Bible discussion
Bible Talk => Apologetics => Topic started by: obi_donkenobi on October 12, 2018, 01:57:48 am
-
If you're agnostic on this question, it means you're not sure. If you're gnostic, it means you're certain. Which are you, and why?
I'm actually an atheist, and my aim is to de-convert as many Christians as possible because belief in anything supernatural is harmful to an individual and society. Belief in gods cause rifts between family members, members and groups within society and entire nations. The divisiveness of religion has always led to hate, conflict, terror, war and death. Belief in the Christian God does provide comfort against the fear of death and oblivion, but it is almost certainly a false comfort and the cost for that benefit (based on falsehoods) is too high.
I don't expect anyone who reads this to suddenly see the logic and truth of what I say and instantly de-convert, but I do hope to plant seeds of doubt which may in the fullness of time lead people out of the errancy of their faith and join me in the real world. I've been here at BibleDiscussion.com before a few years ago, but lost regular access to the Internet and so became dormant. Since then, I notice you have a new anti-blaspheme policy which might get me at least shut down if not outright banned. If that happens, I will see it as an admission that believers cannot withstand challenges to their faith and that their faith must indeed be weak. I will not swear, or become abusive, but I will ask you to defend your beliefs and to do so with an open mind. There is so much wrong with the Bible and all supernatural religions and beliefs, it's literally tearing this world apart. I don't intend to sit idly by and let that happen without at least speaking up.
-
Yes, because, well let’s start off with the fact that you exist.
Welcome to our small corner of the internet.
Fat
-
How about the existence of hydrogen atom.
Even Einstein conceded that all matter was a product of intelligent design.
-
I can see that I won’t need my Bible for this thread.
If you are an atheist, why would you care about others? What does my family have anything to do with you? Do you consider that if you sway only one member of a family to UNCONVERT you may be bringing strife into that family that was once a congenial family unit?
Your O. P. is an attempt to cause Rift.
-
>>Fat: Not sure I understand you. Because I exist, therefore God? How does that work?
>>macuser: Yes, quoting the Bible to an atheist is like shoveling coal to into an electric car. Can you provide a reference backing up that Einstein quote? I'm pretty sure he never said any such thing.
>>Hal: I care about others because I am of the human race, evolved to be a social animal that has had empathy and a sense of fairness bred into me. No gods needed, as can easily be proven by the fact that our species would never have survived if it had to wait for Christianity to arrive in order to be moral. Humans understood morality well before Jesus allegedly came on the scene. And that's besides all the immoral edicts in the Bible.
But I did not create the rift. The rift already existed before I was even born. I'm just putting a bit of light on it.
-
>>Fat: Not sure I understand you. Because I exist, therefore God? How does that work?
>>macuser: Yes, quoting the Bible to an atheist is like shoveling coal to into an electric car. Can you provide a reference backing up that Einstein quote? I'm pretty sure he never said any such thing.
>>Hal: I care about others because I am of the human race, evolved to be a social animal that has had empathy and a sense of fairness bred into me. No gods needed, as can easily be proven by the fact that our species would never have survived if it had to wait for Christianity to arrive in order to be moral. Humans understood morality well before Jesus allegedly came on the scene. And that's besides all the immoral edicts in the Bible.
But I did not create the rift. The rift already existed before I was even born. I'm just putting a bit of light on it.
Einstein's belief in an intelligent designer thus derived not from a pre-conceived religious bias, but from the phenomenal insights into the Universe that he possessed as the most brilliant scientist who ever lived. His recognition of a creator refutes the recent claims by atheists that belief in any sort of god is unscientific. ( Stephen Caesar)
Newton's religion was traditional. He was a staunch believer in Christianity and a member of the Church of England. Einstein's was a more diffuse belief in a deity who set the rules for everything that occurs in the universe. (Charles Krauthammer)
All people who believe in intelligent design may or may not be creationists. But all people who believe in intelligent design are not creationists. (Freud) believed in an intelligent design, Einstein believed in an intelligent design, and Charles Darwin believed in intelligent design. (Ben Wattenberg)
Einstein, nevertheless, always felt the need to explore religion because he felt so profoundly moved by science. He defined science and religion as complementary fields, and he proposed a cooperative union in which science offered facts for religious interpretation. Within this system order manifested itself in everything, and its majesty became Einstein’s god. (Benjamin Ogles)
The fundamental law of physics is that matter/energy cannot be destroyed or created, so it has always existed, Einstein believed this.
Does something need a cause to exist? Or can something just appear from nothing?
-
>Hal: I care about others because I am of the human race, evolved to be a social animal that has had empathy and a sense of fairness bred into me. No gods needed, as can easily be proven by the fact that our species would never have survived if it had to wait for Christianity to arrive in order to be moral. Humans understood morality well before Jesus allegedly came on the scene. And that's besides all the immoral edicts in the Bible.
So your morals comes from breeding? So the people of Chicago are a product of bad breeding? You think Blacks are bred to a lower morale standard then YOU? You sound like Hitler .
God was on the scene before man, man did not need to wait for Him.
You don’t seem to think things out or at least don’t understand our beliefs.
But you would like to cause rift, good luck.
-
>>macuser: Thanks for those references, but aren't you attempting to use the logical fallacy called Appeal to Authority? The fallacy being, just because intelligent or important people believe something doesn't necessarily make it true. That said...
From Wikipedia: Albert Einstein's religious views have been widely studied and often misunderstood.[1] Einstein stated that he believed in the pantheistic God of Baruch Spinoza.[2] He did not believe in a personal God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings, a view which he described as naïve.[3] He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."[3] Einstein also stated he did not believe in life after death, adding "one life is enough for me."[6] He was closely involved in his lifetime with several humanist groups.[7][8]
As a pantheist, Einstein believed the physical universe was "divine," in the sense that it was "wondrous," not that it was supernaturally conceived. "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
As to Newton, did you know he was an alchemist? He kept trying to turn lead into gold. This indicates that even brilliant people aren't necessarily right about everything.
>>Hal: In a manner of speaking, yes and no. Morals are learned from the society in which one lives; the basic sense of empathy and fairness are genetic - it's in most of us, in varying degrees, from millions of years of evolutionary process as a social species. Many other social species share a similar sense of empathy and fairness: chimps, dolphins, horses, dogs, etc. It's all evolutionary biology - no gods needed.
How do you know God was here before anything? Do you have any evidence for Him that isn't any better than other gods or supernatural entities humans have believed throughout history, or even currently? See, that's the problem: none of you has any real evidence worthy of your claim. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You use this truism, yourself, for every other claim you're presented with in life, but not for your god. Why?
-
>>macuser: Thanks for those references, but aren't you attempting to use the logical fallacy called Appeal to Authority? The fallacy being, just because intelligent or important people believe something doesn't necessarily make it true. That said…
Absolutely true, and I hope you remember that you said this as this thread moves on.
>>macuser: Yes, quoting the Bible to an atheist is like shoveling coal to into an electric car. Can you provide a reference backing up that Einstein quote? I'm pretty sure he never said any such thing.
You ask for the references my friend.
As a pantheist, Einstein believed the physical universe was "divine," in the sense that it was "wondrous," not that it was supernaturally conceived. "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954)
Definition of pantheism
1
: a doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe
2
: the worship of all gods of different creeds, cults, or peoples indifferently
also : toleration of worship of all gods (as at certain periods of the Roman empire)
Pantheism and Religion
Pantheistic ideas—and most importantly the belief that God is equal to the universe, its physical matter, and the forces that govern it—are found in the ancient books of Hinduism, in the works of many Greek philosophers, and in later works of philosophy and religion over the centuries. Much modern New Age spirituality is pantheistic. But most Christian thinkers reject pantheism because it makes God too impersonal, doesn't allow for any difference between the creation and the creator, and doesn't seem to allow for humans to make meaningful moral choices.
Please answer my question: Does something need a cause to exist? Or can something just appear from nothing?
-
Yes morals can be seen in nature's animals, like the grizzly bear who kills the cubs so that their mother will be free to mate with him. Murder for sex, very moral. In your above statement you seem to be saying that society can set the morals of man. I don't think you want to go down that road you're liable to end up in the middle of Hitler's Germany but then again you accept 60 million abortions in the United States alone since Roe V Wade?
As I have always understood it Darwin taught the survival of the fittest not survival of the fairest or the most empathetic. Do you believe in Darwin's theory? I think that's another whole you don't want to go down. I've always wondered why one species would involve into another species so that the second species could eat the first species. I have always wondered how a how a species developed into two genders. Which came first the chicken or the egg? Where are the one eyed primates, or the grass eating mammals with an eye in the back of their head so that they can see the predator sneaking up on them? You ever wonder how the eye developed into something so sophisticated it could tell the different wavelengths of colored lights? Of course you never wondered, you have no need for that you are an atheist who has total faith from something told him by a person claims to have the truth.
And of course we go back to the basics, if matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed only change form, how do nothing become everything?
-
Hey Obi, you can speed this up by simply providing there is no God.
Please just list the evidence so we can end this.
-
Hello Obi,
I would like to know a little more about your beliefs. The way I see it the universe could only come about in one of three ways.
1) It appeared for no reason and no cause, from absolutely nothing.
2) It has always existed, no starting time, no beginning.
3) It was created.
What do believe?
JB
-
Absolutely true, and I hope you remember that you said this as this thread moves on.
>>macuser: While I'm glad to see you understand the logical fallacy, Appeal to Authority, I'm then forced to wonder why you employed it. You also seem to think I'm going to use it at some point, too. I don't intend to.
You ask for the references my friend.
Definition of pantheism
1: a doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe
2: the worship of all gods of different creeds, cults, or peoples indifferently
also : toleration of worship of all gods (as at certain periods of the Roman empire)
Pantheism and Religion
Pantheistic ideas—and most importantly the belief that God is equal to the universe, its physical matter, and the forces that govern it—are found in the ancient books of Hinduism, in the works of many Greek philosophers, and in later works of philosophy and religion over the centuries. Much modern New Age spirituality is pantheistic. But most Christian thinkers reject pantheism because it makes God too impersonal, doesn't allow for any difference between the creation and the creator, and doesn't seem to allow for humans to make meaningful moral choices.
This is actually a point from another thread (Is the Bible truly God's word?), which I will respond to, there.
Please answer my question: Does something need a cause to exist? Or can something just appear from nothing?
I'd be happy to: I don't know, but then again, I don't think anybody really knows. Theists claim to know, but their "knowledge" is faith-based, and faith is not a reliable path to truth, is it? And the logical extension to your question has to be: If something cannot come from nothing, then where did God come from? Theists usually then say God is eternal, but couldn't the non-theist just as easily say that the universe is eternal and skip the whole eternal entity question altogether? Having answers to the tough questions can be comforting, but isn't that only if one ignores the fact that the answers may not be true?
The theistic answer to the question of origin is based on a deduction made without sufficient data. In the human experience, everything we are aware of in reality had a cause for its existence. So, it seemed logical that the universe must have also had a cause. But I would posit that without good evidence of the cause (God), the best to be done is to consider the proposition of origin to be a hypothesis that needs further investigation to find any evidence for it. Theists have not done this, and skipped on to belief/faith, which isn't logical and as already mentioned, not reliable. One look through history and at the current state of affairs tells us that humans have been creating supernatural entities for as long as we've been around - hundreds of them. We are genetically prone to doing this - this doesn't make any of it necessarily real, does it?
-
Yes morals can be seen in nature's animals, like the grizzly bear who kills the cubs so that their mother will be free to mate with him. Murder for sex, very moral. In your above statement you seem to be saying that society can set the morals of man. I don't think you want to go down that road you're liable to end up in the middle of Hitler's Germany but then again you accept 60 million abortions in the United States alone since Roe V Wade?
>>Hal: Bears don't commit "murder." "Murder" is a human concept of killing without socially accepted reasons. Through scientific study, we think some non-social species kill the babies of competitors to ensure their own genetic line prevails. As a social species, we may not like it, but biologically, it makes sense, and we have no cause to try transposing our human morality on non-human species. Doesn't that make sense?
Society does set the morals of the peoples within their specific groups. Indians (from India) can't kill cows, Americans don't eat dogs, the Japanese find comics like "Rapeman" acceptable, etc. Or the Hitler thing. It's not a question of whether I want to "go down that road," or not. It is what it is, wouldn't you agree?
As I have always understood it Darwin taught the survival of the fittest not survival of the fairest or the most empathetic. Do you believe in Darwin's theory? I think that's another whole you don't want to go down. I've always wondered why one species would involve into another species so that the second species could eat the first species. I have always wondered how a how a species developed into two genders. Which came first the chicken or the egg? Where are the one eyed primates, or the grass eating mammals with an eye in the back of their head so that they can see the predator sneaking up on them? You ever wonder how the eye developed into something so sophisticated it could tell the different wavelengths of colored lights? Of course you never wondered, you have no need for that you are an atheist who has total faith from something told him by a person claims to have the truth.
Actually, Darwin coined the term "natural selection," and after reading Darwin's On The Origin of Species, biologist, anthropologist, sociologist Herbert Spencer re-phrased it to "survival of the fittest," which Darwin had no problem with. I don't "believe" in Darwin's theory, but I do recognize it as humankind's best explanation for the diversity of life on this planet and is one of the most solidly factual theories in all of science.
Please be aware there's more than one definition of the word, "theory." Used colloquially, it means, "best guess," but in the scientific use, it means, an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.
In science, as far as what we humans know with regard to the real world, a "theory" is the pinnacle of our knowledge in a subject. The wonderful thing about science is, if a theory is proven flawed, it's updated to incorporate the new knowledge, making it an even more accurate description of reality - it just gets better and better. It is not considered to be the immutable and never-changing proclamation of Truth. Be glad we have scientific theories; they give us every modern amenity you can think of: flight, electricity, computers, instant knowledge via the Internet, safe food/housing/cars/buildings, etc., etc., ad infinitum.
And of course we go back to the basics, if matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed only change form, how do nothing become everything?
And to your last question re something from nothing: I don't know, but then again, nobody really knows. Theists claim to know, but their "knowledge" is faith-based, and faith is not a reliable path to truth, is it? And the logical extension to your question has to be: If something cannot come from nothing, then where did God come from? Theists could say God was eternal, but couldn't the non-theist just as easily say that the universe is eternal and skip the whole eternal entity question altogether?
-
Hey Obi, you can speed this up by simply providing there is no God.
Please just list the evidence so we can end this.
>>Fat: First, are you aware that it's impossible to prove a negative? So asking me to prove there is no God is not a viable question. Second, it isn't my position that there is no god or gods; maybe there is or are. I am simply un-convinced that your claim for a Christian God is true. I am not making a positive claim - I am doubting your claim. You now have the Burden of Proof to show such a thing exists in reality, and I'm pretty certain you can't. Can you?
-
Hello Obi,
I would like to know a little more about your beliefs. The way I see it the universe could only come about in one of three ways.
1) It appeared for no reason and no cause, from absolutely nothing.
2) It has always existed, no starting time, no beginning.
3) It was created.
What do believe?
JB
>>Howdy JB, you have provided three possible answers to the question: How could a universe come into being? But there is one more perfectly acceptable one, and indeed, it's the only correct one: I don't know. I don't know is sometimes the very best answer we can have. It opens our minds to searching for real answers that are based on the scientific research of reality. Some questions, such as the above, seem unanswerable to us, but this does not justify taking the easy path and making up answers based on old, unsubstantiated stories to comfort ourselves. Isn't this what theists have done? Would you need faith, if you had real answers?
From the web TV show, The Atheist Experience ( http://www.atheist-experience.com/ (http://www.atheist-experience.com/)), one of the main hosts, Matt Dillahunty, often brings up the "jar of gumballs" argument, which goes like this: "In this jar, there are either an even number of gumballs, or there are an odd number." Joe might say, "I have faith that there are an even number of gumballs in the jar." Greg might reply, "I don't believe you're right." Joe may or may not be right, but isn't using faith to determine the answer, unreliable? Of course, the correct answer would be, "I don't know if there are an even or odd number of gumballs. Let's open the jar and count them up." Greg has correctly taken the skeptical position to Joe's assertion. Doesn't this also apply to the question of origin?
-
>>Howdy JB, you have provided three possible answers to the question: How could a universe come into being? But there is one more perfectly acceptable one, and indeed, it's the only correct one: I don't know. I don't know is sometimes the very best answer we can have. It opens our minds to searching for real answers that are based on the scientific research of reality. Some questions, such as the above, seem unanswerable to us, but this does not justify taking the easy path and making up answers based on old, unsubstantiated stories to comfort ourselves. Isn't this what theists have done? Would you need faith, if you had real answers?
From the web TV show, The Atheist Experience ( http://www.atheist-experience.com/ (http://www.atheist-experience.com/)), one of the main hosts, Matt Dillahunty, often brings up the "jar of gumballs" argument, which goes like this: "In this jar, there are either an even number of gumballs, or there are an odd number." Joe might say, "I have faith that there are an even number of gumballs in the jar." Greg might reply, "I don't believe you're right." Joe may or may not be right, but isn't using faith to determine the answer, unreliable? Of course, the correct answer would be, "I don't know if there are an even or odd number of gumballs. Let's open the jar and count them up." Greg has correctly taken the skeptical position to Joe's assertion. Doesn't this also apply to the question of origin?
So basically your answer is that science is unable to give you an answer so you refuse to look further. There are three answers and two can be proven wrong by any high school science teacher. The faith of an athlete must be right up there with That pope Francis guy.
-
>>Fat: First, are you aware that it's impossible to prove a negative? So asking me to prove there is no God is not a viable question. Second, it isn't my position that there is no god or gods; maybe there is or are. I am simply un-convinced that your claim for a Christian God is true. I am not making a positive claim - I am doubting your claim. You now have the Burden of Proof to show such a thing exists in reality, and I'm pretty certain you can't. Can you?
No side stepping my unbelieving friend, Christian faith is based on the Jewish belief in a Creator. Christ first appears in the third chapter of the Old Testament (vs 15) and is part of our claim of creation.
You say you can’t prove a negative but it seems you are unable to prove a positive either. JB has given you the three possibilities to the existence of the universe you’ve been asked to choose the right answer and you are unable to.
Well I have already given you the answer in my first reply to you OP. The scientific proof of God existence is that you exist, sense the other two possibilities unacceptable according to your beloved science. Prove me wrong, give me a plausible alternative.
This is an apologetic forum, so defend your faith and it is takes faith to believe as you do.( For no reason you exist ) was
-
So basically your answer is that science is unable to give you an answer so you refuse to look further. There are three answers and two can be proven wrong by any high school science teacher. The faith of an athlete must be right up there with That pope Francis guy.
>>JB Horn: Um, no, that's not what I said. Where did I say that I "refuse to look further?" In fact, I said quite the opposite. Let me quote myself: I don't know is sometimes the very best answer we can have. It opens our minds to searching for real answers that are based on the scientific research of reality.
Do you see the difference between what you thought I said, and what I actually said?
Do you not recognize the fourth answer as a valid answer? What if I asked you what the square root of 3,472.568 was off the top of your head and without the use of a calculator? Wouldn't the correct answer be: I don't know?
And isn't it true that when someone thinks they have the right answer, they would stop looking for the right answer? They may be excused for being unaware of being wrong, but once they become aware that they may be wrong, wouldn't the honest thing for them to do would be to start investigating the truth of their previously held belief?
-
>>JB Horn: Um, no, that's not what I said. Where did I say that I "refuse to look further?" In fact, I said quite the opposite. Let me quote myself: I don't know is sometimes the very best answer we can have. It opens our minds to searching for real answers that are based on the scientific research of reality.
Do you see the difference between what you thought I said, and what I actually said?
Do you not recognize the fourth answer as a valid answer? What if I asked you what the square root of 3,472.568 was off the top of your head and without the use of a calculator? Wouldn't the correct answer be: I don't know?
And isn't it true that when someone thinks they have the right answer, they would stop looking for the right answer? They may be excused for being unaware of being wrong, but once they become aware that they may be wrong, wouldn't the honest thing for them to do would be to start investigating the truth of their previously held belief?
You don't remember posting this?
I'm actually an atheist, and my aim is to de-convert as many Christians as possible because belief in anything supernatural is harmful to an individual and society. Belief in gods cause rifts between family members, members and groups within society and entire nations. The divisiveness of religion has always led to hate, conflict, terror, war and death. Belief in the Christian God does provide comfort against the fear of death and oblivion, but it is almost certainly a false comfort and the cost for that benefit (based on falsehoods) is too high.
And by the way Don't know is not an answer, it is a lack of an answer. I believe that you misstated your purpose for visiting this forum.
It is my opinion that you are lost and confused about the purpose of your life, and you've come here to find some reason in your earthly existence. And you have admitted that there may be a God or even gods that exist. Are you an atheist or not?
Second, it isn't my position that there is no god or gods; maybe there is or are.
Most religions believe in a god of creations, even the American indigenous natives, to be politically correct, believe in a creator. Atheists do not, and we are going to have to get through that question before we go any further.
The comfortable thing about being an atheist is that you cannot sin, you can only break the law. As long as what you do is legal then an atheist feels no responsibility for their actions.There is nothing illegal about cheating on your spouse, so it is not a sin and there are no repercussions unless you're caught by your spouse. Tell me Obi if there is a God do you believe that you could have sinned against him?
JB
-
You don't remember posting this?
>>JB Horn: I do remember posting that (from Reply #15, above). Why do you ask? Did you understand what I was saying? In your Reply #16, you wrote:
"So basically your answer is that science is unable to give you an answer so you refuse to look further. There are three answers and two can be proven wrong by any high school science teacher. The faith of an athlete must be right up there with That pope Francis guy."
The bolded part was your misinterpretation of what I actually said, which was:
I don't know is sometimes the very best answer we can have. It opens our minds to searching for real answers that are based on the scientific research of reality.[/i]
And by the way Don't know is not an answer, it is a lack of an answer. I believe that you misstated your purpose for visiting this forum.
Really? "I don't know" isn't an answer, but a lack of an answer? Are you sure about that? Seems like an answer, to me. For another example: I ask you - how old is my aunt's cousin Maybell? I'd really like an answer right now. Wouldn't your answer have to be, "I don't know?"
Isn't a lack of an answer just silence, or the answer to some other question that wasn't asked? (E.g. Q: "What time is it?" A: "The Boston Red Sox First Baseman.")
Don't you really mean that "I don't know" isn't the answer you were looking for?
It is my opinion that you are lost and confused about the purpose of your life, and you've come here to find some reason in your earthly existence. And you have admitted that there may be a God or even gods that exist. Are you an atheist or not?
An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in a god or gods. Since I don't think there's a god or gods, that makes me an atheist. Admitting there might be a god or gods doesn't make me a theist, it makes me an honest atheist.
Most religions believe in a god of creations, even the American indigenous natives, to be politically correct, believe in a creator. Atheists do not, and we are going to have to get through that question before we go any further.
You're quite correct: Atheists do not believe in a Creator. But the thing we need to "get through" is your lack of evidence for your claim that there is one. Theists claim there is one, atheists are skeptical; don't you agree that it is up to the person with the positive claim to provide evidence for their claim?
The comfortable thing about being an atheist is that you cannot sin, you can only break the law. As long as what you do is legal then an atheist feels no responsibility for their actions.There is nothing illegal about cheating on your spouse, so it is not a sin and there are no repercussions unless you're caught by your spouse. Tell me Obi if there is a God do you believe that you could have sinned against him?
"Sin" is a Christian religious construct, meaning "transgressions against God." I would agree that if God existed, then sin would be a real thing to contend with, but not really, because isn't it true that God forgives all sins if a person believes in Him and begs for His forgiveness? So, couldn't a convicted and sentenced murderer and child rapist ask for forgiveness in a sincere "come to Jesus" moment, just before they pulled the switch, and find himself in Heaven? Meanwhile, in China, a Taoist woman who leads an exemplary life of kindness, productivity, charity and love ends up in Hell for not believing in God. Do you think that's just?
There's actually nothing "comfortable" about being an atheist. A good 85% of the U.S. is some type of religious. There are churches on nearly every other street corner in every city of the country. Merely stating a disbelief in God can get one fired, attacked, shunned by family and lifelong friends, and not quite so much in America, but in other countries, can even get one killed. We are pummeled daily with theistic attempts to force their doctrines into our government, our classrooms, our homes. Does that really sound very "comfortable" to you? How comfortable would you be if Wiccans tried to have the words, "Blessed Be," put on all our money, or had legislation passed forcing schoolchildren to learn potions, or had statues of the Goddess erected on public property? As President Obama said, "Put yourself into someone else's shoes. Try to look at the world through their eyes."
Finally, do you believe Christians don't sin? Aren't some of them quite comfortable sinning, knowing they can just ask for forgiveness, later, without even providing restitution for their crimes? And if that's true, then why mention sin at all? Here's my opinion of "sin": it's a brilliant control mechanism based on nothing but fear of an almost assuredly fictional entity that's said to be watching over them 24/7. In doing this, hasn't Christianity supplied both the disease and the cure using nothing but words?
-
>>JB Horn: I do remember posting that (from Reply #15, above). Why do you ask? Did you understand what I was saying? In your Reply #16, you wrote:
"So basically your answer is that science is unable to give you an answer so you refuse to look further. There are three answers and two can be proven wrong by any high school science teacher. The faith of an athlete must be right up there with That pope Francis guy."
The bolded part was your misinterpretation of what I actually said, which was:
I don't know is sometimes the very best answer we can have. It opens our minds to searching for real answers that are based on the scientific research of reality.[/i]
Really? "I don't know" isn't an answer, but a lack of an answer? Are you sure about that? Seems like an answer, to me. For another example: I ask you - how old is my aunt's cousin Maybell? I'd really like an answer right now. Wouldn't your answer have to be, "I don't know?"
Isn't a lack of an answer just silence, or the answer to some other question that wasn't asked? (E.g. Q: "What time is it?" A: "The Boston Red Sox First Baseman.")
Don't you really mean that "I don't know" isn't the answer you were looking for?
An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in a god or gods. Since I don't think there's a god or gods, that makes me an atheist. Admitting there might be a god or gods doesn't make me a theist, it makes me an honest atheist.
You're quite correct: Atheists do not believe in a Creator. But the thing we need to "get through" is your lack of evidence for your claim that there is one. Theists claim there is one, atheists are skeptical; don't you agree that it is up to the person with the positive claim to provide evidence for their claim?
"Sin" is a Christian religious construct, meaning "transgressions against God." I would agree that if God existed, then sin would be a real thing to contend with, but not really, because isn't it true that God forgives all sins if a person believes in Him and begs for His forgiveness? So, couldn't a convicted and sentenced murderer and child rapist ask for forgiveness in a sincere "come to Jesus" moment, just before they pulled the switch, and find himself in Heaven? Meanwhile, in China, a Taoist woman who leads an exemplary life of kindness, productivity, charity and love ends up in Hell for not believing in God. Do you think that's just?
There's actually nothing "comfortable" about being an atheist. A good 85% of the U.S. is some type of religious. There are churches on nearly every other street corner in every city of the country. Merely stating a disbelief in God can get one fired, attacked, shunned by family and lifelong friends, and not quite so much in America, but in other countries, can even get one killed. We are pummeled daily with theistic attempts to force their doctrines into our government, our classrooms, our homes. Does that really sound very "comfortable" to you? How comfortable would you be if Wiccans tried to have the words, "Blessed Be," put on all our money, or had legislation passed forcing schoolchildren to learn potions, or had statues of the Goddess erected on public property? As President Obama said, "Put yourself into someone else's shoes. Try to look at the world through their eyes."
Finally, do you believe Christians don't sin? Aren't some of them quite comfortable sinning, knowing they can just ask for forgiveness, later, without even providing restitution for their crimes? And if that's true, then why mention sin at all? Here's my opinion of "sin": it's a brilliant control mechanism based on nothing but fear of a fictional entity that's said to be watching over them 24/7. In doing this, hasn't Christianity supplied both the disease and the cure using nothing but words?
I have always found it strange that an atheist would be uncomfortable just hearing about someone else's beliefs. How can anyone be forced to believe. God in schools has been replaced by violence, it's working out real well.
Yes everyone sins and if a Christian tells you he doesn't then he just sin by lying. But no Christian is comfortable with sin, if he is then by definition he is not Christian.
God forgives all sins if a person believes in Him and begs for His forgiveness?
NO! that is a total misrepresentation of the Scripture. Acts 2:38; 3:19; 11:18; 17:30; 20:21; 26:20 Do you understand the word Repent as used here?
I almost left here without answering a major question you asked.
Taoist woman who leads an exemplary life of kindness, productivity, charity and love ends up in Hell for not believing in God. Do you think that's just?
Yes, could a just God do anything but be just when it comes to His commandments? Matthew 22:37, 38
-
I have always found it strange that an atheist would be uncomfortable just hearing about someone else's beliefs.
>>JB Horn: I can't speak for all atheists; no atheist can do that, but I can tell you that when I hear theists put voice to their beliefs, I do suffer a bit of eye-roll, just because it all seems so unlikely and that their belief seems out of proportion to their, what seems to me, fantastic claims. That comprises the usual amount of discomfort I experience in the presence of any supernatural beliefs. How do you feel when you see someone expounding on the virtues of Islam, or Mormonism, or Buddhism, or Paganism, or Scientology? Do you still think my reaction to your religion is all that strange?
How can anyone be forced to believe.
You're right: no one can be forced to believe anything, but they can be proselytized or indoctrinated, and this seems to me particularly underhanded with regard to children before they attain the age of reason.
God in schools has been replaced by violence, it's working out real well.
You can't say with honesty that secularism has caused increased violence in schools. You'd have to have a scientifically run sociological study of that claim. Do you have one? Aren't you just voicing an opinion?
Yes everyone sins and if a Christian tells you he doesn't then he just sin by lying. But no Christian is comfortable with sin, if he is then by definition he is not Christian.
Is there a universally accepted definition of what a Christian is? I've never seen one, but I've often heard Christians from one denomination declare that Christians from other denominations weren't really Christians. Interesting fact: states in the Bible belt view a greater-than-average amount of porn https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/religious-people-watch-the-most-porn-2017-3 (https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/religious-people-watch-the-most-porn-2017-3). So maybe Christians are more comfortable with sin than you think(?)
NO! that is a total misrepresentation of the Scripture. Acts 2:38; 3:19; 11:18; 17:30; 20:21; 26:20 Do you understand the word Repent as used here?
Okay, replace "begs for forgiveness" with "repent." So my paragraph now reads:
"Sin" is a Christian religious construct, meaning "transgressions against God." I would agree that if God existed, then sin would be a real thing to contend with, but not really, because isn't it true that God forgives all sins if a person believes in Him and begs for His forgiveness repents? So, couldn't a convicted and sentenced murderer and child rapist ask for forgiveness repent in a sincere "come to Jesus" moment, just before they pulled the switch, and find himself in Heaven? Meanwhile, in China, a Taoist woman who leads an exemplary life of kindness, productivity, charity and love ends up in Hell for not believing in God.
Is that a more accurate description of God's requirements for salvation? Isn't the word "repent" just a synonym for asking forgiveness? I'm not sure what your point is, here. How does "repent" change the above scenario?
And the question remains: Do you think that's just (the murdering child rapist as opposed to the nice Chinese lady)?
I almost left here without answering a major question you asked. Yes, could a just God do anything but be just when it comes to His commandments? Matthew 22:37, 38
So, tell me if I've got this right or not: your Matthew quote means that whatever God says is just, is just? That's just plain scary. If out of a million believers, one says they received a revelatory commandment from God telling him to drive a truck loaded with explosives into a shopping center and blow it up, wouldn't that person be right to do so, based on that Matthew quote and the strength of his faith that he really did receive a message from on high? This is why I say belief in the supernatural is dangerous.
No comments about your misinterpretation of my statement about the answer, "I don't know?" Do you still maintain "I don't know" isn't an answer?
Do you agree that I am an atheist? You seemed to be in doubt about that.
Do you still think being an atheist surrounded by theistic activists is a comfortable position?
Don't you agree that the concept of sin could be thought of as a clever gambit to control the masses? Wouldn't it be better to appeal to people's sense of empathy and fairness, which is demonstrably real, rather than tell them an invisible man is watching them and keeping score?
-
>>JB Horn: I can't speak for all atheists; no atheist can do that, but I can tell you that when I hear theists put voice to their beliefs, I do suffer a bit of eye-roll, just because it all seems so unlikely and that their belief seems out of proportion to their, what seems to me, fantastic claims. That comprises the usual amount of discomfort I experience in the presence of any supernatural beliefs. How do you feel when you see someone expounding on the virtues of Islam, or Mormonism, or Buddhism, or Paganism, or Scientology? Do you still think my reaction to your religion is all that strange?
You're right: no one can be forced to believe anything, but they can be proselytized or indoctrinated, and this seems to me particularly underhanded with regard to children before they attain the age of reason.
You can't say with honesty that secularism has caused increased violence in schools. You'd have to have a scientifically run sociological study of that claim. Do you have one? Aren't you just voicing an opinion?
Is there a universally accepted definition of what a Christian is? I've never seen one, but I've often heard Christians from one denomination declare that Christians from other denominations weren't really Christians. Interesting fact: states in the Bible belt view a greater-than-average amount of porn https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/religious-people-watch-the-most-porn-2017-3 (https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/religious-people-watch-the-most-porn-2017-3). So maybe Christians are more comfortable with sin that you think(?)
Okay, replace "begs for forgiveness" with "repent." So my paragraph now reads:
"Sin" is a Christian religious construct, meaning "transgressions against God." I would agree that if God existed, then sin would be a real thing to contend with, but not really, because isn't it true that God forgives all sins if a person believes in Him and begs for His forgiveness repents? So, couldn't a convicted and sentenced murderer and child rapist ask for forgiveness repent in a sincere "come to Jesus" moment, just before they pulled the switch, and find himself in Heaven? Meanwhile, in China, a Taoist woman who leads an exemplary life of kindness, productivity, charity and love ends up in Hell for not believing in God.
Is that a more accurate description of God's requirements for salvation? Isn't the word "repent" just a synonym for asking forgiveness? I'm not sure what your point is, here. How does "repent" change the above scenario?
And the question remains: Do you think that's just (the murdering child rapist as opposed to the nice Chinese lady)?
So, tell me if I've got this right or not: your Matthew quote means that whatever God says is just, is just? That's just plain scary. If out of a million believers, one says they received a revelatory commandment from God telling him to drive a truck loaded with explosives into a shopping center and blow it up, wouldn't that person be right to do so, based on that Matthew quote and the strength of his faith that he really did receive a message from on high? This is why I say belief in the supernatural is dangerous.
No comments about your misinterpretation of my statement about the answer, "I don't know?" Do you still maintain "I don't know" isn't an answer?
Do you agree that I am an atheist? You seemed to be in doubt about that.
Do you still think being an atheist surrounded by theistic activists is a comfortable position?
Don't you agree that the concept of sin could be thought of as a clever gambit to control the masses? Wouldn't it be better to appeal to people's sense of empathy and fairness, which is demonstrably real, rather than tell them an invisible man is watching them and keeping score?
STRONGS NT 3341: μετάνοια
μετάνοια, μετανοίας, ἡ (μετανοέω), a change of mind: as it appears in one who repents of a purpose he has formed or of something he has done, Hebrews 12:17 on which see εὑρίσκω, 3 ((Thucydides 3, 36, 3); Polybius 4, 66, 7; Plutarch, Peric c. 10; mor., p. 26 a.; τῆς ἀδελφοκτονιας μετάνοια, Josephus, Antiquities 13, 11, 3); especially the change of mind of those who have begun to abhor their errors and misdeeds, and have determined to enter upon a better course of life, so that it embraces both a recognition of sin and sorrow for it and hearty amendment, the tokens and effects of which are good deeds (Lactantius, 6, 24, 6 would have it rendered in Latin byresipiscentia) (A. V. repentance): Matthew 3:8, 11; Luke 3:8, (16 Lachmann); Luke 15:7; Luke 24:47; Acts 26:20; βάπτισμα μετανοίας, a baptism binding its subjects to repentance (Winer's Grammar, § 30, 2 β.), Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 13:24; Acts 19:4; (ἡ εἰς (τόν) Θεόν μετάνοια, Acts 20:21, see μετανοέω, at the end); διδόναι τίνι μετάνοιαν, to give one the ability to repent, or to cause him to repent, Acts 5:31; Acts 11:18; 2 Timothy 2:25; τινα εἰς μετάνοιαν καλεῖν, Luke 5:32, and Rec. in Matthew 9:13; Mark 2:17; ἄγειν, Romans 2:4 (Josephus, Antiquities 4, 6, 10 at the end); ἀνακαινίζειν, Hebrews 6:6; χωρῆσαι εἰς μετάνοιαν, to come to the point of repenting, or be brought to repentance, 2 Peter 3:9 (but see χωρέω, 1 at the end); μετάνοια ἀπό νεκρῶν ἔργων, that change of mind by which we turn from, desist from, etc. Hebrews 6:1 (Buttmann, 322 (277)); used merely of the improved spiritual state resulting from deep sorrow for sin, 2 Corinthians 7:9f (Sir. 44:16: Wis. 11:24 (23); ; Or. Man. f ((cf. the Sept. edition Tdf. Prolog., p. 112f)); Philo, qued det. pot. insid. § 26 at the beginning; Antoninus 8, 10; (Cebes, tab. 10 at the end).)
-
>>JB Horn: I can't speak for all atheists; no atheist can do that, but I can tell you that when I hear theists put voice to their beliefs, I do suffer a bit of eye-roll, just because it all seems so unlikely and that their belief seems out of proportion to their, what seems to me, fantastic claims. That comprises the usual amount of discomfort I experience in the presence of any supernatural beliefs. How do you feel when you see someone expounding on the virtues of Islam, or Mormonism, or Buddhism, or Paganism, or Scientology? Do you still think my reaction to your religion is all that strange?
You're right: no one can be forced to believe anything, but they can be proselytized or indoctrinated, and this seems to me particularly underhanded with regard to children before they attain the age of reason.
You can't say with honesty that secularism has caused increased violence in schools. You'd have to have a scientifically run sociological study of that claim. Do you have one? Aren't you just voicing an opinion?
Is there a universally accepted definition of what a Christian is? I've never seen one, but I've often heard Christians from one denomination declare that Christians from other denominations weren't really Christians. Interesting fact: states in the Bible belt view a greater-than-average amount of porn https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/religious-people-watch-the-most-porn-2017-3 (https://www.maxim.com/maxim-man/religious-people-watch-the-most-porn-2017-3). So maybe Christians are more comfortable with sin that you think(?)
Okay, replace "begs for forgiveness" with "repent." So my paragraph now reads:
"Sin" is a Christian religious construct, meaning "transgressions against God." I would agree that if God existed, then sin would be a real thing to contend with, but not really, because isn't it true that God forgives all sins if a person believes in Him and begs for His forgiveness repents? So, couldn't a convicted and sentenced murderer and child rapist ask for forgiveness repent in a sincere "come to Jesus" moment, just before they pulled the switch, and find himself in Heaven? Meanwhile, in China, a Taoist woman who leads an exemplary life of kindness, productivity, charity and love ends up in Hell for not believing in God.
Is that a more accurate description of God's requirements for salvation? Isn't the word "repent" just a synonym for asking forgiveness? I'm not sure what your point is, here. How does "repent" change the above scenario?
And the question remains: Do you think that's just (the murdering child rapist as opposed to the nice Chinese lady)?
So, tell me if I've got this right or not: your Matthew quote means that whatever God says is just, is just? That's just plain scary. If out of a million believers, one says they received a revelatory commandment from God telling him to drive a truck loaded with explosives into a shopping center and blow it up, wouldn't that person be right to do so, based on that Matthew quote and the strength of his faith that he really did receive a message from on high? This is why I say belief in the supernatural is dangerous.
No comments about your misinterpretation of my statement about the answer, "I don't know?" Do you still maintain "I don't know" isn't an answer?
Do you agree that I am an atheist? You seemed to be in doubt about that.
Do you still think being an atheist surrounded by theistic activists is a comfortable position?
Don't you agree that the concept of sin could be thought of as a clever gambit to control the masses? Wouldn't it be better to appeal to people's sense of empathy and fairness, which is demonstrably real, rather than tell them an invisible man is watching them and keeping score?
Obi there are a lot of people who claim to be christians but few are. A 1800's preacher named Spurgeon, once said that he would guess that only 10% of his church was christian.
Christ addressed those so called christians.
Matthew 7:22-24
22. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'
23. "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'
24. "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.
The word repent (in scripture) means to change your direction of your life. And it is true that your condemned man can be saved from hell even though he is executed. Salvation is not the work of man but of God. If you spend your life doing good for man then let man save you from hell. If you love man over God then expect Him to say DEPART FROM ME.
A cut and paste from a other board (it's a calvinist view):
Repentance is not a work we do to earn salvation. No one can repent and come to God unless God pulls that person to Himself (John 6:44). Repentance is something God gives—it is only possible because of His grace (Acts 5:31; 11:18). No one can repent unless God grants repentance. All of salvation, including repentance and faith, is a result of God drawing us, opening our eyes, and changing our hearts. God’s longsuffering leads us to repentance (2 Peter 3:9), as does His kindness (Romans 2:4).
I am what we call a Calvinist, so I don't care what others do or believe and like JB I have a hard time understanding why you do.
Why do you attack a religion that it appears you know nothing about?
-
STRONGS NT 3341: μετάνοια
μετάνοια, μετανοίας, ἡ (μετανοέω), a change of mind: as it appears in one who repents of a purpose he has formed or of something he has done, Hebrews 12:17 on which see εὑρίσκω, 3 ((Thucydides 3, 36, 3); Polybius 4, 66, 7; Plutarch, Peric c. 10; mor., p. 26 a.; τῆς ἀδελφοκτονιας μετάνοια, Josephus, Antiquities 13, 11, 3); especially the change of mind of those who have begun to abhor their errors and misdeeds, and have determined to enter upon a better course of life, so that it embraces both a recognition of sin and sorrow for it and hearty amendment, the tokens and effects of which are good deeds (Lactantius, 6, 24, 6 would have it rendered in Latin byresipiscentia) (A. V. repentance): Matthew 3:8, 11; Luke 3:8, (16 Lachmann); Luke 15:7; Luke 24:47; Acts 26:20; βάπτισμα μετανοίας, a baptism binding its subjects to repentance (Winer's Grammar, § 30, 2 β.), Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 13:24; Acts 19:4; (ἡ εἰς (τόν) Θεόν μετάνοια, Acts 20:21, see μετανοέω, at the end); διδόναι τίνι μετάνοιαν, to give one the ability to repent, or to cause him to repent, Acts 5:31; Acts 11:18; 2 Timothy 2:25; τινα εἰς μετάνοιαν καλεῖν, Luke 5:32, and Rec. in Matthew 9:13; Mark 2:17; ἄγειν, Romans 2:4 (Josephus, Antiquities 4, 6, 10 at the end); ἀνακαινίζειν, Hebrews 6:6; χωρῆσαι εἰς μετάνοιαν, to come to the point of repenting, or be brought to repentance, 2 Peter 3:9 (but see χωρέω, 1 at the end); μετάνοια ἀπό νεκρῶν ἔργων, that change of mind by which we turn from, desist from, etc. Hebrews 6:1 (Buttmann, 322 (277)); used merely of the improved spiritual state resulting from deep sorrow for sin, 2 Corinthians 7:9f (Sir. 44:16: Wis. 11:24 (23); ; Or. Man. f ((cf. the Sept. edition Tdf. Prolog., p. 112f)); Philo, qued det. pot. insid. § 26 at the beginning; Antoninus 8, 10; (Cebes, tab. 10 at the end).)
>>JB Horn: I'm sorry; quoting scripture doesn't mean anything to me because I don't recognize the source as necessarily true or valid. I respond only to reasonable argument, or rather, argument based on reason - not dogma. Just because a book says a repenting murderous child rapist gets to go to Heaven while a wonderful non-Christian Chinese lady goes to Hell seems pretty unreasonable to me. If you are fine with that based on the writings of anonymous authors who likely got most of their highly un-likely ideas from previous nearby superstitious cultures when there's no good evidence anything supernatural exists, and that you seem to now be ignoring my more specific questions, then I guess you and I are done, here, and that's okay. Thanks for doing as much as you did. I'll let the readers of our exchange be the judge as to which of us had the better arguments, and willingness to engage.
-
Obi there are a lot of people who claim to be christians but few are. A 1800's preacher named Spurgeon, once said that he would guess that only 10% of his church was christian.
Christ addressed those so called christians.
Well, that's a big problem, isn't it? For example: Are you a Christian? Who amongst you gets to say with any authority? What is that authority based on? And then it goes further: which among you has the right interpretation of scripture? Isn't it true that there are over 30,000 denominations of Christianity because none of you, even those of you in the same denomination, can agree on everything in the Bible, thus creating an overall mass confusion as to exactly how you're supposed to follow God's word and achieve Heaven/avoid Hell? This then begs the question: How could an all-power/knowing/loving and perfect god inspire a book that no one can be sure they correctly interpreted except by faith, which is unreliable in the pursuit of truth. Does that make sense to you?
Don't you all really just say to yourselves "close enough," and hope for the best? And that, only if you chance to think of this rather sticky conundrum at all? If you can't understand why I argue against your religion, I can't understand how you can ignore all these logical problems and stay religious.
Matthew 7:22-24
22. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'
23. "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'
24. "Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.
The word repent (in scripture) means to change your direction of your life. And it is true that your condemned man can be saved from hell even though he is executed. Salvation is not the work of man but of God. If you spend your life doing good for man then let man save you from hell. If you love man over God then expect Him to say DEPART FROM ME.
That's only assuming that there is such an entity that can be departed from. That's where I think you're mistaken - where I can't go. For some reason unknown to me, you believe in God, even though there's no good evidence He really exists. Why do you believe?
A cut and paste from a other board (it's a calvinist view):
Repentance is not a work we do to earn salvation. No one can repent and come to God unless God pulls that person to Himself (John 6:44). Repentance is something God gives—it is only possible because of His grace (Acts 5:31; 11:18). No one can repent unless God grants repentance. All of salvation, including repentance and faith, is a result of God drawing us, opening our eyes, and changing our hearts. God’s longsuffering leads us to repentance (2 Peter 3:9), as does His kindness (Romans 2:4).
Again, you first have to believe the Bible for this to have any meaning. I don't mind you quoting and appreciate your hard work, but you might want to keep in mind, it means nothing to me and is unfortunately a useless effort. I'll bet you're hoping I'll find it inspirational or revelatory, but I don't. How can I, when I don't consider the Bible any more real than "The Lord of the Rings," which also has the benefit of not being written in Olde English.
I am what we call a Calvinist, so I don't care what others do or believe and like JB I have a hard time understanding why you do.
and
Why do you attack a religion that it appears you know nothing about?
I understand. Here's why I oppose all supernatural thinking: Because it's harmful, and I don't like to see my fellow planetary occupants, both human and non-human alike, being harmed. I have a genetically developed sense of empathy and justice, just like everyone else (to varying degrees)(no gods needed), including many of the higher animals. Belief in gods cause rifts between family members, members and groups within society and entire nations. The divisiveness of religion has always led to hate, conflict, terror, war and death. Faith in religion can cause some people to ignore human-caused global warming (tons of scientific evidence for this) - the single greatest threat to the future survival of all life on Earth that humankind has ever faced. It can cause people to not fully live the one life they're sure to have because they think there's an afterlife (for which there's no real evidence) which will be better. I think that's incredibly sad. If Calvinism makes you not care about the thoughts and feelings of others, I would disagree, and really, I don't think you mean it. I imagine you're a very fine fellow who loves his family, friends and fellow humans just as much as I do. Well, except for those not of your religion. People have to be taught to hate others they've never met, and doesn't religion and the competition it engenders do just that?
There are, of course, other "causes" that create division: political systems, racial and gender divides, right on down to whose dad is stronger. But none of these other points of conflict compares to the question of eternal damnation, even though there's no good evidence for it. People will commit mass murder in order to "save the souls" of as many others as possible. What could be more important than how one spends one's eternal afterlife? This whips the fundamentalists into a frenzy and throughout human history, it's been a major source of unnecessary pain, suffering and death than just about any other cause.
So, that's why I argue against the supernatural, and supernatural religions in specific - to reduce its harm. I'm a great proponent for the proposition: every little bit helps. Does that make sense to you?
-
Obi
You’ve have shown that you’re unwilling or unable understand our beliefs. True Christianity is based on love, the first is love for Christ and secondly your neighbors. We can prove that with Scripture but you refuse to accept it.
You will not even except definitions of what Christianity is, trying to define words that make it fit your personal BELIEFS.
You may be a good human being and full of good intentions, but serviing man and refusing server God gets you into Hell. Now if you don’t believe in Hell you should have no problem with that.
You guys wrap up this thread because I’m going lock it down after you close up your thoughts.
I thank you Obi enjoy you life of logic or attempt there of.
Dude
-
Well, that's a big problem, isn't it? For example: Are you a Christian? Who amongst you gets to say with any authority? What is that authority based on? And then it goes further: which among you has the right interpretation of scripture? Isn't it true that there are over 30,000 denominations of Christianity because none of you, even those of you in the same denomination, can agree on everything in the Bible, thus creating an overall mass confusion as to exactly how you're supposed to follow God's word and achieve Heaven/avoid Hell? This then begs the question: How could an all-power/knowing/loving and perfect god inspire a book that no one can be sure they correctly interpreted except by faith, which is unreliable in the pursuit of truth. Does that make sense to you?
It is obvious that you have not read the book and you refuse to accept any reference to it. So you've closed off that discussion on your own.
Don't you all really just say to yourselves "close enough," and hope for the best? And that, only if you chance to think of this rather sticky conundrum at all? If you can't understand why I argue against your religion, I can't understand how you can ignore all these logical problems and stay religious.
That's only assuming that there is such an entity that can be departed from. That's where I think you're mistaken - where I can't go. For some reason unknown to me, you believe in God, even though there's no good evidence He really exists. Why do you believe?
Again, you first have to believe the Bible for this to have any meaning. I don't mind you quoting and appreciate your hard work, but you might want to keep in mind, it means nothing to me and is unfortunately a useless effort. I'll bet you're hoping I'll find it inspirational or revelatory, but I don't. How can I, when I don't consider the Bible any more real than "The Lord of the Rings," which also has the benefit of not being written in Olde English.
andI understand. Here's why I oppose all supernatural thinking: Because it's harmful, and I don't like to see my fellow planetary occupants, both human and non-human alike, being harmed. I have a genetically developed sense of empathy and justice, just like everyone else (to varying degrees)(no gods needed), including many of the higher animals. Belief in gods cause rifts between family members, members and groups within society and entire nations. The divisiveness of religion has always led to hate, conflict, terror, war and death. Faith in religion can cause some people to ignore human-caused global warming (tons of scientific evidence for this) - the single greatest threat to the future survival of all life on Earth that humankind has ever faced. It can cause people to not fully live the one life they're sure to have because they think there's an afterlife (for which there's no real evidence) which will be better. I think that's incredibly sad. If Calvinism makes you not care about the thoughts and feelings of others, I would disagree, and really, I don't think you mean it. I imagine you're a very fine fellow who loves his family, friends and fellow humans just as much as I do. Well, except for those not of your religion. People have to be taught to hate others they've never met, and doesn't religion and the competition it engenders do just that?
Your scientific evidence falls apart with your answer, I don't know.
Of course again you try to misrepresent what is being said, I do not care who or how people think about me or my religion. I did not say that I am not concerned about other people's feelings.
There are, of course, other "causes" that create division: political systems, racial and gender divides, right on down to whose dad is stronger. But none of these other points of conflict compares to the question of eternal damnation, even though there's no good evidence for it. People will commit mass murder in order to "save the souls" of as many others as possible. What could be more important than how one spends one's eternal afterlife? This whips the fundamentalists into a frenzy and throughout human history, it's been a major source of unnecessary pain, suffering and death than just about any other cause.
So, that's why I argue against the supernatural, and supernatural religions in specific - to reduce its harm. I'm a great proponent for the proposition: every little bit helps. Does that make sense to you?
Stalin, Pol Pot, and Hitler in my lifetime. And at the present time we have a thing called abortion.
Since this will be my last post on this thread I would like to address your question about the old Chinese lady. We teach and the Bible teaches that if you are without sin you will not go to hell. If your Chinese lady has never sinned against God then she has no fear of hell. And yourself, aren't you trying to suggest, in your own mind, you are that Chinese lady? Since you don't believe in God you can never sin against Him, if you are wrong you are in deep do do. And for a man/woman whose answer to their existence is I don't know your life must be very scary.
Obi I wish you all the best in this life, and hopefully you will prepare your soul for what comes after.
Fat
-
Well Obi the only thing to tell you is you know not what you speak. Christ taught of love and the first was love to God and the second was love to man.
You need both to be a Christian. If you love man without putting God first you fall short of any chance of salvation.
The Scripture say love your neighbor as yourself, it also teaches love God above yourself. I'm sorry that you can't get your head around that.
Matthew 22:36-40
36. "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?"
37. And He said to him, "'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.'
38. "This is the great and foremost commandment.
39. "The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.'
40. "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."
On the other hand Islam teaches to kill Christians and Jews, and they kill thousands of them every year, but no condemnation from Obi. You are not here to un-convert to me, you are here to justify the love you have for yourself. In any case you have done neither and I predict that that feeling you have in your gut of loneliness and confusion is going to follow you until you find the truth.
My prayers and best wishes for you and your loved ones.
JB
-
There is none righteous, no, not one;
There is none that understandeth,
There is none that seeketh after God
How many Christian are martyred each year?
Now that I'm unconverted I have to go out and mow the lawn. May the religion of social justice treat you all well over the weekend.
Mac
will to well
-
Obi
You’ve have shown that you’re unwilling or unable understand our beliefs. True Christianity is based on love, the first is love for Christ and secondly your neighbors. We can prove that with Scripture but you refuse to accept it. You will not even except definitions of what Christianity is, trying to define words that make it fit your personal BELIEFS.
You may be a good human being and full of good intentions, but serviing man and refusing server God gets you into Hell. Now if you don’t believe in Hell you should have no problem with that.
You guys wrap up this thread because I’m going lock it down after you close up your thoughts.
I thank you Obi enjoy you life of logic or attempt there of.
Dude
>>Admin: Thanks for letting me have a final word, though disappointed you feel the need to cut the discussion off. We were definitely not done, here. And isn't this a violation of 1 Peter 3:15 (NIV),
"But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..."
I can quote scripture, too, and though it doesn't mean anything to me, shouldn't it be followed by you? I don't see anything in there that gives a time limit or an "I give up" clause. I have asked many, many questions here, the answers generating even more questions. Isn't this supposed to be an apologetics-themed discussion group? You even sub-titled it, "Can you defend your beliefs?" Apparently not.
Cutting this thread off, sweeping me away with "...you're unwilling or unable to understand our beliefs" with a few vague mis-representations of problems when my questions became uncomfortable seems to me cowardly. I understand your beliefs all too well, just as hundreds of other priests and reverends who've honestly and intently studied scripture came to realize it wasn't real. There's a website to help them out of their ministries and lead them into productive lives with job/skills training and a community of general support called The Clergy Project http://clergyproject.org/ (http://clergyproject.org/). (To become a member, you have to provide evidence that they're for real and sincerely wish to leave their ministry.)
Did you (Admin) get complaints from viewers of this thread? If so, did they wish to remain anonymous? Will this thread be erased from the website, so no one else can read and ponder my challenges? Will I be banned from the site, even though I have followed your rules? If any of these are true, what does this say about the bravery of Christians and the strength of their faith that they can't withstand the questions of a single atheist? Even though you're cutting this thread off, I'd still like to hear your reply, if you're willing.
Otherwise, unless I am banned from the site, I hope to see you all in the other threads, here, with lots more questions and information about Christianity, history, scientific facts, logic, reason, secular morality and humanism.
-
It is obvious that you have not read the book and you refuse to accept any reference to it. So you've closed off that discussion on your own.
>>Fat: I'm sorry, but it seems even more obvious to me that you are unable to answer my questions because to do so would cause you and our readers a crisis of faith. If you wish to keep your faith, then I recommend you continue to avoid my questions and remain blissfully happy. I wouldn't blame you if you did, for I understand the warmth and comfort of faith, even if it is misplaced. Personally, I will do what it takes to believe as many true things and few false things as possible, even if it means I have to give up my dearest most favorite beliefs. This is the creed of an honest person who understand that false beliefs can lead to wrong actions.
Your scientific evidence falls apart with your answer, I don't know.
How does scientific evidence "fall apart" when the answer to a question is unknown? Doesn't the lack of an answer spur us curious and exploratory humans to look even harder for the answer? Should we have just kept saying, "Lightning is caused by Thor," instead of finding out about electrons and protons?
Of course again you try to misrepresent what is being said, I do not care who or how people think about me or my religion. I did not say that I am not concerned about other people's feelings.
If I misinterpreted you, I apologize.
No comment about the problem of 30,000 denominations? No comment on why you can't quote a book and have that count as evidence? No comment on the harm of supernatural thinking? No comment about the problems caused by the divisiveness of religion? Are you avoiding these questions? I hate to have to ask it, but are you being lazy, or just evasive?
Stalin, Pol Pot, and Hitler in my lifetime. And at the present time we have a thing called abortion.
Won't get into the Hitler/Pol Pot/Stalin thing, here. I'd love to, but sadly, Admin is cutting us off. Suffice it to say, those "strong man" dictatorships were political religions, where the free exchange of ideas were brutally suppressed and those with alternate opinions were carted off and killed. If you think Christians didn't do that before secular society reined them in, you don't know your history.
Since this will be my last post on this thread I would like to address your question about the old Chinese lady. We teach and the Bible teaches that if you are without sin you will not go to hell. If your Chinese lady has never sinned against God then she has no fear of hell. And yourself, aren't you trying to suggest, in your own mind, you are that Chinese lady? Since you don't believe in God you can never sin against Him, if you are wrong you are in deep do do. And for a man/woman whose answer to their existence is I don't know your life must be very scary.
Now that's one bit of scripture I would like to see (if you are without sin you will not go to hell). Here's what I heard:
Thessalonians 1:8–9 says that in the end God “will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.”
Do you have a scriptural reference that conflicts with this?
Also, about that "deep do-do" comment: have you ever heard of Pascal's Wager? Briefly, French philosopher Blaise Pascal came up with the argument that if you don't believe in God, pretend to, and you'll win no matter what. If you're right, you go to Heaven. If you're wrong, you simply end, like the atheists posit as the likely truth. Of course, it neglects God's all-knowing ability to see through the deception, but less sophisticated believers might still try it.
Obi I wish you all the best in this life, and hopefully you will prepare your soul for what comes after.
Thanks, Fat, and I mean that. I hope you and your loved ones live in peace and plenty, and that you all continue to benefit from the reason, logic and science that has given us so much of safety and comfort in our nation and in the world.
-
Well Obi the only thing to tell you is you know not what you speak. Christ taught of love and the first was love to God and the second was love to man.
You need both to be a Christian. If you love man without putting God first you fall short of any chance of salvation.
>>JB Horn: I again have to disagree. I do know of what I speak, and I find it a tad disrespectful that you should suggest that I don't, as though you had the right or authority to decree such.
The Scripture say love your neighbor as yourself, it also teaches love God above yourself. I'm sorry that you can't get your head around that.
Matthew 22:36-40
36. "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?"
37. And He said to him, "'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.'
38. "This is the great and foremost commandment.
39. "The second is like it, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.'
40. "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets."
I have a problem with that bit of scripture you quoted, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." The actual biblical passage, Mat 22:36-40 "Love the Lord and your neighbor as yourself," is quite immoral, because it's an impossible edict that sets a person up for immediate failure. It's a device to ensnare the believer it into a lifetime of servitude to an almost certainly imaginary being who is represented by other humans. No one can truly love a neighbor 100% as much as themselves, 24/7. So, in failing to keep this edict, the person automatically becomes a failed "sinner," who now needs "redemption." Isn't this a fake problem with an equally fake cure, meant to ensnare people?
On the other hand Islam teaches to kill Christians and Jews, and they kill thousands of them every year, but no condemnation from Obi. You are not here to un-convert to me, you are here to justify the love you have for yourself. In any case you have done neither and I predict that that feeling you have in your gut of loneliness and confusion is going to follow you until you find the truth.
Yes, the Koran does encourage violence against "infadels," but just because the Bible has no explicit commands to kill (well, except for Ex 22:18 KJV, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live,") (or, 1 Sam 15:3 KJV, "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." What was up with that, by the way? Why the animals, too? Not to mention killing everything and everyone (humans, land and sea animals, and plants) except a 600 year old man (??) and his immediate family.
And besides all that, it doesn't mean Christians didn't restrain themselves from Crusading around from time to time throughout history, right?
Well, no one asked for my specific opinion about the killing of Christians and Jews. I'm against it, in case you were wondering.
I never expected to de-convert anyone right off the bat, and even stated so in my very first post which began this thread. And again, you really have no right or authority to tell me how I feel (lonliness/confusion), and would like to politely ask you to stop doing that. I'm sure you wouldn't like it if I did the same thing to you.
My prayers and best wishes for you and your loved ones. JB
Otherwise, thanks for the well-wishes. Right back atcha, my friend. We may disagree, but ultimately, we are fellow travelers on this incredibly tiny blue marble in the great scheme of things, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
-
First to answer the PM's.
Remember the Great Commission
And
Luke 21:12-17
To Obi
I'll answer for the others, on Mat 22:36-40 get your self a new translation in modern english, try the NAS. On if you are without sin you will not go to hell very true and there is only one without sin, all others Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.
As to your comments to me.
Matt 10:14-15
14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.
Mark 6:11
And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.”
Admin Dude