Atheism

[AngryAnt]

I love loaded questions, I guess if I didn't I wouldn't be here .

A loaded question? Are the sites you present in support of your argument or not? If not, don't present them. If so, expect us to read and challenge.

I think that particular section of the article was poorly done and comes across as a rationalisation - so I actually agree with your point here.

Fair enough. The site is a superb example of fundamentalist Christian rationalisation, so I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

I think it is very hard to put ourselves in the shoes of an ancient people and very easy to be judgemental.

Especially if you are God.

This is why the invasion was justified in my Christian POV:
It was God's judgement. God hates sin and is uncompromising about that. Who are human beings to question God?
The sins of this people were horrific, and liable to quicky spread into the culture of the Israelites who were supposed to represent a Holy God (this actually happened if you read the rest of the OT).

According to those who wrote the OT. Oh hang on, they were the Israelites and their descendents weren't they? History is written by the victors.

It was kill or be killed for the Israelites. Their nationhood and very survival was on the line.

Exactly like any pro-war propaganda of today. Nothing has changed.

The actual people were not really all that bloodthirsty, and if it was meant to be a genocide, they botched the job completely.

That makes it all OK I guess.

God judged the Israelites during this time as well (read the story of Achan)
It is very rare in the Bible for God to wipe out a people like that in judgement using the nation of Israel - the only other example is the Amlekites. Generally the Pentateuch emplores the Israelites to treat 'the stranger in your midst' with respect and compassion.

Except when you want the stranger's land - then you get the go-ahead from God to wipe them out.

 

[Tiger74]

Who are human beings to question God?

I thought the whole point of free will was we were supposed to question and decide for ourselves. Free will means nothing if unquestioning obedience comes with it.

Thansk for the link before too.

 

[Djevv]

A loaded question? Are the sites you present in support of your argument or not? If not, don't present them. If so, expect us to read and challenge.

Fair enough. The site is a superb example of fundamentalist Christian rationalisation, so I thank you for bringing it to my attention.

To me it is trying to understand the nature of God. I'm always happy to discuss these things and try to give honest answers.

Especially if you are God.

Surely an omniscient God is qualified to be a fair judge. If He finds a nation of people who ritually torture-murder their own children for selfish reasons, should He stand back and do nothing?

According to those who wrote the OT. Oh hang on, they were the Israelites and their descendents weren't they? History is written by the victors.

Exactly like any pro-war propaganda of today. Nothing has changed.

That makes it all OK I guess.

Except when you want the stranger's land - then you get the go-ahead from God to wipe them out.

Honest history isn't part of the language of victors from this part of the world. Here's one from Mesha, king of Moab ca 850BC (from the Moabite stone which incidently fits in well with Biblical account . Apparently Mesha completely destroyed Israel!

I (am) Mesha, son of Chemosh-[...], king of Moab, the Dibonite—my father (had) reigned over Moab thirty years, and I reigned after my father,—(who) made this high place for Chemosh in Qarhoh [...] because he saved me from all the kings and caused me to triumph over all my adversaries. As for Omri, king of Israel, he humbled Moab many years (lit., days), for Chemosh was angry at his land. And his son followed him and he also said, “I will humble Moab.” In my time he spoke (thus), but I have triumphed over him and over his house, while Israel hath perished forever (Pritchard, 1958a, p. 209).

Anyway I think the humble language and catalogue of failures recorded in the Pentateuch is in marked contrast to the above inscription.

 

[evo]

Surely an omniscient God is qualified to be a fair judge. If He finds a nation of people who ritually torture-murder their own children for selfish reasons, should He stand back and do nothing?

Well he stood back for 100,000 - 200,000 years (the approx history of mankind) and did nothing;'watching' all manner of babarism and did absolutely nothing.

Why suddenly intervene in the middle east a few thousand ago? Seems rather callous to me for such an alleged loving God

 

[jayfox]

Do you realise that your atheistic presuppositions are driving the way you answer these questions?

Yes, oh yes. Man is that obvious. And the massive level of arrogance is amusing as well.

Great posting today Djevv. I reckon you've done really well in explaining everything you've been asked, and with biblical references to boot. In the end though, as much as they will say that they will, it appears that these guys are unlikely to concede a single point, even when it is well explained. You can't actually tell me that they disagree with practically every single part of the Bible that we have discussed? I mean, get real. Some people are negative for the sake of being negative, I reckon.

 

[Disco08]

When was the last time you conceded a point on evolution, or the faulty logic contained in The Bible (etc.) Jay? I ask because I think there's been quite a few points equally well explained on both sides.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Yes, oh yes. Man is that obvious. And the massive level of arrogance is amusing as well.

So what are these presuppositions that are so obvious?

I wouldn't mind you pointing out some examples of the massive levels of arrogance as well. You like to throw the accusations around without really supporting them.

Also your reference to negativity is amusing. What in the posting is negative? That they disagree with your view and ask for clarification on issues that appear to make no sense? There have been a few posters that have pointed out the breakdown in the 'sacrifice' logic when closely examined. None of their core issues have been addressed.

I guess the demand of logic and rigorous analysis is a little beyond the scope of the 'believer' posters. It would be nice to see you guys actually address the questions, instead of shifting the goal posts constantly. Having said that, I will say that Djevv actually gives it a go, his methodology is just flawed (something we have discussed before).

 

[tigertime2]

The Redemption of Johnny Cash

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekG9uCeTvC4&feature=related

 

[jayfox]

When the last time you conceded a single point on evolution, or the faulty logic contained in The Bible (etc.) Jay? I ask because I think there's been quite a few points equally well explained on both sides.

I admitted only a week or two ago that I believe in natural selection and had a small discussion with PTFC on that. I am also open to the fact that evolution may be real but I just don;t buy all of the arguments supporting it. Truth is, I don't 100% know how God created the Earth and if He used evolution in some way or not. In the end it is not essential to my beliefs anyway and therefore is not an area of expertise of mine. I absolutely struggle to believe that everything we have around us developed by luck or chance, even given the right conditions, and that still doesn't explain the initial origins required for life anyway. To me, God makes sense and the Biblical account of creation makes sense. If I am wrong about it and God used millions of years to create the Earth, then so be it. The first few days of creation were without a Sun, so there was no day and night, so perhaps it wasn't an exact 24 hours? I don't 100% know and as I said it makes no difference to me. But to believe the story of evolution, I would need to see far more real evidence, including way, way more transitional fossils, and I think that that is fair enough. Until then I will be skeptical.

You may say that I should apply the same rationale to my faith in God but I have a personal relationship with God where I feel His presence every day and that is hard to describe to a non-believer but I can assure you that it is real. Also, I have no reason to disbelieve the accounts told in the Bible as I believe them to be historically and archaeologically accurate. There have been accounts in the Bible that were considered fable until archaeological findings proved them to be accurate at a later date, i.e. The Hitites. I believe that anything that we do not have evidence for at this stage could possibly be uncovered at a later date. Also many of the events of the Bible required supernatural involvement, e.g. Noah's Ark, Jonah, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego etc. and when you believe in a supernatural God it is no stretch to believe that He can create supernatural events and wonders.

 

[jayfox]

So what are these presuppositions that are so obvious?

I wouldn't mind you pointing out some examples of the massive levels of arrogance as well. You like to throw the accusations around without really supporting them.

Also your reference to negativity is amusing. What in the posting is negative? That they disagree with your view and ask for clarification on issues that appear to make no sense? There have been a few posters that have pointed out the breakdown in the 'sacrifice' logic when closely examined. None of their core issues have been addressed.

I guess the demand of logic and rigorous analysis is a little beyond the scope of the 'believer' posters. It would be nice to see you guys actually address the questions, instead of shifting the goal posts constantly. Having said that, I will say that Djevv actually gives it a go, his methodology is just flawed (something we have discussed before).

Djevv explains things in a way that I find extremely easy to understand and I'm not sure why you struggle with them so much. If you aren't getting the answers that you are looking for then maybe you have a predisposed idea of what the answer should be and if it doesn't fit your mould then you are unhappy? Alternatively, you could try asking your questions in a different manner and you way get a clearer answer.

As for the negativity, if you can't see that you guys are overtly negative to the accounts held in the Bible and our explanations of them then you are kidding yourself. Any reasonable person would at least every now and again say "Yeah, I guess that that could have happened" but you guys just never seem to be able to, regardless of how well the point is explained. I call that overt negativity towards a point of view, opinion or subject.

As for the "massive levels of arrogance" I was actually talking about Antman's posts and I stand by that. You call it assertive posting, I call it an aggressive, arrogant approach. I believe that Djevv and TT2 feel the same way and I had one of your own non-believers PM me this week (and another also previously) saying that they don't like all the arrogance on this thread so it is not just us that see it. It's amazing how some people refuse to believe despite the evidence available isn't it? ;D

 

[Disco08]

If you take Genesis literally then evolution absolutely conflicts with your beliefs. God created the animals on the 5th and 6th days. Don't you think The Bible would say that God created simple, single cell organisms on the 5th and 6th days that would one day, billions of years later evolve into a multitude of life if that was in fact what He did? In fact, The Bible says that God created fish and birds that immediately inhabited the ocean and the air - evolution obviously refutes this account.

Also, isn't it genealogy that's used to interpret a literal age of the earth from The Bible? So if the earth really is roughly 4.5 billion years old and mankind's time on earth is really around 200000 years, wouldn't that again conflict with your belief in The Bible as the inspired truth?

You may say that I should apply the same rationale to my faith in God but I have a personal relationship with God where I feel His presence every day and that is hard to describe to a non-believer but I can assure you that it is real.

I worked with a Burmese Buddhist not long ago that assured me that he has personal experience of reincarnation and recollection of his previous lives.

I admitted only a week or two ago that I believe in natural selection and had a small discussion with PTFC on that.

So, in light of a mountain of modern evidence, you admit natural selection occurs. This is probably the only point I can think of that you have conceded on either of these threads. You still hold to the 'lack of transitional fossils' argument despite that being thoroughly explained a number of times. Now, while I don't blame you for that because your conviction is obviously very strong, I think it's a little rich chastising others for holding just as firmly to their opinions.

As for the negativity, if you can't see that you guys are overtly negative to the accounts held in the Bible and our explanations of them then you are kidding yourself. Any reasonable person would at least every now and again say "Yeah, I guess that that could have happened" but you guys just never seem to be able to, regardless of how well the point is explained. I call that overt negativity towards a point of view, opinion or subject.

How is this any different to the fact that you have never once agreed that any of the reasoning we present could actually prove that some Biblical accounts could be false?

I think most of us have readily admitted that Jesus' moral teachings were great and generally that Christianity is responsible for many good things in today's society which would mean we've given easily as much as you guys have during this saga.

Also, I notice you're not calling tigertime out for his arrogant posting.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Djevv explains things in a way that I find extremely easy to understand and I'm not sure why you struggle with them so much. If you aren't getting the answers that you are looking for then maybe you have a predisposed idea of what the answer should be and if it doesn't fit your mould then you are unhappy? Alternatively, you could try asking your questions in a different manner and you way get a clearer answer.

Trust me, I understand what Djevv is posting. My point was that his logic and/or reasoning is flawed. I am not looking for any answer, just pointing out the flaws in your (and others) arguments. If you can't see where the reasoning is illogical then so be it.

As for the negativity, if you can't see that you guys are overtly negative to the accounts held in the Bible and our explanations of them then you are kidding yourself. Any reasonable person would at least every now and again say "Yeah, I guess that that could have happened" but you guys just never seem to be able to, regardless of how well the point is explained. I call that overt negativity towards a point of view, opinion or subject.

I don't think you quite understand what you are describing as 'negative'. The believers on this thread claim 100% certainty on issues that it is impossible to have any level of certaintly on. When this is pointed out it is termed 'negative' or 'arrogant'. I could say that some of the things in the Bible could have happened. I could also say that certain events in the Bible did happen as they have solid corroborating historical evidence. I can also say that certain things in the Bible did not happen and are clearly parable or allegory as there is contradictory evidence against them. None of this is 'negative', nor 'arrogant'....it is just the way it is.

As for the "massive levels of arrogance" I was actually talking about Antman's posts and I stand by that. You call it assertive posting, I call it an aggressive, arrogant approach. I believe that Djevv and TT2 feel the same way and I had one of your own non-believers PM me this week (and another also previously) saying that they don't like all the arrogance on this thread so it is not just us that see it. It's amazing how some people refuse to believe despite the evidence available isn't it? ;D

I personally think you might find Antman's posts 'massively arrogant' because he is almost always to the point and logically sound. I would respect your opinion on this matter if you dealt with the points he makes, rather than playing the man. You have accused me of a similar manner in the past and I never saw any evidence of this, despite repeated requests to do so.

As for your PMs, they are your business. If these posters really felt that, I would be interested to see what they consider arrogant clearly pointed out in the open thread.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

I admitted only a week or two ago that I believe in natural selection and had a small discussion with PTFC on that. I am also open to the fact that evolution may be real but I just don;t buy all of the arguments supporting it. Truth is, I don't 100% know how God created the Earth and if He used evolution in some way or not. In the end it is not essential to my beliefs anyway and therefore is not an area of expertise of mine. I absolutely struggle to believe that everything we have around us developed by luck or chance, even given the right conditions, and that still doesn't explain the initial origins required for life anyway. To me, God makes sense and the Biblical account of creation makes sense. If I am wrong about it and God used millions of years to create the Earth, then so be it. The first few days of creation were without a Sun, so there was no day and night, so perhaps it wasn't an exact 24 hours? I don't 100% know and as I said it makes no difference to me. But to believe the story of evolution, I would need to see far more real evidence, including way, way more transitional fossils, and I think that that is fair enough. Until then I will be skeptical.

You may say that I should apply the same rationale to my faith in God but I have a personal relationship with God where I feel His presence every day and that is hard to describe to a non-believer but I can assure you that it is real. Also, I have no reason to disbelieve the accounts told in the Bible as I believe them to be historically and archaeologically accurate. There have been accounts in the Bible that were considered fable until archaeological findings proved them to be accurate at a later date, i.e. The Hitites. I believe that anything that we do not have evidence for at this stage could possibly be uncovered at a later date. Also many of the events of the Bible required supernatural involvement, e.g. Noah's Ark, Jonah, Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego etc. and when you believe in a supernatural God it is no stretch to believe that He can create supernatural events and wonders.

I know I shouldn't bite, because as Disco points out it has been discussed before. However, I am interested in your view on transitional fossils. What exactly are you looking for here?

As for your continued assertions as to the strength of your convictions and the absolute knowledge of certainty, I am still waiting to hear how you prevent self delusion. All humans have flawed perception and are prone to 'wish thinking'. The believers often post that they would rather have their beliefs than the 'meaningless' atheist position. This does not support the truth of their position, on the contrary it is an overt expression of 'wish thinking'....."It gives me a good feeling, thus it must be true".

 

[tigertime2]

I know I shouldn't bite, because as Disco points out it has been discussed before. However, I am interested in your view on transitional fossils. What exactly are you looking for here?

As for your continued assertions as to the strength of your convictions and the absolute knowledge of certainty, I am still waiting to hear how you prevent self delusion. All humans have flawed perception and are prone to 'wish thinking'. The believers often post that they would rather have their beliefs than the 'meaningless' atheist position. This does not support the truth of their position, on the contrary it is an overt expression of 'wish thinking'....."It gives me a good feeling, thus it must be true".

No it is more than wishful thinking it is right! Let's see now we should question what we belive in the bible because scientists have a some theories on evolution, really? Well this book that I believe is the insipred word of God sits in every Courthouse in the land and even our constitution has the words "Humbling relying on the blessings of Almighty God" written into the preamble. But the Athiests have been working hard to have these things changed. I suppose if you guys had your way the Richmond Chaplain would be removed as well? The army could dispense with Chaplains as well as the athiest has no need of these things. The Athiest says man is just an animal, so it is the survival of the fitest - dog eat dog world. Any thinking person knows there is more to life than flesh and blood. Jesus said "Man shall not live by bread alone, but evry word that proceedsfrom the mouth of the Lord" If you wat to check out the verse go to your local CourtHouse or see the Richmond Chaplain. God Bless you all.

 

[tigertime2]

A.S.A. Smith ex athiest read his story with an open mind - very interesting website

http://www.ex-atheist.com/from-skepticism-to-worship.html

 

[Tiger74]

No it is more than wishful thinking it is right! Let's see now we should question what we belive in the bible because scientists have a some theories on evolution, really? Well this book that I believe is the insipred word of God sits in every Courthouse in the land and even our constitution has the words "Humbling relying on the blessings of Almighty God" written into the preamble. But the Athiests have been working hard to have these things changed. I suppose if you guys had your way the Richmond Chaplain would be removed as well? The army could dispense with Chaplains as well as the athiest has no need of these things. The Athiest says man is just an animal, so it is the survival of the fitest - dog eat dog world. Any thinking person knows there is more to life than flesh and blood. Jesus said "Man shall not live by bread alone, but evry word that proceedsfrom the mouth of the Lord" If you wat to check out the verse go to your local CourtHouse or see the Richmond Chaplain. God Bless you all.

I'm pretty sure if you go into a Malay court, that will be a Quoran in their courthouse, so unless you are saying one culture is better than the other, what the heck is your point?

 

[Disco08]

I haven't seen this type of ranting and raving since dmx.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

No it is more than wishful thinking it is right! Let's see now we should question what we belive in the bible because scientists have a some theories on evolution, really? Well this book that I believe is the insipred word of God sits in every Courthouse in the land and even our constitution has the words "Humbling relying on the blessings of Almighty God" written into the preamble. But the Athiests have been working hard to have these things changed. I suppose if you guys had your way the Richmond Chaplain would be removed as well? The army could dispense with Chaplains as well as the athiest has no need of these things. The Athiest says man is just an animal, so it is the survival of the fitest - dog eat dog world. Any thinking person knows there is more to life than flesh and blood. Jesus said "Man shall not live by bread alone, but evry word that proceedsfrom the mouth of the Lord" If you wat to check out the verse go to your local CourtHouse or see the Richmond Chaplain. God Bless you all.

You are going to have to try harder than that.

Your raving assertions, appeals to tradition and misrepresentation (misunderstanding?) of evolutionary theory (dog eat dog?) lend no support to your argument.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Any thinking person knows there is more to life than flesh and blood.

Yes, humans have the capacity for what is commonly called 'spirituality' or 'transcendent experiences'. Does this mean that a higher being exists? No. Is it an interesting phenomenon? Yes, and may at least partially explain the ubiquity of religion amongst human cultures.

We see meaning in the mundane. We are superstitious by nature.

So I agree with your statement that there is more to life than flesh and blood, due to our ability to enjoy our own subjective experiences. However, this is no evidence of some almighty creator.

 

[Six Pack]

I haven't seen this type of ranting and raving since dmx.

he was widely misunderstood. he wasnt the messiah, he was just a naughty boy!