@theists: are you trying to change us or understand us?
Posted on: March 27, 2012 - 8:12am
Offline
@theists: are you trying to change us or understand us?
Before I ask my question to the theists I will admit that I've done similar things when visiting a theist website, but with a very specific agenda. I was very curious at how some types of theists thought so I would log in and watch their posts.
As for my question to the theists, what exactly are you doing here? Are you trying to convert us? test us? test yourself? or maybe you are unsure of your belief system and are searching for other possibilities?
@atheists, feel free to post if you have an opinion.
- Login to post comments
There is no religion that is charitable on the collective scale other than good PR to recruit. As soon as you challenge their leaders or their fans on anything that their books say that contradicts realty, their "charity" is negated by their hostility to the "outsider or questioner".
Its funny that you should rail against Catholics who are, for the most part social liberals, but even then, will protect the criminal acts of their priests. But Evangelicals don't get a pass either. EVEN TODAY as much "charity" you claim ANY religion has done, these same people have no problem being hostile to science, or minorities or gays.
THIS is the same protection racket all forms of god worship and state fascism depend on. Throw enough money and charity at your fans, and they wont get "uppity", Sounds nice until the mere act of questioning or blasphemy and they will become as violent as any alpha male chimp.
THERE IS A PERFECTLY evolutionary reason why humans do this. SO PLEASE while I am picking on religion, I am doing such from a very REAL evolutionary perspective TO EXPLAIN why religion is a distraction and divisive.
WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON is our evolutionary compassion for our fellow human gets mistaken as the invention of a label. Our compassion is a real evolutionary trait, but for the most part that compassion comes at the cost to benefit our increase our status in a social group. Much like any alpha male in the animal kingdom. We will have compassion for our own, but most of the time do not extend it to the other groups.
Lions do this too, they wont kill their own cubs and will even protect them for a period of time, but if they run into the cup of a rival alpha male, they will kill it.
HUMANS do have an advance brain and can extend that empathy beyond our own internal social groups. BUT religious labels take what humans have always done in evolution, and turn it into a fictitious battle between superman vs kriptonite.
So when you say religion does good in charity, you are inadvertently insulting atheists as if we are not capable of the same thing which is patently false.
NOW HERE IS THE BOTTOM LINE.
There is no "chosen people". Evolution was around before all our current myths, and it will continue even if we give up on them for new invented myths in the future. And ultimately our species will go extinct and all our myths we have invented in our history will die with us because there WONT be a future generation for our myths to be passed on to.
Our REAL tendency as part of one species in the entire history of evolution, is to value what is closer to us, such as family, then community, then nation, and then, maybe SOME "outsiders". In reality we can only be special to ourselves and those who personally know us. WHAT WOULD HELP worldwide minimize human division, is stop pretending one group or one label invented human behavior or morality. ALL OUR HUMAN ACTIONS, both good and bad are a RANGE in our long term evolution.
EVOLUTION is why we are here, not because I am an atheist incapable of charity or that you are a believer and only believers are capable of charity.
Labels do not automatically make a person good or bad, and taking arbitrary "do it our else" laws out of a holy book is the WORST case of projection that causes people on the one hand to say "world peace", yea, they want it, sure they do, as long as no one competes for their alpha male position.
I am not good because I am an atheist, but neither am I automatically bad. But neither are you. Perfect example of thinking a book will automatically make you good are PERJURY LAWS. If a book had the magic lasso power of making you tell the truth, there would be no need to have PERJURY LAWS.
So the reality is a person is either going to lie or tell the truth and the only REAL thing making that determination isnt a book, but PEOPLE recording the witness's words and comparing it to their acts or prior words.
Now I am not singling you out at all. On a planet of 7 billion we are BOTH minorities AND majorities depending on your own point of view and what part of the world you live in. ACCEPTING THAT one is NOT special by proxy of label is probably the MOST important concept humanity can spread. Getting stuck on "look at the good I did" is pointless, YEA you should do good, but it does not take a god to do good. If that takes away your recruitment tool, I am sorry but that IS A REALITY.
Muslims give to charity too and that IS PART OF their pillars of faith but you are not a Muslim because of such. I am an atheist and I have given to charity, but you are not an atheist. Jews give to charity too, but you are not Jewish.
SO THE ONLY CONCLUSION that makes sense is that our capability of BOTH compassion and cruelty is evolutionary and NOT label based.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Speaking of "what's up with that"- I heard a rumor you were hooked on Jean. That's too bad. I was gettin' kinda sweet on you.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
CLEARLY the stupidest reason to vote for someone. Labels are a stupid reason to vote for anyone for any reason. LEFT OR RIGHT believer or non believer. PRIOR ACTIONS and results alone, nothing more.
I am an atheist and so is Beyond Saving but we ARE divided on the issue of economics. I like him outside the issue of economics but from my point of view, I would be STUPID to vote for him merely if he said "I don't believe in a god".
AND FYI if you have not read the requirements for the oath of office in the United States Constitution it says "NO RELIGIOUS TEST". Which gave JFK the OPPORTUNITY to run for office. WHICH both JFK, JOHN KERRY AND EVEN MITT ROMNEY ended up saying "I will not use my article of faith to legislate".
It has allowed Muslim Senator Keith Elleson to swear in on a copy of the Koran once owned by Thomas Jefferson. It has also allowed Jew Joe Lieberman to serve. It has also allowed ATHEIST PETE STARK to serve in OUR congress.
Now what I would suggest if you want to get along better with people who don't share the same label, SEE PEOPLE AS INDIVIDUALS, not labels.
I VOTED for Obama, and the LAST reason I did it was because he is a Christian and if he was an atheist, that too would be the last reason I would vote for him. I voted for him because I was tired of the past 30 years of corporate greed, jobs being shipped overseas, "trickle down" economics which have done nothing but create bubble after bubble and kept wages stagnating while the cost of living keeps going up.
I WOULDN'T give a shit if Obama claimed to be an Evangelical or Muslim or Rastafarian, if you can keep your personal beliefs on your sleeve and out of law, then I am fine with you. If you cannot then you will NOT get my vote.
AND BEYOND, I only bring us up to make a point to him. I think you'd still agree that you'd vote for someone outside your atheism if they sided with your more Libertarian views. BUT lets leave our beef for another thread.
I only made this the point from the Constitutional issue that the founders really wanted us to find common law and common solutions first. Sorry to disappoint you Beyond, even us "liberals" value the Constitution.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
2 - Ah, biblical morality
3 - No, just wondering why you seemed to insert jesus in the the same reference as god
4 - I think no pope, past, present or future can control the past.
Don't doubt the charity bit, but why christians "help" others is another thing. In burma they were outlawed by the king because the christians were only giving care if the poor converted to christianity.
It's good to try and balance stuff, but there are people out there that will rebel against balance. I've had a few in my time and I've had to cut off communicating with them because it becomes a disturbance.
Recently I've been discussing stuff with people who are "flat earth believers" and I can not believe their position is rooted in anything other than pure mental sickness. Even when you explain to them the facts they stick there head in the ground.
Your view on Christianity is irrational and rooted in bias, the same thing you accuse the Christians of being. Let's think it out for a moment. If the Christians are a bunch of fools who believe in a make believe God then why do you act as if they have evil intentions in giving to the poor. You are acting as if they really do not believe in this God but they are using God to use people. They give because of the Gospel. The Gospel says that I am an unworthy sinner (Romans 3:23) but while I was still a sinner Christ died for me (Romans 5:
. So God gave His life for me, the least I can do is give monetary things to the poor. Instead of speaking about God's love to the poor I will show it. It is not a PR move. God is God whether you like Him or not. He does not need your vote of confidence or your approval. I do not give to make Him look good. I give because I was given. The Southern Baptist Convention is the first responders in a disaster in the South East of America. We beat the red cross and the red cross uses us all the time to coordinate help. The reason why we operate faster is that we have churches all over the area therefore we are already on the scene. You say that I railed against the Catholic Church but I did no such thing, I disagree with their theology but not their charity. I think we do a better job in the SouthEast of America but they by far out do us in the rest of the world in charity. Charity is NOT an evolutionary trait. Evolution is survival of the fittest not lift up the weak. Call a spade a spade you think Christians are fools, that's fine, but don't act as if there are not kind hearted people out there who care for your soul. Their compassion may be out of ignorance but there is no ill will. Every week we take up a collection at the church and a percent of that goes to charity. It goes to people that are in other countries and some that are local. But the members have no idea who is receiving it and those that are receiving it have never heard of our church and probably will never enter its doors. So it is given unconditionally and out of love. Complain about our attitudes complain about our ignorance but it is a terrible thing for you to question our charity.
Now on to the political part. Should I vote for the guy who will make me the richest? Should I vote for the man that will give me the most stuff? I vote for the man who is like minded with me. We have the same world view. He will respond to situations in a fashion that I would respond. I want someone with my morals. Abortion would be a big issue. I am against it completely. His view on religious freedom is important to me (I think a Christian is more apt to follow my view on this). It's not dumb to want a Christian in office (also in a Christian worldview he would have the Holy Spirit that would guide him).
Hey Brian,
It's fun that you are on display for all to see how atheists are emotional generally speaking. You do not reason, you do not argue rationally, but simply whine and complain and take me out of context.
Pouting and tantrums is all you have to say in response to my arguments. You act like a little girl, pretty weak Brian, pretty weak.
But fun. Display yourself my friend. Keep up the good work.
Respectfully,
Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).
A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.
Respectfully,
Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).
The synods of Nicea burned anything they thought did not support trinitarianism. I would confer that this would include anything considering J to be simply a man. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arian_controversy
We can only speculate what was destroyed..
Have you considered self-fulfilling prophecies? Furthermore, have you ever played chinese whispers? The possibilities from different viewpoints are enormous.
Reason should tell you that supernatural prophesying is not sensible. Intuition on the other hand, is a different matter altogether. I accurately predicted Apple would rise from $240 when purchased two years ago. My faith was contrary to many popular ideas at the time. The ability to make an educated forecast prior to a probabilistic looming event does not make me a prophet.
In the absence of sufficient historical agreement or evidence on the origin, translation, content and arrangement, we can only make assumptions as to the compilation of writings in the book of Daniel.
This is going to come off as a bit pointed. Charity is ironically often a selfish act. Are you truly helping? You didn't elaborate so I apologize in advance if I'm being presumptuous, but what if you diverted your charitable funds into teaching a useful trade or skill instead? "Give a man a fish.." etc.
Your worldview seems to be that the natural is all the exist. This is the problem that we see with science. It is the study of natural. It is in a box and says that nothing exist outside of that box. If there is a supernatural then it can do things that we humans can not do. If you can manipulate the future then you can predict it. As far as the charity is concerned we do our best not to support sorriness. But there is only so much you can do as far as making sure it is going to the needy and not the sorry.
NO, my view on THE BIBLE is that is has some "nice" motifs but at the same time this head character advocates and or allows the murder of people who dont kiss his ass. I didn't write the bible. Don't blame me.
FROM THE START, this character sets up a rigged game as a bet with his minion Satan and uses to innocent people as pawns in his bet who had NO SAY as to how the game was set up and their only communication was "DONT DO THIS" no explanation, no consent, just a dictation. And then blames them for the ignorance he gave them. It was a sucker bet. Nothing fair or consensual about the garden story.
Then he goes on to allow his fans to murder babies just like a lion will murder rival cubs. He drowns the entire population of the world, which would mean(not in reality, but even in this horrible story) that would mean millions of women and children and babies outside Noah's family would have drowned, along with all the innocent animals who didn't get on the ark.
But the end of that book is the worst. It is like a parent handing knives to his kids, sticking them in a cage and saying "The last one standing gets to hang out with me".
It is not "bias", to me it is like going into the library, picking up a book of fiction and giving it a review after I read it.
It reads like a really horrible B horror movie as merely a piece of literature. I don't buy one word of any of that book.
This has nothing to do with my life experiences with believers. Some or nice some are not. But suggesting you take your god goggles off and read it like you are reading a mere book, which it is, does not make me bias.
I would give Harry Potter the same review if it was as horribly written as the bible. I have read lots of great books, the bible is not one of them.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
So why I'm here? Because here I can communicate freely. Practically any talk we have on this forum would earn me a blank stare from people I know and then a stupid joke to ease the awkwardness of situation. And that's not just because it's in English. People I know don't care about anything. They've got this little world, school, job, partner and pub, and that's all they can take in. They can't comprehend anything greater than themselves, greater than their sports team. It's not as I dislike them or something, I just deeply regret that they have very little curiosity.
We bore the hell out of each other, they can't follow my thought and I can't appreciate their lack of thereof. Hell, even Christians are more fun sometimes, they're just the same normal people, but their faith obliges them to tackle some bigger questions. I'm just not good at the small questions. Do you want tea or coffee? I don't know, I don't care, the less I need, the better. Instead let's talk about something big, deep, transcendent, controversial or just complicated.
You guys are awesome, you make my life of the mind possible. My opinions changed and evolved a lot over the years and I got myself a second way of looking at the world, that is, yours, skeptical and critical. Which I use when I see fit. It's not like I don't want to change you, that means, in the sense that we are teachers to each other, but I see that some realizations take hell a lot more than just evidence, like journal articles and laboratory tests. A scientific basis of esoteric phenomena needs a public discussion. We can't suddenly get an opinion different from the whole community and then explain, defend and justify it every time it is mentioned. What we usually do is to stop discussing, silenced but not convinced. Maybe the seed is planted, but it won't grow up until the public discussion comes.
What we can do is to have fun in the discussion, learning and explaining the ideas. I don't require agreement, I need an intelligent response, agreement or not. An intelligent disagreement is a great spice of life. I've heard of whole relationships which started like that.
One example of how awesome the atheist community is, is the Reason Rally. Imagine a great gathering of people, each of which is a thinker, and a friendly one as it seems! It's a sad fact that thinkers are dispersed in society and can't get together personally until perhaps on some college.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
You got me, I am sorry I got upset when YOU said your god allowed the Tsunami in Japan to kill 13,000 innocent people, and not even as a threat to Japan, but as hostages to murder to warn America to kiss your god's ass "or else". Naw, you were "just kidding".
And now like a troll you are basically saying females are weak . I wonder where you got your sexism from? Maybe from the same book that teaches you that taking third parties hostage is ok to make people do what you want?
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Why does it have to be supernatural? There are many naturalistic events we do not fully understand, and I attribute the supreme architect to this as well. I do not take the leap to supernatural and instead conclude the proof is still awaiting discovery.
Wouldn't you agree that scientific evidence for the existence of a god is a more compelling pursuit than searching for meaning in words which you cannot verify or validate?
Good post Luminon.
You attempted to change the subject. We were talking about the motives behind Christian charity. But in response to your last post I will say this, you think too highly of yourself. I had a pair of shoes that I wore around as long as they served their purpose I was pleased with them, but the day I found a hole in them and they no longer served their purpose I threw them away. I did not take it that they had to kiss my butt, I took it as they had a purpose and they didn't cut it anymore. You were created to serve God and the day He has had enough of you not serving your purpose you will be thrown away. You are the created and He is the creator. I did not ask for the opinion of my shoes because they were created and more can be created to replace them. To the shoes life isn't fair. But you have a choice you can repent and except Jesus as your personal Lord and savior or you can be tossed away.
I do not believe that nature can create itself and I see creation. So my next logical step is that something different than what I see had to start this complex system that I live in. So I think that the creator must be different than the created.
I believe that fact that eyewitnesses to the miracles of Jesus were tortured and killed and refused to denounce Jesus is strong evidence that they saw what they claimed in the Bible.
I'm sorry, but your post seems to have been messed up.
I did not write that long post which was about
There is no religion that is charitable on the collective scale other than good PR to recruit. As soon as you challenge their leaders or their fans on anything that their books say that contradicts realty, their "charity" is negated by their hostility to the "outsider or questioner".
Yeah I don't know how that happened, I was writing to Brian.
do you really have to ask this question? As the son of a preacher and a missionary I grew up with the baseline of my comprehension being that all humans deserved to die for the crime of being born. This universal ad hominem fallacy has been endlessly damaging. It took me till my mid-late thirties to begin to break free from it and even now it still tortures me.
To put it to you simply, I would never, ever worship a murdering, torturing, psychotic, supernatural bully for which no material evidence existed. The fact you believe there actually is a hell that people actually deserve to be put into it for the crime of skepticism tellls me all I need to know about you and your complete inability to comprehend the words 'moral inconsistency'.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
We teach people to love and care for others the way God loved and cared for us. We do not tell anyone to murder, torture or bully anyone. We teach there is a hell and that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. The wages of sin is death but the free gift of God is eternal life. Call God what you want, but for you He is offering a chance of eternal salvation. I'm not seeing the bad in that. Does God have a "follow me or else attitude"? Yes He does, but He is the creator and has the right to make the rules for the created. But the people are taught to serve others. Atheist (I'm generalizing here) are overly dramatic about this evil plot that Christians are trying to harm others. When in need people don't search the phone books for their local atheist. They don't ask around what atheist in the neighborhood might pay my light bill. It's always the church. We are used when needed and bashed when we are not needed. But we go on doing our best to preach that there is hope in a hopeless world. I sit by the beds of people dying and give them hope. I sit with the sick in the hospitals and let them know I care. The hospital have a special relationship with pastors (they give us vouchers for parking and call us to make rounds) but the atheist are not asked for their services. What we preach is hope and love.
Atheist aren't a religion. Maybe I need to repeat that.. Atheist aren't a religion. Stop attempting to build a dichotomy. My wife was an atheist and passed away after a 5 year battle with cancer. She suffered extremely and didn't want to go becasue she loved life but she didn't fear death. This concept is taught and it's not taught by atheist. So yes, you might be there when people are at their lowest point and in their most fearfull point but ask yourself why are they afraid? All we know of death is our experience before we were born, anything beyond that is speculation and faith. Being in the business of teaching people to be afraid and then offering a pill for salvation, is no justification at all. In other categories we call this the long con...
Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs
Luminon - great post
A con man gets something out of the con. I receive nothing. I do it out of love. With no God there is no hope. Atheism is as much of a religion as Christianity. It is a group of like minded people in their view of spiritual things. Worst case scenario people die in peace thinking they are going to heaven in Christianity, and the family also feels that peace that their loved one is safe in heaven. Maybe ignorance is bliss.
we all deserve to be burned alive forever on the basis of no proof and christians are the only good people on the planet because they say so. Thanks for confirming my point of view. It's such a pleasure talking to some one who has convinced himself he 'loves' my hypothetical future torturer. And that his doing so is 'good'.
As for God's rules, they were invented by priests. The first 4 have nothing to do with moral behaviour at all but with the aggrandisement of the cult leader. Why not read the UN's International Charter of Human Rights and see if you think these are superior and more comprehensive than the ten commandments. Pay special attention to articles 5, 18, 19 and 30. And then look up the phrase 'universal altruism' on the internet and ask yourself if the christian god and his followers actually have any. I think not.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
I think you see us as people that hate God. Well you are right only in the respect that I hate lies. God is a lie. Ipso-facto I hate God. Like many others I am bitter because I have been deceived and humiliated, but I would rather be bitter and fess up to my foolishness than to still be playing the part of a fool. You seem to accept that your god is playing a rigged game. I can't believe you are ok with that. You also seem to be in the camp that believes god controls everything. How do you defend his cruel nature? You say you teach people to care for others the way God loves and cares for you. Why don't you teach them to be cruel like him?He creates children with horrible deformities with no hope for anything but a life of humiliation and despair. You said you accept the bible in it's entirety, so let's not pretend god is flawless.
When people come to your church in need and you help, that is great. But it merely a communal act. Those who seek your help that are not christians are probably the same ones falling down in the produce aisle and filing lawsuits. I know this kind of scum.
On the sick and deathbed visit gig, I have experienced this myself. These people come to the bed of those in despair to feel empowered. Threre's a strange psychological element there. My biological grandmother specializes in this. She is one of the heads of her church and has been with every elderly and dieing woman for the past 50 years. She gets off on it, and always ends up with their money. She is a very creepy woman.
Some just feel like it's their duty and a charitable act to visit the hospitals. I was in one recently. One day I woke up and this creepy jehova looking woman was just staring at me in my sleep. I said "hello can I help you" She just said we're here if you need us. I said OK. As I gathered my brain up from grogginess she just kept staring at me. I finally told her she was creeping me out and asked her nicely to leave my room. The next day a different dude came in and he was pretty cool. He asked to talk to me and I obliged him. We started a very calm and meaningful debate and I must say I blew him away. He finally asked if he could just pray for me and I said "knock yourself out."
Sorry for babbling. What do you tell children in the burn ward who are in excrutiating pain and will be grotesquely deformed for life? God made this happen for a reason? Or the conjoined twins connected at the head? One of you will not survive this operation and if you don't accept Jesus now you are going to hell? Last chance to escape burning in hell for all eternity like that little burned up girl over there in the burn ward.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
You claim you gain nothing and then proceed that statement with a proclamation of emotional satisfaction, highlighted by an assertion, that without this high, there is no hope. You gain nothing? Just the entire justification for your being and all hope.
Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs
[img=http://img169.imagevenue.com/loc741/th_089347892_TheSeventy_122_741lo.jpg]
You must be new around here.
I see the picture has an overlayed picture of a young girl, but what is the lawn statue? Is it a gremlin?
I meant I do not get anything material for helping others. I do not get a better heaven for caring for people. But you are correct I am happy when I make others happy.
I agree we all deserve to be burned forever because we are sinners. Christians are not the good ones they are the ones who received mercy from God. They are sinners just like everyone else. The reason a Christian is to be humble is because he was shown mercy and deserved none of it. Hell is in the future for you if you do not repent and give your life to Jesus. But God is offering you mercy, but it is you who refuses. No point in discussing our emotions anymore. I feel as if most people that I have talked to in this group have been hurt by some Christian and they are lashing out to all Christians. 2.1 Billion people claim Christianity, its not hard to find a bad one out there. I am sorry if someone did you wrong but the teaching of Jesus is God loved you so much he took your torture on the cross so that you may have heaven. He offers it to you. Biblical morality is love the Lord above all and love your neighbor as yourself. Not invented by priest, it was commanded by God.
I do believe a lot of people in here hate God. They hate anything that has to do with God. The person that came to pray with you may be a fool but they cared enough for a human soul that they came by. I'm sure they didn't ask for anything from you. They love people. I'm going to be judgmental for a moment and say I really don't believe your story about your grandma ending up with people's money. She may be bad but I don't believe she finds people dumb enough to give away their money because someone prayed with them. There are con men on TV all the time parading as Christians and they will burn in hell. But I doubt your grandmother ends up with a bunch of peoples money and no one has stopped her. As an answer to your last part when sin came into the world it brought with it death. God did not promise heaven on earth. I am healthy only because I was shown mercy I do not deserve life health or happiness. God does not promise a good life but He does no more pain no more tears and no more worry in heaven. Paul said all of his trials were worth it to know the hope in Christ.
I see creation more like a series of dominoes that were purposefully set into motion.
What if contrary reports or suggestions of otherwise non-supernatural events in these cases were destroyed? How do we gauge the validity of the reports supporting your position?
"I know what you're thinking, 'cause right now I'm thinking the same thing. Actually, I've been thinking it ever since I got here: Why oh why didn't I take the BLUE pill?"
One of my earliest questions for Christianity came to me at 6 years old when someone was calmly explaining to me the consequences of "making bad choices".
I still remember my initial response even to this day - "What happens to people that make bad choices in heaven?" If you don't believe I could make a statement like this at 6, I can assure you my 5 year old son is well aware of the concept of good and bad choices and could lay out a whole list for you plain and simple. E.g. I ask: Hurting the cat? - bad, I ask: Feeding the cat? - good.
Most answers to this question are paradoxical.
If people can still make bad choices in heaven and from there are sent to damnation for being disobedient, then it would seem that absolvement of human imperfections did not occur, since a "perfect human" would be without flaws.
If people who won't make bad choices in heaven aren't allowed by default, then there is a probability of people being judged prior to entry that did not commit any sin due to their environment over their lifespan, but would commit sin under the right conditions, and because of this aren't allowed (conviction of the innocent).
If you are not capable of committing sin in heaven, then you are a pawn or subject in a dystopian dictatorship which I have yet to see any proof of as being a good thing (unless you prefer ignorance).
The quantity of biblical inconsistencies are nearly immeasurable. There are so many that an activist atheist could dedicate a entire web site site to count them...
If I were to quickly surmise the story of the bible from a modern perspective, it sounds very similar to a science fiction novel:
(BEGIN GENESIS Part 1)
In the beginning, there was a highly technologically advanced extraterrestrial entity or race of beings from an unknown origin that purposefully constructed a galactic prison for other subservient beings to live in.
The only way to escape the prison is to be an ideal slave, nearly without rebellion or disagreement.
The first race this high tech alien created did not satisfy it, so it decided to create a new being which was far inferior.
The first aliens that were created got jealous of the unethical favoritism the creator showed towards the fledgling race and some of them decided to revolt.
This started an intergalactic war somewhere in another galaxy or universe far far away, probably resulting in mass destruction of multiple worlds and galaxies.
Even though the quantity of rebel flagships is well known, they use advanced guerilla tactics and stealth systems and have not yet been destroyed. The war still rages on to this day.
The first alien race created are likely interdimensional travelers, but the rebels are prevented from utterly annihilating Earth and the Milky Way by a supermassive graviton shielding technology that can only be penetrated by miniscule amounts of energy.
For maximum efficiency, the rebels usually direct this energy at the electrochemical signals in the brains of the fledgling race as a form of mind control to cause them to destroy themselves from the inside out.
(END GENESIS Part 1)
Hm, maybe you're right, this is kind of fun to believe!
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
At least you are up front about your beliefs.
Fact is, 'christian morality' is human morality. Your cult has simply trademarked our native ethics. And no one can really love a hypothetical first cause. What they instead love is their own conviction the universe is all about them and the prime mover is their 'father'.
Nor can anyone truly love their neighbours as themselves. You can be kind to your neighbours but all empirical proof suggests humans treat their genetic family best of all, their in-group well and their society better than they might as an extension of family love born from small group evolution. Religion is a cultural evolution of in-group cooperation - nothing more.
Buddy, my opposition to your faith is that my internal morality refuses to be bullied into accepting invisible things exist on the basis of no proof. I also refuse to believe all human deserve eternal torment based on entirely unsupported assertions and threats contained in a book which blends myth, supernatural and third-person priestly decree into one unwholesome bubble and squeak.
If you have any proof for your position offer it. If not, admit that you are so lacking in personal integrity the leaders of a cult can force you to dehumanise all of humanity using nothing more than an empty threat.
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
For those of you who don't know Dan, you can find him in our friend Jeffrick's thread- "Jeffrick vs. a Yek" where he debated him on youtube. http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/31241
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
I tell my church the same thing. I tell them that we are saved by the Grace of God and do not deserve it. I am not Dan Rogge, I am a baptist and not pentecostal. It wouldn't be sniffing me out as a Christian. I think I have been as upfront about that fact as possible. Sorry for offending you I should not have said that it didn't happen.
Ok buddyd. Some people like to go to forums with multiple usernames and pretend they are new. just checking. Of course we all knew you were a christian. I guess that point was lost in text. My real point is that not all of us need a god to have morals. Atheist are so often wrongly stereotyped. "Godless=immoral" I do not think all christians are good or bad people. I used to be a christian. I just condemn christianity.
I believe everyone was born with right to a reasonable expectation of health, happiness, and freedom without the unreasonable and irrational conditions that your god has supposedly put on man. And how dare anyone tell me otherwise and try to put their guilt on me. If you want to live under that yoke then that's your problem. I believe it's wrong to pass it on others. This is an old one but so true:
Eskimo: "So if I didn't know about God and sin would I go to hell?"
Priest: "No, not if you did not know"
Eskimo: "Then why did you tell Me?"
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
The reason why I tell people is that I really believe that without Jesus you will go to hell. I do it out of desperation. I don't see much hope in this type of forum because it would take a personal relationship to get people to be open to hear the Word of God.
My analogy goes more like this
Three guys jump out of a plane
One heard about the parachute and accepted it
The second heard about the parachute and declined it
The third never heard about the parachute.
Whether you hear about it or not I do not believe makes a difference.
Well good can come from discussion even if no one gets to claim victory for their cause. It's always good to learn about and from each other even if we consider the other to be an opponent with little hope of winning over. IF you're losing hope of converting it's because you stand little chance without proof of fact and relying only on faith in the irrational words in a book of here-say put down on paper. Gotta be a tough job. It's either save the lost sheep or preach to the choir, and that's gotta get boring just as it would get boring for me to only discuss religion with atheists. Besides, where else are you gonna get a better insight into the minds of the ones you are supposed to be out to save? IF you leave us, rest assured you won't be the first one to fall back on the "pearls before swine" cop-out.
Now let's look at your parachute analogy.
The parachute is Jesus
Life is the fall
Hell must be hitting the earth without Jesus
Heaven is landing safely
The difference between you and me is; We are not falling, we are just riding in the plane. It only feels like you are falling because someone told you to jump.
The bible presents the illusion that we are falling and offers a parachute. And that parachute has many holes in it and is way overpriced.
If I am wrong I guess the handle just broke on my rip-chord.
If you are right I guess you at least get to say that you told me so.
I'm just gonna stay in the plane and enjoy the ride.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
As crazy as I may be put yourself in the worldview of a Christian for a moment. I think you are going to hell and there is nothing I can do about it. Depressing situation. I have more than faith I gave a few reasons why I believe earlier. The complexity of life blows my mind. Evolution doesn't add up. Naturally something does not come out of nothing. Energy or matter can not evolve into something such as thought. The fact that the eyewitnesses were martyred and never deny Jesus. In the Bible it claims that 500 witnessed the resurrection and nowhere in history have we found a document that said I claimed to be one of the 500 but I lied. Nowhere did we find a document that said I looked for one of the 500 but I couldn't find them. I believe in God because of experiences and dreams also (but I realize that is personal and not good evidence). There are other things such as:
But let me try this one, it's tough to explain in writing.
In Daniel 9:20-27 it says that there will be 70 sevens (seventy sets of seven years) there will be 69 sets from the time that a decree goes out to rebuild Jerusalem to the time that the Anointed one comes to die (Jesus). So there will be 69 sets of 7 years.
69X7=483
So there will be 483 years between the time that Jerusalem is rebuilt to the time of Christ
The decree to rebuild went out between 448-440 BC (There is debate)
Jewish calendar is lunar 360 days in their calendar
360x483=173,880
so 173,880 days between rebuilding and Christ
173,880/365=476 (rounded)
so 476 solar years
from 448-440 BC add 476 years
28-36 AD
Daniel said over 600 years before it happened and in text that predate Christ that Jesus would die on the cross around 28-36 AD (one of many reasons why I believe)
I have my evidences, but most people have made up their minds on the subject and shut out all other possibilities.
To try to convert us indirectly or those who passively read the forums?
To attempt to tarbrush atheism and secular skepticism? Maybe paint Christianity or Judaism in a positive light?
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Bald assertion
Fallacious appeal to complexity. Thought is demonstrably a property of energy and matter. Nothing has never been shown to exist. Randomness has never been shown to exist
Fallacious ad populum
Fallacious ad populum
Subjective assertion
I'd like to accuse this of being an appeal to insufficient statistics. As it is, I think this argument is just plain weird.
Assertion with prejudicial language and a hint of strawman...
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
I just now realize I was merely repeating what this "Buddyd" suggested. It's time for me to find some actual post content to deconstruct or add my $0.02 to (besides Brian37's.)
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
Hmph. I can't tell if you are pulling this out of random quotes from Shakespeare, Dante Alighieri, Faust, Crowley, Milton, John the Revelator, King James, that you might be using a rather generous degree of creative license or if you merely pull this sort 'rhetoric' out from your hindquarters, but in any case you should probably rethink your reasoning here. The absence of a god has never been seen as justification for religion -ANY religion-, and even if it was... why proselytize a falsehood when it is against your moral ethos to do so? Makes you appear to be rather irrational, hypocritical and unjust, doesn't it? Does moral consistency even matter amongst a faith that sees all humans as born spiritually faulty and "sinful", or is that merely some foolish Catholic notion that came about in 17th century Ireland?
Imagine that. The same is said to be true of moral law by some 2.2 billion xtians spread about the globe. Bad news to all of you...
None of us honestly give a f*ck about what you all believe, and..
...we skeptics aren't here to win a popularity contest with the 'faithful'. As far as I'm concerned, xtians could become so populous and (self-)'righteous' as to be able to fill up the Terran sky with their amassed numbers, and it would have zero effect on how I think or feel.
I never would have guessed.
Nothing... until it proselytizes it's drivel with moral authority. Then it becomes wrong and destructive, as the crusades, inquisition, Manifest Destiny, Catechism, European Feudalism, Gallileo's execution, witch trials, Lutheran antisemitism and Faust prove. Why should any of these events have been allowed to pass?
The parts about letting people speak with demagogic moral authority granted to them by a largely imaginary divine entity who (according to scripture) has given few people (if any) to speak on its behalf. There is also the myths, but the religious demagogues who have been enabled by blind faith and scripture take 1st place amongst 'infamous christian wrongs' by leaps and bounds.*
And I'm positive most would find me repulsive and vile if they 'saw' some of my more... creative, fanciful thoughts and concepts. I mostly see it as little reason to hesitate commentary on someone else's morality, ethics, philosophy, ideology, etc.
I'm a particularly harsh critic of the Vatican, when I can manage it.
asked and answered.
*you'll note I'm trying to avoid an obvious Godwin argument here, even if the 'temptation' is abundantly strong.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
You do receive something, stop lying to yourself
There is hope with out god
Atheism is technically not a religion, but I understand what you are getting at; you are misusing the word religion.
OK Ill bite.
I have both NIV and KJV and your numbers don't jibe with either. First off, you are replacing "weeks" with "years". The NIV just says seventy sevens with subtext at the bottom specifying sevens as "weeks" . The KJV plainly says "seventy weeks". I checked 2 online sources and nowhere can I find that a week is to be interpreted as a year.
Secondly, where are you getting the number "69" ? NIV says sixty -two sevens. KJV says three score and two weeks.
KJV- "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people........and to anoint the most holy one. .... from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusealem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again...And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off...and the end thereof shall be with flood. "
NIV- same thing but worded" Seventy sevens are decreed for your people.....until the Anointed one comes there will be seven sevens and sixty-two sevens"
Now in the very next book of Daniel 10;2-4 in both versions the word "week" is used. "In the third YEAR of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel.... In those days I Daniel was mourning three full WEEKS. I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, nor did I anoint myself at all, till three whole WEEKS were fulfilled. And in the four and twentieth DAY OF THE FIRST MONTH, as I was by the side of the great river, which is Hiddekel or (Tigris); then I lifted up mine eyes...."
Clearly he is using the term "week" as seven days or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Week and not 1 year. The words day, week, month, and year are all used in the same chapter. And clearly it says "62" and not "69"
I believe that changes the timeline of your prophecy by quite a bit, whether you use 448-440 BC as an accurate time of the decree or not.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
Hebrew has male and female words just like Spanish. A week is a feminine word but in the Hebrew in Daniel 9 he makes it a masculine word. There is outside of the Bible Hebrew writings that do the same thing and they also are talking about years and not weeks. Second of all they were not going to rebuild the Temple in a matter of weeks it would have taken years. It is a set of 70 weeks but the seventieth week it says will be the end times. It is called Jacob's trouble, it is more clearly defined in Revelation. It says it will be like a flood meaning the war be like a great wave. It says 62 sevens and 7 sevens (Daniel 9:25 there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens). 62+7= 69. It is not talking about a water flood (Daniel 9:26 The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.). It is clearly talking about the end times called the tribulation which is a seven year period. It works out perfect.
It's clear that you are close minded.You did not research and only said "Fallacious ad populum" when you didn't want to agree with something, like a child holding his hands over his ears and shouting. At least Tony research to argue my claims. Energy does not think, nonliving does not become living. Hegesippus and Josephus wrote of the martyrdom of James. Tacitus also wrote of persecuting Christians (He was a Roman Official). The 500 witnesses were written about in 1 Corinthians 15. The Jews and Romans were not friendly to the Christians during this time so if they had some proof otherwise they would have pointed it out during this time. It's not absolute proof but it makes you seem irrational to say Christians have no proof at all. Any intellectually honest evolutionist will say that the complexity of life is a major weakness in their argument.
OK buddyd I got the 69 part and thank you. and I knew it said "like a flood" no confusion there. Can you direct me to where I can find any proof that a Hebrew week can also mean a year? Because in Daniel 10 he is using the words day, week, month , and year. I don't accept that we are to just switch back and forth just to handily fit our numbers into equations and prophecies.
Although I am not completely closed minded, I do believe many of these prophesies are just self-fullfilled and written after the supposed fact, and I would still like to know, if for no other reason just to see how one could base much of their faith on such stories.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
No problem. shabua is the normal way to say week but in Daniel 9:24 he says šā·ḇu·‘îm . http://interlinearbible.org/daniel/9-24.htm and http://interlinearbible.org/genesis/29-27.htm You can see the difference in this interlinear Bible (Hebrew/English Bible).