I'm on the verge of Deconversion

simmo
Posts: 29
Joined: 2007-09-14
User is offlineOffline
I'm on the verge of Deconversion

Hello everyone. 
I had written out a longwinded post here about my journey from true believer to my current state of what I would call semi-decoversion, however before I could post it I hit the wrong button at the wrong time and lost it all. The Christian side of my brain tells me that God didn't want me to post my comments, therefore I lost them, whereas the rational side of my brain tells me I'm just an idiot. But I am going to try again, albeit in a shortened point form. I am looking for comments from atheists and theists to try and help me make sense of things.
- I have always gone to church and had a 'born again' experience and belief as a teenager.- I have been reading many things recently cause me to question the truth of a historical Jesus, particularly the lack of mention of him by historians of the time and the similarities of the Jesus story with prior Egyptian gods.If he did not ever exist as a living person who lived, preached, performed miracles, was crucified and then rose from the dead, then everyting about Christianity changes.- I am still skeptical about there being no creator 'god', as the intracasies of life, the world and the universe seem difficult to imagine happening by chance, so at this stage I'm still with the watchmaker people.- The idea of God answering prayer seems to be an increasingly unlikely thing to me. The number of people who cry out to God for healing and don't get a yes is incredibly high, with the number of genuine healings not  easily explained as having been medically or naturally induced is extremely small.- Despite the negativity of many towards Christianity, I see much to like about it's effect on the world. Much of the humanitarian work throughout the world is done in the name of Christ, and the selflessness that is displayed by many (and should be by all) Christians makes the world a better place. - The teachings of Jesus and Paul in the new testament  are in general great guidelines for life. - The moral codes that Christians generally seek to live by are positive ones.
So at this point I am having severe doubts about the validilty of Christianity yet still see that living a Christian life as being the best way to live. Does that sound confusing to you? Because at the moment many things are confusing me, so I would appreciate your feedback. I hope this makes sense - my original post was far more eloquent than this one, but I was not going to attempt it all again lest I lose it asecond time. If this post doesn't go through perhaps I will take it as a sign from God that I was not going to post it (not that any of you will see it) or perhaps it will just be confirmation that I am truly a moron. 


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
I will have to say that

I will have to say that Hambydammit is quite funny.  He made me laugh.  What is interesting is that he doesn't know God and he pretends to be able to tell you about God.  He doesn't know me and yet he thinks he can tell you about me as well.

 

Hambydammit wrote:

Around here, kiddo, we like references, not just rhetoric. We also don't particularly like ad hominem attacks on those with whom you may not agree, particularly when they've read more history in a month than you have in your life.

Make with the scholarship or stop with the baseless assertions.

So, evidently Hambydammit knows my age because I am a kiddo AND he knows how much I have read.  Incredible. 

Now let's get to the subject.  I am not convinced Hamby knows how to read, but I am convinced that he knows how to copy and paste.  I could do the same all day long.

He printed out a long list of things that he calls similar concerning Christ and Horus.  I would call it a half truth but that is giving him too much credit, because again it is a lie.  Here is what I mean. 

ARE THERE ANY SIMiLARITIES BETWEEN JESUS AND HORUS:  Sure there are, but not near the list that is presented here.  There are simularities between ALL gods.  They are more powerful, longer lasting, etc. . . so what.  The first question I would ask:  Which Horus is Hamby referring to.  I mean he is so learned in history and Egyptology, just curious.  Was it the Southern Egyptian Horus or the Northern Egyptian Horus.  So let me get this straight - there are over 20 different legends about Horus and your are comparing all twenty with the 1 individual of Christ and saying that it is a 1 to 1 comparison - not even close.  They seem to leave that out of the details.  So really Hamby . . . which one is it.

Is it "Horus-the-Child" (Egyptian), Harpokrates, Harsomtus, Horus (as king), Harsiese, Horus-Yun-Mutef, Harendote Harakhti, Horus of Behdet, Harmachis, and several local versions (Nekhen, Mesen, Khenty-irty, Baki, Buhen, Miam) Every one of these have different characteristics and legends to go with them.  Can you tell me the difference between Horus the king and Horus the sun-god?

 Hamby quotes:  www.religioustolerance.org - He failed to mention that this was also a part of that website.  I guess his copy paste fingers were tired.

On the other hand, Christian theologian Ward Gasque surveyed twenty contemporary Egyptologists. He asked them about the relationship whether Horus experienced a virgin birth. Ten responded. They all agreed that there is no evidence that Horus was born of a virgin 2

AND

Did Horus have 12 disciples:

Glenn Miller wrote:

...my research in the academic literature does not surface this fact. I can find references to four "disciples"--variously called the semi-divine HERU-SHEMSU ('Followers of Horus&#39Eye-wink. I can find references to Sixteen human followers. And I can find reference to an unnumbered group of followers called mesniu/mesnitu ('blacksmiths&#39Eye-wink who accompanied Horus in some of his battles. ... But I cannot find twelve anywhere." 17

Of course, the early Christian movement might have imported the concept of disciples from Egypt and changed the number so that the number of Jesus' disciples matched the number of the tribes of Israel.

Again, Gasque's survey came up blank on the matter of Horus' disciples as well.

 

Now www.religioustolerance.org feels that they can quote Glenn Miller - so what else does he have to say . . . You can read for yourself at

Glenn Miller has a multi-part article covering:

You will clearly see that Glenn Miller is not impressed with the claims of atheists.  Come on Hamby - let's be honest here.  I have no problem stating that there are some similarities, but you and other Christ Mythers are being quite dishonest.  Isn't it interesting that is this were true - It would be all over the world as a way to disprove Christianity and Egyptologist would promote this no problem and yet it doesn't happen because it simply is a load of crap. 

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


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 696
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
We eagerly await the arrival

We eagerly await the arrival of more baseless assertions to counteract the "fancy lurnin"

 

(edit: beat by minutes) 

 

 


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 696
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Isn't it interesting

Quote:
Isn't it interesting that is this were true - It would be all over the world as a way to disprove Christianity and Egyptologist would promote this no problem and yet it doesn't happen because it simply is a load of crap.

You know as well as us that "disproving" a religion doesn't tend to have that effect on its followers.  Its makers already built in that trap door: you need "faith."  In the face of mountains of reasons Christianity is incorrect, people still line up.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: I will have to say

Quote:
I will have to say that Hambydammit is quite funny. He made me laugh. What is interesting is that he doesn't know God and he pretends to be able to tell you about God. He doesn't know me and yet he thinks he can tell you about me as well.

Well, Guvna, I'm glad I make you laugh.

Quote:
So, evidently Hambydammit knows my age because I am a kiddo AND he knows how much I have read. Incredible.

I care not about your age. I induce how much you've read by what knowledge you display. I could always be wrong. Perhaps you'll prove it so.

Quote:
I am not convinced Hamby knows how to read, but I am convinced that he knows how to copy and paste.

Oh, I didn't realize I had to produce my own book before I am considered literate. Sorry I upheld literary standards by citing that which I have read instead of plagiarizing it. Perhaps you'll find it in your heart to forgive me.

Quote:

He printed out a long list of things that he calls similar concerning Christ and Horus. I would call it a half truth but that is giving him too much credit, because again it is a lie.

Lots of assertion. Are you ever going to make with the contrary evidence?

Quote:
ARE THERE ANY SIMiLARITIES BETWEEN JESUS AND HORUS: Sure there are, but not near the list that is presented here. There are simularities between ALL gods. They are more powerful, longer lasting, etc. . . so what. The first question I would ask: Which Horus is Hamby referring to.

Yes, all gods have vague similarities. Horus is not much like Kali, though. That's probably why nobody's written about the similarities. Did I seek to prove that Horus and Jesus are the same, REV? Or, did I say that there were earlier instances of almost all the elements of the bible story?

All I have to prove is that there are earlier stories with similar plot lines and themse. That is my premise. Are you going to refute it, or just blather on about my intellect and reading ability?

Quote:
Was it the Southern Egyptian Horus or the Northern Egyptian Horus.

It doesn't matter. All of the articles I quoted acknowledged these and many more incarnations of Horus. If you'd read all of them, you'd have noticed that the last one even mentioned how the various myths converged after Amenhotep applied it to himself and his family. Again, my premise, which I have demonstrated thoroughly, is that there are previous precedents for the Jesus story. Would you like to refute this, or continue to demonstrate that the stories aren't identical, which I never claimed in the first place?

Quote:
Hamby quotes: www.religioustolerance.org - He failed to mention that this was also a part of that website. I guess his copy paste fingers were tired.

You twit. It's right there at the bottom of the page.

Quote:
On the other hand, Christian theologian Ward Gasque surveyed twenty contemporary Egyptologists.

You mean this Ward Gasque?

 

Dr. Gasque is President of Pacific Association for Theological Studies. He has graduate degrees from Fuller Theological Seminary (B.D., M.Th.) and Manchester University in England (Ph.D.). He has dedicated his life to making good theology available to all of God's people. A co-founder of Regent College in Vancouver, Canada, he has also been a visiting scholar at Princeton Theological Seminary and the University of Lausanne (Switzerland). He has written two books, edited four collections of essays and more than 20 commentaries; he has also published nearly 200 articles and many book reviews. He is the New Testament editor of the multi-volume New International Biblical Commentary (Hendrickson), and has served as an editor-at-large of Christianity Today.

http://www.koinos.org/faculty.htm

You mean the guy with a doctor of theology, who spreads god's word? You mean the guy who is not an Egyptologist, who went so far out of his way to ask ten whole Egyptologists what they thought? I wonder if his samples were biased, perhaps.

Again, though, even allowing Doctor Christian Theologian his non-expert opinion, so what if he had four and not twelve? He had disciples, did he not? A clear parallel, and a clear predecessor of the myth. Again, REV, this is what I have tried to demonstrate. You have not refuted it.

Quote:
I have no problem stating that there are some similarities, but you and other Christ Mythers are being quite dishonest.

I have come on here stating nothing more than the fact that there are some similarities. I am honestly quoting the websites available, and providing links so that anyone interested can follow the links and the authors to their heart's content.

Quote:
Isn't it interesting that is this were true - It would be all over the world as a way to disprove Christianity and Egyptologist would promote this no problem and yet it doesn't happen because it simply is a load of crap.

You mean, it would be all over the world, just like it's all over the world that evolution is a proven fact.

Oh, wait.... 60% of Americans don't believe in evolution. They believe in Jesus...

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: What is

REVLyle wrote:
What is interesting is that he doesn't know God and he pretends to be able to tell you about God.

Hahahahaha. I vote for this being the biggest projection ever, seeing as this is exactly what all theists through the entire history of mankind have been doing.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: REVLyle wrote:

Quote:
REVLyle wrote:
What is interesting is that he doesn't know God and he pretends to be able to tell you about God.

Hahahahaha. I vote for this being the biggest projection ever, seeing as this is exactly what all theists through the entire history of mankind have been doing.

Simmo, I wouldn't ordinarily bother with this debate with REVLyle. I don't mind telling you that I'm doing it for your benefit. I'd like you to notice the difference in the two sides. One of us has made an assertion and then backed it up with evidence... lots of it.

Another of us has spent at least 75% of his time simply asserting that he's correct and attacking my literacy and intellect, and chiding me for doing exactly what any good researcher does -- quoting my sources! When he has produced "counter-evidence," it's been from a theologian who is not qualified to produce such evidence, and who would certainly not be considered an unbiased source.

If you've read my essays on critical thinking yet, what do you think of his evidence? All that bluster, and only one reference, and a non-qualified theologian at that!

I wonder why he felt the need to attack Rook, who is not even involved in this debate, and who I have not quoted?

Simmo, this is the way virtually all atheist-theist debates I've ever seen have gone. Where there's smoke, there's fire, as they like to say on the news.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:   He

Hambydammit wrote:

  He had disciples, did he not? A clear parallel, and a clear predecessor of the myth

 

Wait, a minute! Jesus had a name, Horus had a name!

Surprised

 


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
I will admit I didn't even

I will admit I didn't even read all the junk you wrote (copy/pasted) I have read it before.  You lose credibility when you bring up the Temple of Luxor.  Look, even though I very much disagree with Richard C. Carrier as far as theology goes (since he is an outspoken atheist) even he says concerning the Temple of Luxor - "In conclusion, the Luxor narrative has some parallels with the Christian narrative, but also with dozens of other narratives that would have been more familiar to the Christians (such as those surrounding Alexander the Great), though none present a complete or particularly startling parallel."

I really am not going to waste anymore of my time on this junk.  I have read and researched and the facts that you propose and other Christ mythers offer simply are not there.  Please feel free to read all of Richard Carrier's article at:

http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/carrier_luxor_inscription.htm

Hamby - it is time that you simply own up to the fact that this argument can't hold water.  It is fabricated for the purpose of putting forth Christianity as false and simply another myth.  It is not truth.  Even though I disagree with Carrier, at least he's honest in saying this is not the proof that many would like it to be.

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


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: "In conclusion, the

Quote:
"In conclusion, the Luxor narrative has some parallels with the Christian narrative, but also with dozens of other narratives that would have been more familiar to the Christians (such as those surrounding Alexander the Great), though none present a complete or particularly startling parallel."

Yes, REV. I know. Did I not just finish saying that all I was attempting to demonstrate was parallels, not complete parallels?

So, you've conceded my point by quoting this. Thank you.

You've also provided more evidence for me by introducing this quote that there are, in fact, dozens of similar narratives. The familiarity of these narratives to Christians is completely irrelevant since we're talking about stuff that happened before there were Christians on the planet.

You're really a great debater, REV.

Quote:
I really am not going to waste anymore of my time on this junk. I have read and researched and the facts that you propose and other Christ mythers offer simply are not there. Please feel free to read all of Richard Carrier's article at:

I'm all a-quiver.

When you're beaten, you simply assert that you're correct again, and then quit the debate. I'm sure the audience will be roaring their approval.

Quote:
Hamby - it is time that you simply own up to the fact that this argument can't hold water. It is fabricated for the purpose of putting forth Christianity as false and simply another myth. It is not truth. Even though I disagree with Carrier, at least he's honest in saying this is not the proof that many would like it to be.

REV, I wouldn't ordinarily stoop to debating you because you can't even figure out the premise you're trying to debate. You have proven my point adequately, and I thank you for your time.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Hambydammit wrote:

Quote:
Hambydammit wrote:

  He had disciples, did he not? A clear parallel, and a clear predecessor of the myth

 

Wait, a minute! Jesus had a name, Horus had a name!

Surprised

 

Cpt, you were kidding, right?  You aren't seriously making this objection, are you?

I really don't want to spend twenty minutes of my life refuting such a silly argument.  Please tell me you're kidding.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 696
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
Isn't Carrier researching

Isn't Carrier researching for a book currently on the mythicist position?   I suppose since REV respects his work so much, he'll be willing throw the Jesus story right out the window when he's done.


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

Hamby wrote:

You mean the guy with a doctor of theology, who spreads god's word? You mean the guy who is not an Egyptologist, who went so far out of his way to ask ten whole Egyptologists what they thought? I wonder if his samples were biased, perhaps. 

 

Come on Hamby - reading comprehension - you can do it.

He asked 20 Egyptologist and 10 responded.  He never presents himself as the expert Egyptologist.  I am surprised that it would bother you anyway.  Rook presents himself as an ancient text expert and yet I see nothing behind his name and when asked for credentials, he refuses.  You bore me with your idea that only Christians are biased.  Old argument and worthless, as if those who want to disprove Jesus Christ are not biased.

You wrote:

You twit. It's right there at the bottom of the page.

Great, we are calling names again.  So far I am kiddo and twit . . . nice.  Perahps you ought to count to 10 before you post.  Where on your post is the quote from Glenn Miller or Ward Gasque?  It simply is not there.  You did not copy them because it did not support your argument.  I wasn't talking about the web site reference.  You didn't present all the information.

The problem that you have is that you only quote secondary sources.  You go to the internet and copy what others have written.  Anyone who has done research - and I have - alot of it - knows that primary sources are what you go for.  For instance:

Would you please show me where, for instance:

(Primary source) that Horus taught in a temple.

(Primary source) that Horus was baptized.

Where are the Egyptian writings that we have that says these things?  If we have come to these conclusions, then where are the sources that have led to these conclusions?  What has actually happened is that we have read the Bible and we are superimposing scripture onto the story of the Egyptian myths.

Here is the synopsis of what is true:

Most of the above 'similarities' simply vanish, become irrelevant, or contribute nothing to the argument for some alleged 'identical lives' assertion for Horus and Jesus. To further highlight this, let's look at the thumbnail sketch of Horus' life given in Encyclopedia of Religions, s.v. "Horus":

"In ancient Egypt there were originally several gods known by the name Horus, but the best known and most important from the beginning of the historic period was the son of Osiris and Isis who was identified with the king of Egypt. According to myth, Osiris, who assumed the rulership of the earth shortly after its creation, was slain by his jealous brother, Seth. The sister- wife of Osiris, Isis, who collected the pieces of her dismembered husband and revived him, also conceived his son and avenger, Horus. Horus fought with Seth, and, despite the loss of one eye in the contest, was successful in avenging the death of his father and in becoming his legitimate successor. Osiris then became king of the dead and Horus king of the living, this transfer being renewed at every change of earthly rule. The myth of divine kingship probably elevated the position of the god as much as it did that of the king. In the fourth dynasty, the king, the living god, may have been one of the greatest gods as well, but by the fifth dynasty the supremacy of the cult of Re, the sun god, was accepted even by the kings. The Horus-king was now also "son of Re." This was made possible mythologically by personifying the entire older genealogy of Horus (the Heliopolitan ennead) as the goddess Hathor, "house of Horus," who was also the spouse of Re and mother of Horus.

"Horus was usually represented as a falcon, and one view of him was as a great sky god whose outstretched wings filled the heavens; his sound eye was the sun and his injured eye the moon. Another portrayal of him particularly popular in the Late Period, was as a human child suckling at the breast of his mother, Isis. The two principal cult centers for the worship of Horus were at Bekhdet in the north, where very little survives, and at Idfu in the south, which has a very large and well- preserved temple dating from the Ptolemaic period. The earlier myths involving Horus, as well as the ritual per- formed there, are recorded at Idfu."

Notice how "almost identical lives" Horus and Jesus had (smile):

  • There is no mention of the more striking claims of similarity made by the CopyCat authors (such as resurrection of El-Azar-us), even though such items would surely be noteworthy in books in the Western world(!);
  • This sketch does not even REMOTELY look 'almost identical' to the life of Jesus Christ! To look at this and make claims of 'majority overlap' would be ridiculous in the extreme.
  • The alleged similarities (which MUST be present to even START the argument about borrowing, remember) are so weak and so dwarfed by the differences between the two figures, as to leave us wondering why anyone brought this argument up in the first place...

You can read more at:  http://www.christian-thinktank.com/copycatwho2.html

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


Tomcat
Posts: 346
Joined: 2006-10-24
User is offlineOffline
simmo wrote: REVLyle, one

simmo wrote:
REVLyle, one of the difficulties I have in being able to discuss these matters with Christians is exactly some of the things that you say in your first post. When you say "nothing here but fools" that immediately brings me back to the common reference in the bible stating that only a fool would say there is no God. So as soon as someone suggests there may be no God, the Christian instantly dismisses them as being foolish based upon what the bible says. So should we just dismiss their opinion because of what the bible says and not listen to what can be well thought out and rationalised? If we go to a fundamentalist extreme, do we just dismiss atheists as agents of Satan, whose goal is to turn people such as me away from faith? Of course many of the atheists are trying to turn people away from religion, just as many Christians are trying to 'win the world for Jesus'. But should they be demonised and branded as fools for not believing what the bible has to say?

There's one thing that I believe will end this confusion and anxiety for you: the courage to say the honest truth.  Think about the times you've had the courage to do what's right, and try as hard as you can to bring that into your life right now.  Only then will you solve this dilemma.  Good luck.

The Enlightenment wounded the beast, but the killing blow has yet to land...


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
stuntgibbon wrote: Isn't

stuntgibbon wrote:
Isn't Carrier researching for a book currently on the mythicist position?   I suppose since REV respects his work so much, he'll be willing throw the Jesus story right out the window when he's done.

You must not read what I write.  I do not respect his work - but you guys do and even he is saying y'all are full of it when it comes to the Temple of Luxor.  That is my only point.  Hamby didn't like that I used a Christian source, Ward Gasque, because he is biased so I use one of your own people and evidently that is not good enough either.  Oh yeah, this is the rational response.  Never looking for truth. . . just taking a position against 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.


stuntgibbon
Moderator
stuntgibbon's picture
Posts: 696
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: stuntgibbon

REVLyle wrote:

stuntgibbon wrote:
Isn't Carrier researching for a book currently on the mythicist position? I suppose since REV respects his work so much, he'll be willing throw the Jesus story right out the window when he's done.

You must not read what I write. I do not respect his work - but you guys do and even he is saying y'all are full of it when it comes to the Temple of Luxor. That is my only point. Hamby didn't like that I used a Christian source, Ward Gasque, because he is biased so I use one of your own people and evidently that is not good enough either. Oh yeah, this is the rational response. Never looking for truth. . . just taking a position against God.

 

What is it about Richard's methods, specifically, that led you to discount his work?   


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: He asked 20

Quote:
He asked 20 Egyptologist and 10 responded.

So, he had the opinion of 10 Egyptologists.

Quote:
Rook presents himself as an ancient text expert and yet I see nothing behind his name and when asked for credentials, he refuses.

You haven't noticed the extensive bibliographies in his works? I didn't realize you had to have a PhD to write. Why are we talking about Rook? I didn't cite him, nor did you.

Quote:
Great, we are calling names again. So far I am kiddo and twit . . . nice.

Kiddo was name calling. Admitted. You are a twit. It's an observation of fact. NA NA NA NA NA NA.

Are you satisfied that I'm a name caller? Good. Now you have something to make yourself happy about losing the real debate.

Quote:
Where on your post is the quote from Glenn Miller or Ward Gasque? It simply is not there. You did not copy them because it did not support your argument. I wasn't talking about the web site reference. You didn't present all the information.

I didn't realize I'm required to quote everything on a page. I quoted what was relevant. I didn't require that quote because it didn't contradict anything I was saying, nor did it add to my argument.

My link to the webpage with the quote was the last thing on my thread, right where links ought to be.

Quote:
The problem that you have is that you only quote secondary sources. You go to the internet and copy what others have written.

Would you like me to photocopy books and post them online so you can have your primary sources? I quote what is available. Each one of my citations led straight to a source that you are free to read. The books cited have bibliographies, including primary sources.

Quote:

Would you please show me where, for instance:

(Primary source) that Horus taught in a temple.

(Primary source) that Horus was baptized.

REV, I cited all of this. I'm terribly sorry I cited books that have their own bibliographies, and not the bibliographies themselves. They are simply not in full text form on the internet. You'll have to do your own reading. I'm sorry.

Quote:

Notice how "almost identical lives" Horus and Jesus had (smile):

  • There is no mention of the more striking claims of similarity made by the CopyCat authors (such as resurrection of El-Azar-us), even though such items would surely be noteworthy in books in the Western world(!);
  • This sketch does not even REMOTELY look 'almost identical' to the life of Jesus Christ! To look at this and make claims of 'majority overlap' would be ridiculous in the extreme.
  • The alleged similarities (which MUST be present to even START the argument about borrowing, remember) are so weak and so dwarfed by the differences between the two figures, as to leave us wondering why anyone brought this argument up in the first place...

You haven't once even acknowledged that you understand my original statement. Try going back and reading it again. I never said that Horus' life was identical, or even parallel to Jesus'. I said that there are precedents for nearly all of the elements of the biblical myth, including Jesus. I have demonstrated this, and all you've done is cite Christians who say, "The similarities aren't exact enough to draw a parallel."

Fine, REV. The point doesn't have to be conceded because it was never in contention. There are precedents. There are differences, too. Lots of them. That's how myth evolves.

There are many elements in the life of Horus that don't line up with Jesus. Are you happy?

There are many elements in the life of Horus (in its many versions!) that are reminiscent, even strikingly similar, to that of Jesus. SIMILAR, REV. You know the word, right? The stories are not identical. There are similarities. THAT IS MY POINT.

You mentioned Horus, and blithely dismissed the claims of similarities. I cited numerous sources affirming the existence of similarities. That is all. You have not refuted this. You have simply cited Christian sources who say the similarities are not strong enough for their liking. This does absolutely nothing to my point.

The charts I posted are conglomerates. Admitted. They are taken from vastly different accounts of Horus over many centuries. Admitted. Not one story of Horus contains even a third of those elements. Admitted. THIS IS NOT MY POINT, NOR IS IT RELEVANT. Most, or all, of those elements, are present in at least one version of the Horus myth, and all of these myths predate Christianity.

QED

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
 I didn't realize I'm

 I didn't realize I'm required to quote everything on a page. I quoted what was relevant. I didn't require that quote because it didn't contradict anything I was saying, nor did it add to my argument.

 The quotes by Glenn Miller and Ward Gasque were certainly relevant.  They were addressing the topic we were addressing.  They simply did not support what you were proposing.

This is getting to the point of being pointless.  The deception that is taking place is that Christ mythers make it appear that they look at the life of Horus or any number of the ancient myths and do a 1 to 1 comparison.  I could easily bring 20 people into a room and find as many similarities between you and the 20 of them.  There are more similarities between Pres. Lincoln and Kennedy (1 to 1) than between Horus and Jesus Christ (between 15 and 20 to 1).  I am sure you have seen the comparisons.  Christ mythers are somewhat less than honest in their presentation.  You tell me, why isn't your disclaimer  Not one story of Horus contains even a third of those elements ever seen at the top of these websites?  It is presented as a 1 to 1 comparison each time.  I simply took the story of Horus because to address each god that this has attempted with would simply take too much time. 

The first time I saw this - I questioned, was Jesus just a copy.  The exact same thing that is happening on this thread.  After doing research I found out the deception that is contained in these websites and movies that are simply not telling the truth.

Lastly, I did not just cite Christians.  I cited Carrier as well.  He doesn't believe it and this is simply bad history.  It doesn't hold water.  This is a poor argument that is perpetuated over the internet time and time again.  It is simply false in the way it is presented.  There is no doubt that the gods of the ages have been presented as having some of the same attributes of Yahweh.  That is not news worthy nor does it take away from what Scripture presents about God.  Man has always worshipped false images of the One True God.  That is even presented in the Bible - so no news there.

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


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
You're right.  It is

You're right.  It is getting pointless.  Until you demonstrate a basic comprehension of my actual premise, it's not doing any good to respond to you.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
You tell me Hamby - what did

You tell me Hamby - what did you think of the Zeitgeist movie?


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I've already answered that

I've already answered that question in other threads, and it's not relevant to this discussion.

Until you can adequately explain to me what my point is, I'm not going to bother with you.  I don't know how else I can state it, and you seem incapable of understanding it.

We can't very well debate if you don't even know what you're arguing against, can we?

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Why don't you simply link

Why don't you simply link me to one of those threads. 

Hamby wrote:

Until you can adequately explain to me what my point is, I'm not going to bother with you.

That is a good one.  You want me to explain your point?  I think that is your job.  You want to support crap??? That is your business.  Let me know when you write a paper on the similarities between Zeus and Yahweh.  Let me start you out with Zeus used lightning and in Job, God also commands the lightning bolts.  WAIT A MINUTE - I think we are on to something. . . .

I think I will simply address what simmo asked of me.  You seem to want to avoid what you know is pure hogwash.  Again, even one of y'alls heros - Richard Carrier doesn't buy into the same junk. 

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


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: Why don't

REVLyle wrote:

Why don't you simply link me to one of those threads.

Hamby wrote:

Until you can adequately explain to me what my point is, I'm not going to bother with you.

That is a good one. You want me to explain your point? I think that is your job.

No, he wants you to explain it back to him to demonstrate that you grasp his point.

Your words here demostrate that you most likely aren't able to follow his point... 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
simmo wrote: REVLyle, one

simmo wrote:
REVLyle, one of the difficulties I have in being able to discuss these matters with Christians is exactly some of the things that you say in your first post. When you say "nothing here but fools" that immediately brings me back to the common reference in the bible stating that only a fool would say there is no God. So as soon as someone suggests there may be no God, the Christian instantly dismisses them as being foolish based upon what the bible says. So should we just dismiss their opinion because of what the bible says and not listen to what can be well thought out and rationalised? If we go to a fundamentalist extreme, do we just dismiss atheists as agents of Satan, whose goal is to turn people such as me away from faith? Of course many of the atheists are trying to turn people away from religion, just as many Christians are trying to 'win the world for Jesus'. But should they be demonised and branded as fools for not believing what the bible has to say?

Simmo, I have a question. I know I haven't been involved with this thread the whole way through but I have been observing it. Sometimes those that are merely spectating can learn more than those actively involved.

I have been watching this exchange between RevLyle and Hamby and I wonder if you have been playing spectator as well. Have you noticed that when the Rev first showed up his initial comment was:

RevLyle wrote:
Let me first say that if you are reading at this site - most of what you read is just plain crap. That is about as plain as I can put it.

Does that sound like someone who is secure in their beliefs and who looks at all evidence objectively? That seems to be a pretty broad statement to make about an entire site and an entire group of members, doesn't it?

RevLyle began his very first statement, not with a defense of his faith or words of encouragement for you to help you reaffirm yours, rather he immediately hurled an insult at everyone here and most of what is written on these pages.

If there is strength in his faith he surely has not shown it, instead he seems to be displaying a fear that others may have an opposing view and attacking like a cornered animal.

If christianity were the one true faith wouldn't it be easier to defend? Wouldn't it be open to question and doubt... even non-belief in the eyes of an all loving god?

I am not getting into the biblical debate, though I have read it I am no expert. What I would like to ask you to do is look at ALL the evidence as objectively as possible. Read the claims that are being made and research them yourself. Research them from all type of sources, pro and con, especially independent. Ask yourself why you believe what you believe, look at what led you to that belief. Were you indoctrinated or did you really 'choose' christianity. All of this examination might lead you to points of view that make you angry, or make you feel deceived but it is important you keep digging. Look at all the claims and honestly assess the evidence to support them.

You will see a few things if you begin to dig into the evidence.

  1. Most christians believe what they because they have been indoctrinated and they have never examined their faith critically.
  2. Many things attributed to god through the ages have been more readily and evidentially explained by science.
  3. When read objectively and thoroughly, STRAIGHT THROUGH, the bible makes a strong case that it actually is primitive mythology and not the inerrant word of god.

I urge you to continue honestly looking for answers, from your first post this seems to be your goal.

If you are so inclined check out some of the essays by Hamby here on reasoning and debate techniques,

The Mad Rantings of Hambydammit

And some of the essays and articles from Todangst,

Compilation of works from Todangst

 

 

 


simmo
Posts: 29
Joined: 2007-09-14
User is offlineOffline
You are quite correct BGH, I

You are quite correct BGH, I have been spectating through this ongoing conversation. It's obvious that I would need to take a lot of time to do my own research into this and many other issues that I have expressed concern about. I have always had doubts about my faith, which I am sure all Christians have at some time or another, however have been reasonably content to go along with my life maintaining these beliefs as a way of explaining my existence, purpose and my eternal future. I realise that there is much about Christianity that makes no sense, and that is what I am trying to explore. As I have stated before, I still want it to be true, but am having a hard time being convinced that it is.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
  There are many other

 

There are many other cases that can be made against Christianity other than the fact that Christian themes existed before the bible. I'll just gloss over a few of the bigger ones that I like. You can research this stuff on your own, but I have a feeling you'd be interested in the basic arguments first. Yes?

Here are a few of the big ones that I enjoy:

 

1) Evolution is very corrosive to the creation story. (It's also a fact, and it can be backed up with clear evidence. There is no debate among scientists about the truth of evolution. Zero. None).

2) Biblical lineages set the age of the eart at about 6,000 years ago, which is very from the truth.

3) There is absolutely no way Noah's Ark could be true. You don't even need science to figure that one out. Science just makes it look even more silly than it already is by common sense.

4) The bible often contradicts itself. A local expert could explain some of these to you much better than I could.

5) No support for the story of Jesus' life outside of the bible. If Jesus really did all of those amazing things, it's strange that no one seemed to care or thought them important enough to write down.

6) Almost invariably, religious people practice the religions of their community. Also, religions must be taught. No one is born with a belief in God. If you would have been born overseas, it's extremely likely that you would have practiced Islam.

 

And now I must have some dinner.

 

*edit* added the words "among scientists"

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Simmo,  Let me address a

Simmo, 

Let me address a couple of things that I have seen already.  I am not going to attempt to defend my position to every single person who disagrees with me.  Of course they disagree - I am a Christian and they are Atheists. 

I now have a guy, BGH, who says I am like a cornered animal and that I am struggling to defend my faith.  I simply stated what the Bible says about those who say there is no God - they are fools.  I believe the Bible, the question is - do you.  Again, I am not saying that they are not intelligent - but the beginning, just the beginning of wisdom, is the fear of the Lord (Psalm 111:10)  I do easily defend my faith and I use scripture to do just that.  Already I have been criticized for that as well.  If I was not secure in my faith - why am I on their turf.  I still believe.  No problem here.

AND OF COURSE Todangst decides to join the conversation.  I can tell this guy really appreciates me.  He attacked me before and challenged me to read Rook's stuff - which you know is a lot of stuff - I begin to pick it apart just looking at one simple issue - which took three days of debate and Rook finally conceded.  I didn't hear from Todangst again until now.  BY THE WAY, would you tell Rook I am still waiting for him to correct his "Biblical Contradictions" - I think 5 months is enough time to delete an error.  BUT OF COURSE - again the issue here is not truth - it is anti-theism.

You asked for websites against the Egypt - Christ myth thing:

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

http://singinginthereign.blogspot.com/2007/07/zeitgeist-movie-is-christianity.html

http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/carrier_luxor_inscription.htm (This is one of their guys - an atheist)

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/copycat.html

Let me assure you that none of these sites will meet their approval because according to them only their links are unbiased and credible - YIKES.

You are correct in your thought that your kids would not know Christ unless you or someone told them about Jesus.  Romans 10:4 - How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?


But there is another statement that Hamby made that is just plain false.

He wrote:  Simmo, they were born not believing in a god. If it had never been taught to them, what would their beliefs be? You got it. Atheism. They're old enough to understand that some people believe that there's a god, but there isn't really one. It's kind of like Santa Claus, except that a lot of adults believe it. That's it. Simple.

Again that is in direct opposition to God's word and the observable world.  Every single culture, every single people group we have ever encountered worshipped something.  We have never stumbled into any group in any part of the world that did not worship.  It is a universal truth.  Why is that - BECAUSE there is something in man that causes him to desire a relationship with God.  Even though their worship was misdirected - as Hamby shows us with worship of who knows how many gods - they still worshipped.  Your kids would worship something no matter what - you and your wife have been correct in teaching them the truth.  Jesus Christ is THE truth.  I wrote it and I have no doubts about it.

What this site is about is suppressing that truth.  Read Romans 1. 

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.

What Paul is writing is that all these guys and gals know there is a god, but they are actively suppressing that truth and exchanging it for a lie.  How do they know - God has shown it to them but they refuse to believe.  Not only do they refuse to believe they suppress what they know to be true.  Why do you think they are investing so much time in this website.  This is an active pursuit.  If they really thought there was no god - then just go on with your life without him - but they can't.  They must be actively suppressing the truth.

So what do these guys worship - ask them.  Many of them they are simply worshipping themselves
(their minds).  Again just like the passage - they are claiming to be wise - but they are fools.  The wisdom of which I speak is not my own - but the wisdom of God. 

If you would like for me to address your issues - I would be more than happy.  I love preaching the Word of God and I love to teach it to people.  My goal in even being here is to help some see the truth.  If I can help you, all of this would be worth it.  Just let me know.

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


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: Simmo, Let

REVLyle wrote:

Simmo,

Let me address a couple of things that I have seen already. I am not going to attempt to defend my position to every single person who disagrees with me. Of course they disagree - I am a Christian and they are Atheists.

I now have a guy, BGH, who says I am like a cornered animal and that I am struggling to defend my faith. I simply stated what the Bible says about those who say there is no God - they are fools. I believe the Bible, the question is - do you. Again, I am not saying that they are not intelligent - but the beginning, just the beginning of wisdom, is the fear of the Lord (Psalm 111:10) I do easily defend my faith and I use scripture to do just that. Already I have been criticized for that as well. If I was not secure in my faith - why am I on their turf. I still believe. No problem here.

AND OF COURSE Todangst decides to join the conversation. I can tell this guy really appreciates me. He attacked me before and challenged me to read Rook's stuff - which you know is a lot of stuff - I begin to pick it apart just looking at one simple issue - which took three days of debate and Rook finally conceded. I didn't hear from Todangst again until now. BY THE WAY, would you tell Rook I am still waiting for him to correct his "Biblical Contradictions" - I think 5 months is enough time to delete an error. BUT OF COURSE - again the issue here is not truth - it is anti-theism.

You asked for websites against the Egypt - Christ myth thing:

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

http://singinginthereign.blogspot.com/2007/07/zeitgeist-movie-is-christianity.html

http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/carrier_luxor_inscription.htm (This is one of their guys - an atheist)

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/copycat.html

Let me assure you that none of these sites will meet their approval because according to them only their links are unbiased and credible - YIKES.

You are correct in your thought that your kids would not know Christ unless you or someone told them about Jesus. Romans 10:4 - How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?


But there is another statement that Hamby made that is just plain false.

He wrote: Simmo, they were born not believing in a god. If it had never been taught to them, what would their beliefs be? You got it. Atheism. They're old enough to understand that some people believe that there's a god, but there isn't really one. It's kind of like Santa Claus, except that a lot of adults believe it. That's it. Simple.

Again that is in direct opposition to God's word and the observable world. Every single culture, every single people group we have ever encountered worshipped something. We have never stumbled into any group in any part of the world that did not worship. It is a universal truth. Why is that - BECAUSE there is something in man that causes him to desire a relationship with God. Even though their worship was misdirected - as Hamby shows us with worship of who knows how many gods - they still worshipped. Your kids would worship something no matter what - you and your wife have been correct in teaching them the truth. Jesus Christ is THE truth. I wrote it and I have no doubts about it.

What this site is about is suppressing that truth. Read Romans 1.

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.

What Paul is writing is that all these guys and gals know there is a god, but they are actively suppressing that truth and exchanging it for a lie. How do they know - God has shown it to them but they refuse to believe. Not only do they refuse to believe they suppress what they know to be true. Why do you think they are investing so much time in this website. This is an active pursuit. If they really thought there was no god - then just go on with your life without him - but they can't. They must be actively suppressing the truth.

So what do these guys worship - ask them. Many of them they are simply worshipping themselves
(their minds). Again just like the passage - they are claiming to be wise - but they are fools. The wisdom of which I speak is not my own - but the wisdom of God.

If you would like for me to address your issues - I would be more than happy. I love preaching the Word of God and I love to teach it to people. My goal in even being here is to help some see the truth. If I can help you, all of this would be worth it. Just let me know.

 

No fancy science stuff here. Just one comment: Notice how he uses the Bible to prove the Bible?

That would be like me reading The Cat In the Hat to you and claiming that it was absolutely true, and we know it's true, because the book clearly states that it's true. And if you don't believe it, that's okay, but you're being foolish.

You can't use the information in question to prove the truth of itself. That's just common sense. No science required. Can you accuse me of being narrow-minded when I say that? Does it sound like I'm just being biased? That's just the way it is, I'm afraid.

 

I now have a guy, BGH, who says I am like a cornered animal and that I am struggling to defend my faith.

 

He said that because you were slinging more mud than arguments. Atheists and Theists both accuse the other side of being full of crap. The difference is that atheists can usually back up their claims with more than insults, and theists tend to resort to scripture. We've already discussed why that's silly.

 

Again that is in direct opposition to God's word and the observable world.  Every single culture, every single people group we have ever encountered worshipped something.  We have never stumbled into any group in any part of the world that did not worship.  It is a universal truth.  Why is that - BECAUSE there is something in man that causes him to desire a relationship with God.

 

 If there is something in man that causes him to desire a relationship with God, then why don't they all have a desire to have a relationship with the same god? And if they all acquired some kind of a relationship with a god, then why didn't that god tell them all the same things? Why is it that some religions don't even involve a god? I'm guessing that suddenly those ones don't count?

Actually, it's more likely than earlier societies knew much less about the world and used the idea of gods to fill the gaps in their understanding. There is a lot of knowledge that we have today that even Christians take for granted. Today we know why it rains, why it snows, why the seasons change, why there is a day and a night, why the sun moves across the sky, among other very basic things. There was a time when people did not know these things. How do you think they explained them? Since different cultures were once very isolated from one another, they just came up with different theories.

I personally have no desire to have a relationship with a god, but that doesn't mean that I worship myself or my mind. If you've done some serious studying in your lifetime, then you are aware of this rule: "The more you learn, the less you know."

I'm fully aware that I don't everything, and there are many subjects that I know absolutely nothing about. Most of the people here know more about these things than I do. If I worship anything at all, it is most definitely not my nerdy, homely appearance or my relatively mediocre brain.

Good guess though. =)

 

What Paul is writing is that all these guys and gals know there is a god, but they are actively suppressing that truth and exchanging it for a lie. 

Bolded Text: That's funny, we say the same thing about you guys! 

 

How do they know - God has shown it to them but they refuse to believe.  Not only do they refuse to believe they suppress what they know to be true.  Why do you think they are investing so much time in this website.  This is an active pursuit.  If they really thought there was no god - then just go on with your life without him - but they can't.  They must be actively suppressing the truth.

 

We invest time in this website not because we are trying to prove anything to ourselves, though educating yourself is hardly something to look down on. Religion is harmful and irrational and self-serving. We don't just congregate to talk about how untrue it is (though that part is always fun), but also to talk about how unfair it is and the negative impact it has on the country. Among other things. 

 

So what do these guys worship - ask them.  Many of them they are simply worshipping themselves
(their minds).  Again just like the passage - they are claiming to be wise - but they are fools.  The wisdom of which I speak is not my own - but the wisdom of God.

 

Not a very wise God, I guess.

 

 

 I love preaching the Word of God and I love to teach it to people.  My goal in even being here is to help some see the truth. Reject everything I see and insist that it's wrong because the Bible says so.

 

 No pressure, Simmo. Just observe and take your time. =)

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: So what do

REVLyle wrote:

So what do these guys worship - ask them. Many of them they are simply worshipping themselves (their minds).

Rev, do you believe that everyone MUST worship something? Why do you feel that if someone does not worship your god, they must therefore worship something else? Why do you project this need for worship onto the whole of society? 

 

REVLyle wrote:
Again just like the passage - they are claiming to be wise - but they are fools. The wisdom of which I speak is not my own - but the wisdom of God.

How do you know this is the wisdom of god? If you say because it is in the bible, how do you KNOW the bible is the word of god? 


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Bad dinner Archeopteryx? 

Bad dinner Archeopteryx?  Very weak response.  Of course I use the Bible, I am a Christian.  Do you understand the words I am typing.  I am not using the Bible to prove the Bible - although it does that quite well.  I am using the Bible to simply show Simmo exactly what is happening right here, right now in our world.  You and Hamby really need to work on that reading comprehension thing. 

 

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


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: Bad dinner

REVLyle wrote:

Bad dinner Archeopteryx? Very weak response. Of course I use the Bible, I am a Christian. Do you understand the words I am typing. I am not using the Bible to prove the Bible - although it does that quite well. I am using the Bible to simply show Simmo exactly what is happening right here, right now in our world. You and Hamby really need to work on that reading comprehension thing.

 

 

It was a very good dinner! Thank you so much for asking. Jambalya + Steak + Peppers + Gigantic Bowl = Delicious, delicious, delicious. Jambalya is the best thing that ever happened to rice.

 

*ahem*

 

My response was weak? Try looking at the one you just typed. Here is every reason why it sucked:

 

1) "Very weak response". <---No reason why is given. We're not just going to take your word for it.

2)  I am not using the Bible to prove the Bible - although it does that quite well --- All the stories about Santa Claus do a good job of proving their own truth, too. I predict you will refuse to understand why those two statements ARE the same thing, exluding the value you place on one over the other.

 3) And you end it with the traditional theist ad hominem. Do you see this, simmo? He has accused hamby and me of having no reading comprehension. That means you shouldn't trust anything we say. Obviously. Because we're so illiterate and everything.

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Okay, let us make some

Okay, let us make some points here:

1) Science, Cosmology, Evolution are perfectly capadable with Religion (even Christianity)

2) The actions of REV are not good enough to generalize Theists.

I don't think this insult exchange will get anywhere.


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
Simmo - First, I commend

Simmo - First, I commend you on coming here and expressing your doubts.  I wish I had done that much sooner in life than I did, but thankfully, I have a very patient and understanding friend.

Second - Can you tell me what your faith does for you and where did it come from?   


simmo
Posts: 29
Joined: 2007-09-14
User is offlineOffline
A few more questions and

A few more questions and comments - Rev - I guess what I am largely looking for in all of this is confirmation outside of the bible for Jesus being who Christians claim him to be. At this point the creator God concept is something I'm still prepared to accept as a reasonable possibility, but Christianity as the only true expression of God is what I am most interested in pursuing at present.To the atheists - one thing I have noticed is that many of you seem to adopt personas on here that I think some Christians would see as being somewhat satanic in outlook (dark clothing, death imagery etc.). Have some/any of you gone down that path as a means to express your objections to Christianity?Cpt_Pineapple - You have stated that your are a non-Christian theist. Could you briefly describe what your beliefs are and whether you align yourself with any particular religion. Thanks.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: Okay,

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Okay, let us make some points here:

1) Science, Cosmology, Evolution are perfectly capadable with Religion (even Christianity)

2) The actions of REV are not good enough to generalize Theists.

I don't think this insult exchange will get anywhere.

 

1) I'm not of the position that science/evolution in themselves absolutely disprove the existence of a god or that a belief in a god is not at all compatible with science. But evolution does contradict the literal interpretation of the bible. If you don't practice a literal interpretation, that's just opening up an entirely new problem.

I'm with RD on this one. It's possible to interpret the bible in such a way as to reconcile religion with science, but that seems more like a delusional optimism than anything. It's a slippery slope to climb.

 

2) I'm not making general statements about theists based on what REV is saying. I'm making those statements based on what I've seen other theists say and do in my own experience. Actually, my comments tend to be about Christians only, so using the word "theist" there is probably a bad word choice, you're right.

I also concede that not all Christians will act that way, since I have met a few who were more open-minded, but it rarely happens.

I understand why you don't like the generalizations, and I agree with you. I'll make it a point to be more specific about the positions I bash. 

 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


simmo
Posts: 29
Joined: 2007-09-14
User is offlineOffline
Can you tell me what your

Can you tell me what your faith does for you and where did it come from?   
My faith came from my upbringing, then from reaching a point where I felt that I needed to accept Jesus as my saviour in order to be acceptable to God and inherit eternal life. I realise that sounds extremely cliche'd but that was how I felt at that time. What faith does for me is provide an explanation as to why I am here, that life is not meaningless and that this life is not all there is. Again pretty basic stuff, but that's generally what I think it does for me (and many others). That hope for the future beyond this life is so important for many people, particularly when what they have here is so miserable for them.


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
simmo wrote:   To the

simmo wrote:

 

To the atheists - one thing I have noticed is that many of you seem to adopt personas on here that I think some Christians would see as being somewhat satanic in outlook (dark clothing, death imagery etc.). Have some/any of you gone down that path as a means to express your objections to Christianity? 

 

Well, I can't speak for the creators of this site, but if I understand correctly, they actually enjoy having a more relaxed atmosphere for debates around here. We may act a little bizarre sometimes, but everyone on the internet does that.

(Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = ? )

 

As far as dark clothing and death imagery go, I'm not sure that I've noticed that. There is nothing inherently wrong with dark colors. Tuxedos are black and those are not considered to be satanic. Some people just prefer dark clothing over light clothing. I have a lot of black clothing of my own, but it's simply a matter of color preference and nothing more.

As for the site itself being of a dark color, that is probably because staring into a computer monitor is a lot like staring into a light bulb. It's not especially good for your yes. Black backgrounds with white text hurt your eyes less.

As for the skull in my display picture: It has nothing to do with death really. It's a non-human skull and it's ceramic. It was a gift to me from a high school teacher I had a good relationship with. While taking picture for another site, I had the fake skull sitting there on my desk, so I snapped a shot. It also had a Hamlet reference as a caption, but I removed it when I made it my avatar.

The reason I chose the particular picture as my avatar and the reason I also chose the name Archeopteryx was because I am very interested in evolution. I am by no means an expert or an evolutionary biologist, but I think it's interesting to read about.

So when you look at it, don't think "death". Think "archeology" and see if it makes a difference. =)

 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVLyle wrote:

AND OF COURSE Todangst decides to join the conversation.

Just to point out that you can't even follow someone else's points accurately.

Quote:

I can tell this guy really appreciates me.

I actually don't remember you.

Quote:
 

He attacked me before and challenged me to read Rook's stuff - which you know is a lot of stuff - I begin to pick it apart just looking at one simple issue - which took three days of debate and Rook finally conceded. I didn't hear from Todangst again until now.

Sorry to have asked you to read, I can tell such a task is a struggle for you. You seem to struggle with just grasping an argument, let alone responding to one...

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote: Okay,

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Okay, let us make some points here:

1) Science, Cosmology, Evolution are perfectly capadable with Religion (even Christianity)

2) The actions of REV are not good enough to generalize Theists.

I don't think this insult exchange will get anywhere.

The term theists can mean so much, so I have no idea what you believe.  But I will simply say - It is ridiculous to think that a Christian will debate the important things of this life without the Bible.  I am only labeled a theist by this site.  I am specifically a Christian.  I do not begin to say that I represent all theists. 

I will say that I appreciate the question posted by BGH, but it is a trick question.

How do you know this is the wisdom of god? If you say because it is in the bible, how do you KNOW the bible is the word of god?

God's Word (The Bible) is the Word of God and therefore either God is a fool in what He says and he knows nothing, which would negate Him being called God or the very words of God (Scripture) contains the eternal wisdom of God.  This latter is most certainly true.  Does the Bible say that it is the word of God - sure it does.  The beginning of the written word of God is the 10 commandments.  The Bible states that it was written with the finger of God (Exodus 31:18).  Other books were written by men whom God commanded - Examples include Isaiah 30:18 and Jeremiah 30:2 and in the New Testament 1 Corinthians 14:37.  So God used men to write His Word.  Therefore, the Bible contains the words that God wanted to tell man.

So the Bible states that it is the Word of God.  Of course, you want proof outside the Bible to prove the Bible is God's word.  In essence, what you are asking is:  Isn't there a "Book A" that states that the Bible is true or God's word?  Since the Bible is not allowed to defend itself in your eyes, where is that other book?  So if there was "Book A" and I quoted it to support the validity of scripture, you could easily respond:

1.  If God inspired "Book A" why isn't it in the canon of scripture?

2.  If it is NOT inspired by God, then why should we simply trust what a man or woman wrote? 

 

There is no way I can answer that question to your satisfaction.  You either trust it or not.  Y'all do not.  I do. 

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


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote: God's Word

REVLyle wrote:

God's Word (The Bible) is the Word of God and therefore either God is a fool in what He says and he knows nothing, which would negate Him being called God or the very words of God (Scripture) contains the eternal wisdom of God.

Or the various books of the bible contain writings of primitive men, demonstrated by the fact that 1) the bible makes all sorts of clearly false claims, such as that the earth rests on pillars and 2) contains vague passages (that have been copied from copies and translated several times over) that theists simply reinterpret to fit their current needs.

Quote:
 

This latter is most certainly true. Does the Bible say that it is the word of God - sure it does. 

What really matters is whether an unbiased reading of the bible points to an unearthly origin. And it doesn't. Unless you're raised christian, or in a christian culture, you're not likely to hold that the books of the bible are the words of any god.

 

Quote:
 

There is no way I can answer that question to your satisfaction. You either trust it or not. Y'all do not. I do.

But not for any good reason. 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


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

todangst wrote:
REVLyle wrote:

AND OF COURSE Todangst decides to join the conversation.

Just to point out that you can't even follow someone else's points accurately.

Quote:

I can tell this guy really appreciates me.

I actually don't remember you.

Quote:
 

He attacked me before and challenged me to read Rook's stuff - which you know is a lot of stuff - I begin to pick it apart just looking at one simple issue - which took three days of debate and Rook finally conceded. I didn't hear from Todangst again until now.

Sorry to have asked you to read, I can tell such a task is a struggle for you. You seem to struggle with just grasping an argument, let alone responding to one...

Hey Todangst, this is exactly what you did last time (attack me and bring nothing to the conversation).  Good to see you again.  I think you failed to read what I posted earlier.  Let me write in simple sentences for you.1.  I read.2.  I confronted Rook.  (Let me know if I am going too fast for you)3.  Rook conceded.4.  Todangst was quiet afterward 

I wonder if you could do #4 again.

 

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
todangst wrote:REVLyle

todangst wrote:
REVLyle wrote:

AND OF COURSE Todangst decides to join the conversation.

Just to point out that you can't even follow someone else's points accurately.

Quote:

I can tell this guy really appreciates me.

I actually don't remember you.

Quote:
 

He attacked me before and challenged me to read Rook's stuff - which you know is a lot of stuff - I begin to pick it apart just looking at one simple issue - which took three days of debate and Rook finally conceded. I didn't hear from Todangst again until now.

Sorry to have asked you to read, I can tell such a task is a struggle for you. You seem to struggle with just grasping an argument, let alone responding to one...

Hey Todangst, this is exactly what you did last time (attack me and bring nothing to the conversation).  Good to see you again.  I think you failed to read what I posted earlier.  Let me write in simple sentences for you.

1.  I read.

2.  I confronted Rook.  (Let me know if I am going too fast for you)

3.  Rook conceded.

4.  Todangst was quiet afterward 

I wonder if you could do #4 again.

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


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVLyle wrote:
todangst wrote:
REVLyle wrote:

AND OF COURSE Todangst decides to join the conversation.

Just to point out that you can't even follow someone else's points accurately.

Quote:

I can tell this guy really appreciates me.

I actually don't remember you.

Quote:

He attacked me before and challenged me to read Rook's stuff - which you know is a lot of stuff - I begin to pick it apart just looking at one simple issue - which took three days of debate and Rook finally conceded. I didn't hear from Todangst again until now.

Sorry to have asked you to read, I can tell such a task is a struggle for you. You seem to struggle with just grasping an argument, let alone responding to one...

Hey Todangst, this is exactly what you did last time (attack me and bring nothing to the conversation).

No, what I actually did was point out how you managed to fuck up what Hamby said: he was trying to get you to represent his argument accurately.

 

Quote:

Good to see you again. I think you failed to read what I posted earlier. Let me write in simple sentences for you.

No, I read it.

Quote:

1. I read.

But without the ability to accurately demonstrate reading comprehension.

Quote:

2. I confronted Rook. (Let me know if I am going too fast for you)

3. Rook conceded.

4. Todangst was quiet afterward

I wonder if you could do #4 again.

I didn't do it the first time. I really don't care if Rook conceded some issue to you, particuarly on your 'say so'. There's nothing for me to be 'silent about' in the first place.

 Now, can you get on with working out your blunder here: your inability to grasp Hamby's point? Or do you need even simpler sentences?

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
I will say that at least

Todangst, 

I will say that at least you make me laugh.  My wife thought it was quite funny as well.  Are you sure you are not gifted in the area of comedy.

You are so easy to read.  I was sure you would question my character:  This is what Rook posted.

You're right, and in Greek, in the LXX, it has been translated to be adelphos. The word is metaphorical or general. There is a variant of the Hebrew word used which would have meant brother, literally, however it is not that variant. So you are correct. I wonder then why the translaters of some of the versions used "brother" instead of "kin"? Perhaps by using the LXX they determined that in order to keep good with the theme in the Greek NT, they decided to keep it "brother", but that doesn't seem to jive well with the Hebrew, or the intentions of the seventy scholars.  This is why I am not a fan of english versions, because I don't like how they alter or paraphrase a word or sentence in Greek into english.

But either way, you're correct.  I should go through and update my list. Please help me get my resources so I can continue to historically show the inadequacies of the Bible and early Christians.
My wish list.
Fri, 2007-05-18 14:22 reply | write to author | quote

This may be tough for you though, because Rook didn't write in simple sentences.  I would enjoy our conversations so much more if you actually had something to say.  Back to the issue of Simmo.  You have distracted me long enough.

By the way, I knew exactly what Hamby wanted from me.  I think they teach that "repeat what I just said to you" stuff in Conflict Resolution 101.  I simply was not going to do his work for him.

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


Archeopteryx
Superfan
Archeopteryx's picture
Posts: 1037
Joined: 2007-09-09
User is offlineOffline
  I would like to randomly

 

I would like to randomly point out that regardless of the fact that anything was conceded by Rook at any point, that still has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation at hand, and I don't think anyone is yet aware why that keeps getting brought up.

Rook agreed with you about the translation of a word, so that means you are automatically right about everything? I don't see the point in continually bringing that up.

 

Also, I don't think you did get his point.

 

Hamby: "Biblical themes were around before the Bible was written. Here are some stories where biblical themes can be found."

 

REV: "None of those stories are the same as Jesus."

 

Point missed.

 

A place common to all will be maintained by none. A religion common to all is perhaps not much different.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Hey, I simply took one of

Hey, I simply took one of those myths that supposedly has a biblical theme and showed that it did not.  I guess we could sit here all day and take them one by one.  AGAIN, hopefully for the last time, Is there similarities in attributes given to all gods - YES.  In the myths, did the gods interact with man - YES.  I have gladly agreed with this.  But is it true that:

"god A" is a lot like Jesus

"god B" is a lot like Jesus

"god C" is a lot like Jesus 

AND SO ON - the answer is No

CAN YOU  - take all the gods, and all the stories and point out that some of the same themes have occured such as

"god A" died

"god B" walked on water

"god C" rose from the dead

THEREFORE Jesus is just a combination of all these other themes and happenings - sure you can.  Again, I can take you into a room with 20 other people and it would be amazing how much you would have in common with the 20 stories all lumped together.  My problem is that the Christ mythers are very deceptive in presenting exactly what they have done.  They act like it is a 1 to 1 comparison when it simply is not.

In the case of Horus (many different legends and many different gods) and yet in presenting the similarities Christ mythers present it as, "Here is THE story of Horus as compared with THE story of Jesus." 

That is deception.

THAT IS MY POINT

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


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
REVLyle wrote:

REVLyle wrote:

Todangst,

I will say that at least you make me laugh. My wife thought it was quite funny as well.

You're need to boost your ego is rather pathetic, but this is the internet after all...

 

Anyway, not sure why you thought it was funny, seeing as you're only asking me to accept that my friend conceded some minor issue.

Perhaps being right is something so new and exciting for you that you can't contain yourself?

Quote:

You are so easy to read. I was sure you would question my character:


 I questioned your ability to follow a point. I still do.

 

Quote:

By the way, I knew exactly what Hamby wanted from me.

Then you were trolling when you avoided doing what he asked?

Why not just represent his position accurately then?

Oh, and if you are so concerned for substantive debate, why didn't you respond to my other post?

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


REVLyle
TheistTroll
Posts: 236
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Finally a question and not

Finally a question and not an attack.  Why do I not respond to your other posts?  I am not quite sure of the language here but my understanding is that each topic is a thread and the writings in each thread are the posts.  If I am wrong on this let me know.  IF that is the case I am assuming you want to know why I do not debate you on your threads.  I have studied a number of years and received degrees concerning Biblical scholarship.  My understanding is that your field of study is Psychology.  I have not studied that field.  As I stated earlier, I do not go into the science area and attempt to write about that which I do not know.  I would not do the same in your field either.  I simply write concerning either philisophical issues that I believe the Bible addresses or issues within the Bible itself.  Simmo is asking about theological issues and therefore I responded.  If he would have asked about a scientific issue - I may have read it, but I would not have responded.

IF you would like to quit this petty stuff - I am right there with you.  You may not remember me, but I remember you and you have only attacked me and never addressed the issues I have brought up.  So you decide.   

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


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
I'm going to respond to

I'm going to respond to several different posters here, though it'll mostly be directed at simmo...everyone else, look for your name Smiling

simmo wrote:
Hello everyone.


I had written out a longwinded post here about my journey from true believer to my current state of what I would call semi-decoversion, however before I could post it I hit the wrong button at the wrong time and lost it all. The Christian side of my brain tells me that God didn't want me to post my comments, therefore I lost them, whereas the rational side of my brain tells me I'm just an idiot. But I am going to try again, albeit in a shortened point form. I am looking for comments from atheists and theists to try and help me make sense of things.
- I have always gone to church and had a 'born again' experience and belief as a teenager.
I, too, was quite "born again" and raised more-or-less christian. At the age of 7 or 8 I was made to go to church/sunday school, by 14 I was a Young Earth Creationist. I then went more and more liberal, and questioned everything. It tooks a long time for me to go atheist, and I finally did 3 years ago (thank no-god) It is a tough process. I'm 25, and haven't told my parents yet, for fear of ostracization.
simmo wrote:
- I have been reading many things recently cause me to question the truth of a historical Jesus, particularly the lack of mention of him by historians of the time and the similarities of the Jesus story with prior Egyptian gods.If he did not ever exist as a living person who lived, preached, performed miracles, was crucified and then rose from the dead, then everyting about Christianity changes.
You may wish to look into the Old Testament as well. Much of it seems to have been copied from Canaanites and Sumerians/Babylonians, particularly the Creation Story, Noah's Ark and Job. Look up the Ugaritic Texts for some background on the Canaanite end of things, google "the epic of Gilgamesh" for the Babylonian/Sumerian version of Noah's Ark. There's also evidence that the Canaanites ripped off their Creation story from the Sumerians. Look up Sumerian mythology on google for evidence on that (sorry I'm not much more help, I can't recall any sources off hand)
simmo wrote:
- I am still skeptical about there being no creator 'god', as the intracasies of life, the world and the universe seem difficult to imagine happening by chance, so at this stage I'm still with the watchmaker people.
This has been addressed earlier in the thread.
simmo wrote:
- The idea of God answering prayer seems to be an increasingly unlikely thing to me. The number of people who cry out to God for healing and don't get a yes is incredibly high, with the number of genuine healings not easily explained as having been medically or naturally induced is extremely small.
A good question that may sway you into the "prayer can't heal" side is this: has a human who has lost a limb ever grown it back? With or without being prayed over, has it happened?
simmo wrote:
- Despite the negativity of many towards Christianity, I see much to like about it's effect on the world. Much of the humanitarian work throughout the world is done in the name of Christ, and the selflessness that is displayed by many (and should be by all) Christians makes the world a better place.
This is not an argument for the truth of the religion. One can take the morality of the good parts of the bible without believing in the deity of it.
simmo wrote:
- The teachings of Jesus and Paul in the new testament are in general great guidelines for life.
I must heartily disagree. Both were in favour of slavery. Paul was in favour of making women second-class citizens, and had a near-phobia of sex, which is evident in his rules regarding it (I, for one, would not want to restrict my sexual relations as much as Paul demands, and I don't think it's especially healthy to restrict yourself in this area. I realize not all of us are especially sexual, but some are, and those people being restricted can have very negative side effects). Jesus required his followers to adhere to a rather draconian version of the Mosaic code-which was anything BUT moral-upon penalty of hellfire, leaves no room for change in the religion, and seemingly condoned spousal abuse by claiming one could only divorce in the case of adultery. Also, Paul and Jesus disagreed on one fundamental aspect of Salvation. Jesus said that people could only get into heaven by adhering to the Mosaic Code to the fullest, while Paul said that only ethnic Jews had to, and then saying that the law is abolished. This is a contradiction.
simmo wrote:
- The moral codes that Christians generally seek to live by are positive ones.
Not an argument for the truth of the religion. Besides, with a few minor exceptions, those morals are followed by all humans. Furthermore, we find similar moral codes in other social animals, thus suggesting an evolutionary reason for morality.
simmo wrote:
So at this point I am having severe doubts about the validilty of Christianity yet still see that living a Christian life as being the best way to live. Does that sound confusing to you? Because at the moment many things are confusing me, so I would appreciate your feedback. I hope this makes sense - my original post was far more eloquent than this one, but I was not going to attempt it all again lest I lose it asecond time. If this post doesn't go through perhaps I will take it as a sign from God that I was not going to post it (not that any of you will see it) or perhaps it will just be confirmation that I am truly a moron.
I will remind you that the largest charities and humanitarian organizations in the world today, outside of the Red Cross/Red Crescent/Red Swastika and Salvation Army, are primarily secular. So you can lead a moral life without religion.

simmo wrote:
My greatest concern is with friends and my 'status' within my church community. I have held numerous leadership type positions within my church over the years and many people look to me as someone to whom they can turn to. Not so much in the sense of being a great adviser on spiritual or biblical matters, but as friend who cares about them. Many of these relationships I have had for years and value immensely, but they are sustained very much by our continued shared church community involvement. I don't want to lose these (or even really have them diminished in value to these other people) but it would obviously be hypocritical for me to continue being an active attending church member if I don't believe it any more.

I must tell you that those who would leave your side when you leave the faith are not true friends. Changing your belief system is a big thing, and people need support during that time. Those who leave you when you leave your faith are simply conditional friends, nothing more, and you're likely better off without them. I lost many friends over my atheism, and contnue to do so. Recently a long-time friend told me, essentially, to never speak to her again after a short discussion on evolution and whether it should be taught in school. She said something to the effect of "if you want to believe we came from monkeys and lead a sinful life, fine, but don't force my kids to believe it" and then told me off.

I do agree, however, regularly attending church when you don't believe is not cool, and not honest. It's also cowardly. Whatever you do, if you abandon your faith, you should notdo this.

simmo wrote:
Another issue I have is the difficulty in discussing my doubts with other Christians (hence my presence here) - at this time I don't think it's my place to place doubts in the minds of other believers, because at this stage, if I'm wrong and Christianity is true, then I don't want to be responsible for leading others away from their faith. I know you will say that is a highly flawed argument, but as you hopefully can see from my writings so far I'm in a very strange place in my mind at present. I still really want God/Jesus to be true, because he provides a concrete meaning to life and a hope for a life beyond this one, which I think are positive things (if they are true, which I recognise at this point they probably aren't). I have plenty more to ask and say, so for those of you prepared to continue reading and commenting alongside this fairly simplistic thought process it would be most appreciated. I would really like to hear from the Christians on here as well. Thanks.
I fully understand. During the last year or so of my christianity, I KNOW I caused a lot of doubts, because I actively questioned EVERYTHING. I felt very bad, for a while, but I figured that it is so hard to change peoples' minds on things that I probably wouldn't with my questions. It was eventually the Ugaritic Texts which made me drop the religion (it was not the only objection I had, but it was the clincher) and I brought this up to christian friends as well. My last few churches were quite liberal, and accepted such questioning-with limits. I'm guessing you're in a fairly conservative church (correct me if I'm wrong). What I've noticed is christians are fine with others questioning aspects of the belief, such as contradictions in the bible, but it's rare to find one who will tackle the tough questions. It's sad.

kellym78 wrote:

Oh no you didn't, you will not be bringing him into your comfortable little deist club.

Kelly, we shouldn't be trying to deconvert the guy. We should answer his questions, reply to his concerns-but not actively try to recruit him into atheism. Let's let him make up his own mind.

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Time will tell.

 

*Fiddles fingers*

You too, pineapple. Let's leave the proselytyzing to the christians and muslims.

simmo wrote:
To the atheists - one thing I have noticed is that many of you seem to adopt personas on here that I think some Christians would see as being somewhat satanic in outlook (dark clothing, death imagery etc.). Have some/any of you gone down that path as a means to express your objections to Christianity?
This is a stereotype. While there certainly are these types, it's more likely that you know of them because of their outspoken nature than anything else. That said, I think you may misunderstand Satanism. There are 2 types of Satanism. There's Satanism, which is essentially hyper atheism-anti theism combined with a worship of the individual, the self. There's also Theistic Satanism, as in people who actually worship Satan. These people probably number in the dozens worldwide, if there are any at all. (There are those who say they worship Satan to scare off fundamentalists, however...) Black masses, Satanic rituals and the like are just medieval rumours spread by the Catholic Church to stamp out opposition. That said, I personally wear what I feel like (currently a lime green shirt and jeans) and never try to put on a dark persona, except to mock goths. I have been "shocking" before, but only to launch a non-violent attack radical religious people, and always within reason. For example, I make YouTube videos, and one I made recently was directed at a Messianic Jew who was spreading hate speech against homosexuals using the bible [he has since taken down his homophobic video]. He wasn't far from calling for their execution. My video is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2Td_TDSX_8 The image is intentionally shocking (though it's YouTube appropriate, so no nudity involved), and some bad words were used in the songs, but it was, I believe, adequate, given the circumstances.
simmo wrote:
Cpt_Pineapple - You have stated that your are a non-Christian theist. Could you briefly describe what your beliefs are and whether you align yourself with any particular religion. Thanks.
He's a deist. http://www.deism.com/


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
simmo wrote: To the

simmo wrote:
To the atheists - one thing I have noticed is that many of you seem to adopt personas on here that I think some Christians would see as being somewhat satanic in outlook (dark clothing, death imagery etc.). Have some/any of you gone down that path as a means to express your objections to Christianity?

Simmo,

As with most organizations that do not have a central dogma to dictate the way one should or should not act, atheists are individuals and find many ways to express themselves or their personality.

I also would like to add to my earlier comments to you, I am not trying to deconvert or convince you of anything. I think the most rational reason to come to non-belief is through self study and looking at the reasons why you believe what you believe. If you ever want to know why any of us lack belief or what we think about certain subjects, just ask. Make no assumptions and continue to inquire as you have been, this will help you most of all in this quest.

If you want to know something specifically from me or any other member, do not be afraid to ask and if it is a question you wish not to ask in a public thread feel free to private message any one of us. I am not going to proselytize to you on the merits of non-belief, I am going to give you honest answers why I do not believe, I am going to explain how I came to atheism and I am going to tell you where I think the evidence is lacking regarding god.

This quest may take you six months, a year, or ten years and the conclusion you reach may not be one that I agree with but it will be one that suits you. As long as you keep your mind open and you analyze things objectively, you will reach an honest conclusion for yourself. Some of what you find may be tough to deal with at times but ultimately it will be worth it.

 

 

 


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Simmo wrote: Cpt_Pineapple

Simmo wrote:

Cpt_Pineapple - You have stated that your are a non-Christian theist. Could you briefly describe what your beliefs are and whether you align yourself with any particular religion.  Thanks.
 Panentheist, and no particular religion
 

 

BenfromCanada wrote:

You too, pineapple. Let's leave the proselytyzing to the christians and muslims.

Fine, I'll play nice.