Rook, I don't know if you will answer this but

Pathofreason
Superfan
Pathofreason's picture
Posts: 320
Joined: 2006-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Rook, I don't know if you will answer this but

How can we be certain of contradictions? I mean I was dicussing one you covered in your show about who came to the tomb first, Remember Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, John 20:1 and Matthew 28:1, and they claimed that it wasn't a contradiction just different versions of the same story but they still claimed that there was harmony in the story. Just because they left people out. Now my other question is, where can I learn as much as you know, And what are some of the best ways to use contradictions and debate theists? because I am great with evolution but I don't know the bible quite as well as you do. I have read it numerous times but it doesn't stick as well as science does so I can't refer to it as easy.

Co-Founder of the Atheist/Freethought website Pathofreason.com

www.pathofreason.com

Check it out


kellym78
atheistRational VIP!
kellym78's picture
Posts: 602
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Well, I'm not Rook, but

Well, I'm not Rook, but anyway...

I really think that the best way to learn the Bible and these types of issues within is to read something from their team. With any reasonable amount of logic, you can not only debunk their arguments while you read, but you can also learn what type of canned responses to expect when arguing with them. If you're looking for something exhaustive, go with Josh McDowell's 900 page textbook of apologetics, The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. After that, pick up The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty and/or The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man by Robert Price. Then you're armed on both sides. :-D 


Pathofreason
Superfan
Pathofreason's picture
Posts: 320
Joined: 2006-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Thank you!

I actually have The Evidence that demands a verdict, but It makes me kinda sick to read it. I am taking it page by page refuting things as I go along. It's just hard to know what is accurate and what isn't anymore.  Thank you so much for responding to me! I used to be your typical run of the mill Christian , I spent 19 years going to church before I realized how insane and violent the old testament was.(amongst other things) Your site is a wonderful education tool!  Now I do what ever I can to learn as much as I can. But thank you so much for the recomendations! You guys are wonderful. I love the Ray Comfort debate. If you ever need anything let me know. I run the website www.pathofreason.com and I will help you guys in any ways I can.

Co-Founder of the Atheist/Freethought website Pathofreason.com

www.pathofreason.com

Check it out


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
Pathofreason wrote: I

Pathofreason wrote:
I actually have The Evidence that demands a verdict, but It makes me kinda sick to read it. I am taking it page by page refuting things as I go along. It's just hard to know what is accurate and what isn't anymore.

That's the problem with apologetics. They never give an acceptable method of distinguishing bad arguments from the good ones. (And even if they're bad, some still use them.)


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Pathofreason wrote: How can

Pathofreason wrote:
How can we be certain of contradictions? I mean I was dicussing one you covered in your show about who came to the tomb first, Remember Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, John 20:1 and Matthew 28:1, and they claimed that it wasn't a contradiction just different versions of the same story but they still claimed that there was harmony in the story. Just because they left people out. Now my other question is, where can I learn as much as you know, And what are some of the best ways to use contradictions and debate theists? because I am great with evolution but I don't know the bible quite as well as you do. I have read it numerous times but it doesn't stick as well as science does so I can't refer to it as easy.

 

I haven't been on the site for a long time because life has been so fast paced, but your question certainly intrigued me.  I guess what is interesting is that you really believe that Rook knows the Bible.  I have debated with Rook on his writings and I will be the first to say that I no longer waste my time, because even when Rook is proved to be wrong (and he admitted it) he does not correct errors on his website.  That fact says a lot about his desire for truth.

I would like to address the "contradiction" that Rook and others believe they have found in the Gospels concerning the visitors to the tomb.  I simply want to give you something to think about.  I am not making up this story and I think it will simply show you that if one wants and strongly desires to find error - they will simply over look what is right in front of them.

 I saw where you spent 19 years in a church.  Clearly by my login, you can see that I am a minister.  I did not, even from the beginning, attempt to hide where I stand.  I am neither angered by this site nor am I suprised.  What happens on RRS is simply another proof that scripture is true.

As a youth minister, I spoke to 200 kids a week concerning the Bible and how it should apply to their life.  I have written this before, but I happened to find it so I will paste it here for you.

It was not too long ago, as a youth minister, we had a worship service on Wednesday night.  I put one student on one side of the auditorium and had him write down everything that he saw as important that happened during the worship time.  I had another student do the same thing from the other side of the auditorium.  I did not tell them about one another and I did not tell the other students what they were doing.  At the end of the worship, I compared their notes.  There was very little that they had in common.  They saw things from different perspectives and they had two different personalities.  My question to you is - Which one of them was false?  Which one of them was incorrect in what they saw?  I can't remember everything they wrote, but one of them listed all the band members on the platform and the other did not even name one of them.  One of them wrote about the bright lights (looking at the stage) - while the other one talked about the dimly lit room (The lights were out in the congregation space and it was night so no lights through the windows).

Let me conclude with this.  If the gospels were the same (word for word) in describing events - The claim would be conspiracy theory.  The example used above is a very poor example of a "contradiction" in scripture.  I will also say that I would not, even if challenged, deal with every one of Rook's views concerning scripture, because to even list the above as a contradiction is a clear indicator of Rook's depth of thought AND even if I debunked them - he still would not change his website. 

The only way you will understand scripture is you have to know the one who wrote it.  You have to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.  Man, on his on, has no access to the things of God.

I hope this helps.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
   REVLyle, how do you

   REVLyle, how do you deal with the Gnostic texts and eastern ideas ? Geeez , could I actually end up in Hell for eternity ? 

 you write , "Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior"

Sounds like idol worship,  My Jesus would not approve of that quote. Should read  "Jesus Christs' MESSAGE as we are ONE with Lord and that is Saving"    

Jesus would be mad at you lost friend. BTW, Jesus was an Atheist, and so is      

G O D , no god before ME ! WE ARE ONE ......


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: I haven't

REVLyle wrote:

I haven't been on the site for a long time because life has been so fast paced, but your question certainly intrigued me. I guess what is interesting is that you really believe that Rook knows the Bible. I have debated with Rook on his writings and I will be the first to say that I no longer waste my time, because even when Rook is proved to be wrong (and he admitted it) he does not correct errors on his website. That fact says a lot about his desire for truth.

[sarcasm] Uhhh. Yeah. He just reads all of those books looking for spelling errors. Not looking for the truth at all.[/sarcasm]

Why does it sound like 'looking for the truth' according to you means believing in something before looking for verification of it?

 

Quote:
I would like to address the "contradiction" that Rook and others believe they have found in the Gospels concerning the visitors to the tomb. I simply want to give you something to think about. I am not making up this story and I think it will simply show you that if one wants and strongly desires to find error - they will simply over look what is right in front of them.

'strongly desires to find error' WTF?

Does this not contradict your accusation concerning the 'desire for truth'????

Make up your mind. When someone looks for the truth, is it not a good idea to try to find errors? We call that 'critical analysis' something sorely overlooked in your youth ministering I'm sure.

Quote:
I saw where you spent 19 years in a church. Clearly by my login, you can see that I am a minister. I did not, even from the beginning, attempt to hide where I stand. I am neither angered by this site nor am I suprised. What happens on RRS is simply another proof that scripture is true.

Or self-fulfilling. Like starting out a fake story with "Some people won't believe this, but..."

One wonders Why you became a minister instead of something more useful except for the fact that most jobs require interaction rather than preaching.

Quote:
As a youth minister, I spoke to 200 kids a week concerning the Bible and how it should apply to their life.

Personally, I wouldn't mind attending your trial for human rights atrocities concerning the mistreatment of children in this manner.

Quote:
I have written this before, but I happened to find it so I will paste it here for you.

It was not too long ago, as a youth minister, we had a worship service on Wednesday night. I put one student on one side of the auditorium and had him write down everything that he saw as important that happened during the worship time. I had another student do the same thing from the other side of the auditorium. I did not tell them about one another and I did not tell the other students what they were doing. At the end of the worship, I compared their notes. There was very little that they had in common. They saw things from different perspectives and they had two different personalities. My question to you is - Which one of them was false? Which one of them was incorrect in what they saw? I can't remember everything they wrote, but one of them listed all the band members on the platform and the other did not even name one of them. One of them wrote about the bright lights (looking at the stage) - while the other one talked about the dimly lit room (The lights were out in the congregation space and it was night so no lights through the windows).

Yet no one is demanding that anything else written by those two students must be considered 'gospel truth'.

[ad hom]One book could say "Rape sheep!" and another could say "Love sheep." and you people would still say that they are the same thing. [/ad hom]

Quote:
Let me conclude with this. If the gospels were the same (word for word) in describing events - The claim would be conspiracy theory. The example used above is a very poor example of a "contradiction" in scripture. I will also say that I would not, even if challenged, deal with every one of Rook's views concerning scripture, because to even list the above as a contradiction is a clear indicator of Rook's depth of thought AND even if I debunked them - he still would not change his website.

Even though your assertions concerning Rook's thinking have been debunked, you haven't changed. Tu quoque answer for the ad hom.

Quote:
The only way you will understand scripture is you have to know the one who wrote it. You have to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Man, on his on, has no access to the things of God.

Bull-fucking-shit! I shouldn't HAVE TO 'BELIEVE' in ANYTHING for it to be true.

If you want me to 'know the one who wrote it' then I'm going to need a time machine or an ancient text expert. Oh wait. Don't I already know someone who studies ancient texts?

Quote:
I hope this helps.

What helps? Being preached at again after already enduring it for 19 years?????

Whatever.

There are literally hundreds of other contradictions that go unanswered/ignored that are subjected to this same discourse. The idea that you offer something new and Rook does not is completely backwards.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


WhiteManRunning
WhiteManRunning's picture
Posts: 32
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle, ill give you

REVLyle, ill give you credit, that is a good way to explain a lot of contradictions in the bible. However, thats only one minor problem that the bible has. It still has murders, torture, support of slavery, etc... Not to mention the fact that the entire religion is based around fear.

Really, if you want the best way to debate the bible with a theist, just use history. The bible has mislead MANY people in the past, and continues to do so today. That fact alone should cause people to at least admit that the moral code of the bible might be a bit skewed. They might respond by saying " but that is caused by evil people twisting the words of the bible into something sinister." Maybe, but probably not. I know a few christians who would consider themselves to be good people, but who also have some very skewed ideas, simply because the bible tells them to think that way.

Most christians out there already ignore half the bible anyway. They cherry pick their way through it and only listen to the parts that fit with their moral code. Thats something I have never understood, how someone chooses which parts of the bible to follow and which parts to ignore, and then say they get their morals from the bible. Fundamentalists are the only people that can truly say they get their morals from the bible, and those people scare me.

"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
darth-josh, I have studied

darth-josh,

I have studied and I have read and the more I do - the more I know that the Bible is true.  Faith in God is not blind faith.  I have researched what Rook and other like yourself have stated and I simply find more evidence for the truth of God's word.  I have no problem with anyone asking questions concerning God's word, but there is a difference between searching for truth and assuming error hoping to validate it.  When my child tells me a story, I will question him to make sure that what he says is true.  I will certainly investigate.  With that being said, I do not assume he is telling a lie and then attempt to validate my assumption.  That is exactly what many do concerning the Bible. 

 My story is not fake.  I did not go to an apologetics book to figure out how to "argue" as kelly advised.  I simply took a real world situation and demonstrated that this "contradiction" does not exist.  I see all over this website "Give me proof.  Give me proof."  Even if you hate what I stand for (and obviously you do) you simply cannot argue with the fact that what I did PROVES that eyewitnesses simply CAN all be accurate in what they write and yet be different in their writings.  What the students wrote was truth.  

It is almost laughable that you think being a minister does not require interaction.  I spend time with families during their most joyous occasions and during their most troubling ones.  I give of myself to others constantly.  I wonder, when was the last time you found yourself in the poorest of third world countries helping children who barely have enough to eat?  When was the last time you gave of your money to help people with clothes and shelter?  Maybe that does describe your life.  I certainly do not believe charity only belongs to Christians, but you do not even know me.  I did not describe myself as a preacher - you did.  I am a minister and I live my life as such.  I do preach, but that is a fraction of what I do in my life. 

Human rights atrocities?  Let me see:

1.  I told them to love God

2.  I told them to reflect that love by acting in a righteous way

I know you do not believe that there is a God, but again - You cannot prove there is not a God anymore than I can prove there is one. (I know, Y'all think the burden of proof is on me - I have heard all of Sapient's junk).  So since you are going on belief just as much as I am - should you also be on trial?  Are you passing your beliefs on to others without being to PROVE that you are right?

You really think that Rook offers something new????  WOW.  Now THAT is incredible.  Like I said before, everything that is being done at the RRS site has already been talked about in scripture.  I have no problem quoting you verses, but I am sure you would just be angrier.  Calm down.  It is not good for you.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
WhiteManRunning

WhiteManRunning wrote:

REVLyle, ill give you credit, that is a good way to explain a lot of contradictions in the bible. However, thats only one minor problem that the bible has. It still has murders, torture, support of slavery, etc... Not to mention the fact that the entire religion is based around fear.

Really, if you want the best way to debate the bible with a theist, just use history. The bible has mislead MANY people in the past, and continues to do so today. That fact alone should cause people to at least admit that the moral code of the bible might be a bit skewed. They might respond by saying " but that is caused by evil people twisting the words of the bible into something sinister." Maybe, but probably not. I know a few christians who would consider themselves to be good people, but who also have some very skewed ideas, simply because the bible tells them to think that way.

Most christians out there already ignore half the bible anyway. They cherry pick their way through it and only listen to the parts that fit with their moral code. Thats something I have never understood, how someone chooses which parts of the bible to follow and which parts to ignore, and then say they get their morals from the bible. Fundamentalists are the only people that can truly say they get their morals from the bible, and those people scare me.

Thanks for at least stating your position without attacking me.  My story happened because I was curious.  I had heard this argument (the stories did not jive) many times and I simply wanted to see what would happen.  I would love for you to simply expound on some of what you are talking about.  I do not want to go from issue to issue in the Bible.  I am not afraid of that, but if you would not mind, tell me more about what you are saying concerning the cherry picking and the skewed ideas of the "Christians that are good people."  I know of many "Christians" that have some skewed ideas as well.  I simply believe many of them are Biblically illiterate.  Some are simply immature in their faith.  Some simply believe what a televangelist said at one time (Don't get me started on that issue).  I certainly do not believe I have all the answers, but I will say that over many years of reading and study I have grown in my faith in God's word.  Some of that growth has come from people questioning my faith and in turn I have questioned.  It has made me research and know why I believe what I believe. 

Thanks.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
   Faith ? poor lost

   Faith ? poor lost souls, Say as Jesus did, I AM the Nitty Gritty SHIT, as you !  Laughing 

, be careful , you might get hurt .... Cry


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
and then another Prophet

and then another Prophet was murdered .... WE are one with the Walrus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqOKvonLrH8


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
I know this is probably

I know this is probably information you all ready know, but only 2 of the gospels are "eye witness" accounts. Matthew and Mark are supposed to be eye witness account, while Luke and John are based on information that was supposed to have been based on an unknown authors. Perhaps someone can tell me if I am right so far?

Contradictions in the bible are irrelevent in my opinion. I know there have to be some sriously legitimate ones, after all man wrote, edited and voted the damn thing into existance. I agree with Darth that the autrocities in the bible keep me from believing. All most everything it says yends to point to the fact it was not anything other than uninspired. I was a christian for a very tiny part of my 39 years here and I just didn't have the faith it required I guess to want to believe every little thing that it says. For instance, adam and eve and the fall of mankind sounds too allegorical to me to believe. I mean come on, it sounds like ancient man trying to understand the world around them more than literal history. If you can question whether or not this is literal, how can lowly man know what is literal and what isn't other than faith.

REVLyle's experiment is interesting, but hardly conclusive. You can do the same thing with the game telephone and find out that when someone says something and passes it to someone else by word of mouth by time it gets back to you the story has changed dramatically. Since we don't have the original texts, it is impossible to tell what they would even say. "Misquoting Jesus: Who changed the bible and why" is a great book that is highly referenced and goes into some of this arguement.

I am not into bashing others' beliefs, but I feel quite open to question them and I don't mind others telling me if my beliefs are wrong, but I would rather go to hell based on my opinions of bible god than spend an eternity in bliss while the majority of mankind suffers because some mythological beings decided to eat some fruit.

 

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Ask my christian minister

Ask my christian minister neighbor how much charity I do since he can't even be bothered to make sure his 'latch-key' children have a warm place to stay until he can leave the church to come home when they forget their key. The older of the two children is 11.

Ask the christian chick that I gave $40 to pay the locksmith to open her car to get her keys so she could make it to church choir practice on time yesterday.

Ask the christian family around the corner whose kids helped theirs with Science because they've never heard of geology.

Ask the 20 or so people over the past few years that I have helped what I told them to do as repayment of my good deed. "Don't thank god that I came along. Thank me by paying it forward and feel good for doing it because I do now."

Why did I do those things? It wasn't any jesus sitting on my shoulder. I did those things and many others to feel good for doing them. Perhaps if your fellow ideologues could take care of themselves a little better then I would get the chance to help 3rd world countries. As it stands now, I feel like I'm in one now because the people I interact with have just as many problems in their environments.

Don't ever cry 'christian charity' as a reason to believe to me. I've done more for christians than I have ever had to do for atheists. And all without the help of your deity or your happy little book of hypocrisy.

You missed some of my response to you. 'critical analysis' and 'self-fulfilling'

Your scripture is right because it stated the obvious result of its own application. Clever little verses saying that 'in the end you'll be persecuted for your beliefs' could be said in ANY religion and applied at any time.

Quote:
I know you do not believe that there is a God, but again - You cannot prove there is not a God anymore than I can prove there is one. (I know, Y'all think the burden of proof is on me - I have heard all of Sapient's junk). So since you are going on belief just as much as I am - should you also be on trial? Are you passing your beliefs on to others without being to PROVE that you are right?

I can prove that I lack a belief in god and I can tell you why. Duh. What's your reason for Why you DO believe? 'Faith?' 'The bible says so?'

No I am NOT going on as much belief as you are. I'm not the one trying to reconcile a centuries-old book with modern civilization by crying 'No fair!' when allegedly eye-witness HEARSAY is shown to contradict itself.

I never said that your story about the kids was fake. I would like to ask you next time to take it the next step and have those kids' friends 30-40 years from now go back and write their account of the concert/show. Then it would be a comparative analogy with as much credence as the bible's stories.

One wonders if those recounts would suddenly have the guitar player burst into flames in them.

Quote:
You really think that Rook offers something new???? WOW. Now THAT is incredible. Like I said before, everything that is being done at the RRS site has already been talked about in scripture. I have no problem quoting you verses, but I am sure you would just be angrier. Calm down. It is not good for you.

[sarcasm] I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you had a special chapter in the bible that stated that a young man in the 21st century would prove that your messiah might never have existed based upon an analysis of jewish hellenism. [/sarcasm]

No, I wouldn't get angrier. Let's go. I have several bibles. Which 'version' do you like?

Too many atheists throughout history have 'calmed down' and let your religion wreak havoc on humanity. I will NOT 'calm down'. I will NOT be quiet when my fellow ideologues treat your religion with wanton permissiveness and negligent tolerance.

And I will most certainly match you ad hom for ad hom while discussing the flaws in your scripture.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
   Yeah Cali_Athiest2, I

   Yeah Cali_Athiest2, I try also too understand, because I care, I don't much ask why, I just do.

Trust your common sense, it's all we got. If it ain't all ours then we are slaves to something. Fuck that !

Bashing religion is indignation, because love cares, LOVE is LOUD, and unrelenting.

Get it on, get more pissed off .... look around .... think of your grand kids kids.

Why care? , I don't know , I just DO ! Smile

 


WhiteManRunning
WhiteManRunning's picture
Posts: 32
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
To REVLyle: Ill give you a

To REVLyle:

Ill give you a good example of a large group of christians that had a fairly skewed view. I'm currently a college student, and on this particular weekend my parents decided to come up to where I live and visit. This was before I told them I was atheist, so we ended up going to a local church, with some friends of my parents, on sunday. The preacher decided that the subject of the day was going to be the "under god" statement in the pledge. He spend the majority of the sermon explaining that the people who wanted to remove the "under god" line from the pledge were the enemies of christianity, unpatriotic, and seeking to undermine their kids moral values. He then went on to say that it was a christians duty to stop these atheists from getting away with this.

Now, when I read the line "seperation of church and state", its fairly black and white. There's a seperation of church and state, end of argument. So this seems like a very skewed way to look at this situation. And it pissed me off. It took all of my self-control to not stand up and start yelling at this guy in the middle of church. But in the bible it says that atheists are evil, and therefore any attempt to remove religion from anything is evil.

These were normal people. Not fundamentalists, not extremists, just your average everyday person living in north texas. My parents were also nodding along with this guy. This may not be a "You eat babies?" kind of moral situation, but it is a good example of a large group of normal people that have a skewed view caused by religion.

And just to make sure I have all the bases covered, there are also the people that hate homosexuals because the bible says so, people that believe abortion is wrong ONLY because of the bible, people who think dungeons and dragons and harry potter is evil(I've only met one, but that was an entertaining experience.), etc...

 

Examples for people cherry picking are fairly easy to find. Just consider the passages about stoning children, burning witches, and tell me how many modern day christians follow those parts. Personally I dont have any problem with people cherry picking, I just dont understand it.

"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker


DeathMunkyGod
atheist
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-09-15
User is offlineOffline
I never saw the point in

I never saw the point in arguing biblical contradictions, esspecially when they can just assert the fact that different accounts from different perspectives will not perfectly agree.  I know of no one who has yet been able to demonstrate that this is not the case for the bible and so I don't use the fact that the biblical accounts contradict each other in an argument.  Everytime I do it never gets me anywhere.  However the reason why the bible fails to convince me has nothing at all to do with biblical contradictions.  Actually it has almost entirely to do with the fact that the bible asserts faith as its primary justification and the fact that it is filled with informal logical fallacies.  I have had many christians point many of them to me, I should start documenting them, but so far I've seen, and this is not a complete list, but I have seen:

Appeal to force

Appeal to consequences

Argumentum ad Hominem

Poisoning the Well

False Dichotomy

False Analogy

And those were just the few that I could think of off the top of my head.  And these are contained within the bible itself, not how christians argue to justify the bible.  I would be interested to see someone go through the bible book by book, chapter by chapter and verse by verse and record all of the fallacies contained within.

It basically comes down to this, though, any system of belief that has to rely on faith as its foundational justification has a serious problem.  Because it would be logical to conclude that any belief with no basis in reality would naturally have to require one to accept it on faith.  No one yet has been able to tell me one belief that cannot be justified by faith alone.  This is because faith is just a choice to trust the accuracy of a given assertion, it is no informational filter at all.  There is absolutely no way for faith alone to filter out true information from false information.  Which is why any belief that relies on faith as foundational has a serious problem.  Then there is the fact that any book promoting a belief system with no basis in reality would naturally need to rely on logical fallacies to be convincing.  It would not be able to rely on factual arguments because the belief has no factual basis.  So, while the fact that christianity in the bible commits both of these egregious errors is not necessarily proof that christianity is false, it is a reason why christianity and the bible fails to convince any rational person.


kmisho
kmisho's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2006-08-18
User is offlineOffline
It was interesting to hear

It was interesting to hear from an actual minister. The actual contents of what he said only stengthens my doubt.

The only thing he said that was a partially good point was the catch-22 that too much agreement looks like prefabrication and too little agreement looks like just plain wrongness. There is some truth to this in how people actually act.

I agree that arguing specifics of the bible are pointless in the end. The real problems with christianity doom it long before we ever get to the text. For instance:

The following applies to all holy-book-based religions: If the contents of the Bible were so all-fired important, why would God trust them to book-form, so inherently fraught with problems? The mere existence of the bible implies to me that god is quite apathetic about whether people buy into it or not.

All messianic religions have the following problem: the very existence of god obviates the need for a messiah since everything god wants done can be done without resort to a messiah. The existence of a messiah, then, implies that god is either incompetent or inefficient. If we require that god by his very nature be capable of supreme competence and efficiency, the existence of a messiah tells us that god is not god.

The knife in the heart of Christianity is that Jesus did not die for our sins, since he did not die, but rose again on the thrid day. Christianity is based on a mythological payday loan.

This indirectly answers the original question in making the point that you really don't need to be an expert in the bible to find christianity lacking.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
To

To WHITEMANRUNNING: 

 

Alright, let me start by saying once again that I do not have all the answers, but I certainly want to address your point.  I couldn't agree with you more concerning separation of church and state.  I certainly do not want the state coming in and dictating to me what I must preach and what I must believe.  If you go back and look at history you will certainly see that when the state and church were connected - lots of corrupt stuff happened.

 

I can also tell you WHY, perhaps, this preacher took an opportunity to preach on this subject.  You have already seen on this topic that Darth-Josh made the comment:

 

"Personally, I wouldn't mind attending your trial for human rights atrocities concerning the mistreatment of children in this manner."

 

So let me ask you.  Here is a person who would like the government to put me on trial for teaching teenagers the Bible.  How does that sound like the separation of church and state?  He should be free to teach children to curse the name of God, but I should be put on trial for teaching children to love God???  The hypocrisy that I see on this site is almost overwhelming.

 

I just wonder - Will all of you jump to my defense when the state comes in and arrests me because I preach that homosexuality is a sin and the government calls it hate language - which leads to my next point.

 

I have never preached and I cannot find in my Bible anywhere that we are told to HATE homosexuals.  I can honestly tell you that I have never heard a sermon on "hating homosexuals" and I have been in church for 39 years and I live in the south.  We are told that in scripture that homosexuality is sin.  We are told that it is an abomination, but I have yet to read that I am to hate them.  Unless I explain my answer, I am sure what will happen as soon as I post this is that an atheist will quote a passage in Leviticus 20 - I am well aware that the death penalty is called for sexual immorality.  I will also tell you that we are not living in that time or in that place.  Then someone on this site is going to accuse me of using the "context" way out - and they accuse me of suing the same old tactics.  I have seen them all.  Context is important and for anyone to say other wise is a liar.  Even when you begin to tell any story and you begin with "The other day . . .  or This morning . . . or When I was at work  . . . you are putting it into context.  The Bible is no different.  It is not separated from history.  Many parts of it ARE HISTORY.  The case of Leviticus is a people who have been in a very sexually immoral place as slaves for 400 years and they are about to go into a land that is full of nations who are also practicing sexually immorallity.  God did not want his people in any way shape or form to participate in those activities.  The punishment for participating would be severe. 

 

 Let me continue.  As a Christian, I believe in the New Testament as well.  In Acts 15 you have the Jerusalem Council.  It is clear that in concerning the law, there are 4 things that apply to Christians:

 

1.  Abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols.

 

2.  Abstain from blood

 

3.  Abstain from what has been strangled

 

4.  Abstain from sexual immorality

 

I certainly believe there are principles that apply, (for instance, the 10 commandments are not to be ignored) but I am not required to do all of the law.  As far as homosexuality, that is still spoken of as sin in the NT.  It is something that Christians should avoid.  I do believe there are Christians that struggle with this sin just as there are Christians who struggle with lust, lying, hate, deceit, gossiping etc . . .  I would challenge anyone to find in the NT where it tells us to hate homosexuals.  Jesus Christ said,  "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself."  Let me clear about this as well.  I am a very conservative Christian. 

 

The issue of abortion.  The Bible doesn't say that abortion is wrong.  The Bible states that murder is wrong.  Look at the situation we have ourselves in right now in this country.  Just this past week an ex-cop in Ohio was found guilty of murder for not only his wife, but aggravated murder of an unborn child.  AND YET, a woman can go and partially birth a child in order for a doctor to murder it and we call it abortion and it is legal.  Again, the hypocrisy is unbelievable.  Do I believe that abortion is wrong - YES.  I believe that it is murder.  Do I choose to elect politicians who share that belief??? - Yes.  Just like those who are pro-choice - as if having sex wasn't a choice - want to elect those who agree with them.

 

I will have to tell you that once again I need you to show me passages in the Bible that instruct me to burn witches and stone children.  Please show me what you are writing about.  Please do not use the story of Abraham and Isaac as child sacrifice. 

 

#1 - It is clear at the beginning of the story in Genesis 22 - Abraham is Tested

 

#2 - God stopped him and provided a ram

 

It is amazing that no one seems to go to Leviticus 18 and 20 when it comes to child sacrifice.  It is absolutely forbidden by God punishable by death.  I can't say anything about D&D or Harry Potter.  I believe we should be careful about what we read, look at, play etc . . . but I cannot speak to these things specifically.  Many atheists believe that going to church is evil and they preach that.

 

  
 

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
darth-josh   Would you

darth-josh

 

Would you please read before you respond:

 

WHAT I PREVIOUSLY WROTE: 

 

I give of myself to others constantly.  I wonder, when was the last time you found yourself in the poorest of third world countries helping children who barely have enough to eat?  When was the last time you gave of your money to help people with clothes and shelter?  Maybe that does describe your life.  I certainly do not believe charity only belongs to Christians, but you do not even know me. 

 

As I said before - you might be a person who gives to others.  Charity does not only belong to Christians.  I simply responded to the issue that you thought I did not interact with people.  You did not need to prove anything to me.

 

I am not sure what you were trying to imply by this statement:

 

Ask the christian family around the corner whose kids helped theirs with Science because they've never heard of geology.

 

I am going to assume you were not trying to say that Christian people are ignorant of the sciences.  Reality simply proves the opposite.  Even within my family there is an architect, engineers, pharmacist, nurses, doctors, and accountants.  We have both undergraduate and advanced degrees - AND WE ARE ALL CHRISTIANS.

 

You wrote:  No I am NOT going on as much belief as you are.

 

So, when it comes to how life began, what happens when you die, why am I here, AND IS THERE A GOD - you either have never asked these questions OR you simply believe or have faith in an answer.  One of y'alls heroes, Dawkins, believes in Multiverse - something that has not even one ounce of proof - WOW - kind of sounds like faith to me.  The problem that you and other atheist have is that you are attempting to answer philosophic questions with empirical science.  It will never work.  Science answers many questions - but it cannot answer the most interesting ones.

 

You wrote:  I never said that your story about the kids was fake. I would like to ask you next time to take it the next step and have those kids' friends 30-40 years from now go back and write their account of the concert/show. Then it would be a comparative analogy with as much credence as the bible's stories.

 

Actually, let's not go back 30-40 years - let's go back 1000 years.  Until we discovered the Dead Sea Scrolls - the earliest Hebrew manuscripts we had of the OT was around 1000 AD.  When the scrolls were found all of the sudden these documents went back to around 100 BC and all the doubters could not wait to see how inaccurate the bible was - they were shocked to find out that in that 1000 year time span, you know . . . when all the additions and mistakes were taking place, that our current Hebrew text was 95% the same and the 5% difference were simply spelling changes or slips of the pen.  There were NO doctrinal changes. 

 

You wrote:  One wonders if those recounts would suddenly have the guitar player burst into flames in them.

 

I seriously doubt that, BUT if he actually had burst into flames I am sure they would have never forgotten that.  Kind of like, when Jesus rose from the dead - it was a fact that no one could forget.

 

 Again - calm down.  It is alright to disagree.  You believe I am wrong.  I believe you are wrong.  I will say the consequences for you being wrong - are much greater. (AND YES - I am familiar with Pascal's Wager)

 

 

 

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
kmisho, you made some

kmisho, you made some really good points. I have had a similiar discussion at the infidelguy's website about the shortcomings of holy text based religions. My big problem with jesus' alleged sacrifice is how easy it was. I mean an omni-potent god wouldn't need to create a sacrifice paid in blood to provide salvation for mankind unless he wasn't all powerfull. Besides, what a terrible sacrifice to have to come to Earth for a few years, live as a human being and then get killed only to rise up after a few days and live in heaven. It would've been a much bigger sacrifice to go to hell in place of sinners instead of the right hand of god. I guess he couldn't handle his own punishment maybe, I dunno.

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVLyle wrote:
Faith in God is not blind faith.

"Faith in Allah is not blind faith"

"Faith in Yahwey is not blind faith"

Ok Charlely Brown's teacher.

Quote:
I know you do not believe that there is a God, but again - You cannot prove there is not a God anymore than I can prove there is one.

Ok, "I can fart a full sized Lamborginni out of my ass and since you cant prove I cant, I can by default". 

Rook doesnt buy claims of ghosts knocking up girls and zombie gods surviving rigor mortis after 3 days. If if anyone is in denial of the truth it is you. If anyone is out to expose the truth it is Rook.

"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 BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
If someone says to you: "Do

If someone says to you: "Do this or you'll be burnt with fire!" Is that not a terrorist threat?

In subtle ways every preacher conveys that message.

When you're in those 3rd world countries in your 'charitable capacity, do you ask those people to pray before you feed them?

In the 'missions' I've been to in America, services attendance is compulsory before breakfast.

Do I ask people to take the blasphemy challenge before I help them? No. Althogh the more I see of people like you the more it sounds like a great idea.

Quote:
So, when it comes to how life began, what happens when you die, why am I here, AND IS THERE A GOD - you either have never asked these questions OR you simply believe or have faith in an answer. One of y'alls heroes, Dawkins, believes in Multiverse - something that has not even one ounce of proof - WOW - kind of sounds like faith to me. The problem that you and other atheist have is that you are attempting to answer philosophic questions with empirical science. It will never work. Science answers many questions - but it cannot answer the most interesting ones.

*BUZZZZZ* Wrong answer. My answer of "I don't know these things." means that I DO NOT HAVE A BELIEF IN YOUR ANSWERS EITHER.

Interesting you should invoke Dawkins since apparently you didn't read the rest of the book. Jump to Chapter 10 for a primer on philosophy coupled with science.

As far as questions not asked... Have you ever asked is there not a god? Or even the better one "Why do you believe?" Or the one I asked for consideration earlier elsewhere "Why doesn't he believe?"

As far as homosexality in the bible,

Ever read Romans 1

How does a preacher rationalize 'worthy of death'?

Also am I the only person that thinks Ruth and Naomi were lesbians?

 

Quote:
I am going to assume you were not trying to say that Christian people are ignorant of the sciences. Reality simply proves the opposite. Even within my family there is an architect, engineers, pharmacist, nurses, doctors, and accountants. We have both undergraduate and advanced degrees - AND WE ARE ALL CHRISTIANS.

Ever read about cognitive dissonance or compartmentalization?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: REVLyle

Brian37 wrote:

REVLyle wrote:
Faith in God is not blind faith.

"Faith in Allah is not blind faith"

"Faith in Yahwey is not blind faith"

Ok Charlely Brown's teacher.

Quote:
I know you do not believe that there is a God, but again - You cannot prove there is not a God anymore than I can prove there is one.

Ok, "I can fart a full sized Lamborginni out of my ass and since you cant prove I cant, I can by default". 

Rook doesnt buy claims of ghosts knocking up girls and zombie gods surviving rigor mortis after 3 days. If if anyone is in denial of the truth it is you. If anyone is out to expose the truth it is Rook.

Hey Brian37 - This is really quite easy.  If Rook is really concerned about the truth . . . just get him to change the website where he has been proven wrong.  I have been in many a lecture and when the professor was wrong he or she readily admitted it and then corrected it.  It is not that hard.  Y'all want logical arguments - they are given - and then you accuse Christians of perpetuating lies.  Again - the hypocrisy on this site is amazing.

Hey, by the way - be sure to get witnesses concerning the farting the Lamborginni so they can write about it.  Wait a minute - eye witnesses are not good enough.  Maybe you could film it - No, you could use special effects.  You know, come to think of it - there is no way - no matter how you prove it - some simply are not going to believe.  I will be looking for it on Youtube.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: Hey, by the

REVLyle wrote:

Hey, by the way - be sure to get witnesses concerning the farting the Lamborginni so they can write about it. Wait a minute - eye witnesses are not good enough. Maybe you could film it - No, you could use special effects. You know, come to think of it - there is no way - no matter how you prove it - some simply are not going to believe. I will be looking for it on Youtube.

Whoa! Are you getting it? Skepticism. Congratulations. You and I are now abrianfartslamborghinians. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVL

 

 

 

 

 

The issue of abortion. The Bible doesn't say that abortion is wrong. The Bible states that murder is wrong. Look at the situation we have ourselves in right now in this country. Just this past week an ex-cop in Ohio was found guilty of murder for not only his wife, but aggravated murder of an unborn child. AND YET, a woman can go and partially birth a child in order for a doctor to murder it and we call it abortion and it is legal. Again, the hypocrisy is unbelievable. Do I believe that abortion is wrong - YES. I believe that it is murder.

 

[/quote wrote:

God's prohibition against murder was implemented within the era of the Old Covenant and the the laws were clearly defined. Murder is sin especially if the innocent victim is an unborn child yet, paradoxically God declares his anger against Samaria by stating in Hosea 13:16

"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

Strange that God would trangress his own moral laws against unjust killing by decreeing the deaths of Samarian infants who would have been too young to be morally culpable. God even goes the extra mile and decides that the unborn victims should be "aborted" by the edge of a Hebrew sword and "ripped" away from their still living mothers.

God goes on a killing spree that Charles Manson would envy, even murdering pregnant women without mercy. Remember that one of Manson's victims was Sharon Tate who was pregnant at the time she was brutally murdered.

If Sharon Tate had been a "rebellious" Samarian her fate would have been exactly the same as you see in this photo. God's laws on killing are subject to his Divine whim and moral consistency is a concept that is foreign to the Bible.

You're right REV , the hipocrisy is unbelievable.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
YOU WROTE: God's

YOU WROTE:

God's prohibition against murder was implemented within the era of the Old Covenant and the the laws were clearly defined. Murder is sin especially if the innocent victim is an unborn child yet, paradoxically God declares his anger against Samaria by stating in Hosea 13:16

"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

Strange that God would trangress his own moral laws against unjust killing by decreeing the deaths of Samarian infants who would have been too young to be morally culpable. God even goes the extra mile and decides that the unborn victims should be "aborted" by the edge of a Hebrew sword and "ripped" away from their still living mothers.

God goes on a killing spree that Charles Manson would envy, even murdering pregnant women without mercy. Remember that one of Manson's victims was Sharon Tate who was pregnant at the time she was brutally murdered.

All I can say is that your lack of knowledge when it comes to scripture is amazing.  I am not sure I have ever seen anything quite this misleading.  If there was ever an example of lack of knowledge concerning history and Biblical knowledge, this is it.  You have just proved my point that anyone can take any passage and make it say what he or she wants.  IF there is ever an example to once again show that CONTEXT is important - this is it.

WHERE TO BEGIN. . .

The people of Samaria were the Israelites.  The Hebrew sword that you spoke of "edge of a Hebrew sword" is an Assyrian sword when they conquered Israel. 

So if you have ever read the Bible you would know that the Israelites were God's chosen people.  Well, God had saved them from the Egyptians, provided for them in the desert, gave them the land of Canaan, and the people rebelled against Him.  So, God's brings in the Assyrians to conquer them in 722 BC.  Hosea is telling the Israelites that this is going to happen to them AND he wants them to know that it is God's judgment upon them for their rebellion.  Now, you seem to think that 2700 years later you can decide whether it was fair for God to bring that judgment upon the people of Samaria (Israel).  The Israelites seem to take a different take on it than you (and remember; if anyone should be able to cry UNFAIR - it should be Israel).  You might want to look at Nehemiah 9 written about 300 years later (450 BC).  What you will find is that the Israelites don't talk about God's unfair wrath.  INSTEAD, what they emphasize is their rebellion and God's mercy for not wiping them off the face of the planet.

Please at least do a little research before you join the conversation.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: YOU

REVLyle wrote:

YOU WROTE:

God's prohibition against murder was implemented within the era of the Old Covenant and the the laws were clearly defined. Murder is sin especially if the innocent victim is an unborn child yet, paradoxically God declares his anger against Samaria by stating in Hosea 13:16

"The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open."

Strange that God would trangress his own moral laws against unjust killing by decreeing the deaths of Samarian infants who would have been too young to be morally culpable. God even goes the extra mile and decides that the unborn victims should be "aborted" by the edge of a Hebrew sword and "ripped" away from their still living mothers.

God goes on a killing spree that Charles Manson would envy, even murdering pregnant women without mercy. Remember that one of Manson's victims was Sharon Tate who was pregnant at the time she was brutally murdered.

All I can say is that your lack of knowledge when it comes to scripture is amazing. I am not sure I have ever seen anything quite this misleading. If there was ever an example of lack of knowledge concerning history and Biblical knowledge, this is it. You have just proved my point that anyone can take any passage and make it say what he or she wants. IF there is ever an example to once again show that CONTEXT is important - this is it.

WHERE TO BEGIN. . .

The people of Samaria were the Israelites. The Hebrew sword that you spoke of "edge of a Hebrew sword" is an Assyrian sword when they conquered Israel.

So if you have ever read the Bible you would know that the Israelites were God's chosen people. Well, God had saved them from the Egyptians, provided for them in the desert, gave them the land of Canaan, and the people rebelled against Him. So, God's brings in the Assyrians to conquer them in 722 BC. Hosea is telling the Israelites that this is going to happen to them AND he wants them to know that it is God's judgment upon them for their rebellion. Now, you seem to think that 2700 years later you can decide whether it was fair for God to bring that judgment upon the people of Samaria (Israel). The Israelites seem to take a different take on it than you (and remember; if anyone should be able to cry UNFAIR - it should be Israel). You might want to look at Nehemiah 9 written about 300 years later (450 BC). What you will find is that the Israelites don't talk about God's unfair wrath. INSTEAD, what they emphasize is their rebellion and God's mercy for not wiping them off the face of the planet.

Please at least do a little research before you join the conversation.

Is this the same way you teach the children in your youth group?

Is it the person misleading or is it the text that is misleading?

I had some other questions for you. Perhaps you could scroll up or should I post them again? 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVLyle wrote:

 

The people of Samaria were the Israelites.

 

This changes nothing you disgusting fool. That's like whining over whether the victims were Hutus or Tutsis.

It does not change the immoral and disgusting aspect of slicing open pregnant women you worthless piece of God worshipping shit. You completelly missed the point.

Fuck you and your stupid middle-eastern tribal bull shit. Who cares ! It was a fucking pregnant woman getting "ripped open" by God's command and you start yapping about what tribe they belong to ? I don't give a fuck if a Samarian is a Hebrew or a Hebrew is a Jew or a Jew is whatever ! Who the fuck cares !!!

Fuck you, you're just a Christian Ted Bundy who justifies blood lust by saying God wills it ! Here's another quote from your "Holy Book" :

Deuteronomy 2:34:

"And we took all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and all the little ones , of every city. We left none to remain."

Your religion has made you as blind to this "godly" act of murder as the modern day Islamist who cut off the heads of hostages and claim it's God's will.

FUCK YOU you deluded fool ! You are a piece of SHIT !!! Fuck you Rev, can you here me with your head stuffed up you God damned ass hole.....?

You're the same kind of fucked up Christian who would have burned "witches" and never even give a thought that you have just murdered someone.

But that's okay because I'm sure that you STILL have no idea what I'm talking about because your fucked up religion can justify even the most brutal behaviour by coming up with excuses like you offered here.

Just to make a point, I wish I belonged to a religion where I could take my steel toed boots and stomp your head into mush and then say "Well God told me to do it , so it's not really murder."

( ps, the above statement was made only for the purposes of illustration as I would never stoop to the depravity of "godly" justice. No literal threats were implied or intended you filthy mother fucker )

You're a fucking loser REV. I spit on you and your worthless God.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
You wrote:    Is this the

You wrote: 

 

Is this the same way you teach the children in your youth group?

 

Is it the person misleading or is it the text that is misleading?

 

I had some other questions for you. Perhaps you could scroll up or should I post them again?

 

Is this the way that I teach youth group? - Do I teach them history and the correct way to look at scripture, YES.  Am I as condescending - No. For that I am sorry.  When I teach you they come with a desire to learn - not with a desire to attack.  Was the person misleading or was it the text?  You tell me.  Today we talk about Americans as those who live in the United States of America.  That is in context with today's time.  Americans could certainly be anyone who lives in the Western Hemisphere.  Someone who lives in Brazil could be called an American.  BUT IF ONE UNDERSTANDS CONTEXT (history of the United States over the past 200+ years) there is nothing misleading about someone called an American.  The text is not misleading.  Prozacdeathwish had one objective - He wanted to present God as a cruel God, plain and simple.  He attempted to make a point using scripture in which he was ignorant of the context. 

 

Your other questions:  You wrote:

 

If someone says to you: "Do this or you'll be burnt with fire!" Is that not a terrorist threat?

 

In subtle ways every preacher conveys that message.

 

 Well, if we are going to use your very broad definition of a terrorists - we all are, so be careful with that.  What you are implying is that if someone gives you a choice and if you make the wrong choice punishment comes as a result - then that is terroristic in character.  As a parent, I tell my kids, "Do not go into the street OR you will get a spanking."  Does that make me a terrorist?  They have a choice.  They can stay away from the street and avoid punishment OR they can go in the street and punishment is promised.  I have often explained to my kids that "They are choosing punishment - not me."  I do not want to, nor do I enjoy punishing them, but when they choose to rebel against my authority - they choose punishment.  Let's also be clear on this.  The difference between a terrorist and what I do as a parent is that a terrorist makes threats in order to control.  I make a threat for the good of my children.  It is for their good that they obey me.

 

Let's take that to a larger scale.  Our government has laws and it states that if one chooses not to kill then they will avoid punishment - but if they do kill, they will possibly face the death penalty.  Does that make our local laws terroristic in nature?

 

Let's go back to the Hosea 13 passage.  God had given the people of Israel the law.  He had been good to them and shown them mercy AND he had warned them.  Follow the laws of God or else - Hosea is now telling them that they had rebelled and they were going to face the punishment from God.  Of course, you do not believe in God and when the Assyrians came in and conquered them, you believe that was simply another episode in the history of mankind.  The Bible doesn't present it that way and I believe the Word of God.

 

Let's take that to modern day preaching.  When man was created, he had a choice.  Follow God or rebel.  Man chose to rebel.  God even told him - if you disobey - death is in your future.  Because man failed, God still came in and saved the day.  He sent His Son to live a perfect life and die on the cross for our sins.  We have a choice to either accept the mercy and grace of God offered through Jesus Christ, His Son, or reject it.  God has created you, given you life, and provided for you.  I believe that God has even arranged this e-mail exchange so that you could hear the Gospel - which is simply good news.  THE GOOD NEWS IS if you believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior - you will be saved.  If you reject the offer of God to save your from your sins - and you do not give him the honor and glory that is due to him - you will be punished.  You are choosing punishment in the same way that my children choose to be punished.  Again, this offer of salvation is for your good - you will be spared eternity in hell. 

 

Now, since you do not believe in God - you believe there is no punishment.  That is the only way that you can deal with that issue - you have to make it go away.  You made the comment in a previous post concerning death that "I don't know these things."  Alone, I also do not know these things either - BUT GOD DOES and he has told us (warned us - but you think that it is a terroristic threat) so that we can know.  

 

When you're in those 3rd world countries in your 'charitable capacity, do you ask those people to pray before you feed them?

 

In the 'missions' I've been to in America, services attendance is compulsory before breakfast. 

 

We do not ask that the people we help do anything.  I know of what you are speaking of and I can respond by simply stating this.  Our mission as Christians is to help people with their physical needs, but we are also to help them with their spiritual needs.  Whereas, Christians want to help feed people, if we only feed them and we never tell them the gospel - what good have we really done.  They are well fed, but without Christ - they are still doomed.  I know some Christian charities ask that the people who show up for food also attend a service, but I do not know of any that the food given is based upon a confession of Christ.  What is the point????  It would not be real.  When you are feeding people it is certainly a chance to tell them the Gospel.

 

As far as homosexality in the bible,  

 

Ever read Romans 1

 

How does a preacher rationalize 'worthy of death'?

 

Also am I the only person that thinks Ruth and Naomi were lesbians?

 

Yes, I have read Romans 1 many times.  You will notice that nowhere in the passage does it tell us to hate homosexuals and "worthy of death" is not a task that is given to Christian people.  You will notice that Romans 1:18-32 is talking about God's wrath on unrighteousness.  It is NOT the wrath of God's people.  Again - to simply take three words and make it say what you want it to say is just not legitimate.  You look at death as the end of this life.  As Christians, we talk about everlasting life.  We will not die (yes - there is an end to this life here on earth), but we will live with Christ.  The death that is spoken of in Romans 1 is separation from God and eternity in hell.  Again, go back and look at the passage.  The death spoken of here is for THESE people:

 

Romans 1:21-23

 

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (ESV)

 

Homosexuality is simply the "debased mind to do what ought not to be done."  You will notice that there is a whole list of things that are attributed to a debased mind.  Homosexuals do not go to hell because they are homosexuals.  People will go to hell because they did accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and in turn they did not honor God or give him thanks.  That is what the passage says.  It does not say that I, as a Christian, should hate or kill homosexuals.  Again, you will accuse me of "rationalization," but I am simply stating what the passage says. 

 

As far as Ruth and Naomi?

 

There is absolutely nothing in scripture that states anything other than the fact that Ruth was very devoted to her mother-in-law.  She was married to Naomi's son before he died.  Naomi encourages the relationship between Ruth and Boaz.  Ruth and Boaz are eventually married.  To suggest otherwise is not true to scripture.

 

Ever read about cognitive dissonance or compartmentalization?

 

I have certainly read about cognitive dissonance and could EASILY apply it to atheists.  A very empty argument to use against Christians and one that even atheists on this site have admitted falling into.  You really believe that all Christians ignore information in order to reinforce what they believe?  My conversation with prozacdeathwish is a perfect example of an atheist falling into that line of reasoning. 

 

A.  He was ignorant of the passage he quoted.

 

B.  I gave him new information so that he reevaluate what he thought

 

C.  The new information was ignored and he reinforced what he already believed. 

 

As far as compartmentalization I assume what you are speaking of is the idea that people can be intelligent in one area of life such as math or biology and then not have the ability to either take or use that intelligence into another area of life.  In this case you would be wondering why someone could not see your view of atheism, because you believe that is the only intelligent view.  If my evaluation is correct, I have heard sapient and kelly speak to this, and again, I could use the same argument.  How could all these intelligent people not see the truth of God.  Again, a very empty argument. 

 

 You can hate me if you want, but my intention of putting myself here, at a site where hostility toward me is very apparent, is to share the good news of Christ.  Unlike prozacdeathwish - I do not desire to harm you or anyone.  I do not want anyone to endure the wrath of God.  That is why I am here.  Thanks for the questions.

 

  

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13396
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:

Quote:
I do not want anyone to endure the wrath of God. That is why I am here. Thanks for the questions.

If God is all loving, why the "wrath" angle? When my x wife left me I didnt threaten her. I simply accepted she didnt love me anymore and let her go a seperate path.

Mature adults dont have to feel the wrath of anyone. When they dissagree, they debate and bitch, and if an agreement is not reached they go on their seperate ways.

Your fictional god character was written by triballistic people who needed a club to survive. The modern age is about the individual and not the collective. If you cannot allow me to think for myself, why the fuck would I worship a god that wouldnt let me think for myself?

You want to be a sheep like the sicko 19 hijackers who thought that they were implementing Allah's wrath for any oposition not submitting to his will?

There is no magical "will". There are natural humans doing stupid things, like pretending, like you, to know what is good for the rest of the planet without a lick of evidence.

When you can produce godsperm or,show me how a ghost knocks up a girl, or show me HOW, human flesh survives rigor mortis after 3 days,, then you might have something. Dont worry, I wont hold my breath.

I am not afriad of your fictional character because EVIDENCE is what you dont have. And if you think I am going to cower to a fictional threat uttered by a human because they want a magical sky daddy to beat up on the critics, you are sadly mistaken. 

If you want to make the attempt to appeal to reason and logic, be my guest. But never mistake me for one who bows to threats. 

 

 

 

"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 BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Here is a thread: How to

Here is a thread:

How to use the quote function

As soon as the evening's festivities are over I will respond.  It takes a bit of time to reformat the text in order to maintain an on-going conversation.

Skipped questions and all that rot. y'know? 

 

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
I will not partake in the

I will not partake in the ad hom war going on in this thread.  This question was not really answered and it deserves to be.  It would be great if a Mod could clean this thread up.

Pathofreason wrote:
How can we be certain of contradictions?

Contradicitions exist.  I left those contradictions up to show this very fact.  The intent of showing the Bible has contradicitions is only to show those who think it to have none that it clearly does. 

That being said, showing there are contradictions in the Bible is generally boring.  It is also not very helpful.  A better discussion would be on why these contradicitions exist.  That is a much more enlightening discussion. 

Quote:
I mean I was dicussing one you covered in your show about who came to the tomb first, Remember Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, John 20:1 and Matthew 28:1, and they claimed that it wasn't a contradiction just different versions of the same story

That is a contradiction. 

Quote:
but they still claimed that there was harmony in the story.

The harmony comes from everyone borrowing from Mark, who was borrowing from scripture, Homer, and Paul.  Matthew copies off Mark and expands the story.  Luke then copies off Mark and Matthew and makes it more legendary and embellishes further.  John completes this embellishment (as far as the canonical Gospels go - the deuterocanonical Gospels go even further with the embellishing) with his story.  The harmony exists only because of this process.  You should ask them why there was a need to embellish between stories, and why it is so indicative of legendary creation. 

Quote:
Just because they left people out.

You should ask why there was a need to leave people out?  What is the purpose of that?  Why is it Mark has only three women coming to the tomb whereas John has this circus scene of women and disciples running back and forth and back and forth over and over?  Why does Luke include a striking scene where Jesus visits two disciples on the road, remarkably similar to the story of Romulus meeting his own disciples on the road to Rome (both stories include the disciples ignorance as to who he is)?  Why does Matthew include an empty tomb narrative in his story?  Obviously that claim had come up - that the disciples had stolen the body.

All of this could be gleaned simply by reading the texts.  (Did you?  Did they?) Eye-wink   

Quote:
Now my other question is, where can I learn as much as you know, And what are some of the best ways to use contradictions and debate theists?

1.) To learn as much as I know you need to study for 9 years at twice the pace to catch up with me.  Short of that, just keep reading.  Read my blogs, get the resources I list, and pour over them like a hermit.  After having no life for a large majority of 9 years, you'll be there.  =)

 2.) Don't use contradictions.  If you do, make sure you follow it up with why they exist.  Be sure you know why.  The best way to do that is to read my blogs, and read my articles, and read the resources that are readily available in my endnotes.

Quote:
because I am great with evolution but I don't know the bible quite as well as you do.

I always advocate reading the bible. 

Quote:
I have read it numerous times but it doesn't stick as well as science does so I can't refer to it as easy.

Understandable.  Perhaps you should direct those people to me then, and I'll continue directing those creationist loons to you.

 

The best to you,

Rook 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVLyle wrote:
You wrote:

 

Is this the same way you teach the children in your youth group?

 

Is it the person misleading or is it the text that is misleading?

 

I had some other questions for you. Perhaps you could scroll up or should I post them again?

 

Is this the way that I teach youth group? - Do I teach them history and the correct way to look at scripture, YES. Am I as condescending - No. For that I am sorry. When I teach you they come with a desire to learn - not with a desire to attack. Was the person misleading or was it the text? You tell me. Today we talk about Americans as those who live in the United States of America. That is in context with today's time. Americans could certainly be anyone who lives in the Western Hemisphere. Someone who lives in Brazil could be called an American. BUT IF ONE UNDERSTANDS CONTEXT (history of the United States over the past 200+ years) there is nothing misleading about someone called an American. The text is not misleading. Prozacdeathwish had one objective - He wanted to present God as a cruel God, plain and simple. He attempted to make a point using scripture in which he was ignorant of the context.

 

Your other questions: You wrote:

 

If someone says to you: "Do this or you'll be burnt with fire!" Is that not a terrorist threat?

 

In subtle ways every preacher conveys that message.

 

Well, if we are going to use your very broad definition of a terrorists - we all are, so be careful with that. What you are implying is that if someone gives you a choice and if you make the wrong choice punishment comes as a result - then that is terroristic in character. As a parent, I tell my kids, "Do not go into the street OR you will get a spanking." Does that make me a terrorist? They have a choice. They can stay away from the street and avoid punishment OR they can go in the street and punishment is promised. I have often explained to my kids that "They are choosing punishment - not me." I do not want to, nor do I enjoy punishing them, but when they choose to rebel against my authority - they choose punishment. Let's also be clear on this. The difference between a terrorist and what I do as a parent is that a terrorist makes threats in order to control. I make a threat for the good of my children. It is for their good that they obey me.

 

Let's take that to a larger scale. Our government has laws and it states that if one chooses not to kill then they will avoid punishment - but if they do kill, they will possibly face the death penalty. Does that make our local laws terroristic in nature?

 

Let's go back to the Hosea 13 passage. God had given the people of Israel the law. He had been good to them and shown them mercy AND he had warned them. Follow the laws of God or else - Hosea is now telling them that they had rebelled and they were going to face the punishment from God. Of course, you do not believe in God and when the Assyrians came in and conquered them, you believe that was simply another episode in the history of mankind. The Bible doesn't present it that way and I believe the Word of God.

 

Let's take that to modern day preaching. When man was created, he had a choice. Follow God or rebel. Man chose to rebel. God even told him - if you disobey - death is in your future. Because man failed, God still came in and saved the day. He sent His Son to live a perfect life and die on the cross for our sins. We have a choice to either accept the mercy and grace of God offered through Jesus Christ, His Son, or reject it. God has created you, given you life, and provided for you. I believe that God has even arranged this e-mail exchange so that you could hear the Gospel - which is simply good news. THE GOOD NEWS IS if you believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior - you will be saved. If you reject the offer of God to save your from your sins - and you do not give him the honor and glory that is due to him - you will be punished. You are choosing punishment in the same way that my children choose to be punished. Again, this offer of salvation is for your good - you will be spared eternity in hell.

 

Now, since you do not believe in God - you believe there is no punishment. That is the only way that you can deal with that issue - you have to make it go away. You made the comment in a previous post concerning death that "I don't know these things." Alone, I also do not know these things either - BUT GOD DOES and he has told us (warned us - but you think that it is a terroristic threat) so that we can know.

 

When you're in those 3rd world countries in your 'charitable capacity, do you ask those people to pray before you feed them?

 

In the 'missions' I've been to in America, services attendance is compulsory before breakfast.

 

We do not ask that the people we help do anything. I know of what you are speaking of and I can respond by simply stating this. Our mission as Christians is to help people with their physical needs, but we are also to help them with their spiritual needs. Whereas, Christians want to help feed people, if we only feed them and we never tell them the gospel - what good have we really done. They are well fed, but without Christ - they are still doomed. I know some Christian charities ask that the people who show up for food also attend a service, but I do not know of any that the food given is based upon a confession of Christ. What is the point???? It would not be real. When you are feeding people it is certainly a chance to tell them the Gospel.

 

As far as homosexality in the bible,

 

Ever read Romans 1

 

How does a preacher rationalize 'worthy of death'?

 

Also am I the only person that thinks Ruth and Naomi were lesbians?

 

Yes, I have read Romans 1 many times. You will notice that nowhere in the passage does it tell us to hate homosexuals and "worthy of death" is not a task that is given to Christian people. You will notice that Romans 1:18-32 is talking about God's wrath on unrighteousness. It is NOT the wrath of God's people. Again - to simply take three words and make it say what you want it to say is just not legitimate. You look at death as the end of this life. As Christians, we talk about everlasting life. We will not die (yes - there is an end to this life here on earth), but we will live with Christ. The death that is spoken of in Romans 1 is separation from God and eternity in hell. Again, go back and look at the passage. The death spoken of here is for THESE people:

 

Romans 1:21-23

 

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (ESV)

 

Homosexuality is simply the "debased mind to do what ought not to be done." You will notice that there is a whole list of things that are attributed to a debased mind. Homosexuals do not go to hell because they are homosexuals. People will go to hell because they did accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and in turn they did not honor God or give him thanks. That is what the passage says. It does not say that I, as a Christian, should hate or kill homosexuals. Again, you will accuse me of "rationalization," but I am simply stating what the passage says.

 

As far as Ruth and Naomi?

 

There is absolutely nothing in scripture that states anything other than the fact that Ruth was very devoted to her mother-in-law. She was married to Naomi's son before he died. Naomi encourages the relationship between Ruth and Boaz. Ruth and Boaz are eventually married. To suggest otherwise is not true to scripture.

 

Ever read about cognitive dissonance or compartmentalization?

 

I have certainly read about cognitive dissonance and could EASILY apply it to atheists. A very empty argument to use against Christians and one that even atheists on this site have admitted falling into. You really believe that all Christians ignore information in order to reinforce what they believe? My conversation with prozacdeathwish is a perfect example of an atheist falling into that line of reasoning.

 

A. He was ignorant of the passage he quoted.

 

B. I gave him new information so that he reevaluate what he thought

 

C. The new information was ignored and he reinforced what he already believed.

 

As far as compartmentalization I assume what you are speaking of is the idea that people can be intelligent in one area of life such as math or biology and then not have the ability to either take or use that intelligence into another area of life. In this case you would be wondering why someone could not see your view of atheism, because you believe that is the only intelligent view. If my evaluation is correct, I have heard sapient and kelly speak to this, and again, I could use the same argument. How could all these intelligent people not see the truth of God. Again, a very empty argument.

 

You can hate me if you want, but my intention of putting myself here, at a site where hostility toward me is very apparent, is to share the good news of Christ. Unlike prozacdeathwish - I do not desire to harm you or anyone. I do not want anyone to endure the wrath of God. That is why I am here. Thanks for the questions.

 

 

Ohhhhh I'm so sorry Rev, so it was the Assyrians who ripped open the pregnant women to satisfy God's wrath. My mistake.

Well now that I know the true ethnicity of these murderers that casts this brutal atrocity in a whole new light. How foolish of me to still find that morally offensive.

And yes REV your suspicions were right, as a mean spirited atheist I was simply attempting to cast God in a cruel light. ( boy, you can read me like a book!)

And yes it's true, only a morally depraved atheist like myself would consider mutilating a pregnant woman to be insanely cruel .....but I agree with you now, cutting open a live human female who is pregnant or killing little children in genocidal warfare is no reason to get upset, .....but whoa, aborting a fetus at an abortion clinic..that's just going too far !

( ps, please go back and re-read my post and you will see that I made no literal or implied threats against you or anyone. I utterly reject your false accusation.  If you would have simply read the text it would have been plainly obvious even to an idiot that I was using a brutal illustration to highlight the utter hipocrisy of how religious people such as yourself will resort to using your contemptable theology to rationalize insanely cruel behavior by claiming it's "God's will". .....No Rev, I would never harm you ...but for you my heart burns with hatred )

Lastly,I may be a godless, spiritually empty, morally degenerate, hedonistic hell-bound jerk but I'm a better man than you.

Why ? ..because I know that, God or no God, there is never a justifiable reason to physically abuse a pregnant woman much less ruthlessly cut her open and kill her and the unborn child that you anti-abortionist claim to be so concerned about.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Funny thing REV, that on

Funny thing REV, that on the news when Iraqi Muslims present video images of themselves slowly cutting off the heads of their live hostages that Christians are horrified by the brutality and lack of mercy.

Incidentally, here's a web link for you to actually observe Old Testament style "justice" in action: http://www.terroristcamp.com

Strangely enough when Christians read in their Holy Bible about similar acts of brutality committed in the name of their own God, they just shrug their shoulders and use the same damn excuses that the Muslims do...

"God is holy and just, how dare you question him !!!"

Too bad the Assyrian butchers you spoke of didn't have video cameras to capture the sounds and images of themselves performing God's righteous work.

Because this wrathful response was an expression of God's will how could anyone argue that it would detrimental for any spiritually enlightened person to actually hear the screams of the victims as they lay dying or to see with your own eyes human beings sliced and diced with swords and axes. After all, it was simply an expression of God's justice.

Besides, it was also done to teach a lesson about God's justice and so was recorded in the book of Hosea so that future generations could benefit from this righteous example.

Yes, REV I think I understand now. God loves us so very much that words can barely express it, but........ the flip side is to never, ever, EVER rebell against him or he may resort to his old tactics to get you attention and teach you a lesson:

2 Kings 15:16 "Then Menahem struck Tiphsah and all who were in it and its borders from Tirzah, because they did not open to him; therefore he struck it and ripped up

all its women who were with child."

 

Joshua 6:21 "And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword."



I Chronicles 20:3 "And he ( King David ) brought out the people that were in it, and cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes....."

...( per above scripture reference ) example of person killed with an axe , ala King David method !

and lastly, God himself speaks directly:

Deuteronomy 32:39 " See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill and I make alive, I wound, and I heal; neither is their any that can deliver out of my hand."

So remember, these verses were put in the Bible to show you that God loves you like you're his dear little puppy .....but if you pee on the carpet he'll chop you up like you're a piece of sandwich meat and make you wish you'd never been born.

 

 

 

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: darth_josh

REVLyle wrote:
darth_josh wrote:



Is this the same way you teach the children in your youth group?


Is it the person misleading or is it the text that is misleading?


I had some other questions for you. Perhaps you could scroll up or should I post them again?



Is this the way that I teach youth group? - Do I teach them history and the correct way to look at scripture, YES. Am I as condescending - No. For that I am sorry. When I teach you they come with a desire to learn - not with a desire to attack. Was the person misleading or was it the text? You tell me. Today we talk about Americans as those who live in the United States of America. That is in context with today's time. Americans could certainly be anyone who lives in the Western Hemisphere. Someone who lives in Brazil could be called an American. BUT IF ONE UNDERSTANDS CONTEXT (history of the United States over the past 200+ years) there is nothing misleading about someone called an American. The text is not misleading. Prozacdeathwish had one objective - He wanted to present God as a cruel God, plain and simple. He attempted to make a point using scripture in which he was ignorant of the context.


Soooo, for them you’re nice like honey.
For us you’re sour like vinegar.
Your ‘American’ analogy doesn’t make sense within the context of this conversation to me.
If the bible is true then god most definitely was one cruel deity. In fact, we have a thread dedicated to analyzing biblical homicide:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/rook_hawkins/biblical_errancy/3582
Since the bible is supposed to be the record of this god, then it all comes down to its truthfulness. If it isn’t true then we know nothing of god. If it is true then we have a record of atrocities DIRECTLY attributable to him/her/it.
Prozacdeathwish made an interpretation of the scripture and you made yours. Which is right and who is to judge? If you declare that you are by virtue of your title then I must direct your attention to everyone with a ‘higher’ title that disagrees with you.


REVLyle wrote:
darth_josh wrote:

If someone says to you: "Do this or you'll be burnt with fire!" Is that not a terrorist threat?


In subtle ways every preacher conveys that message.



Well, if we are going to use your very broad definition of a terrorists - we all are, so be careful with that. What you are implying is that if someone gives you a choice and if you make the wrong choice punishment comes as a result - then that is terroristic in character. As a parent, I tell my kids, "Do not go into the street OR you will get a spanking." Does that make me a terrorist? They have a choice. They can stay away from the street and avoid punishment OR they can go in the street and punishment is promised. I have often explained to my kids that "They are choosing punishment - not me." I do not want to, nor do I enjoy punishing them, but when they choose to rebel against my authority - they choose punishment. Let's also be clear on this. The difference between a terrorist and what I do as a parent is that a terrorist makes threats in order to control. I make a threat for the good of my children. It is for their good that they obey me.


I have never told anyone that they were going to ‘burn in fire’ FOR ANY REASON. Ergo, No we are not ALL terrorists.
Are you saying that terrorists are not killing people for their own good? I’m afraid they would disagree.
I give my children REASONS why they should follow certain practices. I have never said to them: “BECAUSE I SAID SO!”
Thus in my opinion, you and your alleged god are BAD PARENTS!


REVLyle wrote:
Let's take that to a larger scale. Our government has laws and it states that if one chooses not to kill then they will avoid punishment - but if they do kill, they will possibly face the death penalty. Does that make our local laws terroristic in nature?


No. Because the law is made by the people for REASONS. The initial killing is the act of terrorism. As a society, we punish the criminal act as well as the threat of an act. EXCEPT WHEN RELIGION IS INVOLVED. Personally, anyone that tells me that I’m going to hell to be burnt with fire is in fact making a terrorist threat against me.


REVLyle wrote:
Let's go back to the Hosea 13 passage. God had given the people of Israel the law. He had been good to them and shown them mercy AND he had warned them. Follow the laws of God or else - Hosea is now telling them that they had rebelled and they were going to face the punishment from God. Of course, you do not believe in God and when the Assyrians came in and conquered them, you believe that was simply another episode in the history of mankind. The Bible doesn't present it that way and I believe the Word of God.


Let's take that to modern day preaching. When man was created, he had a choice. Follow God or rebel. Man chose to rebel. God even told him - if you disobey - death is in your future. Because man failed, God still came in and saved the day. He sent His Son to live a perfect life and die on the cross for our sins. We have a choice to either accept the mercy and grace of God offered through Jesus Christ, His Son, or reject it. God has created you, given you life, and provided for you. I believe that God has even arranged this e-mail exchange so that you could hear the Gospel - which is simply good news. THE GOOD NEWS IS if you believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior - you will be saved. If you reject the offer of God to save your from your sins - and you do not give him the honor and glory that is due to him - you will be punished. You are choosing punishment in the same way that my children choose to be punished. Again, this offer of salvation is for your good - you will be spared eternity in hell.


Nice sermon, preacher. Too bad that it is contingent upon more factors than just your interpretation of a book whose veracity has been questioned for centuries.
I’d like to point out to you that you have just made a terrorist threat in that last paragraph. Soooo, my earlier question has finally been answered truthfully. You DO tell people that they will go to hell and burn.


REVLyle wrote:
Now, since you do not believe in God - you believe there is no punishment. That is the only way that you can deal with that issue - you have to make it go away. You made the comment in a previous post concerning death that "I don't know these things." Alone, I also do not know these things either - BUT GOD DOES and he has told us (warned us - but you think that it is a terroristic threat) so that we can know.


Perhaps it is best for me if I wait for verification of this MEMO from your god before implementing any of the abhorrent practices in it. i.e. terrorist threats, racial prejudice, slavery, etc.


REVLyle wrote:
darth_josh wrote:
When you're in those 3rd world countries in your 'charitable capacity, do you ask those people to pray before you feed them?


In the 'missions' I've been to in America, services attendance is compulsory before breakfast.



We do not ask that the people we help do anything. I know of what you are speaking of and I can respond by simply stating this. Our mission as Christians is to help people with their physical needs, but we are also to help them with their spiritual needs. Whereas, Christians want to help feed people, if we only feed them and we never tell them the gospel - what good have we really done. They are well fed, but without Christ - they are still doomed. I know some Christian charities ask that the people who show up for food also attend a service, but I do not know of any that the food given is based upon a confession of Christ. What is the point???? It would not be real. When you are feeding people it is certainly a chance to tell them the Gospel.


Thanks for being relatively honest. It does nothing to solve the problems concerning those missions though. Nor does it justify the reprehensible behavior of people who use charity for their own agenda of ‘preaching the gospel’.

REVLyle wrote:
darth_josh wrote:
As far as homosexality in the bible,


Ever read Romans 1


How does a preacher rationalize 'worthy of death'?





Yes, I have read Romans 1 many times. You will notice that nowhere in the passage does it tell us to hate homosexuals and "worthy of death" is not a task that is given to Christian people. You will notice that Romans 1:18-32 is talking about God's wrath on unrighteousness. It is NOT the wrath of God's people. Again - to simply take three words and make it say what you want it to say is just not legitimate. You look at death as the end of this life. As Christians, we talk about everlasting life. We will not die (yes - there is an end to this life here on earth), but we will live with Christ. The death that is spoken of in Romans 1 is separation from God and eternity in hell. Again, go back and look at the passage. The death spoken of here is for THESE people:


Romans 1:21-23


18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (ESV)


Homosexuality is simply the "debased mind to do what ought not to be done." You will notice that there is a whole list of things that are attributed to a debased mind. Homosexuals do not go to hell because they are homosexuals. People will go to hell because they did accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and in turn they did not honor God or give him thanks. That is what the passage says. It does not say that I, as a Christian, should hate or kill homosexuals. Again, you will accuse me of "rationalization," but I am simply stating what the passage says.


‘worthy of death’ does not mean to hate?

At least that clarifies that we are using the ESV version of the bible for this discussion of contradictions. I will hitherto endeavor to use only that one when discussing scripture with you.

Let us go on using the ESV because you stopped SHORT of the passage removing part of the context:

ESV bible wrote:
24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.


Is that last line something you didn’t want to discuss? I can see why it doesn’t fit with your happy little sermon of love and tolerance.


REVLyle wrote:
darth_josh wrote:
Also am I the only person that thinks Ruth and Naomi were lesbians?



As far as Ruth and Naomi?


There is absolutely nothing in scripture that states anything other than the fact that Ruth was very devoted to her mother-in-law. She was married to Naomi's son before he died. Naomi encourages the relationship between Ruth and Boaz. Ruth and Boaz are eventually married. To suggest otherwise is not true to scripture.


You read loyalty. I read lesbian marriage ceremony.
Ruth wrote:
Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.


The marriage to Boaz was for the land. Naomi told her to seduce him.

REVLyle wrote:
darth_josh wrote:
Ever read about cognitive dissonance or compartmentalization?



I have certainly read about cognitive dissonance and could EASILY apply it to atheists. A very empty argument to use against Christians and one that even atheists on this site have admitted falling into. You really believe that all Christians ignore information in order to reinforce what they believe? My conversation with prozacdeathwish is a perfect example of an atheist falling into that line of reasoning.


I beg to disagree. I see more examples of ignored questions by virtue of following threads WITHOUT commenting. I have kept no detailed record of how many theists(not just christians) ignore the hard questions, but it has happened often enough to be a routine.


REVLyle wrote:
A. He was ignorant of the passage he quoted.


How does having a differing interpretation from yours equate to ignorance?


REVLyle wrote:
B. I gave him new information so that he reevaluate what he thought


You preached which forced PDW to react in an adverse manner just as I did previously. That is also a pattern. We’re here to discuss, not be preached at or to.


Quote:
C. The new information was ignored and he reinforced what he already believed.


Apparently, the ‘new information’ did not achieve what you had hoped or perhaps it was its conveyance.


REVLyle wrote:
As far as compartmentalization I assume what you are speaking of is the idea that people can be intelligent in one area of life such as math or biology and then not have the ability to either take or use that intelligence into another area of life. In this case you would be wondering why someone could not see your view of atheism, because you believe that is the only intelligent view. If my evaluation is correct, I have heard sapient and kelly speak to this, and again, I could use the same argument. How could all these intelligent people not see the truth of God. Again, a very empty argument.


In your instance it is a tu quoque fallacy.
Since you have so many family members who are successful in life, why not ask them if there have been things in their chosen fields that have contradicted their belief in god.

REVLyle wrote:
You can hate me if you want, but my intention of putting myself here, at a site where hostility toward me is very apparent, is to share the good news of Christ. Unlike prozacdeathwish - I do not desire to harm you or anyone. I do not want anyone to endure the wrath of God. That is why I am here. Thanks for the questions.


Thus another piece of my case against your preaching. Subtle threats are just as obnoxious as any made by others.
I don’t hate YOU. I have no reason.
However, I do hate your religious ideology for many reasons. One of which is what it has turned you into.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Hi REV. In your lengthy

Hi REV.  In your lengthy replies you consistently rationalize acts of unthinkable cruelty as simply well-deserved examples of God's "justice."  Regardless of the multiple biblical verses that I have cited ( most of which you ignored ) in which brutal acts were perpetrated upon unarmed and defenseless women and children, including the unborn you have steadfastly refused to offer even the slightest criticism regarding the immoral nature of these ruthless murders. It is only logical to assume that you condone this form of Godly "payback" and that you consider genocidal-style responses as being morally acceptable.

I find it interesting to ponder that most humans, even in spite of the supposed influence of their depraved "sin nature" find these acts as so morally repugnant that any individuals who engage in this disgraceful behaviour are prosecuted as criminals.

It is apparent that based upon your statements regarding your own religious principles,  you are willing to condone and even defend the use of such harsh justice if you believe it is ordained by God.

My question to you is purely hypothetical ( so don't try and bullshit your way out of it with theological double-talk or meaningless historical minutiae ) :

If you were a Hebrew male living during that era would you obey your God and pick up your sword, knife, axe, etc and kill pregnant women by "ripping" them open ? 

Would you grasp young toddlers by their ankles, raise them into the air and then smash their heads against the ground ?

Would you be willing to enter a town or village and without showing the slightest hint of mercy completely destroy every living person, young or old if you thought it was God's will ?

Deuteronomy 2:34  "And we took all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and all the little ones of every city.  We left none to remain."

It's just a simple, straight-forward question that can easily be answered with a "yes" or "no".

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Hey, where'd you go REV ?

Hey, where'd you go REV ?  You were here for so long and now you just disappeared.  

Come back and explain to us again how killing women and children isn't really murder as long as God says it's okay.

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
*bump*C'mon back, preacher.

*bump*

C'mon back, preacher. After all, you got the power of god on your side don't ya?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
response to darth-josh

In regard to how I addressed PDW as opposed to the youth I have taught - I suppose you greet your wife the exact same way you greet someone who is attacking you?  If a teenager aggressively went after me or my faith - it is certainly within me to defend my faith.  That is all I was saying.  I am who I am.  I am just like any other human.  I attempt to keep my emotions under control just like anyone, but I do not always succeed.

I have no problem with people interpreting scripture differently than me . . .  when there is something to interpret differently.  You nor I nor PDW can look at the time of Christ and say that the rule of the Roman Empire is up for interpretation.  The problem was ignorance on his part, not interpretation.  I suppose if PDW interpreted Romans to mean Great Britain that would be OK too because that is just his interpretation.  Very, Very weak.  You defend him simply because you share a common worldview (there is no God).

Let me see if I can explain a little more so that you will get my drift.  A black person in the United States is called an African-American.  2800 years from now will someone believe that we were ambiguous because we did not write, “Black Man in the United States”?  Will they wonder, “Is the person an African or American AND will it be up to their interpretation to place that person as a completely different nationality simply because they do not undertake the time to do proper research of what that term meant during 2008 - a specific place in time.  Will someone say that any interpretation of that term will do and is just as valid?      

I have not once used my title to support an argument.  Since you seem to think the Hosea passage is up for interpretation – Just curious - Who are the experts who believe the "people of Samaria" were not the Hebrews in that passage?  Who is it that believes the Israelites were not conquered by Assyria?  I have not read those opinions.  Lastly, why is it that within the same passage PDW interprets the killing as a literal interpretation, but the exact people group can be interpreted any way one wants?  Once again, very weak.  

My issue with your interpretation of what a terrorist is stems from the fact that a threat does not make one a terrorist.  You always explain everything to your children?????  WOW, you are one patient father.  With three children, I do not have the time to always give all the reasons why I tell my children something.  You are certainly the exception.  There are times when I simply say, "Do this, or you will get a spanking."  I am the authority and the child is going to be submissive to my authority.  I guess I did not convey what I mean about "their own good."  A terrorist threatens in order for the terrorist to have power.  I threaten my kids for the good of the kids.  I do not want them to go into the street, not simply because I want power to keep them out of the street.  I do not want them to go into the street BECAUSE there is a great danger of them being hit and killed by a car.  

When you speak of God as being homicidal - That is where you and I are going to have to say that this debate will go nowhere.  I am not sure from what perspective you wish to argue.  There are really only two points of view:

 

#1 – Your view (there is no God) – if this was true then all the events of killing throughout history are simply random events caused by humans.  You have no one to blame but humans themselves and their sinful nature, but again you don’t believe in sin . . . do you?

#2 – The correct view (God exists) – this view is that God owns it all.  He created it all and it all belongs to him.  All of creation us subject to his authority.  Man’s sinfulness, Satan’s deception, and God’s sovereignty all play a part in the life and death of mankind.

 

There is a thread on this site in which Sapient compares numbers as to “How many God killed verses Satan.”  The interesting thing about that is that if you believe there is no God – then the answer is none.  God did not kill anyone.  So what is your problem?  If you believe as I do, God owns it all and He certainly has the right to do with humanity as he wills.  I certainly do not pray for death for anyone – but if God chooses to take it – I will still choose to worship him.  He gave life. He can certainly choose to take it away.  The only reason you and I live and breathe is that God allows it.  Look at the story of Job.  He lost his entire family except for his wife.  He lost his health and He still chose to worship God.  I hope and pray that I am that kind of man.  I am not going to argue with you or PDW that God takes life - certainly He does.  I did not argue with PDW in regard to God saying that death would come - I argued with his horrible understanding of that particular passage.

 

I do most certainly preach that if people do not believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior that they will spend eternity in hell.  If I did not preach that, I would not be preaching the Word of God.  You did not discover anything new about me.  I have made that clear many times since I have been a part of RRS.  It is not a terroristic threat.  I tell my kids to stay out of the street for their own good.  I tell people for their own good to believe in Jesus Christ.  Is it right or wrong to warn people about a coming danger?  You think of it as a terroristic threat because you HAVE TO make yourself believe that it is never coming.  You must also convince others that God’s wrath does not await them so that they can go down the same path as you.  As I said before, your way of dealing with the Second Coming of Christ is to “make it go away.”   

Am I afraid to discuss any passage in Romans??? Not at all.  Let’s be sure we are discussing what it says in scripture and not what you are reading into a passage.  You completely failed to understand what I wrote.  You had already pointed out the “deserve to die” in your previous e-mail.  You stated: “that means I (a Christian)  should hate them.  I find it interesting that I am part of the Christian faith and I believe the Bible as the Word of God – AND YET – you are telling me what I ought to believe in regard to my faith and the Bible.  As I stated before – the entire passage is speaking of GOD’S WRATH.  Nowhere does it state that I, as a Christian, am to do anything.  PDW wrote that he wanted to smash my head in and then wrote – that was not a threat.  He specifically wrote a desire and you did not have a problem with that, but then you read INTO the passage that I am to hate someone when it most certainly does not say that.  All I can say is, absolutely incredible.  Those that are homosexuals are not even the focus of God’s wrath.  That is simply a byproduct of a debased mind.  God wrath will be poured on those who “did not honor him as God or give thanks to him.” 

Let me see if I can make this simpler for you.  Darth-josh the atheist – according to scripture, the problem is that you have not honored God and you do not thank Him.  It says in verse 28 that there are those who did not see fit to acknowledge God.  That sound like you guys.  So what is the result – God gives you up to a debased mind.  One of those byproducts is as you see in verse 30 is “haters of God.”  The fact that you don’t even acknowledge God results in that you hate what I believe.  You will go to hell because you do not even acknowledge.  You acknowledge Him by accepting his Son as your Savior (salvation which God provided), but you fail to do this.  According to your interpretation I should hate you as well, because God-haters is in the same list as homosexuals.  It is you that is failing to read the scripture in context.    

As far as Ruth and Naomi – all you are doing is simply reading your fantasy into scripture.  There is absolutely nothing in scripture that supports your idea.  Not even going to waste my time.

Your individual observation does not prove anything concerning cognitive dissonance.  Again, we observed a great example with PDW.  Perhaps you claim it because you do not get the result you want.  Seriously, this is so weak.  I have already said, I took one little “contradiction” that Rook believed existed, proved him wrong almost a year ago – and he never changed the website.  So the questions is, why reply on anything else?  Why waste my time?  The truth will simply get buried.  Even in this thread, there is no acknowledgement that PDW was completely wrong in his understanding of the passage (who it was written to and as to what it concerned) and you think it is an interpretation issue.  Almost laughable!!!!!  So why take the time to reply – even when you guys are proven wrong – nothing changes.  The Bible certainly speaks of the futility of throwing pearls before swine.

When my family talks about our faith – the exact opposite seems to happen.  We cannot believe all the things that happen that supports our faith.  That is what surprises us (even though it shouldn’t).   I fail to see your point.  Again, I could ask why can’t others who seem to be so smart – not see God.  It seems so simple to me.  What is the problem with all those intelligent people?  Why don’t you ask all those atheists about things that happen that simply do not support their view concerning God.

Lastly, you wrote that you hate what my faith has turned me into.  What has my faith turned me into?  A person who doesn’t agree with you and that is simply so awful???  I have a wife that I am faithful to.  I have children that I love.  I am kind to people and I am a responsible person in the community.  I give to charities and I volunteer my time to people.  I teach the word of God so that others might be saved.  That is what my faith has done to me.  I do not force my belief on anyone.  I can’t.  It would not be real.  If I lived next door to you I imagine you and I would get along except one thing – you hate my belief.  So your problem is not with me – your problem is with God, which is EXACTLY what Romans 1 speaks of and why those who hate God will endure the wrath of God.  You don’t have to worry about me.  It is God that you must deal with.  He is the one you should worry about.

I will respond to you, PDW, when I get a moment.

 

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


WhiteManRunning
WhiteManRunning's picture
Posts: 32
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Quote:I do most certainly

Quote:
I do most certainly preach that if people do not believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior that they will spend eternity in hell.  If I did not preach that, I would not be preaching the Word of God.

That is what drove me away from religion in the first place. To put it simply, if you love someone, you do everything you can to make them happy. Even if they don't love you back.

I have never understood why christians think this kind of reasoning comes from a loving and just god, and yet when many of the fictional bad guys of our culture use this same reasoning, its obviously evil. (Necromungers from Riddick, Xerxes from 300, ANY of the bad guys from the Stargate series, etc... These are the ones I can think of right off the top of my head.)

Quote:
Am I afraid to discuss any passage in Romans???

You may not be afraid of discussing it, but you do come up with an odd interpretation of it. Im sorry, but "worthy of death" is kind of difficult to misinterpret. It means its ok to kill them. I really dont see how anyone else can come up with any other interpretation. Think about it, if I publicly say "Jon doe is worthy of death" and he ends up dead the next day, guess who the police are going to be looking for.

Here's another tough one for you. "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." I really dont think there is any other way to interpret that. If you see a witch, kill her. Its fairly self explanatory, and really dumb, considering witches pose no threat whatsoever.

So, we're all coming up with different interpretations of scripture. Now, I understand how the atheists on this forum are coming up with their interpretations. Not because I share a world view with them, but because they make sense. I really dont understand how you are coming up with yours.

 

Quote:
It is God that you must deal with.  He is the one you should worry about.

If I end up at the pearly gates after I die, and god says to me: "You have lived your life with no belief in me. Now kneel before me, and beg for my forgiveness, and you shall enter my domain." I would turn around and walk straight into hell. I refuse to worship a god that controls people with fear. That makes him no better than a wife-beater.

Here's a question for you: Who said this?

"I am a kind and generous god. Worship me, and I will reward you with everything you desire. Deny me, and you will suffer."

God or Xerxes?

"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker


WhiteManRunning
WhiteManRunning's picture
Posts: 32
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Oh, and a side note. Those

Oh, and a side note. Those pictures are amazingly disgusting. Please, PLEASE put a spoiler tag, or something similar on them. I seriously had nightmares after seeing them.

"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3558
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
WhiteManRunning wrote:Oh,

WhiteManRunning wrote:

Oh, and a side note. Those pictures are amazingly disgusting. Please, PLEASE put a spoiler tag, or something similar on them. I seriously had nightmares after seeing them.

Yes, those awful images are visually grotesque and psychologically damaging (as they should be ) but apparently such is the true nature of God's justice.

  But one would assume that examples of a holy God's justice should need never be censored, nor should even the images ( in this case, photos of modern-day equivalents ) of God's justice be censored.  In fact, I regret that I could not find examples of eviscerated pregnant women with which to further reveal the true character of God's wrath.

I only wish that I could somehow transport the righteous REV back through history to the exact day and location of the brutal executions so that he could actually watch little Hebrew/ Samarian  toddlers chopped down with Assyrian swords and axes.  I would want his ears to soak in the sounds of a screaming  pregnant woman being sliced open until the body of her unborn baby spilled out onto his shoes and splashed it's blood onto his nice, clean Christian pants.

I would want the REV to stand there and watch the entire slaughter from start to finish until there was so much blood pooled on the ground that he could actually smell it.   You know, just let all of his senses absorb the whole wretched, disgusting experience.... right down to the noise of buzzing flies once they had detected the putrid stench of God's justice.

 

But of course, my appeal to his inate sense of human decency will run head-long into the impenetrable barrier of religious dogma.  He must protect his religion and defend his God no matter what the costs.

I realize that in the face of irrational religious devotion I can only fail in my foolish attempts to portray murder as murder. 

 Perhaps to the REV it is actually myself who lacks moral perception because of my failure to re-interpret murder through the revisionist eye of his religion.

At any rate, I am sick of this entire thread and the pathetic excuses made by the REV.

Yes REV, God had his reasons for brutally killing the Samarians just as Hitler had his reasons for brutally killing the Jews but since you cannot possibly comprehend the significance of my analogy I will simply raise my middle finger to you and bid you adieu...

 

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:In regard to

REVLyle wrote:

In regard to how I addressed PDW as opposed to the youth I have taught - I suppose you greet your wife the exact same way you greet someone who is attacking you?  If a teenager aggressively went after me or my faith - it is certainly within me to defend my faith.  That is all I was saying.  I am who I am.  I am just like any other human.  I attempt to keep my emotions under control just like anyone, but I do not always succeed.

"We all fall short."

I respond to my wife in much the same manner when she begins a 'preaching' episode. Except I laugh more.

Quote:
I have no problem with people interpreting scripture differently than me . . .  when there is something to interpret differently.  You nor I nor PDW can look at the time of Christ and say that the rule of the Roman Empire is up for interpretation.  The problem was ignorance on his part, not interpretation.  I suppose if PDW interpreted Romans to mean Great Britain that would be OK too because that is just his interpretation.  Very, Very weak.  You defend him simply because you share a common worldview (there is no God).

No. I simply wanted to clarify that the English version of the bible does not convey the point that you are trying to make to everyone. Prior to reading Maccabees 1, I LACKED BELIEF in the christian doctrine due to the absence of a reference to Alexander the Great. After reading the rest of the apocrypha that I had missed(I'd only read 2 Maccabees because at the time I did not know there was a 1), my DISBELIEF was yet again reasoned.

Quote:
Let me see if I can explain a little more so that you will get my drift.  A black person in the United States is called an African-American.  2800 years from now will someone believe that we were ambiguous because we did not write, “Black Man in the United States”?  Will they wonder, “Is the person an African or American AND will it be up to their interpretation to place that person as a completely different nationality simply because they do not undertake the time to do proper research of what that term meant during 2008 - a specific place in time.  Will someone say that any interpretation of that term will do and is just as valid?

Wait a minute. You've answered your own question here.

You had to explain the difference between now-and-then interpretation using then-and-now interpretation. I fully expect people in general not to know what even an 'American' means 2,800 years from now.     

Quote:
I have not once used my title to support an argument.  Since you seem to think the Hosea passage is up for interpretation – Just curious - Who are the experts who believe the "people of Samaria" were not the Hebrews in that passage?  Who is it that believes the Israelites were not conquered by Assyria?  I have not read those opinions.  Lastly, why is it that within the same passage PDW interprets the killing as a literal interpretation, but the exact people group can be interpreted any way one wants?  Once again, very weak. 

We weren't discussing 'experts'. Killing is killing. Group, individual, or entire race it is still killing.

Quote:
My issue with your interpretation of what a terrorist is stems from the fact that a threat does not make one a terrorist.  You always explain everything to your children?????  WOW, you are one patient father.  With three children, I do not have the time to always give all the reasons why I tell my children something.  You are certainly the exception.  There are times when I simply say, "Do this, or you will get a spanking."  I am the authority and the child is going to be submissive to my authority.  I guess I did not convey what I mean about "their own good."  A terrorist threatens in order for the terrorist to have power.  I threaten my kids for the good of the kids.  I do not want them to go into the street, not simply because I want power to keep them out of the street.  I do not want them to go into the street BECAUSE there is a great danger of them being hit and killed by a car. 

In your example, you give the REASON for your assertion that the children do not go into the street.

If it were truly 'for their own good' then  why not explain it before asserting 'authority'?

People need reasons, not commandments. People need advisors, not preachers. It is this idea that 'I'm right because I am the authority!' that will forever create rebellious behaviour. Your religion does exactly that except it uses 'eternal rewards' and 'infinite punishment' without saying anything other than "Do it because I said so!" Thus my original stance that both you and your alleged god are bad parents.

If we are to do what we are 'supposed' to do and not do what we are 'forbidden' then clear reasons for this affectation are needed. Almost without fail, it has been shown that there are no reasons for the behaviour illustrated in the bible to be practiced or perpetuated.

Quote:
When you speak of God as being homicidal - That is where you and I are going to have to say that this debate will go nowhere.  I am not sure from what perspective you wish to argue.  There are really only two points of view:

Quote:
#1 – Your view (there is no God) – if this was true then all the events of killing throughout history are simply random events caused by humans.  You have no one to blame but humans themselves and their sinful nature, but again you don’t believe in sin . . . do you?

Quote:
#2 – The correct view (God exists) – this view is that God owns it all.  He created it all and it all belongs to him.  All of creation us subject to his authority.  Man’s sinfulness, Satan’s deception, and God’s sovereignty all play a part in the life and death of mankind.

Thus the introduction of dogma by virtue of your phrase 'The correct view'.

That is why this discussion of theodicy can go no further toward reconciliation. Have you ever asked the 'Whence came evil?' question?

 

Quote:
There is a thread on this site in which Sapient compares numbers as to “How many God killed verses Satan.”  The interesting thing about that is that if you believe there is no God – then the answer is none.  God did not kill anyone.  So what is your problem?  If you believe as I do, God owns it all and He certainly has the right to do with humanity as he wills.  I certainly do not pray for death for anyone – but if God chooses to take it – I will still choose to worship him.  He gave life. He can certainly choose to take it away.  The only reason you and I live and breathe is that God allows it.  Look at the story of Job.  He lost his entire family except for his wife.  He lost his health and He still chose to worship God.  I hope and pray that I am that kind of man.  I am not going to argue with you or PDW that God takes life - certainly He does.  I did not argue with PDW in regard to God saying that death would come - I argued with his horrible understanding of that particular passage.

Consistently, we are confronted by this same strawman argument. I've let it pass in order to maintain this conversation because I've found it to be a point of impasse in RL discussions.

First, a lack of belief (atheism) is NOT an assertion. There are several entries by the other High-Level mods that go into this in GREAT detail. HambyDamnit and deludedgod have each written in-depth diatribes addressing the issue. Sapient, Rook, Kelly, and many others including myself have written the same arguments in message board posts for literally YEARS now.

Secondly, it shows that you really have answered the other question posed to you by me  that you really DO NOT leave open the possibility that your god may not be real

Thirdly, the idea that your 'understanding' of said passage is authoritative by any stretch of the word seems to be only within the confines of your mind, preacher. PDW sees it differently. Any discussion as to ethnicity of the victims seems to be moot since they are still victims. 

Lastly, Sapient left 'wiggle-room' in the numbers and the bible asserts that god killed the people using his people.

Quote:
I do most certainly preach that if people do not believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior that they will spend eternity in hell.  If I did not preach that, I would not be preaching the Word of God.  You did not discover anything new about me.  I have made that clear many times since I have been a part of RRS.  It is not a terroristic threat.  I tell my kids to stay out of the street for their own good.  I tell people for their own good to believe in Jesus Christ.  Is it right or wrong to warn people about a coming danger?  You think of it as a terroristic threat because you HAVE TO make yourself believe that it is never coming.  You must also convince others that God’s wrath does not await them so that they can go down the same path as you.  As I said before, your way of dealing with the Second Coming of Christ is to “make it go away.”  

Just as 'worthy of death' can't possibly mean 'hate', you want to tell me that promising someone that they'll burn in hell is not a threat? Wow. You're really stumbling here.

I have no need to 'convince' others or myself that the christian doctrine is incorrect. I have the right to reserve judgment with accord to my own reasons. YOU'RE the one telling people they shouldn't question your 'facts' with regard to a god.

By virtue of unanswered questions, I have the benefit of reasonable doubt on my side.

Which god?

Which 'christ'?

Where is hell?

I am indifferent to your declarations of 'second comings'. You may ask anyone, I look forward to a 'rapture' if it were to ever happen. C'mon. Seven years without a christian??? That doesn't sound so bad at all. Please if you will, do not plant your garden before the 'second-coming' because I would prefer NOT to smell rotting vegetables during the 'tribulation'. Have a little consideration for your atheist friends when you are 'taken up', will you? OH Yeah! Can I have your church in order to make a homeless shelter out of when y'all are gone? What size clothes do you wear? I could use a good 'sunday suit'. lol.

Quote:
Am I afraid to discuss any passage in Romans??? Not at all.  Let’s be sure we are discussing what it says in scripture and not what you are reading into a passage.  You completely failed to understand what I wrote.  You had already pointed out the “deserve to die” in your previous e-mail.  You stated: “that means I (a Christian)  should hate them.  I find it interesting that I am part of the Christian faith and I believe the Bible as the Word of God – AND YET – you are telling me what I ought to believe in regard to my faith and the Bible.  As I stated before – the entire passage is speaking of GOD’S WRATH.  Nowhere does it state that I, as a Christian, am to do anything.  PDW wrote that he wanted to smash my head in and then wrote – that was not a threat.  He specifically wrote a desire and you did not have a problem with that, but then you read INTO the passage that I am to hate someone when it most certainly does not say that.  All I can say is, absolutely incredible.  Those that are homosexuals are not even the focus of God’s wrath.  That is simply a byproduct of a debased mind.  God wrath will be poured on those who “did not honor him as God or give thanks to him.”

YOU'RE SHOCKED?? I reiterated the question because of my shock. I even used the same version of the bible that you stopped quoting because it was even harsher than the KJV.

That passage in Romans screams nothing BUT prejudice to me. Thus my incredulity.

Quote:
Let me see if I can make this simpler for you.  Darth-josh the atheist – according to scripture, the problem is that you have not honored God and you do not thank Him.  It says in verse 28 that there are those who did not see fit to acknowledge God.  That sound like you guys.  So what is the result – God gives you up to a debased mind.  One of those byproducts is as you see in verse 30 is “haters of God.”  The fact that you don’t even acknowledge God results in that you hate what I believe.  You will go to hell because you do not even acknowledge.  You acknowledge Him by accepting his Son as your Savior (salvation which God provided), but you fail to do this.  According to your interpretation I should hate you as well, because God-haters is in the same list as homosexuals.  It is you that is failing to read the scripture in context.

I cannot help that you do not live by the scripture. It is a good thing that you do not hate me as an individual. The question is: Do you hate my ideology of atheism? Do you hate homosexuality? If so then you can probably see why I continue to hate christianity, but I like the poor, demented christians.(editorialized to get revenge for your sermonizing earlier)

Quote:
As far as Ruth and Naomi – all you are doing is simply reading your fantasy into scripture.  There is absolutely nothing in scripture that supports your idea.  Not even going to waste my time.

Merely illustrating how far 'interpretation' can go, preacher.

Quote:
Your individual observation does not prove anything concerning cognitive dissonance.  Again, we observed a great example with PDW.  Perhaps you claim it because you do not get the result you want.  Seriously, this is so weak.  I have already said, I took one little “contradiction” that Rook believed existed, proved him wrong almost a year ago – and he never changed the website.  So the questions is, why reply on anything else?  Why waste my time?  The truth will simply get buried.  Even in this thread, there is no acknowledgement that PDW was completely wrong in his understanding of the passage (who it was written to and as to what it concerned) and you think it is an interpretation issue.  Almost laughable!!!!!  So why take the time to reply – even when you guys are proven wrong – nothing changes.  The Bible certainly speaks of the futility of throwing pearls before swine.

Interesting terminology that scripture. One could say that the exact same thought crosses my mind every time a 'faith-healer' goes to the doctor to have a procedure developed by science without regard to theological concerns.

Using the same metaphor with science as the 'pearls' and the 'swine' as the cognitively dissonant theist, one can see that warning holds merit.

Quote:
When my family talks about our faith – the exact opposite seems to happen.  We cannot believe all the things that happen that supports our faith.  That is what surprises us (even though it shouldn’t).   I fail to see your point.  Again, I could ask why can’t others who seem to be so smart – not see God.  It seems so simple to me.  What is the problem with all those intelligent people?  Why don’t you ask all those atheists about things that happen that simply do not support their view concerning God.

I'll ask this one again from page one: Have you ever thought that it might NOT have been 'god's will' that something happened?

Quote:
Lastly, you wrote that you hate what my faith has turned me into.  What has my faith turned me into?  A person who doesn’t agree with you and that is simply so awful???  I have a wife that I am faithful to.  I have children that I love.  I am kind to people and I am a responsible person in the community.  I give to charities and I volunteer my time to people.

I do most of those same things without a god. Your faith has apparently made you self-righteous for starters.

Quote:
I teach the word of God so that others might be saved.  That is what my faith has done to me.  I do not force my belief on anyone.  I can’t.  It would not be real.

You stated earlier in this thread that you did preach to people when giving food.

Quote:
If I lived next door to you I imagine you and I would get along except one thing – you hate my belief.

I already have a preacher for a neighbor that can't be bothered to skip church work to make sure his kids have a parent at home when NEEDED. Remember the two latch-key kids? Their dad is a preacher.

On the other side, I have a die-hard GW Bush lover that puts up pretty little lighted signs declaring his patriotism.

Across the street, I've got a kid with a Saturday night party habit and a Sunday morning commute to church that he's made under the influence.

Quote:
So your problem is not with me – your problem is with God, which is EXACTLY what Romans 1 speaks of and why those who hate God will endure the wrath of God.  You don’t have to worry about me.  It is God that you must deal with.  He is the one you should worry about.

So be it. Where's 'he' at anyway? This is the equivalent of some kid in elementary school telling me that the 'big bad bully' is going to get me after school because I don't believe his dad is a pro wrestler.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

WhiteManRunning wrote:

Oh, and a side note. Those pictures are amazingly disgusting. Please, PLEASE put a spoiler tag, or something similar on them. I seriously had nightmares after seeing them.

Yes, those awful images are visually grotesque and psychologically damaging (as they should be ) but apparently such is the true nature of God's justice.

  But one would assume that examples of a holy God's justice should need never be censored, nor should even the images ( in this case, photos of modern-day equivalents ) of God's justice be censored.  In fact, I regret that I could not find examples of eviscerated pregnant women with which to further reveal the true character of God's wrath.

I only wish that I could somehow transport the righteous REV back through history to the exact day and location of the brutal executions so that he could actually watch little Hebrew/ Samarian  toddlers chopped down with Assyrian swords and axes.  I would want his ears to soak in the sounds of a screaming  pregnant woman being sliced open until the body of her unborn baby spilled out onto his shoes and splashed it's blood onto his nice, clean Christian pants.

I would want the REV to stand there and watch the entire slaughter from start to finish until there was so much blood pooled on the ground that he could actually smell it.   You know, just let all of his senses absorb the whole wretched, disgusting experience.... right down to the noise of buzzing flies once they had detected the putrid stench of God's justice.

 

But of course, my appeal to his inate sense of human decency will run head-long into the impenetrable barrier of religious dogma.  He must protect his religion and defend his God no matter what the costs.

I realize that in the face of irrational religious devotion I can only fail in my foolish attempts to portray murder as murder. 

 Perhaps to the REV it is actually myself who lacks moral perception because of my failure to re-interpret murder through the revisionist eye of his religion.

At any rate, I am sick of this entire thread and the pathetic excuses made by the REV.

Yes REV, God had his reasons for brutally killing the Samarians just as Hitler had his reasons for brutally killing the Jews but since you cannot possibly comprehend the significance of my analogy I will simply raise my middle finger to you and bid you adieu...

 


Well, you already raised your middle finger to me, so that is a repeat. 

I am glad that I was not there to see the sights.  I am grateful that God has spared me from His judgment.  The pictures you posted and the description you gave will be a fantasy compared to what hell will be like.  That is why I am trying to warn you guys.  You love to tell how in your mind, God is this tyrant who can't wait to kill.  You just don't get it. 

God freed his people from Egypt sometime in the early 1500 BC.  They rebelled and rebelled as he provided and provided and for approx. 700 years God's patience endured.  Again, go read Nehemiah 9.  The people who endured the wrath of God did not blame God, they blamed themselves.  God brought His judgment and people died.  That is all you see.  You curse His name and yet he allows you to live another day, but you think He is not just.

Darth-Josh accuses me of self-righteousness.  It is just the opposite.  There is nothing righteous about me.  I am a huge sinner.  I fail everyday.  I echo the words of the Apostle Paul, "Why do I do the things I ought not to do, and I do not do the things that I ought to do?"  God has shown me incredible mercy.  I deserve to go to hell, but God has shown mercy and provided a way out through belief in Jesus Christ.  That same mercy is available to you, if you simply believe.  Again,  He has already shown you incredible mercy in the fact that you have another day to simply believe.  It is available to Darth-Josh, kelly, sapient, rook, and whomever.  What then?  If you refuse the salvation that God provides, then do you have the right to call Him an unmerciful God? 

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:Darth-Josh

REVLyle wrote:
Darth-Josh accuses me of self-righteousness.  It is just the opposite.  There is nothing righteous about me.  I am a huge sinner.  I fail everyday.  I echo the words of the Apostle Paul, "Why do I do the things I ought not to do, and I do not do the things that I ought to do?"  God has shown me incredible mercy.  I deserve to go to hell, but God has shown mercy and provided a way out through belief in Jesus Christ.  That same mercy is available to you, if you simply believe.  Again,  He has already shown you incredible mercy in the fact that you have another day to simply believe.  It is available to Darth-Josh, kelly, sapient, rook, and whomever.  What then?  If you refuse the salvation that God provides, then do you have the right to call Him an unmerciful God? 

Saved by faith alone?

What does Paul have to say about that issue in the epistles?

Even better, what consensus is reached in the bible regarding faith, works, works of faith, and faith by works?

I'll let you go first since you're on a preaching roll. lol.


 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
   I know I know ,,, I AM

   I know I know ,,, I AM GOD , ..... right ??????????

FORGET THE QUESTION MARKS.      me kissing Darth-Josh !   i AM what i AM


WhiteManRunning
WhiteManRunning's picture
Posts: 32
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
*sigh* No, we get it. We

*sigh* No, we get it. We really do. The entire reason I left religion in the first place is because of statements like: "The pictures you posted and the description you gave will be a fantasy compared to what hell will be like.  That is why I am trying to warn you guys." Again, anyone who is willing to torment you for eternity simply for having an opinion is the definition of a tyrant. Dont believe me? Here are some definitions of the word tyrant, taken from various sources on the net. 

1. An absolute ruler who governs without restrictions.2. A ruler who exercises power in a harsh, cruel manner.3. An oppressive, harsh, arbitrary person.4. a cruel and oppressive dictator5. A ruler who does not have the support of the people and who governs through might and fear. Explain to me how god does not fit all of those definitions.  And where is the wrath against the Assyrians? The people of Samaria rebelled against god. Im not sure what they did, but im guessing it wasnt as bad as ripping open pregnant women. So the assyrians show up and destroy them in the most brutal way possible. And that action is somehow not as bad as a little rebellion. The brainwashing you were put through as a child must be unbelievably effective for you to think this way and not see anything wrong with it.

 

"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker


WhiteManRunning
WhiteManRunning's picture
Posts: 32
Joined: 2008-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Quote:      me

Quote:
      me kissing Darth-Josh !   i AM what i AM

Awwww, how cute.

Dude, I love the random chaos you add to these threads.

"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker


Tanath
Tanath's picture
Posts: 70
Joined: 2008-02-13
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish, I'd really

ProzacDeathWish, I'd really appreciate it if you wouldn't embed disturbing images in your posts. If you're going to post something like that, it would be better to link to them instead.

----
Faith is not a virtue.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
           random

           random chaos  

oh shit my funny bone just went off

, wow I AM awake !  hold me please