Who's the band-wagoner now?
Becouse its bilogically proven that dead don`t raise.
There have been many cases of people coming back to life after being biologically dead. I really wish you'd check your facts before coming to this discussion. Biology itself keeps changing when someone is actually dead. It was when they stopped breathing, but that changed. Then it was when the heart stopped, but that changed. Then it was when people's brains stopped sending signals, but there seems to be a point even beyond that.
You have no standard that is measurable in Biology, so how can you prove yet that there's a point that a person can't be brought back from?
Also Church itself has proven to use any mean to gain control.
Keyword is Church. Church is not Christianity, church is man's attempt to live by Christianity's principles. You are mixing the two, and you'd be wise not to.
Christianity is not meant to gain control over men. It is meant to liberate them from the bondage they face in this life.
A few people writing few pages of what they want us to believe doesn`t make all people believers. If you look at it rational you can see the bottom line- they WANT you to believe. Belief is a strong mean of control and influence
I'm guessing you really haven't read what they wrote, because in it they, the disciples, come out as idiots who can't understand Christ and people who betray Christ. Now why would a rational person who wants power include that?
Jesus died and stayed dead. period.
/sarcasm on
Great statement. Full of rational thought, logic, and evidence. I'll be sure to believe you on this one.
/sarcasm off
Why do you think in age of science and discoveries people suddenly started to see the true nature of Church?
And what was the true nature of the Church? I'll be the first to say that the Church has messed up and was corrupt under many people. However, that doesn't make the nature of that time period of the Church the STANDARD for which the church should be.
And people use the same discoveries to see just how glorious God's creation is. Science doesn't disprove God.
Evolution is true if and only if the way life developed is actually what happened in history.
Christianity is true if and only if Jesus was born,died, and rose again according to the scriptures.
Evolution is also only true if and only if the theory is proven, which is why it's still called the "Theory" of evolution.
Max Logan
08-12-2008, 15:09
Did you read the entire post? I said they claimed to be speaking for God and then backed it up with signs/wonders and miracles. Reread what I wrote.
It is only biologically proven that dead people do not raise naturally. Biology says nothing of the supernatural. And again - what the church has done by no means validates or invalidates its truth claims. People have used science to gain power and try to control people - that doesn't mean that science is wrong. People have used everything to gain power -that doesn't mean everything is wrong. Claims have to be evaluated on the own grounds - not on the grounds of the actions of those who believe them.
I read it fairly good. Just that there are no proof of the so-called wonders. Thats all
Supernatural as such has yet to be proven to exists.
And what Church has done has the most significant impact on what they say is true or not. As the Church is the one to teach us what God supposedly said and what Jesus supposedly did. And as Churches teaching cannot be claimed as accurate, we can assume that 'miracles and wonders of Jesus' is another cultism idea. Nothing more
Max Logan
08-12-2008, 15:15
This is a statement about history that you have to provide evidance for. Since this is a negative claim about history you have to show that all the evidence that backs up the claim is false. This is going to be hard to do - as we have multiple, reliable eyewitnesses - who wrote in the context of other eyewitnesses and they were not refuted at the time. Besides that, the fact that Jesus rose from the dead has the greatest explanatory scope and power of all the events that followed which are also well documented. There are no valid reasons to deny the historicity of the new testament. If you think you have some - feel free to share.
I am much more inclined to believe the words of someone who was there then someone was born 2000 years later. Unless you have good evidence for your claim (or in this case - good reasons for dismissing all of the evidence for the counter-claim) - I'm going to have to dismiss it.
(And to try to inticipate your response - if you say that they made up the story in order to gain power/respect/control - you better well have good evidence to back it up.)
There is NO evidence that you can show me that Jesus walked the earth after he was crucified. And no Bible doesn`t count as an evidence. Case closed.
'Eyewitnesses' in 1st century are not the most reliable sorts. esp religious fanatics. Do we ought to believe every sect out there? NO! We base our belief on logic. And logic says- you die, you stay dead. You need evidence for that? Go to the graveyard and dig someone out and show me him! Wanna bet he`s gonna be stinking deadish?
My evidence to back up Churches power struggle? Lmao! You need to read more history then you do! Middle age, witch hunt, indulgence selling, 'sin release', conspiracies, blackmail, extort, murder, Jesuits, pop deaths, holy wars... lmao, evidence..lol
Max Logan
08-12-2008, 15:21
The truthfullness of Christianity is not dependent on the actions of the church.
Example:
Suppose in the name of evolution - I declare that a certain subset of people are inferior and due to natural selection, they should be eliminated. I gain a large support base and start killing those who disagree. I then effectively wipe out an entire race of people, becuase I belive that it is the next step in the evolutionary process.
If this were to happen - would you have any reason to deny the truthfullness of evolution? Of course not - what I do with my beliefs about evolution are compeletly seperate from the truth claims of evolution. But it is exactly the same with Christianity. If people abuse the beliefs of Christianity - it does not render them false. It means the people suck and are wrong - not neccessarily the beliefs.
Evolution is true if and only if the way life developed is actually what happened in history.
Christianity is true if and only if Jesus was born,died, and rose again according to the scriptures.
Make sense? Z, do you agree with this?
Actually no. The basis of Christianity is not Jesus death and reborn. Christianity is a religion that teaches us the way of living and not worship. It teaches us that murder and decieve are wrong and that it comes with punishment. And the symbolic punishment is Hell. And those who live according to laws are good and morally wealthy. if all people were good and lawful we would live in a perfect world, hence the meaning of Heaven.
What you fanatics don`t see is that religion is symbolic. It doesn`t demand from you, it teaches you. It doesn`t want you to belive in supernatural being or afterlife (as a symbol of your good deeds live in your children and in your work after you have died). You need to understand that Bible cannot be read litterally.
Sorry
Max Logan
08-12-2008, 15:22
Actually, Max didn't make any arguments - he made statements. An argument neccessarily has permises, evidence and a conculsion. He just stated his conculsions - therefore they were neither rational or irrational.
It`s becouse I disagree with you! Thats just it. Everyone who disagrees with you is wrong and blah blah blah!
Max Logan
08-12-2008, 15:23
Yea--Max's statements alone make no logical sense, only when used in your backround of understanding do they make logical sense. IE--if Max were the only person posting in this thread against Jason and I, he would have no conclusive logic or reasoning--merely statements that he believes are true and statements that others may believe are true, but these statements have not been proven in this thread.
But anyways--let's have a little fun with Max's arguments since he seems to be staying with the thread. We'll just have to see how he responds to my responses :D
This would imply that all men would have been brain washed before the time of scientific reason, but this simply is not the case. There were dissenters at the time who did not believe in a God. If it were true that the Scientific Age gave man the ability to disprove God, then there would not have been any dissenters before the Scientific age. What's more likely is that Mankind felt the presence of God in ways that they tried to explain. When science came along, it may have disproved some of Man's claims. This doesn't disprove God however.
There was plenty of rationalism in that time. See every single great philosopher over which every great scientist will conclude was a rational human being.
Of which I'm finding you're not.
Quite wrong, most of the Christians from the 1st-4th Century, a time of growth and power for the Roman Empire, converted because of Faith and Belief. If people converted out of fear, then certainly there would be no Christians because of the fear caused by becoming a Christian due to Torture and widespread persecution.
Or perhaps people could come along and use an already existing organization to create power for themselves. Again, if you'd actually read any of the posts I posted before, the Church's actions can reside outside of what God wants. Christianity abhors power and lording authority over people. Christianity abhors judging others. Yet, when people (who are corrupt), come along and do this, you equate their actions with Christianity's actions. That's not logical or rational.
Of which their claims and arguments have further been disproven by non-Christian sources. Of course, if you'd actually claim specific examples instead of broad generalizations, this would be a much more productive discussion. Who's the band-wagoner now?
There have been many cases of people coming back to life after being biologically dead. I really wish you'd check your facts before coming to this discussion. Biology itself keeps changing when someone is actually dead. It was when they stopped breathing, but that changed. Then it was when the heart stopped, but that changed. Then it was when people's brains stopped sending signals, but there seems to be a point even beyond that.
You have no standard that is measurable in Biology, so how can you prove yet that there's a point that a person can't be brought back from?
Keyword is Church. Church is not Christianity, church is man's attempt to live by Christianity's principles. You are mixing the two, and you'd be wise not to.
Christianity is not meant to gain control over men. It is meant to liberate them from the bondage they face in this life.
I'm guessing you really haven't read what they wrote, because in it they, the disciples, come out as idiots who can't understand Christ and people who betray Christ. Now why would a rational person who wants power include that?
/sarcasm on
Great statement. Full of rational thought, logic, and evidence. I'll be sure to believe you on this one.
/sarcasm off
And what was the true nature of the Church? I'll be the first to say that the Church has messed up and was corrupt under many people. However, that doesn't make the nature of that time period of the Church the STANDARD for which the church should be.
And people use the same discoveries to see just how glorious God's creation is. Science doesn't disprove God.
Evolution is also only true if and only if the theory is proven, which is why it's still called the "Theory" of evolution.
Thats why God is still in the mythology books. And all your points go down. Sorry
This is a statement about history that you have to provide evidance for. Since this is a negative claim about history you have to show that all the evidence that backs up the claim is false. This is going to be hard to do - as we have multiple, reliable eyewitnesses - who wrote in the context of other eyewitnesses and they were not refuted at the time. Besides that, the fact that Jesus rose from the dead has the greatest explanatory scope and power of all the events that followed which are also well documented. There are no valid reasons to deny the historicity of the new testament. If you think you have some - feel free to share.
I am much more inclined to believe the words of someone who was there then someone was born 2000 years later. Unless you have good evidence for your claim (or in this case - good reasons for dismissing all of the evidence for the counter-claim) - I'm going to have to dismiss it.
(And to try to inticipate your response - if you say that they made up the story in order to gain power/respect/control - you better well have good evidence to back it up.)
actually we do not know who wrote the four gospels in the new testament. THEY BELIEVE THEY MAY KNOW but they dont know for sure on top of that, they dont even know if the people where really their. which explains where their is differences in all 4 gospels. honestly icould right something now, saying i was at ground zero on sept 11.th and pass it down from generation to generation and they would believe i was there, even thought i was really i school in history class at the time. but just because they had it in writing, doesnt make it true.
Thats why God is still in the mythology books. And all your points go down. Sorry
Lol max--you're like tits on a boar when it comes to discussions.
I'll just point out what I said earlier for you.
This couldn't be farther from the truth, but I find it's useless to debate with Max.
And thanks for proving this statement right. That is, if you can prove I wrote it, and if you can prove that this statement actually happened!
lol
jasonlfunk
08-12-2008, 18:42
There is NO evidence that you can show me that Jesus walked the earth after he was crucified. And no Bible doesn`t count as an evidence. Case closed.
Max - please stop making statements without saying why you think they are true. Why doesn't the bible count as evidence? What reasons do you have for considering it historically inaccurate?
'Eyewitnesses' in 1st century are not the most reliable sorts. esp religious fanatics. Do we ought to believe every sect out there? NO! We base our belief on logic. And logic says- you die, you stay dead. You need evidence for that? Go to the graveyard and dig someone out and show me him! Wanna bet he`s gonna be stinking deadish?
It is not illogical or irrational to say "All people whom God does not raise from the dead, stay dead." This is not a question of logic and reason - this is a question of history. HAS anyone in history ever risen from the dead? In the bible we have multiple eyewitness accounts - claiming that people, and specifically one man (though bible does talk about others) who rose from the dead. Unless you have good evidence and reasons for denying the historicity of the bible - you are the one who is sticking his head in the sand.
My evidence to back up Churches power struggle? Lmao! You need to read more history then you do! Middle age, witch hunt, indulgence selling, 'sin release', conspiracies, blackmail, extort, murder, Jesuits, pop deaths, holy wars... lmao, evidence..lol
I didn't ask for evidence for the Churches currportion - that is obvious. I asked for evidence that the authors of the new testament, wrote the new testament to gain power and control. That is a completely different question.
We are talking past each other for this reason. You have an unproven assumption that there is nothing other than the natural realm. That all there is is the stuff we can sense and observer. That there is no such thing as spirits, souls, angels, gods, etc. This is a presupposition - you are bring this worldview into your reading of the bible. If I thought there were no such things as dogs, and I read a story about dogs - I would automatically assume the story was false. Not on the grounds of evidence - but on the grounds of my presupposition. This is what you are doing. In all of your arguments ( though you have presented very few) you bring this hidden assumption into them. Because of this - I am able to be more unbiased in my reading for history - for I do not a prior dismiss evidence on unproven grounds.
jasonlfunk
08-12-2008, 18:46
It`s becouse I disagree with you! Thats just it. Everyone who disagrees with you is wrong and blah blah blah!
That is not what I said at all. :thumbdown:
I can think you are completely wrong and still have presented arguments. The majority of the time you say statements. You do not argue.
As a footnote: I want to make it clear to you and anyone who still reads this thread that I have no animosity towards Max or Z or anyone else. I enjoy discussions and trying to figure out truth. And debate is one of the best ways to discover truth - or at least discover your own beliefs. Emotion is often lost in writing so I hope I do not come across as frustrated, angry or any negative emotions at all. I'd not turn down a beer and a football game with any of you - supposing we lived in the same country. :p
jasonlfunk
08-12-2008, 18:52
Actually no. The basis of Christianity is not Jesus death and reborn. Christianity is a religion that teaches us the way of living and not worship. It teaches us that murder and decieve are wrong and that it comes with punishment. And the symbolic punishment is Hell. And those who live according to laws are good and morally wealthy. if all people were good and lawful we would live in a perfect world, hence the meaning of Heaven.
What you fanatics don`t see is that religion is symbolic. It doesn`t demand from you, it teaches you. It doesn`t want you to belive in supernatural being or afterlife (as a symbol of your good deeds live in your children and in your work after you have died). You need to understand that Bible cannot be read litterally.
Sorry
This is one of those points where I can legitimately claim that I have more right to speak on this issue than you. A Christian more easily can claim what Christianity is than a non-Christian. For the simple fact that I am on the inside and you are not.
I've quoted this before:
Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; 14 and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. 15 Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; 17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied. 20 But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep.
This is the core of Christianity. If Jesus Christ did not actually live, die and rise from the dead then "we are of all men most to be pitied". Christianity IS a historical religion. If the events in history did NOT happen, then Christianity is FALSE. That has to be made perfectly clear before you can begin to understand what Christianity actually is. Christianity is all about the man Jesus Christ. If the man Jesus Christ did not live, no one should be a Christian. If it could be proved to me that Jesus Christ was never born, lived, died - I would stop being a Christian, because there is no point. If Christ has not been raised (literally - was dead, now alive) everyone's faith is worthless. Period.
I will allow the last word to the irrational fanatic, since any attempts to dispute it will inevitably be met with more irrational responses.
Z
Z
jasonlfunk
08-13-2008, 11:14
-Z-, I would welcome you pointing out which of my statements are irrational and specific reasons why they are irrational.
It is also important to note that irrational is different than wrong. A person can be rational and wrong just as a person can be irrational and right. Irrationality is a quality of ones arguments. As I examine my own arguments - logically and rationally they are sound. Please, if there is something rationally wrong with my arguments - point it out. Otherwise, there is no point in continuing to discuss this with you.
Max Logan
08-13-2008, 12:54
Bible is a religious book, meant to make people believe in a supernatural entity that governs the world. Its a mythology book. And you can`t provide it as and evidence becouse we are debating if its true or not!
I understand that I a fanatic like you might believe everything that`s written in the bible, but rational and logical people don`t. There is NO proof that its absolutely true! It MIGHT be historically accurate, but its def not 100% true! There is no God and Jesus was just a CHARISMATIC person that influenced people and made them fallow his belief.
Everyone at that time could write everything in the Bible and people would believe. I could write that Jesus was gay and you would believe me, becouse it was written 2k years ago and is in the Bible. But I guess you still don`t see the bottom line after all those posts.
Its a fiction! Get over it! lol
1. The world doesn`t stand on 3 elephants!
2. The Earth isn`t the center of the universe!
3. Lightning is not Thunder Gods rage!
4. Eros does not fire arrows left and right!
5. You can`t reach India going straight west from Europe
If you don`t see arguments in my posts, its becouse your dull mind can`t comprehand the truth! You`re as a brick block, you wear whats painted on you and don`t listen to logic and sound rationalism!
As Z said, you`re irrational and ignorant. And he forgot to mention, you haven`t presented a single evidence or valid argument in the entire thread, just speculations around one book.
Thank you and goodbye!
I'm all for arguments about religion. Calling someone "ignorant" based on their personal beliefs is really stretching it though. There are a great deal of things in this world that people believe in, which may not be supported by science or math, but that doesn't make them wrong. It is comforting to believe in things, ghosts, Jesus, an afterlife, even if there is no proof of it, and to call someone ignorant for believing in these things is just you being a total ****. People enjoy reading fiction, and maybe by reading some science fiction are able to work toward creating better things, or a better life. Does that make them ignorant for believing things which aren't currently proved by science, to be ignorant? Religion offers much more than believing in jesus or whatever, it sets certain guidelines for how to live your life. Some people are genuinely nicer, and more compassionate for having religion in their lives. Some people can overcome addictions by "finding god". These people are far from ignorant. Insulting people for believing in something you don't, to me, is far more ignorant. Also, just because nothing scientific has yet been able to prove religion, doesn't mean in the future it won't be. Someday, someone may be able to prove this, so it's possibly not a good idea to call them ignorant just yet.
Max Logan
08-13-2008, 15:35
Its about him applying it as general truth, not his belief. He may believe in tooth fairy and elves if he wants to, it doesn`t make them REAL
jasonlfunk
08-13-2008, 15:41
Bible is a religious book, meant to make people believe in a supernatural entity that governs the world. Its a mythology book. And you can`t provide it as and evidence becouse we are debating if its true or not!
The bible is primarily a history book. Until you accept this one fact you will never understand Christianity. Simple as that.
You sir were there the ones making claims - I was simply asking for evidence to back up those claims. You cannot call me out as not providing evidence, for that was never my intention. I was not making the claims - you were. You cannot say things like "The bible is fake - where is your evidence that is isn't?" That isn't proper discussion/debate/converstation. If you make a claim - back it up, otherwise don't say it. If you make a claim that the bible is myth or false or that it was written to control people - those are worthless claims until they are supported by evidence which you never ONCE did - despite my multiple requests.
Is there anyone on these forums that actually has reasons for their beliefs?
Max Logan
08-13-2008, 17:05
Prove me it IS what it claims to be first! Then we can discuss my stance.
And no, supernatural something doesn`t count as evidence
jasonlfunk
08-13-2008, 18:16
Prove me it IS what it claims to be first! Then we can discuss my stance.
And no, supernatural something doesn`t count as evidence
1) The authors claim to be historical.
- Whenever you are investigating any document claiming to be historical - it should be given the benefit of the doubt. It's only fair. The default position should not be skepticism in literary historicism, the class of evidence required is much less than that of testable scientific theories. In order to know much about history before the modern age, you should trust the authors - until good reason arises to doubt the authors. This is where you come in - what is the good evidence to doubt the validity of the authors claims.
2) Everywhere that it can be tested - it proves reliable.
3) The authors proved that they believed the stories by dying without recanting.
My guess, and I have already said this, is that you have a presupposition of naturalism - namely, any book that claims that supernatural things have happened HAS to be wrong. There is no chance that it is right. Until you abandon all unfounded presuppositions, you wont be a good historian. You need to judge on the basis of evidence - not presuppositions.
Its about him applying it as general truth, not his belief. He may believe in tooth fairy and elves if he wants to, it doesn`t make them REAL
And if he did, would you call him ignorant? Just because there is no scientific fact for the tooth fairy, doesn't mean it isn't real. It just means it hasn't been proven. The tooth fairy is very real to little kids, just as god is very real to Christians. Air is real, but you can't touch it. Why put someone down for something that makes them feel good? None of this needs to be justified to you at all. Just like you being a **** doesn't need to be justified to us. You don't need to explain why you are the way you are, I believe you.
And if he did, would you call him ignorant? Just because there is no scientific fact for the tooth fairy, doesn't mean it isn't real. It just means it hasn't been proven. The tooth fairy is very real to little kids, just as god is very real to Christians. Air is real, but you can't touch it. Why put someone down for something that makes them feel good? None of this needs to be justified to you at all. Just like you being a **** doesn't need to be justified to us. You don't need to explain why you are the way you are, I believe you.
Oh my, this made me laugh. But its so so true, God is only real in people's minds, in the real world he/she/it is non-existant. Just as real as the tooth fairy, santa claus, the easter bunny and the voices in my head.
Air is real and you can touch it, you feel its effects all the time and is possible to prove it is there. Its much more difficult to prove something isn't there than to prove that it is. Prove to me there is no elephant in your room.
Now this question is actually just purely one because I'm too lazy to go read the Bible, but how do we know Jesus was actualy dead? Who writes about this? Doctor's get it wrong about people being dead all the time, could this not have happened then? When people knew even less about the human body?
I don't think believing in God is stupid, as you pointed out it can have some positive effects. But religion is inherently evil, giving power to the church; what if the Pope was tempted by the Devil the whole Catholic system would be undermined... They might even let gay people marry... Oh wait! (not a dig at gay people)
jasonlfunk
08-14-2008, 09:04
Now this question is actually just purely one because I'm too lazy to go read the Bible, but how do we know Jesus was actualy dead? Who writes about this? Doctor's get it wrong about people being dead all the time, could this not have happened then? When people knew even less about the human body?
Read up on Roman execution... he was dead.
Read up on Roman execution... he was dead.
Rofl, they were good at what they did, Doctors are usually pretty good too, you ask us to provide proof, we don't have to give you any, go find it yourself...
jasonlfunk
08-14-2008, 14:16
Rofl, they were good at what they did, Doctors are usually pretty good too, you ask us to provide proof, we don't have to give you any, go find it yourself...
You want me to go and find evidence for your views for you? :confused:
Honestly - I'm pretty sure I could argue for atheism/naturalism far better than a lot of people on these forums could. Not because I think it is true - but because in the process of learning what I believe and why I believe it, I've spent plenty of time learning the arguments for opposing views. Asking for evidence for your beliefs is not for my benefit.
Just trying to make the point, I ask for evidence that Jesus was really dead, this has to be true for him to be able to rise which is another problem entirely, and you just tell me to look something up...
Max Logan
08-14-2008, 15:29
1) The authors claim to be historical.
- Whenever you are investigating any document claiming to be historical - it should be given the benefit of the doubt. It's only fair. The default position should not be skepticism in literary historicism, the class of evidence required is much less than that of testable scientific theories. In order to know much about history before the modern age, you should trust the authors - until good reason arises to doubt the authors. This is where you come in - what is the good evidence to doubt the validity of the authors claims.
2) Everywhere that it can be tested - it proves reliable.
3) The authors proved that they believed the stories by dying without recanting.
My guess, and I have already said this, is that you have a presupposition of naturalism - namely, any book that claims that supernatural things have happened HAS to be wrong. There is no chance that it is right. Until you abandon all unfounded presuppositions, you wont be a good historian. You need to judge on the basis of evidence - not presuppositions.
1) claims...now I heard someone saying that WRONG to make claims... :rolleyes:
2) yeah...
3) the authors belief does not make it right
basicly you have NO argument to support you. no evidence that Bible is true. so I won`t even continue this charade!
Max Logan
08-14-2008, 15:31
You want me to go and find evidence for your views for you? :confused:
Honestly - I'm pretty sure I could argue for atheism/naturalism far better than a lot of people on these forums could. Not because I think it is true - but because in the process of learning what I believe and why I believe it, I've spent plenty of time learning the arguments for opposing views. Asking for evidence for your beliefs is not for my benefit.
you don`t argument. you`re only argument is Bible and thats not even an evidence at the least! you got NO arguments, just your belief! you are contradicting yourself once more
lol and jason prob. actually believes noah put all dem animals on that wee lil boat
jasonlfunk
08-14-2008, 16:43
Just trying to make the point, I ask for evidence that Jesus was really dead, this has to be true for him to be able to rise which is another problem entirely, and you just tell me to look something up...
I see - I misunderstood your point. Sorry.
Jesus actually dying is based on the historicity of the bible, which I have given evidence for.
jasonlfunk
08-14-2008, 16:48
1) claims...now I heard someone saying that WRONG to make claims... :rolleyes:
This is very important - it distinguishing between the author intending to write fiction and non-fiction.
1Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
The conclusion you have to come away with is that he is either lying or telling the truth. He had no intention of writing myth or a story.
2) yeah...
Yup
3) the authors belief does not make it right
This coupled with the first one is very powerful. The authors intended to either write history or lie and then they were punished/tourtured/and killed for what they wrote without admitting it was a lie. Therefore it is reasonable to think they weren't lying and therefore reasonable to think it is history as they recall.
basicly you have NO argument to support you. no evidence that Bible is true. so I won`t even continue this charade!
Basically, you didn't understand my argument.
jasonlfunk
08-14-2008, 16:50
you don`t argument. you`re only argument is Bible and thats not even an evidence at the least! you got NO arguments, just your belief! you are contradicting yourself once more
We are only debating the bible right now.... Why wouldn't I be referencing the bible? If you asked me to defend the existence of God or other Christian philosophical ideas - I wouldn't reference the bible quite as much.
Max Logan
08-15-2008, 00:06
This is very important - it distinguishing between the author intending to write fiction and non-fiction.
The conclusion you have to come away with is that he is either lying or telling the truth. He had no intention of writing myth or a story.
Yup
This coupled with the first one is very powerful. The authors intended to either write history or lie and then they were punished/tourtured/and killed for what they wrote without admitting it was a lie. Therefore it is reasonable to think they weren't lying and therefore reasonable to think it is history as they recall.
Basically, you didn't understand my argument.
Important? In which hand book is that an valid argument? people claims being abducted by aliens. Now do we believe everything they claim?
His intention was simple, to get support.
Now THAT combined with previous posts of power is VERY important!
Jesus lived, died and was MADE a divine son by the Church without any basis! he was just another man, just shad a slight more impact on history. Period.
Max Logan
08-15-2008, 00:09
Basically, you didn't understand my argument.
Basically you don`t have any argument.
jasonlfunk
08-15-2008, 10:56
His intention was simple, to get support.
I backed up my claims as to what his intentions were - please back up yours.
Max Logan
08-15-2008, 17:33
Basically you don`t have any argument.
Argument- it must be cuz Bible says so doesn`t count
Try again
I'd give up on debating with Max. You deserve a better opponent Jason.
Max Logan
08-16-2008, 13:10
You always give up and make crap excuses when you can`t prove your point.
jasonlfunk
08-16-2008, 13:58
Argument- it must be cuz Bible says so doesn`t count
Try again
What other source besides the work in question would you like to use for demonstrating the authors intention?
You always give up and make crap excuses when you can`t prove your point.
Says the guy who's entire argument is :
Thats why God is still in the mythology books. And all your points go down. Sorry
Yea, must be me who gives up and makes crap excuses when I can't prove my point.
Max Logan
08-16-2008, 17:08
Says the guy who's entire argument is :
Yea, must be me who gives up and makes crap excuses when I can't prove my point.
no, i just didn`t want to bother making replay to your posts. I just don`t find you interesting, thats all
Max Logan
08-16-2008, 17:09
What other source besides the work in question would you like to use for demonstrating the authors intention?
Give some EVIDENCE! Not just some fiction book! EVIDENCE!
no, i just didn`t want to bother making replay to your posts. I just don`t find you interesting, thats all
So first, I have no clue what I'm talking about. Then when I reply to your posts, I'm not interesting.
Yea, more likely that you're an idiot who can't argue back w/o saying "Where's your evidence?!?!?" or "Bible is a myth, so all your points go down."
jasonlfunk
08-17-2008, 00:11
Give some EVIDENCE! Not just some fiction book! EVIDENCE!
You are not starting investigation from neutral grounds. You are starting with the belief that the book is false. This is not good history. In fact- it appears that most of your beliefs are based in unproved, unjustified presuppositions, from everything that you have said thus far.
Having said that -
Since we are currently talking about the intentions of the author- what is a better source of evidence than the work itself? Give me an example of a piece of evidence that would convince you that the author intended to write accurate history.
and ur basing ur views on the assumption that the bible is correct. doing the same exact thing. Max, i would give up on jason... he is to brainwashed
Max Logan
08-17-2008, 04:52
So first, I have no clue what I'm talking about. Then when I reply to your posts, I'm not interesting.
Yea, more likely that you're an idiot who can't argue back w/o saying "Where's your evidence?!?!?" or "Bible is a myth, so all your points go down."
if you don`t understand it, don`t bother replaying
Max Logan
08-17-2008, 04:53
You are not starting investigation from neutral grounds. You are starting with the belief that the book is false. This is not good history. In fact- it appears that most of your beliefs are based in unproved, unjustified presuppositions, from everything that you have said thus far.
Having said that -
Since we are currently talking about the intentions of the author- what is a better source of evidence than the work itself? Give me an example of a piece of evidence that would convince you that the author intended to write accurate history.
Its a book. And we have millions of books. What makes Bible more true? Gove EVIDENCE that supports it! Com`on, I didn`t put it that hard!
Religion, brainwash, control, power, influence - I summed it up for you! You meet 4 of the 5 ;)
jasonlfunk
08-17-2008, 12:28
and ur basing ur views on the assumption that the bible is correct. doing the same exact thing. Max, i would give up on jason... he is to brainwashed
I am not starting with the assumption that the bible is correct. I have arrived at the belief that the bible is correct. You must start at a neutral stance, either this book is accurate history or it is not. Max has started at he belief that it is false. Or at least refuses to reveal the evidence/train of thought he used to get from a neutral stance to a belief it was not accurate history.
I am not brainwashed. A brainwashed person has no reasons - I have reasons for what I believe, and I have provided some them - and upon asking for evidence or refutation I get - "It's a book!" "The church is all about control" "It's fake - lies". I get no answers to the questions I ask. I will pose this one last time, as clear as I can make it.
The question we are dealing with is this: is the bible (specifically the New Testament) historical? My argument is this:
1) The authors claimed to be writing history
1Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
30Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 31But these are written that you may[a] believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
2) The authors were tortured/persecuted/killed for their beliefs without ever once recanting or admitting that they were lying - even though in doing so they would have been let go.
3) Therefore it is rational to believe that the authors thought they were telling the truth. So they were either telling accurate history or they were delusional.
It would take a very committed group of con artists to pull off the scam that happened in early Christianity if it was false. You would have to find good motivations for doing it - not only just making the story up - but continuing in the lies even after they stood to gain nothing, only death.
4) If the authors were delusional then it would have been easily dismissed by the general public - for the events that they were claiming to have happened were not done in secret.
The things that they authors claimed to have happened were done in large groups, in public places. These were not conversations in hidden rooms, with a mysterious figure that the authors were claiming to have happened.
5) There is no indication that the general public did dismiss the authors accounts of history as false - in fact - many,many believed their accounts.
6) Therefore it is rational to believe that the authors were writing accurate history.
This is my argument for believing that the New Testament is accurate recorded history.
you do understand that the word belief means you do not know for sure. you can not tell me 100% that the bible is true, your conclusions are assumptions. that don't mean ****
Max Logan
08-17-2008, 18:59
thats what I said. he just doesn`t get it.
1)what authors say doesn`t matter. they all lie
2)payback?
3)delusional
4)early history. the common people accepted anything that makes them even with the Greats
5)up
6)irrational statement
jasonlfunk
08-17-2008, 20:06
thats what I said. he just doesn`t get it.
1)what authors say doesn`t matter. they all lie
2)payback?
3)delusional
4)early history. the common people accepted anything that makes them even with the Greats
5)up
6)irrational statement
:wall:
I'm done with this for awhile.
jasonlfunk
08-17-2008, 20:07
you do understand that the word belief means you do not know for sure. you can not tell me 100% that the bible is true, your conclusions are assumptions. that don't mean ****
My conclusion was NOT an assumption. I just gave you one line of reasons to get to the conclusion. By definition it is not an assumption.
it is u lol you have no real evidence
Jasonlfunk you lost the moment you opened this thread and could not state your reasons or beliefs and back them with any kind of evidence
He asked the opposing side to present their evidence.
Hence the thread title.
yet when asked he wouldnt procure any himself... I asked him to share why he believed what he believed and he ignored it or changed the subject
To believe in something with no proof is itself not logical, as he cannot show his position to be the right one (he is saying the bible is correct, whic evidently is not believed here) it is more logical he is wrong, therefore the opposite belief is true...
"it must be correct because man wouldn't lie or distort the truth for any type of gains" and doesn't the bible state that Jesus would come back before the last disciple died? but yet he didn't :P and is never going to. you can wish in one hand, **** in the other... see which one fills up first
Max Logan
08-18-2008, 12:27
He asked the opposing side to present their evidence.
Hence the thread title.
so he doesn`t have to give evidence to support that this thread has any value at all except the authors belief that Bible is true?
sounds VERY delusional! and very not true
So let me get this straight.
Jason asks the intellectual atheists to present a defense of their position.
They reply with "What's your defense?" and "The Bible isn't true!!! (with no evidence.)
And that's a good defense?
To believe in something with no proof is itself not logical, as he cannot show his position to be the right one (he is saying the bible is correct, whic evidently is not believed here) it is more logical he is wrong, therefore the opposite belief is true...
Even though the opposite belief can't support their belief in this thread.
he should have known not to delve into religion without getting attacked... now we want his beliefs once i hear his with proof i will tell him mine with proof
he should have known not to delve into religion without getting attacked... now we want his beliefs once i hear his with proof i will tell him mine with proof
lol--that's not the thread title...
Does he have to pull the "He asked first" card? lol
he tried that.... didnt work out for him so i doubt it would this time
Too bad you guys aren't even asking for proof--you're asking him to convince you to believe otherwise which is a completely different argument.
He's provided why he believes. You guys don't reciprocate, you just argue on why he believes. So go ahead and provide why you believe what you do now.
Max Logan
08-19-2008, 12:25
Even though the opposite belief can't support their belief in this thread.
I stated my belief plain and clear. If you don`t read my post, its your problem. So just scroll back and see again.
And I`m still waiting for some proof from Lunat...i mean fanatic
I do believe that God and Jesus are the most succesful brand ever created by mankind.
And no, I don`t believe whatever is told to me. If I believe in something, then becouse there are strong claims in favor of it, and still, i tend to question it, becouse there is no universal truth and there can`t be one. I belive that Earth is not the center of universe, thats proven. I don`t believe in divine beings or a single Creator, as by definition God is supposed to be flawless and so his creation, but as we see, its far from that!
This is close to what you might believe, but you never explain why. You only say "But as we see" as your proof.
But let me ask you this, does God have to be flawless by Human Definition?
Or is it possible that our human definition of flawlessness is flawed?
Its probably not a very tolerant thing to say but: Organized religion has always been the biggest crime syndicates in the history
Another statement, but only in attack.
But Bible isn`t entirely a historical document.
Another statement, but only in attack. You don't show why you believe that, or point to specific things.
the universe was always there.
Getting closer now.
The basic idea of Bible is to brainwash people into obidient servants of The Lord
Another statement, but not altogether a rational argument because you don't provide texts from the bible where you see God brainwashing people.
no, the science says that Big bang was created out of mass of gases, meaning from the elements of Universe.
So I can freely say Universe was always there.
Holy crap! A belief. But your only source of proof is Big Bang Theory?
I claim there is no God, my claim is backed by thousands of people each having his evidence and arguments.
And those evidence and arguements are what? Would you like to present them? Or are you just going to reference thousands of anonymous works as evidence?
Actually no. The basis of Christianity is not Jesus death and reborn. Christianity is a religion that teaches us the way of living and not worship. It teaches us that murder and decieve are wrong and that it comes with punishment. And the symbolic punishment is Hell. And those who live according to laws are good and morally wealthy.
You really couldn't be more wrong on this statement btw. Read any of the NT letters, and you'll see that it's not about living the right life, but it's entirely about the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Thats why God is still in the mythology books. And all your points go down. Sorry
Too bad I never quoted the Bible in my arguments against your points...
Prove me it IS what it claims to be first! Then we can discuss my stance.
Seems by page 5 you still haven't given your stance.
So far, you've only attacked the Bible and Jason. The only arguments about your personal belief is that you think the Big Bang created the Universe, and that there are thousands of people out there who have evidence to back up what you're saying.
All we want to know is--what's that evidence? You wanna debate Big bang? We can do that. You wanna debate Evolution? We can do that. You wanna debate anthropology and psychiatry? We can do that. You just need to present an actual argument first with logical reasoning that draws from a statement to a conclusion--not just your conclusion.
Max Logan
08-19-2008, 16:39
evidence? the bible.
biggest brainwashing fiction ever created. now look at those points and if you`re half intelligent you`ll notice that all my points are valid.
Power, control, wealth.
Do I have to take a stick and point it out? Com`on!
Max Logan
08-19-2008, 16:43
This is close to what you might believe, but you never explain why. You only say "But as we see" as your proof.
But let me ask you this, does God have to be flawless by Human Definition?
Or is it possible that our human definition of flawlessness is flawed?
Another statement, but only in attack.
Another statement, but only in attack. You don't show why you believe that, or point to specific things.
Getting closer now.
Another statement, but not altogether a rational argument because you don't provide texts from the bible where you see God brainwashing people.
Holy crap! A belief. But your only source of proof is Big Bang Theory?
And those evidence and arguements are what? Would you like to present them? Or are you just going to reference thousands of anonymous works as evidence?
You really couldn't be more wrong on this statement btw. Read any of the NT letters, and you'll see that it's not about living the right life, but it's entirely about the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Too bad I never quoted the Bible in my arguments against your points...
Seems by page 5 you still haven't given your stance.
So far, you've only attacked the Bible and Jason. The only arguments about your personal belief is that you think the Big Bang created the Universe, and that there are thousands of people out there who have evidence to back up what you're saying.
All we want to know is--what's that evidence? You wanna debate Big bang? We can do that. You wanna debate Evolution? We can do that. You wanna debate anthropology and psychiatry? We can do that. You just need to present an actual argument first with logical reasoning that draws from a statement to a conclusion--not just your conclusion.
And rationally I can`t quote the Bible as I said its not true, so its irrational and illogical to quote it. The entire book is fiction written by a group of people to to control masses. Masses like you and Jason-baby, that don`t look into it, just read it word by word and believe everything thats written!
Gilgamesh, Mahabharath, Odysseus, Illiad.
The list goes on! Pick ony mythology book there is and you can claim it to be true. Don`t be shy! No Bible is THE RIGHT one.
Thats flawed thinking
And rationally I can`t quote the Bible as I said its not true, so its irrational and illogical to quote it. The entire book is fiction written by a group of people to to control masses. Masses like you and Jason-baby, that don`t look into it, just read it word by word and believe everything thats written!
Gilgamesh, Mahabharath, Odysseus, Illiad.
The list goes on! Pick ony mythology book there is and you can claim it to be true. Don`t be shy! No Bible is THE RIGHT one.
Thats flawed thinking
Sigh.
Where did I ever quote it unless it was in response to someone else quoting it?
evidence? the bible.
biggest brainwashing fiction ever created. now look at those points and if you`re half intelligent you`ll notice that all my points are valid.
Power, control, wealth.
Do I have to take a stick and point it out? Com`on!
So, you're evidence for belief is in the fact that you think the Bible is false.
The question becomes--if the Bible is false, how does that make all of your statements true?
That's what Jason was asking for--what do you believe and why? You simply can't believe your theory is true because ours is false--that's not a good basis.
actually homers Iliad and Odyssey is based on a War between Greeks and Troys, which they have found the remains of Troy, so odds our their was war between them. So it is most likely based off a real war
it doesnt matter if god exists or not u know.
Be a good person.
its comon sense.
If comon sense does not apply to the after life, then we can also not count on applying any other aspect or our reality to what happens after we die.
U see what I am saying
in the hypothetical spiritual realm, or the noonsphere as some put it, none of these arguements would even exist, perhaps arguement itself is somthing that is not real.
all we can comprehend and thus all that matter to us is what we know as humans in life.
Love and be loved.
Cause pleasure, not pain.
build, do not destroy.
Its pretty simple.
lol
Z
jasonlfunk
08-20-2008, 12:11
it doesnt matter if god exists or not u know.
Be a good person.
its comon sense.
If comon sense does not apply to the after life, then we can also not count on applying any other aspect or our reality to what happens after we die.
U see what I am saying
in the hypothetical spiritual realm, or the noonsphere as some put it, none of these arguements would even exist, perhaps arguement itself is somthing that is not real.
all we can comprehend and thus all that matter to us is what we know as humans in life.
Love and be loved.
Cause pleasure, not pain.
build, do not destroy.
Its pretty simple.
lol
Z
Except that if you die and then you are dead and that's the end, then I have no compelling reason to love, cause pleasure, build. Eventually the universe will all die, and everything will be dead and none of it will matter. It won't matter if I help people or hurt people. Everything will be dead eventually. If all roads lead to nothing - it doesn't matter which someone takes.
BUT - if there is life after death. If we aren't just physical beings that will die eventually and be gone - then I have very good reason to love, build, and cause pleasure.
If you are going to live forever, if I am going to live forever, it certainly does matter how I live while I'm on earth.
If we are all going to turn back into dust, then it doesn't matter if I treat everyone like dirt now.
yes it does, because if you treat me like ***; i am gonna treat you like ***. living a life of love and peace in powers you. you can feel the difference, so yes it does matter.
Max Logan
08-20-2008, 13:02
So, you're evidence for belief is in the fact that you think the Bible is false.
The question becomes--if the Bible is false, how does that make all of your statements true?
That's what Jason was asking for--what do you believe and why? You simply can't believe your theory is true because ours is false--that's not a good basis.
If Bible is false then my statements ARE true... wtf? :blink: even you can understand it. becouse my statement is based upon motives, actions and results of Bible and the authors.
And no, my evidence is all the actions I have stated that Church has made over the years and logical basis behind it.
And my belief is clear since my 1st post in this thread. And I even gave explanation to Jason about it.
Max Logan
08-20-2008, 13:05
Except that if you die and then you are dead and that's the end, then I have no compelling reason to love, cause pleasure, build. Eventually the universe will all die, and everything will be dead and none of it will matter. It won't matter if I help people or hurt people. Everything will be dead eventually. If all roads lead to nothing - it doesn't matter which someone takes.
BUT - if there is life after death. If we aren't just physical beings that will die eventually and be gone - then I have very good reason to love, build, and cause pleasure.
If you are going to live forever, if I am going to live forever, it certainly does matter how I live while I'm on earth.
If we are all going to turn back into dust, then it doesn't matter if I treat everyone like dirt now.
action - reaction
or- wie du mir, so ich dir!
And yes, when you die, its over. you don`t reborn as swans or rats, you stay dead, get eaten up by bacteria or vermin. thats the whole truth
If Bible is false then my statements ARE true... wtf? :blink: even you can understand it. becouse my statement is based upon motives, actions and results of Bible and the authors.
And no, my evidence is all the actions I have stated that Church has made over the years and logical basis behind it.
And my belief is clear since my 1st post in this thread. And I even gave explanation to Jason about it.
Actually, you've only said what you think about the Bible and the Church. You've never stated why you believe what you believe for yourself. You've certainly said why you believe Christianity is wrong, but you haven't said anything about what you believe to be right.
Understand?
Max Logan
08-20-2008, 13:43
Actually, you've only said what you think about the Bible and the Church. You've never stated why you believe what you believe for yourself. You've certainly said why you believe Christianity is wrong, but you haven't said anything about what you believe to be right.
Understand?
eh...you prob missed half of my posts here, so, oh well, ignorance is blessing. in yours and Jason case, thats at finest
eh...you prob missed half of my posts here, so, oh well, ignorance is blessing. in yours and Jason case, thats at finest
Lol, you're such an idiot max.
I've quoted all your posts in this thread. If I missed one, feel free to quote it here.
If you don't, then I'll just assume you have no basis for your beliefs and that you're just an antagonistic fool.
jasonlfunk
08-20-2008, 14:01
yes it does, because if you treat me like ***; i am gonna treat you like ***. living a life of love and peace in powers you. you can feel the difference, so yes it does matter.
No - ultimately it does not matter.
Eventually everything and everyone will be dead and gone - the universe will all be in heat death and thats the end of the story. It doesn't matter how it gets there - the end is the same in both cases.
Tell me - when all the universe is nothing but a single layer of an equally distributed inert gas - what difference would it have made if I gave food to the needy instead of killing everyone I could?
jasonlfunk
08-20-2008, 14:03
action - reaction
or- wie du mir, so ich dir!
And yes, when you die, its over. you don`t reborn as swans or rats, you stay dead, get eaten up by bacteria or vermin. thats the whole truth
If there is no God - I agree with you. There are no morals, no reason to love, build, help society, etc. You should live however and do whatever the heck you want with no regard for anyone.
But if you are a normal human - you can clearly see that this is not the way one should act, but on atheism - this conscience cannot be accounted for.
There are practical reasons for regulating one's behaviour, as well as moral ones.
jasonlfunk
08-20-2008, 16:19
There are practical reasons for regulating one's behaviour, as well as moral ones.
But nothing objective - nothing enough to condemn behavior in others.
Max Logan
08-20-2008, 16:26
Lol, you're such an idiot max.
I've quoted all your posts in this thread. If I missed one, feel free to quote it here.
If you don't, then I'll just assume you have no basis for your beliefs and that you're just an antagonistic fool.
then its ignorance. as I clearly stated why I believe Bible is false. if you don`t find the answer in ALL the posts quotes you made, then you shouldn`t even be here!
and starting to swear you just prove i`m right. just stay out
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.