Or to put it another way, it's full of untruths in order to con people into thinking it's full of truths. I'm sorry but this is the worst of your arguments Kal, I can accept the others but this one is just another example of a very, very contrived way of denying evidence against the bible's validity.Originally Posted by kalniel
no problem with the Torah - it is the first 5 books of Moses.
Asian texts: come on, compare them, please. I want a comparison both internal and external. Having lived in Asia for part of my life (and soon to be returning, and half my family is Buddhist/Taoist), I have a pretty fair understanding of what those texts say, what they claim, how they affect the lives of the followers etc. NONE of them stand up to the Bible, either historically, theologically, philosophically etc.
did you read anything I posted this morning? Did you read anything about God TRYING to keep every person out of hell. The only people going to hell are those who WANT to go there. (sigh.........)So, why have hell? Why if there is any love send someone to hell? Its barbaric, its spiteful, its revenge, it also makes no sense economically speaking to torture someone indefinitely, after all is being beaten 1000 times less of a deterent than being beaten 1001 times? Also philosophically one questions the concept of free will in a feedback system.
Where does it say in scripture that birth control is wrong? COMPARED with where does it say in Catholicism that it is wrong. Two very different sources, really. Each church has problems, since they are run by fallible beings, but the head of the Church is not (Christ). So don't mistake one for the other.If someone demonstrates a principle, or heck just a well reasoned argument I'm more than happy to look at it. If someone says "this is above all else, above reproach" then they are simple not on the same wavelength. An example would be how the catholic church deals with descent inside it over the use of condoms, which save so many lives, so cost effectively.
really? lol.No because you are actually very rude, you assert with a blind faith that this book is above all else because you researched it....
as I just posted, the head of the human genome project started the project as an atheist. By the end, he had become Christian (note: not religious). He knows a little more than you or I about genetics, and he became Christian because what he found in his research was FAR more in favour of there being a God than there being only chance to explain genetics. Fact.I for instance am fairly sure we share a common ancestor with chimps, no, this isn't based on working briefly in a zoo, its based on a rudementary level understanding of genetics, with every further step in to knowledge (and I mean scientific knowledge, not knowledge because its in an old book) it adds weight to the argument that we share so much in common, we know about mutations and generations of breading, fossil records etc, that we probably have a common ancestor. It makes more probable sense than just having many direct stranges common from something. At the most basic level you must admit we share the same building blocks, the same carbon, that entropy wise we are the same matter.
Now, that doesn't prove God's existence, of course. However, it should raise questions, and should encourage someone to look into the matter with an open mind.
That is not about treating gays badly, it is about not compromising their beliefs.The upshot of this, means some people feel they have a right to treat gays badly, such as the couple who run a B&B, wanting to refuse them sharing the same room..... I'm sorry but that is simply not acceptable!
Example: if my kids grow up and want to have their girlfriends to stay in my house and share a room, I will not allow it. End of. Criticise me all you want.
One can never stop saying Thank You
The bible is wildly inaccurate, very frequently. The various versions of the bible show that people have recognised the inconsistencies or simply draconian nonsense and realised that less people would believe it was true, it had to be rewritten which is absolutely ludicrous. It all comes back to why a Christian God would make it so difficult for educated people to believe that he exists; it's all utterly preposterous if you ask me.it's not inaccurate - that's the point.
He's not trying to win brownie points. And if a specific year was put into the Bible in Genesis, it would date immediately - lol.
Genesis is not simply about facts of creation, it is FAR more about relationship - the Trinity of God, of God to the earth, of us to God, of us to the earth, of man to woman, of people to each other etc.
The reason for laying Genesis as it is becomes amazing, when considered in this light
I don't understand how you get to that viewpoint, unless you believe that there is only one way of looking at and understanding the world. I might describe how an apple falls using classical physics, a future generation might look at that description and show how naive and inaccurate it is. That doesn't change the fact that at this time and place, classical physics conveys the right information for my knowledge level.
It seems to me like some people actively look for escape routes. if someone is trying to convey a message and it has to be translated then if there is a slightly inaccuracy or even lack of understand with the translation in some insignificant part of the document the whole thing is ruled invalid. Thats to my mind a very closed way of thinking, and it wouldn't be a barrier in most walks of life - we manage to have conversations and follow each others points on these forums despite the typo's and grammatical howlers that go on.I'm sorry but this is the worst of your arguments Kal, I can accept the others but this one is just another example of a very, very contrived way of denying evidence against the bible's validity.
Again, you'd have thought that God would have made sure that St. Jerome had translated the bible correctly. Since there are such manifest falsehoods in the bible why would God leave them in? The way I see it is that people are either born into faith (before you ask, there are members of my family who believe in a god and there are members who are atheists but neither view was imposed upon me) or they go through some sort of emotional experience and "find" god. You never see stories of level headed academics merely abandoning their views after coffee one morning, because as far as I'm concerned it takes a certain level of delusion to believe in the literal story of the Bible. I'm not saying that there is no God (although it is my suspicion), I'm saying that the evidence against the Christian God is enormous. The evidence for it is some inconsistent stories written by humans, and a whole load of circular reasoning and waiving away of serious questions.
I hasten to add that I don't let people's beliefs affect the way I treat them, I just like having debates like this! I think something we can all agree upon is that it's very interesting to discuss
Let's get some pre-conceptions out of the way then shall we? :
Hello.
I was neither born into faith, nor have I had some kind of emotional experience to find God.
Furthermore, I am a scientist with an extremely high level of education and qualification (and a philosopher and musician).
Last edited by kalniel; 19-08-2011 at 12:30 PM.
I didn't say it was fact, it just seems to be a recurring theme. I'm not doubting your intelligence, I'm just saying that I expect someone of your reasoning capabilities to be able to look at the evidence and say "something here doesn't add up". Well, that's the way it works for me I guess, but I can totally accept that some people can bring themselves to see past the problems I see and it's fine by me. I can also see that I'm imposing my way of thinking on you and that's clearly not how it works for you guys. This debate was started because Fuddam posted another semi-provocative semi-propaganda article about someone having a miraculous conversion which I find hard to fathom.
Last edited by nibbler; 19-08-2011 at 12:40 PM.
For my part I like to echo a quote I discovered from CS Lewis a while ago, "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen. Not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." (Is Theology Poetry? - 1945)
However, I think a lot of the problems that arise during discussions of atheism/theism come from the fact that participants are often in very different places mentally.
An atheist may be arguing because he or she feels they are having something unwanted forced upon them. The theist may be attempting to force theism upon them or it's possible the theist simply wishes to share something they believe is of value. Alternatively, (or subsequently), the theist may feel that something which is of great value to them is being attacked, and so they seek to defend it (and even more so if it is perceived of great objective value). This may be a theist's first response in the case of books or other presentations in speech or otherwise made to attack or debunk theism or a specific variety.
Whatever the case, little progress can be made in a discussion where two parties did not come with the motivation of inquiry or discovery - but only transmission or rebuttal. Depending upon the participants, sometimes facts and ideas can be presented which are seen as interesting or of value and these can be investigated or adopted leading to a change in viewpoint. Rarely however does one end up convinced of something, when the initial starting point was lack of interest or worse, perceived intrusion or attack.
No trees were harmed in the creation of this message. However, many electrons were displaced and terribly inconvenienced.
fuddam (19-08-2011)
A new monk arrives at the monastery. He is assigned to help the other monks in copying the old texts by hand. He notices, however, that they are copying copies, and not the original books.
So, the new monk goes to the head monk to ask him about this. He points out that if there was an error in the first copy, that error would be continued in all of the other copies. The head monk says, "We have been copying from the copies for centuries, but you make a good point, my son."
So, he goes down into the cellar with one of the copies to check it against the original. Hours later, nobody has seen him. So, one of the monks goes downstairs to look for him. He hears sobbing coming from the back of the cellar and finds the old monk leaning over one of the original books crying. He asks what's wrong.
"The word is celebrate not celibate," says the old monk with tears in his eyes.
The Karl Pilkington of Hexus
format (19-08-2011),MaddAussie (19-08-2011),nibbler (19-08-2011),Noxvayl (29-08-2011)
There are far too many to compare, and your the one making the assertion that none of them stand up the bible? You don't know what they are, you can't possible. You dismiss my last comment that you have a "pretty fair understanding" because half your family is Buddhist or Taoist, yet the exact example I plucked from the air is clearly neither of those if you knew ANYTHING about which you spoke, you wouldn't have used that as an example, its akin to me saying I speak fluent English, I know all about the old Icelandic texts. Its quite simply stupid beyond all measure.no problem with the Torah - it is the first 5 books of Moses.
Asian texts: come on, compare them, please. I want a comparison both internal and external. Having lived in Asia for part of my life (and soon to be returning, and half my family is Buddhist/Taoist), I have a pretty fair understanding of what those texts say, what they claim, how they affect the lives of the followers etc. NONE of them stand up to the Bible, either historically, theologically, philosophically etc.Yes, Yes I did. So your saying its someone who WANTS to go there, what about those who never heard the 'good word' do they want to? Or are they spared?
Is it not, pathetic, vindictive and vengeful to put someone through eternal torture, you've not begun to address how its not. Espesually if your some supreme all powerful being.Ok, so Catholicisim is wrong, its falible, but yet the humans who wrote the bible aren't? Quite a gaping in consistancy there no?
He was Cristain before he started his work. In the same way that being autistic does not preclude one from doing good work, neither does having ones brain covered with religion.
http://articles.cnn.com/2007-04-03/u...ation?_s=PM:US (source for my statement)I believe everyone called fuddam should be beaten with a sack of oranges, these are my deeply help believes, they are on a text which is about <0.01% the age of the earth, so they must be valid and true, they also include many beautiful mathematical proofs, so they are obviosuly valid. If ever I meet one who uses that online alias I can pour acid in their eyes, because its my belief.
**** RIGHT OFF.
You can't persicute someone because its a belief as a moral OK, socity let them do it. You think its not a belief that sends people to war, you think its not a belief that they were supirour that allowed so many people to be killed in Bosnia?
I don't care as to what that person thinks their reasoning is, I'm sure pedofiles and the like think its OK because they believe they aren't hurting their victims.
If something is wrong, the purpetrator can not claim its their beleifs which entitle them to this. A good example is female genital mutilation, most perpitrators think they are doing whats right.
Your not providing a commercial service. It would be no different from me saying I won't have any ni**ers or p****s in my company.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
pls point them out
CS Lewis immediately sprang to mind. lol.You never see stories of level headed academics merely abandoning their views after coffee one morning, because as far as I'm concerned it takes a certain level of delusion to believe in the literal story of the Bible.
Second, the Bible is NOT to simply be read as a literal story - one of the big stumbling blocks of many a skeptic.
Rather, it contains literal/historical sections (eg Chronicles, which I'm wading through right now, the gospels), poems /songs (Psalms), wisdom (Proverbs), stories (parables), sexual practice (Song of Songs), etc
One wouldn't treat a song by some pop musician as the same literary genre as a treatise on WWII, nor as something by Shakespeare, nor as Kama Sutra. So, don't treat the Bible as one genre either.
show meI'm saying that the evidence against the Christian God is enormous. The evidence for it is some inconsistent stories written by humans, and a whole load of circular reasoning and waiving away of serious questions.
One can never stop saying Thank You
Whilst no-one can really say for sure if there is a god or not Anthony Flew is not really your best example here to show.
The poor man had had dementia for a while (he died in a nursing home suffering from it). He only converted in 2003/04 so it is probable he was suffering dementia already or at least the earliest signs of it.
There is plenty of evidence that abiogenesis could have happened of its own accord. Amino acids form naturally and they are the basis of all life really. The DNA system is only omnipresent because it works so well, it's a fantastic system. This is like the "the universe is too perfect to have come about by chance" argument. We only see the DNA system because we are in it. There may have been other 'attempts' at life which failed because they weren't as good as systems for propagation as DNA is. There is plenty of support for it coming around naturally and the head of the human genome project is just one man.
quote from wiki:
During a debate with the biologist Richard Dawkins, Collins stated that God is the explanation of those features of the universe that science finds difficult to explain (such as the values of certain physical constants favoring life), and that God himself does not need an explanation since he is beyond the universe. Dawkins called this "the mother and father of all cop-outs" and "an incredible evasion of the responsibility to explain", to which Collins responded "I do object to the assumption that anything that might be outside of nature is ruled out of the conversation.
I'm with Dawkins on this one, and it's one of my problems with Religion. As a scientist, I would love to know the answers to these questions and to just say that anything we don't know or find difficult to explain was done by God is ridiculous and seriously hampers scientific advancement.
C.S Lewis books are just theology for the layman if you don't mind me saying.pls point them out
CS Lewis immediately sprang to mind. lol.
Second, the Bible is NOT to simply be read as a literal story - one of the big stumbling blocks of many a skeptic.
Rather, it contains literal/historical sections (eg Chronicles, which I'm wading through right now, the gospels), poems /songs (Psalms), wisdom (Proverbs), stories (parables), sexual practice (Song of Songs), etc
One wouldn't treat a song by some pop musician as the same literary genre as a treatise on WWII, nor as something by Shakespeare, nor as Kama Sutra. So, don't treat the Bible as one genre either.
show me
We have no facts, evidence or whatever you want to call it that Jesus lived when they said he lived and did the things the New Testament said he did.
THe only early references to Jesus outside the Bible are from Josephus in the 2nd century and even those are inconclusive. The only thing we can know from what we have from Josephus is that a man called Jesus died crucified around 30 years A.C. There are no historical references to Jesus for 2 centuries (yes you read that right) after Jesus died and its only because Justin Martyr noticed that they were missing facts! In fact during the 1st century a branch of Christianity called Gnosticism completely rejected the idea of a historical jesus and was just a divine figure. It has also been suggested Jesus might have been a mythical figure although that view is largely ignored my mainstream scholarship, most of non-fundamentalistic new testament scholars have reached the conclusion that whilst Jesus was a historical figure, we know very little of him.
Before you feel the need to bring Paphias or the Testimonium Flavianum please know that neither of them are taken as serious historical evidence due to interpolations and various editing by Christian authors. Tacitus or Seutonius are no much better either.
Also, the Gospels were all written all well after the dead of Jesus and not by eyewitnesses of Jesus (at least 40 years after) and Paul didn't meet Jesus.
Some interesting websites that deal with the subject about the Historical Jesus and the New Testament:
http://earlychristianwritings.com/
http://vridar.wordpress.com/
http://www.patheos.com/community/exploringourmatrix/
http://tomverenna.wordpress.com/
Last edited by EzyRyder; 19-08-2011 at 02:03 PM.
format (19-08-2011)
what example? Go read what you wrote - there is no example, other than to mention the chiêm thành.
OK, how about this: I have lived in Chinese society. Part of that experience has been to visit temples of all sorts and discuss their beliefs with the officials of those temples. I have been been allowed to pray for those officials, i.e. I got on kinda well with them. No confrontation, no brow beating, no anger - unlike the very evident anger you have for all and sundry when it comes to God.
It's much simpler than that. God is a loving God, who doesn't want ANYONE to go to hell / be separate from Him. He is also just. So, how does your assertion work that He would send the ignorant to Hell? It doesn't.Yes, Yes I did. So your saying its someone who WANTS to go there, what about those who never heard the 'good word' do they want to? Or are they spared?
Your concept of God is too small, which is understandable - you don't know Him. Unlike the local justice system, where ignorance is no excuse before the law, God doesn't work that way. He judges people according to what they know. The bigger picture of this is that He presents Himself to everyone of His children, to rescue every single one from themselves, so where you are born, whichever culture you are born into, doesn't make it a problem. There is no lottery of birth.
So, tell me this: should God force everyone into Heaven / His presence / be with Him? You clearly don't want any part of Him (because you don't know Him, to be frank), so should He brainwash you into being a believer? I don't think so. If you reject Him, you will be in a place WITHOUT Him. And since He is the source of all goodness, you will be in a place without that. There is no middle, grey area, which is without God and also without the hopelessness and torment of NO God.Is it not, pathetic, vindictive and vengeful to put someone through eternal torture, you've not begun to address how its not. Espesually if your some supreme all powerful being.
No. The Bible is the holy Word of God. The Catholic church is not. Until you experience the Holy Spirit, this won't make sense.Ok, so Catholicisim is wrong, its falible, but yet the humans who wrote the bible aren't? Quite a gaping in consistancy there no?
Your examples don't hold water.You can't persecute someone because its a belief as a moral OK, society let them do it.
Are there buildings in the UK where I'm legally not allowed entry because I'm male? Yep.
Are there buildings in the UK where woman can't go? Yep.
Can someone be legally ejected from a building (eg a mosque) for wanting to enter and preach/teach contrary to the religion of that owners of that building? Yep.
What those Christians who own the B&B should have done is have a sign up outside that stipulated it was only for married couples. Lotta places like that. Simples.
Anyway, to be blunt, you're so full of rage against a God you don't believe in (which is pretty common, in my experience), there is no room in you to consider the truth held in the Bible - love your neighbour. Love yourself. Be generous, kind, compassionate, caring, truthful, disciplined, respectful etc. If a fraction of those rioters from last week subscribed to those principles, the country would be massively better place, and this is before even considering the existence of God Himself.
One can never stop saying Thank You
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote