Why offer the same evidence you dismiss?

AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
Why offer the same evidence you dismiss?

Any discussion about the existence of God, or the truthfullness of a certain religion centers around evidence. However, competing religions often cite the SAME evidence; thus theists simultaniously claim and dismiss the same evidence.

Christians, why do you claim the existence of the Universe is proof of your God, but dismiss it as evidence of Allah, Zeus, Oden, Vinishu, or the Flying Spagetti Monster?

Why do you accept the Bible's claim of being divinely inspired while simultaniously dissmissing similar claims within the the Koran and the Book of Mormon? (as well as every other "Holy Book")

Why do you dismiss miracles claimed by Mormons, Muslims, Hindu's, and Buddhists while demanding that your miracles be acknowledged as evidence of the divine?

How can you claim faith as "evidence" of your God, while ignoring the faith of billions of people who believe in different God's?

How can you cite answered prayers as proof of your God's divine intervention, while refusing to acknowledge answered prayers of Muslims as proof of the divine intervention of Allah? (side note: All Gods are very bad at answering prayers... as such all have a statistical success rate equal to chance. There is no statistical advantage for praying to one God as opposed to the another.)

Arguments for truth of any religion, or the existence of any God, consist primarily of demanding that your "evidence" be accepted without question, while identical evidence, presented by competing religions, is wholely dismissed.

Is there any honest argument for your God which you are not accepting on one side and simultaniously dismissing it with the other? Is there any evidence for your God which can not also be used to prove the existence of the God(s) from other current, or former, religions?

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


Randalllord
Rational VIP!
Randalllord's picture
Posts: 690
Joined: 2006-04-12
User is offlineOffline
I grew up in a Southern

I grew up in a Southern Baptist church and over the years I have heard these same questions and below are the answers I heard Christians give.

AZSuperman01 wrote:
Any discussion about the existence of God, or the truthfullness of a certain religion centers around evidence. However, competing religions often cite the SAME evidence; thus theists simultaniously claim and dismiss the same evidence.

Some of them found parts of the truth too, but Satan has confused them so that they don't see the whole truth like I do.

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Christians, why do you claim the existence of the Universe is proof of your God, but dismiss it as evidence of Allah, Zeus, Oden, Vinishu, or the Flying Spagetti Monster?

It just proves that God created the universe, some are just deceived as to who the real God is.

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Why do you accept the Bible's claim of being divinely inspired while simultaniously dissmissing similar claims within the the Koran and the Book of Mormon? (as well as every other "Holy Book")

1.The Bible tells me so.
2. Satan lied to them like just like he did to Eve.

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Why do you dismiss miracles claimed by Mormons, Muslims, Hindu's, and Buddhists while demanding that your miracles be acknowledged as evidence of the divine?

This is proof that Satan is powerful and can decieve many. That's why you should only trust the Bible as Gods one true message to humankind.

AZSuperman01 wrote:

How can you claim faith as "evidence" of your God, while ignoring the faith of billions of people who believe in different God's?

Satan has deceived them. We should only follow Jesus as he is the only one that has withstood the temptations of Satan. All others are therefore false.

AZSuperman01 wrote:

How can you cite answered prayers as proof of your God's divine intervention, while refusing to acknowledge answered prayers of Muslims as proof of the divine intervention of Allah? (side note: All Gods are very bad at answering prayers... as such all have a statistical success rate equal to chance. There is no statistical advantage for praying to one God as opposed to the another.)

God works in mysterious ways. The Bible says (quoting God) "My thoughts are not your thoughts."

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Arguments for truth of any religion, or the existence of any God, consist primarily of demanding that your "evidence" be accepted without question, while identical evidence, presented by competing religions, is wholely dismissed.

The Bible tells me that there is only one true way to God, therefore all others are false.

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Is there any honest argument for your God which you are not accepting on one side and simultaniously dismissing it with the other? Is there any evidence for your God which can not also be used to prove the existence of the God(s) from other current, or former, religions?

One can not know God except through faith. Evidence is not proof. When you invite Jesus into your heart, you will have all the proof you'll need.

______________________________________

With answers like those above, it should be clear that no rational discussions will be honestly entertained as the religious mind is not operating from the prespective of logic.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
It's true! Praying to the

It's true! Praying to the Flying Spaghetti Monster is just as useful as praying to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Angelic_Atheist
Silver Member
Angelic_Atheist's picture
Posts: 264
Joined: 2006-04-06
User is offlineOffline
oooo that evil deceiving

oooo that evil deceiving satan...curse himmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!

Yeah I was fed the same lines.
Sure would like to see some new variations though

We must favor verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth.
~ Richard Dawkins


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
From what I read in the

From what I read in the Bible, God is much more evil than Satan. And, notice nobody ever heard his side of the story.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


GodStoleMyFriends
GodStoleMyFriends's picture
Posts: 173
Joined: 2006-08-09
User is offlineOffline
I think Satan is actually a

I think Satan is actually a pretty decent guy. He never killed anyone in the Bible. He didn't flood the entire world. He didn't harden a Pharoah's heart just so he could be incredibly nasty to the Egyptians.

Hell, the only "bad" thing Satan did was revolt against a God who is, in the words of Richard Dawkins,"...jealous and proud of it, petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist, an ethnic-cleanser urging his people on to acts of genocide." Hell, I think I'd do the same thing if I was an angel! Fuck Yahweh.

If Hell does exist...who wants to bet that Satan is really throwing massive parties and orgies 24/7? I mean, many things god considers to be sinful (sex before marriage, cursing, etc)...are actually pretty fun. So maybe...just maybe...God is bullshitting us about how Hell really is.

...well, if he existed.

"If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss Bank."-Woody Allen

"Atheism is life affirming in a way religion can never be."-Richard Dawkins


Angelic_Atheist
Silver Member
Angelic_Atheist's picture
Posts: 264
Joined: 2006-04-06
User is offlineOffline
GodStoleMyFriends wrote:

GodStoleMyFriends wrote:

If Hell does exist...who wants to bet that Satan is really throwing massive parties and orgies 24/7? I mean, many things god considers to be sinful (sex before marriage, cursing, etc)...is actually pretty fun. So maybe...just maybe...God is bullshitting us about how Hell really is.

...well, if he existed.

Just call me a Hellbound Heathen

We must favor verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth.
~ Richard Dawkins


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
Randalllord wrote:With

Randalllord wrote:
With answers like those above, it should be clear that no rational discussions will be honestly entertained as the religious mind is not operating from the prespective of logic.

I grew up in a Mormon church... they are especially fond of the "others found part of the truth" argument. They claim all religions contain some truth (since all religions were derived from the beliefs of Adam and Eve). They claim the truth has been distorted and changed over the years. They teach that the Mormon church is the only religion which contains the "fullness of the gospel."

Obviously, all of the arguments you demonstrated could be used to justify any religious believe. Substitute "Allah" and "Koran" in the right places and you'll have "evidence" for Islam.

I am always amazed at how quick religious people are to dismiss the experiences of others, while becoming irate if their own experiences are questioned.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


Reddragon
Posts: 54
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Hi... this is a good

Hi... this is a good question. It's one that I think of from time to time since I have friends who follow other religions or are atheists. What makes my religion real and there's false??? First, what makes my religion real to me, is the experiences I have within the religion. First believing in God and having experiences, then accepting Jesus as my Savior which came with even more experiences. And then asking for the Holy Spirit which came with even more experiences. I think the real iceing on the cake is that I know that God has communicated with me, and He's made me know that his will for my life is for me to tell people about Jesus. Now with that being said, there's no way that I could follow some other religion unless the god of that religion reveals himself to me as God has done, and proves that he is over and above the Christian God. In other words if I have experiences with other gods that are greater than the experiences I have with God, then I have a reason to leave Christianity to follow these other gods.

Now, I don't deny that people have experiences in their religions with miracles or anything like that. I'm sure there are spirits envolved with these.

AZSuperman01 wrote:
Christians, why do you claim the existence of the Universe is proof of your God, but dismiss it as evidence of Allah, Zeus, Oden, Vinishu, or the Flying Spagetti Monster?

To me, all organized systems are proof of some higher being. There's nothing there that says that it has to be the Christian God. Now since I believe in the Christian God it makes since for me to automaticly assume that these systems are in place because of Him.

Quote:

Why do you accept the Bible's claim of being divinely inspired while simultaniously dissmissing similar claims within the the Koran and the Book of Mormon? (as well as every other "Holy Book")

The same personal experiences that cause me to believe in God over others,also cause me to follow the Bible over other books.

Quote:

Why do you dismiss miracles claimed by Mormons, Muslims, Hindu's, and Buddhists while demanding that your miracles be acknowledged as evidence of the divine?

I don't deny their miracles. I believe spirits can do miracles and can directly effect reality. Most of the time we call it witchcraft. BTW I can't accept nore reject any specific miracles since I've never studied this in other religions.

Quote:

How can you claim faith as "evidence" of your God, while ignoring the faith of billions of people who believe in different God's?

I would have to say God has earned my faith. I like to replace the word faith with the word trust, as in God has earned my trust. It's sort of like if your parents always did what they said they were going to do. If they tell you they're going to take you to the store later in the day. You would believe it without questioning because they've earned your trust. BTW I re-read the above quote and I'd like to add that faith is not evidence of God. My experiences with God are my personal proof(to myself) that God is real. So my believing in God isn't based on faith since faith is believing without proof.

Quote:

How can you cite answered prayers as proof of your God's divine intervention, while refusing to acknowledge answered prayers of Muslims as proof of the divine intervention of Allah? (side note: All Gods are very bad at answering prayers... as such all have a statistical success rate equal to chance. There is no statistical advantage for praying to one God as opposed to the another.)

I believe that there are answered prayers in other religions. They are answered by spirits IMO. God just happens to be over and above all of these spirits unless they can prove otherwise.

Quote:

Arguments for truth of any religion, or the existence of any God, consist primarily of demanding that your "evidence" be accepted without question, while identical evidence, presented by competing religions, is wholely dismissed.

If someone is looking for a religion, I recomend that they try different religions before choosing one. But I usualy recomend that they try Christianity first. I assume that if they experience what I have experienced then they will stick with it. Otherwise I wish them good luck on finding a religion. I stay away from the "this religion is better than that religion" argument because like your saying I can't proove Christianity is more real than Islam. All I can do is hope the person will come to their own conclusions based on their own experiences.

Quote:

Is there any honest argument for your God which you are not accepting on one side and simultaniously dismissing it with the other? Is there any evidence for your God which can not also be used to prove the existence of the God(s) from other current, or former, religions?

I have this same question. All I have is my personal experiences. Beyond that I wonder what types of personal experiences other people have within their religions. And if they don't have personal experiences then what is their personal proof that their religion is real?

Hey, I gotta go. I hope all of that was clear.

If I tell people the Gospel, it's not because I care about whether or not they go to heaven or hell. I do it because I honestly believe that this is God's will and purpose for my life... weeeeeeeee!!!


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I have had personal

I have had personal experience eating spaghetti, and watching monster movies. I have also seen personally birds and airplanes flying. That counts as evidence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's existance I guess.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
You do realize that every

You do realize that every single religion that exists (or ever existed) has or had people who have had personal experience with its God or gods. And mentally ill people have had personal experience with celebrities being in love with them, or meeting aliens or Elvis's ghost.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
Reddragon wrote:Hi... this

Reddragon wrote:
Hi... this is a good question. It's one that I think of from time to time since I have friends who follow other religions or are atheists. What makes my religion real and there's false??? First, what makes my religion real to me, is the experiences I have within the religion... Now, I don't deny that people have experiences in their religions with miracles or anything like that. I'm sure there are spirits envolved with these.

It's interesting how the first "proof" you offer is personal experience. However, you're quick to dismiss the personal experiences of others as less powerful "spirits."

What reason do you have to belittle thier religious experiences? (Other than an a priori dismissal of every religion which is different than yours.)

Quote:
I think the real iceing on the cake is that I know that God has communicated with me, and He's made me know that his will for my life is for me to tell people about Jesus.

How did God communicate with you? How can you be sure it wasn't a "spirit?" Or perhaps your own mind? Some Muslims believe God has revealled their purpose in life is to tell people about Mohammed... how can you be sure they're wrong?

Quote:
... In other words if I have experiences with other gods that are greater than the experiences I have with God, then I have a reason to leave Christianity to follow these other gods.

What if religious experiences could be scientifically proven to be naturally caused inside the brain? What if religious experiences could be duplicated in a labratory by stimulating certain parts of the brain, or increasing certain naturally-produced chemicals?

If a natural explanation for the experiences you've had is found, will you accept that there is no God?

Quote:
To me, all organized systems are proof of some higher being. There's nothing there that says that it has to be the Christian God. Now since I believe in the Christian God it makes since for me to automaticly assume that these systems are in place because of Him.

Is God more or less organized than the universe he created? If God is more organized, more complex, or more complicated than the universe, than he is "proof" of some even greater being...

If the universe can serve as "proof" of a God, then that God MUST serve as "proof" of an even greater God... and that greater God MUST serve as "proof" of an even greater God still.

If something as complex as God can exist without a creator, then why can't something as small and feeble (by comparison) as the universe, exist without a creator?

Quote:
The same personal experiences that cause me to believe in God over others,also cause me to follow the Bible over other books.

Why should your personal experiences be given a higher value than the personal experiences of those in other religions?

Quote:
I don't deny their miracles. I believe spirits can do miracles and can directly effect reality. Most of the time we call it witchcraft. BTW I can't accept nore reject any specific miracles since I've never studied this in other religions.

How can you be so certain that your religion, that your miracles, that your experiences, are not a result of "spirits?" As opposed to a result of an interaction with God?

Perhaps an even better question is this: Why would God allow billions of people who are seeking him to be lead astray by "spirits?" Is God not more powerful than the spirits?

Quote:
My experiences with God are my personal proof(to myself) that God is real. So my believing in God isn't based on faith since faith is believing without proof.

Have you attempted to experience other God's, for comparison sake? (You can't recognize a fake Rolex unless you've seen a real one.)

Quote:
I believe that there are answered prayers in other religions. They are answered by spirits IMO. God just happens to be over and above all of these spirits unless they can prove otherwise.

It's interesting... Your entire argument has been this: "My religion looks just like theirs, but theirs is fake. They have the same proofs I do, but theirs are done by spirits, whereas mine is done by God."

Other than your personal opinion, you haven't given any reason for someone to believe Christianity is any more likely to be true than Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, or Voodoo for that matter.

What evidence do you have that your "proofs" are a result of God's direct interaction, and that the same "proofs" being offered by other religions are from some kind of lesser spirit?

Quote:
If someone is looking for a religion, I recomend that they try different religions before choosing one.

Out of curiosity, how many religions have you tried? Did you try worshipping Allah? Did you study the Book of Mormon? Have you tried to reach enlightenment like Buddha? Just how much exploring have you PERSONALLY done?

Quote:
All I have is my personal experiences. Beyond that I wonder what types of personal experiences other people have within their religions. And if they don't have personal experiences then what is their personal proof that their religion is real?

Kinda makes you wonder doesn't it? If God is as great as everyone thinks he is, and if God is as good as everyone thinks he is, then why wouldn't he be able to create such an obvious difference between the "true" church and the "false" church, that everyone would be drawn to worship him?

Most people inherit their religion the way they inherit their accent. The grow up around it, and they don't know any better. It's rare enough for someone to change denominations... it's extremely rare that anyone changes from one set of core beliefs to another.

In a world where every religion offers the same "proofs," and where there are natural explanations for the "proofs," which don't require the existence of a supernatural being... there is only one logical conclusion you can make.

There is no God.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


Reddragon
Posts: 54
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:You do

MattShizzle wrote:
You do realize that every single religion that exists (or ever existed) has or had people who have had personal experience with its God or gods.

Yeah, I think I gave my oppinion on this at the beginning of the post.

Quote:

And mentally ill people have had personal experience with celebrities being in love with them, or meeting aliens or Elvis's ghost.

LoL, yeah I know this. I've been called crazy by atheists before. It's understandable. If I were in your shoes and had no reason to believe in God, I would say the same thing. What would be interesting to me would be to meet an atheist who had experiences but left their religion anyways.

If I tell people the Gospel, it's not because I care about whether or not they go to heaven or hell. I do it because I honestly believe that this is God's will and purpose for my life... weeeeeeeee!!!


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Well then I'll be your

Well then I'll be your huckleberry. Honestly, I was studying to become a priest, and I actually felt the call of God to take that profession. Among other feelings of God's presence when I was a Christian, I had very severe ones especially alone in the Chapel. Yet now I am an atheist. Most people on this board have once been Christian and felt the very same way you do.

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


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
I really was thinking that

I really was thinking that reddragon was doing parody. I've seen atheists reply just like that to mock.

You know, it's so hard to tell the satire from the real thing, sometimes.

btw, Dan Barker is another case of Christian-turned-atheist.

You can find a bit about his book ,a href='http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/'>Losing Faith in faith on the internet. It's a great resource, if you ever get the chance to use it.

Eye-wink

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Losing Faith in Faith is a

Losing Faith in Faith is a great book. I must have read it about a dozen times by now.


Reddragon
Posts: 54
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
ShaunPhilly wrote:I really

ShaunPhilly wrote:
I really was thinking that reddragon was doing parody. I've seen atheists reply just like that to mock.

You know, it's so hard to tell the satire from the real thing, sometimes.

btw, Dan Barker is another case of Christian-turned-atheist.

You can find a bit about his book ,a href='http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/'>Losing Faith in faith on the internet. It's a great resource, if you ever get the chance to use it.

Eye-wink

Shaun

I'm a christian. I'm always interested in learning about other people's beliefs and why they believe as they do. This is all interesting stuff. I'm looking at the Losing Faith in Faith site now.

If I tell people the Gospel, it's not because I care about whether or not they go to heaven or hell. I do it because I honestly believe that this is God's will and purpose for my life... weeeeeeeee!!!


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
Dan Barker is a great guy.

Dan Barker is a great guy. I had the opportunity to meet him when he came to Phoenix for a book signing.

While he was signing my copy of Losing Faith in Faith, I asked him if he could still "speak in tongues." He said he could. AND... he said it still felt the same.

Dan said he could still do all of the things, and feel all of the feelings, which he used to associate with the Holy Spirit and God - but he now understands there are natural biological explanations for the things he felt.

I'd say that's a good example of someone who "had an experience" and left the church anyway. Heck, it's a guy who STILL has experiences, but has accepted that there is a natural explanation for experiences he used to consider "supernatural."

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


kmisho
kmisho's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2006-08-18
User is offlineOffline
Satan wrote the bible to

Satan wrote the bible to deceive people into thinking there is a mysterious god.


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
AZSuperman01 wrote: While he

AZSuperman01 wrote:

While he was signing my copy of Losing Faith in Faith, I asked him if he could still "speak in tongues." He said he could. AND... he said it still felt the same.

Dan said he could still do all of the things, and feel all of the feelings, which he used to associate with the Holy Spirit and God - but he now understands there are natural biological explanations for the things he felt.

I'd say that's a good example of someone who "had an experience" and left the church anyway. Heck, it's a guy who STILL has experiences, but has accepted that there is a natural explanation for experiences he used to consider "supernatural."

Christianity is not about supernatural experiences or "feelings." Yes, there are other religions that also practice a form of "speaking in tongues" and alot of the charasmatic phenomenons are fake, or do have natural explanations. this is what is wrong with mainstream, pentecostal, charasmatic christianity. it focuses on the wrong things, and in the meantime perverts what the bible teaches about those phenomenons. (Example: Biblical speaking in tongues were actual, known languages. Not jibberish. This "experience" certainly is not common anymore, nor is it necessary.)

If this man's devotion to Jesus was because of supernatural "feelings" then he never truly knew him nor what he is all about.


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
adamgrant wrote:If this

adamgrant wrote:
If this man's devotion to Jesus was because of supernatural "feelings" then he never truly knew him nor what he is all about.

Does it matter what I had said about the man?

Pentecostals would say he never knew Jesus if he hadn't received "gifts of the spirit." You said he never knew Jesus because he spoke in tongues. Is there any definition of a Christian who turned atheist to which you wouldn't respond by claiming they were never "really" Christian?

People have deconverted from every Christian denomination - including whatever flavor you call the "truth", many can be found here on this board.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
AZSuperman01 wrote: Does it

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Does it matter what I had said about the man?

Pentecostals would say he never knew Jesus if he hadn't received "gifts of the spirit." You said he never knew Jesus because he spoke in tongues. Is there any definition of a Christian who turned atheist to which you wouldn't respond by claiming they were never "really" Christian?

People have deconverted from every Christian denomination - including whatever flavor you call the "truth", many can be found here on this board.

just to clarify, i wasn't trying to start a debate or anything. I just thought his quotes were interesting and wanted to input a christian opinion to it.

i never said he didn't know jesus because he spoke in tongues. my point was that if his conversion to christianity was based on emotional highs and experiences, then he might not have ever had a relationship with Christ in the first place. And if he continues in his atheism, then certainly he never was a true follower, for he would have stayed one. But, i cant judge man's heart. He may just be turned away at the moment and really be saved in God's eyes. If so, he'll come back around.


the_avenging_bucket
the_avenging_bucket's picture
Posts: 184
Joined: 2006-06-17
User is offlineOffline
his heart is not the

his heart is not the problem, it's his head!
and if he has one, he probably won't 'come round'.


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
adamgrant wrote:And if he

adamgrant wrote:
And if he continues in his atheism, then certainly he never was a true follower, for he would have stayed one. But, i cant judge man's heart...

You just did.

I'll restate my question: Is there any definition of a Christian who turned atheist whom you wouldn't dismiss by claiming they were never "really" Christian?

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
AZ, good question. But I

AZ, good question.

But I think it might be interesting to also ask how he would feel if, by some "miracle" (sic), he became an atheist and other people said that he was never actually a Christian, how might he feel.

Or, how about a Moslem that becomes a Christian, perhaps they were never actually Moslem?

Or perhaps an ex-atheist whom is now a Christian; were they never really an atheist?

And if a certain Scottsman...

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
Shaun, very well said. There

Shaun, very well said.

There are probably a lot of Christians out there who DO doubt, but are unwilling to openly admit it because they know their peers would back-date their opinions... and everything they ever said or did would be doubted.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


Faithless1981
Posts: 30
Joined: 2006-10-25
User is offlineOffline
Where am I going and why am

Where am I going and why am I in this handbasket?


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
AZSuperman01 wrote: I'll

AZSuperman01 wrote:

I'll restate my question: Is there any definition of a Christian who turned atheist whom you wouldn't dismiss by claiming they were never "really" Christian?

Yes. My good friend Brian is a great example. In his early teens he gave his life to God, was baptized, and believed the Christian doctrine. Later in life, during his college years he began questioning his faith and proclaimed himself an Atheist. This guy was pretty deep into it intellectually. As always, the biggest issue was the problem of evil and suffering.

Fast forward to just this last Saturday, and Brian has been convinced of the truth of God and Christianity. He asked God to forgive him of his years of apostasy. As weak and cliche the term is, he "re-dedicated" his life to service to Christ.

My opinion on this particular issue is that Brian truly was a child of God. He was an elect, and his baptism was not in vain. However, he slipped into a time of disobedience and doubt, abounding in sin and bad habits. But through reason, searching, and prayer he realized his foolishness.

So yes, Brian was "really" christian, but led astray for a time, only to return. As will all of God's sheep.

ShaunPhilly wrote:
AZ, good question.

But I think it might be interesting to also ask how he would feel if, by some "miracle" (sic), he became an atheist and other people said that he was never actually a Christian, how might he feel.

Or, how about a Moslem that becomes a Christian, perhaps they were never actually Moslem?

The difference between Christianity and other forms of belief in this context is that the Bible specifically teaches that if you are truly of the family, God cannot let you go. You may have times where you fall into a life of sin, but you are still God's child and will turn around eventually. So yes, someone could be a real "muslim" or "buddhist" and later fall away from that certain belief, because other religions do not require you permanantly join a family. Other religions don't even have a God that promises to keep them in the family.

Quote:

Or perhaps an ex-atheist whom is now a Christian; were they never really an atheist?

Actually, they weren't really an atheist. because atheist's don't exist. The bible says that all men have an innate knowledge of their Creator, and his laws are written on their hearts. Everyone believes in God, they just supress that knowledge with their wickedness. -Romans 1.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Christianity is not

Quote:
Christianity is not about supernatural experiences or "feelings."

Ok. We're on good terms so far. Give me a reason to believe, outside of supernatural experiences or feelings.

Quote:
Actually, they weren't really an atheist. because atheist's don't exist. The bible says that all men have an innate knowledge of their Creator, and his laws are written on their hearts. Everyone believes in God, they just supress that knowledge with their wickedness.

Nice!

I don't exist! This is news to me, I must admit. All this time, I thought that people didn't create anarchy because it was detrimental to the species. It seemed so logical to believe that humans, in their individual weakness, realized the strength of social groups, and in that realization, came to the conclusion that it was a bad idea to randomly kill members of their own species for no reason.

Well, I'm going to have to ask you for empirical evidence for this position. As far as I can tell, you're deep in a shitstorm of theories, and not really all that deep on evidence. Would you mind giving me a reason to believe what you say? (By the way, quoting someone else who believes your bizarre theories doesn't count as evidence. Evidence counts as evidence.)

I'm sorry for your friend Brian. Hopefully, he'll come to the realization that social pressure and threats of damnation are not mutually consistent with logical thought.

Anyway, would you mind making with the evidence, please?

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

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


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Just because the Bible says

Just because the Bible says it doesn't make it true - in fact, if it's in the Bible it's more than likely false. The babble also says that insects have 4 legs, bats are birds, and Christians can ingest poison and be bitten by venomous snakes without being harmed. Are you willing to test that last claim? Or are you afraid you might not really be a true Christian? And you might try asking a Cardiologist if "God exists" or "Christianity is true" is actually written on anyones heart. :ROTF:

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Faithless1981 wrote:Where am

Faithless1981 wrote:
Where am I going and why am I in this handbasket?

Nowhere since you're looking for a destination that doesn't exist. lol.
It isn't that bad, in my opinion.

Often I have to take solace in the fact that more people read this than post here. For every one of the believers that post here, ten or more others read and think. That's worth the torture of dealing with the same bull excrement (I'm over my limit of profanity for the day) time after time.

Scoot over in your handbasket and make some room. Eventually, someone will pick us up and carry us forward. Orrr we'll get tired of waiting and walk away. lol.

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


ShaunPhilly
High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
Ah, yes, the pernicious and

Ah, yes, the pernicious and erroneous claim that atheists don't exist.

I recently had, elsewhere, a very long discussion about whether atheists actually exist. The claim is absurd.

I'm assuming you define an atheist as someone who claims that God does not exist, and like the Way of the Maser asshat Ray Comfort, you think that to make such a claim you need to know everything to make such a claim, right?

NO, that's BS. An atheist simply someone who lacks belief in God. Many people who lack this belief might add, in addition to this lack that they actually believe that God does not exist, but this is IMHO, a belief in addition to their being an atheist.

And still, there will be many people who will still make the belief claim, so even if the stronger definition of atheist is valid, you still have to concede that many people still make the claim that God doe snot exist--and they actually believe taht claim!

To claim that we all believe in God is not only obnoxious and arrogant, it is also a claim that you cannot make; you cannot know the beliefs of another, aside from what they tell you, any more than your straw-man "atheist can know everything.

You are so wrapped up in your own ridiculous worldview that you cannot even peek outside of it. Your arrogance to know the minds of others, based on a book that you choose to believe in, is telling...

I won;t say of what it tells, because I want to remain a little respectful, if only as a facade.

Shaun

I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
adamgrant wrote:AZSuperman01

adamgrant wrote:
AZSuperman01 wrote:

I'll restate my question: Is there any definition of a Christian who turned atheist whom you wouldn't dismiss by claiming they were never "really" Christian?

Yes. My good friend Brian is a great example. In his early teens he gave his life to God, was baptized, and believed the Christian doctrine. Later in life, during his college years he began questioning his faith and proclaimed himself an Atheist. This guy was pretty deep into it intellectually. As always, the biggest issue was the problem of evil and suffering.

Fast forward to just this last Saturday, and Brian has been convinced of the truth of God and Christianity. He asked God to forgive him of his years of apostasy. As weak and cliche the term is, he "re-dedicated" his life to service to Christ.


If your friend Brian had not reverted back to Christianity, then you wouldn't believe he was ever a true Christian, true? Likewise, if Brian ever becomes an atheist again you'll say he never really was a Christian afterall... either time he proffessed to be.
adamgrant wrote:
So yes, Brian was "really" christian, but led astray for a time, only to return. As will all of God's sheep.

In otherwords, if someone was ever really a Christian, then they will not remain atheist... sounds like the "No True Scotsman" agrument to me.

adamgrant wrote:
ShaunPhilly wrote:
The difference between Christianity and other forms of belief in this context is that the Bible specifically teaches that if you are truly of the family, God cannot let you go. You may have times where you fall into a life of sin, but you are still God's child and will turn around eventually. So yes, someone could be a real "muslim" or "buddhist" and later fall away from that certain belief, because other religions do not require you permanantly join a family. Other religions don't even have a God that promises to keep them in the family.

Of course you'll say this about non-Christian religions... and they'll say the same thing about Christianity.

Now we're left with name calling and finger pointing - but no one can actually prove their claims.

adamgrant wrote:

The bible says that all men have an innate knowledge of their Creator, and his laws are written on their hearts. Everyone believes in God, they just supress that knowledge with their wickedness. -Romans 1.

The Bible also says disrespectful children should be killed, and women should be given as wives to their rapists - I don't put much stock in what the Bible says... neither should you.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
I can't answer all of your

I can't answer all of your replies/questions at this moment, I am about to leave for work. However, I will answer the replies about my 'non-existence of atheists' comment.

I'm not so dumb to really claim that no persons in the world claim to not believe in god, nor that they don't really believe their own claims. Of course, people who "dis-believe" in God do exist, and they do really think they "dis-believe" in God.

My point is that atheists, though they may truly think they don't believe in this God, cannot escape the marks of their creator that they bear and deep down, do know he exists. Whether they currently realize it or not. As i stated before, this innate knowledge we all have is supressed by our wickedness, therefore causing us to be deceived.

You may say the knowledge of God is not innate. it is only a brainwashing passed down through generations. If this is the case, then where did the very first person to start this brainwashing get the idea of "god" in the first place? Or, if we are not perfect people, with no perception of perfection to start from, how could we have ever discovered the concept of a perfect being?

Also, all you guys ever talk about is something that you say doesn't exist. you speak of him with such hatred, blaming him for mankinds faults and pronouncing his actions as evil. Even the atheist speaks from a presuppostion that God exists! At best, all you can do is seemingly prove that God is evil. This is because you exalt your own actions and thoughts as good, and in your rebellion to submit you must therefore make him out to be pure evil.. justifying your unloyalty.
And, you can't hate something that doesn't exist. Eye-wink

i'll try to stop by later tonight and answer the other replies.
-adam


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Also, all you guys

Quote:
Also, all you guys ever talk about is something that you say doesn't exist. you speak of him with such hatred, blaming him for mankinds faults and pronouncing his actions as evil. Even the atheist speaks from a presuppostion that God exists! At best, all you can do is seemingly prove that God is evil. This is because you exalt your own actions and thoughts as good, and in your rebellion to submit you must therefore make him out to be pure evil.. justifying your unloyalty.
And, you can't hate something that doesn't exist.

Suppose I came to you one day and said, "Adamgrant, we have a bit of a problem. You see, you have one slightly deformed tonail on your left foot. The problem with this is that I'm a member of the the religion "Slightly Deformed Tonail Haters." It is in our belief system that anyone with a slightly deformed tonail is actually an embodiment of the Spaghetti Striped Toenail Roundworm. If you didn't know, that's the monster who's going to come from the middle of Antarctica when the time of the prophecy is fulfilled. The only way to keep the prophecy from being fulfilled is for you to voluntarily yank out your slightly deformed tonail with a specially fitted cattle prod. I have one right here. Would you mind going ahead and doing that for me?"

You'd tell me to take a hike, right?

What if I came to your house and happened to be wearing a police uniform, and told you that a law had just been passed making the beliefs of the Slightly Deformed Tonail Haters into law, and that you were required to yank your slightly deformed tonail out with a specially fitted cattle prod?

What if everyone around you was part of the Slightly Deformed Tonail Haters, and everywhere you went, they were making society into a place where nobody got to keep their slightly deformed tonails?

You wouldn't hate the Spaghetti Striped Tonail Roundworm, would you?

Why wouldn't you hate it? BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXIST!

You'd have a pretty good head of steam up for the bastards that elected the Slightly Deformed Tonail Hater president, though...

Point made?

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

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


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
VERY good point!

VERY good point!


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: I'm sorry

Hambydammit wrote:

I'm sorry for your friend Brian. Hopefully, he'll come to the realization that social pressure and threats of damnation are not mutually consistent with logical thought.

Social pressure? Threats of Damnation? I highly suggest you know all the facts before you stick your foot in your mouth any further.

Brian had no social pressure. In fact, he plays in a touring hardcore/metal band full of partying, amoral, agnostic drunkards. He also took part in this behavior, none of his friends were christians, nor was anyone pressuring him to live a moral lifestyle.

There were no threats of damnation. If you are suggesting I did such, or that's what all christians do, you are mistaken. And you would also be making a hasty generalization (fallacy of induction) about a group of people you obviously don't know everything about.


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: The

MattShizzle wrote:
The babble also says that insects have 4 legs, bats are birds, and Christians can ingest poison and be bitten by venomous snakes without being harmed. Are you willing to test that last claim?

i'm just gonna copy and paste this from a website i found that explains this very well.

------------
Lev. 11:13, 19: " And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls...And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat. (See also Deut. 14:11, 18)."

First, linean classification was not available when Leviticus and Deuteronomy were written, nor did a specific scientific definition for what a bird was exist. The classification of animals was made by function and form. This can be seen in the definition of words used to describe animals in the Old Testament. For example, the word here that we render "fowl" comes from the Hebrew word owph which means flying creatures, to include birds, winged insects, and any animal that owns a wing. It comes from a root word that means to cover or to fly. This verse could rightly be interpreted, "And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among flying creatures....". The King James Version seems to call the bat a fowl, but when you understand the times in which it was written, and the meaning of the original Hebrew, it's obvious there is no error here.

Lev. 11:20: "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you. Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you."

Once again the word translated fowl here is 'owph', which means a creature with wings. It's the same word used in verse 21 and translated flying. The reference in both cases is referring to insects. Notice the differentiation between the four feet and the "legs above their feet". The large legs on insects such as the locust, grasshopper, cricket (beetle) etc., are considered legs, but they are different than the other legs which are called "feet" in every instance here. You can add the four feet (legs) to the legs above their feet (legs) and get 6 legs if you like, however, the Hebrews chose to differentiate between the regular legs on the insects described here and the large legs used for jumping or lifting off to take flight.
---------

Matt, the verse in Mark 16 about serpents and drinking poison was Jesus prophecying about the evidences of the Apostles that would later take place, as recored in Acts after the day of Pentecost.

The apostle Paul experienced supernatural protection from a viper when he was shipwrecked on the island of Melita (Acts 28:3-5). As far as I know, this is the only recorded example of this in the New Testament. Of course, there is no record of the apostles or disciples picking up snakes just to prove they are believers, that would be tempting God (Lk. 4:9-12).


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
ShaunPhilly wrote: I'm

ShaunPhilly wrote:

I'm assuming you define an atheist as someone who claims that God does not exist, and like the Way of the Maser asshat Ray Comfort, you think that to make such a claim you need to know everything to make such a claim, right?

I actually don't even know who Ray Comfort is or what you are talking about "way of the master asshat"? please, stop assuming.

Quote:

To claim that we all believe in God is not only obnoxious and arrogant, it is also a claim that you cannot make; you cannot know the beliefs of another,

I've already explained myself in an earlier post about my "no-atheist" comment. I do beleive that you sincerely do lack belief in a God, but it's because you've deceived yourself. Your existence is dependant on him, and his image is placed in you. You have the innate knowledge, whether you realize it or not. My claim is not obnoxious or arrogant because it is not based from my own understanding or my own personal opinion. I get my beliefs from a standard outside of myself.

Quote:

You are so wrapped up in your own ridiculous worldview that you cannot even peek outside of it. Your arrogance to know the minds of others, based on a book that you choose to believe in, is telling....

yes, i am wrapped up in my worldview. I can't resist the truth when it grabs hold of me. Am I being arrogant? No! I am only boasting in the truth and grace of Christ. As explained above, i did not claim to know the minds of others.


GlamourKat
GlamourKat's picture
Posts: 461
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
"I've already explained

"I've already explained myself in an earlier post about my "no-atheist" comment. I do beleive that you sincerely do lack belief in a God, but it's because you've deceived yourself. Your existence is dependant on him, and his image is placed in you. You have the innate knowledge, whether you realize it or not. My claim is not obnoxious or arrogant because it is not based from my own understanding or my own personal opinion. I get my beliefs from a standard outside of myself."

Well, I believe that you are decieving yourself. I know you have Odin's creation in your heart. We are all children of Ask and Embla, carved by trees and life breathed into us by Odin. Vili gave us awareness, and Ve gave us touch, taste, smell, and all the other ways to realize this beautiful world that was Ginnungagap, that was nothingness that Odin shaped. Why do you defy Him? Hail Odin. I hope you mend your ways and that we will meet in Valhalla and not Hel.


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
AZSuperman01 wrote: Of

AZSuperman01 wrote:

Of course you'll say this about non-Christian religions... and they'll say the same thing about Christianity.

Incorrect. As far as I know, no other religion teaches that the requirement is to join a family, a community. No other religion promises that those in that family will persevere. No other religion promises security. No other religion is gracious enough to promise entrance no matter what - no matter how far you turn away.

Quote:

The Bible also says disrespectful children should be killed, and women should be given as wives to their rapists - I don't put much stock in what the Bible says... neither should you.

The penalty of the Old Covenant, death due to sins, is what was done away with Jesus' death. He paid the price for sins once and for all. there is now no blood to ever be shed for the remission of sins. Do you seriously think christians slaughter their kids? no. These laws were established for a certain time for a certain people. If you want to get into WHY these laws were ever in effect, that can be another post.


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
GlamourKat wrote: Well, I

GlamourKat wrote:

Well, I believe that you are decieving yourself. I know you have Odin's creation in your heart. We are all children of Ask and Embla, carved by trees and life breathed into us by Odin. Vili gave us awareness, and Ve gave us touch, taste, smell, and all the other ways to realize this beautiful world that was Ginnungagap, that was nothingness that Odin shaped. Why do you defy Him? Hail Odin. I hope you mend your ways and that we will meet in Valhalla and not Hel.

This only proves that other beliefs can have the same or similar belief structures. if someone really believed this, then we would have to study the differences between the "gods" in question and continue from there. trying to make someone sound stupid does not prove they are false.


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

Quote:
This only proves that other beliefs can have the same or similar belief structures

Exactly RIGHT!

Other beliefs DO have exactly the same or similar belief structures! The thing is, you reject thousands of them based on their complete lack of evidence...

We just reject one more than you do, for exactly the same reasons.

(And for the record, nobody made you sound stupid. Someone did point it out...)

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

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


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Ever notice how much time

Ever notice how much time Christians put into rationalizing or explaining away the bad parts of the Babble? And how can you say the old laws were changed by Jesus when he himself said he came not to change the old law, but uphold it, and that he came not to change "one jot or tittle (whatever the fuck a tittle is)" of the old law?

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
adamgrant wrote:However, I

adamgrant wrote:
However, I will answer the replies about my 'non-existence of atheists' comment.

I hope to demonstrate how poor your arguments are by demonstrating how easily they can be used to prove no theists exist.
-----------------
I'm not so dumb to really claim that no persons in the world claim to believe in God, nor that they don't really believe their own claims. Of course, people who believe in God do exist, and the do think they believe in God.

My point is that theists, though they may truely think they believe in this God, cannot escape the marks of their own evolution that they bear and deep down, do know he doesn't exist. Whether they currently realize it or not. As I stated before, this innate knowledge we all have is supressed by our religious upbringing and our conceit therefore causing us to be deceived.

You may say the knowledge of no God is not innate, it is only a brainwashing passed down through generations. If this is the case, then where did the very first person to start this brainwashing get the idea of "no god" in the first place? Or, if we are not evoloved creatures, with no perception of evolution to start from, how could we have ever discovered the concept of evolution?

Also, all you guys ever talk about is something that you say doesn't exist. You speak of evolution with such hatred, blaming it for mankinds faults and pronouncing teaching it as evil. Even the theist speaks from a presupposition that evolution exists! At best, all you can do is seemingly prove that teaching evolution is evil. This is because you exalt your own actions and thoughs as good, and in your rebellion to admit your own evolution you must therefore make it out to be pure evil... justifying your superstition.

And you can't hate something that doesn't exist. Eye-wink
--------------------------

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Zowie. Blammo Thwack! Zork! W

Zowie.

Blammo

Thwack!

Zork!

What did the five fingers say to the face? SLAP!

Seriously, that's damn clever, AZ. It's not going to help much, but it's damn clever. (Sorry, I'm feeling a bit pessimistic today.)

You know what I thought of a little while ago? Christians are like Jesus with the fish and loaves. Even when the fish and loaves ran out, there was more fish and loaves, and no matter how many people came up to the table, there was still fish and loaves...

Likewise, no matter how many ways you destroy every argument a Christian brings to the table, there's still argument left, and mostly, it looks just like the last argument.. and smells like rotten fish.

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

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


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
adamgrant wrote:Incorrect.

adamgrant wrote:
Incorrect. As far as I know, no other religion teaches that the requirement is to join a family, a community. No other religion promises that those in that family will persevere. No other religion promises security. No other religion is gracious enough to promise entrance no matter what - no matter how far you turn away.

First of all, almost every religion teachs that you need to join their "family" or "community" in order to be saved. Christianity is not unique in this (or anything thing else really). Also, Christianity doesn't teach that you can return no matter how far you turn away. If you commit the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, then you are condemned to Hell forever - whether you come back into the fold or not.

No other religion, to my knowledge, has such a unforgivable sin.

Since most ex-Christians have spoken ill of the "Holy Spirit" we're almost all guilty of this sin - quite possibly including your friend Brian - even if Christianity did turn out to be true, any of us who "returned to the fold" would still be damned.

adamgrant wrote:
The penalty of the Old Covenant, death due to sins, is what was done away with Jesus' death. He paid the price for sins once and for all. there is now no blood to ever be shed for the remission of sins. Do you seriously think christians slaughter their kids? no. These laws were established for a certain time for a certain people. If you want to get into WHY these laws were ever in effect, that can be another post.

Do you HONESTLY believe there was a time and a place where slaughtering disrespectful children was right and good? Do you think the command to rip open pregnant women, slaughter old men, and keep virgin woman as sex slaves was EVER "just" or "holy?"

God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are supposedly the same entity... In otherwords - JESUS COMMANDED THE SLAUGHTERS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The bloody cruel laws of the Old Testament were created by the same God who sacrificed himself to himself in the New Testament. Perhaps that's why Jesus said he didn't come to change "one jot or tittle" of the old law. He made it. He commanded it. He ordered it. Jesus/God is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:Cool.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


AZSuperman01
AZSuperman01's picture
Posts: 45
Joined: 2006-09-20
User is offlineOffline
I wanted to address one more

I wanted to address one more of your comments before I log off for the day.

adamgrant wrote:
Also, all you guys ever talk about is something that you say doesn't exist. you speak of him with such hatred, blaming him for mankinds faults and pronouncing his actions as evil. Even the atheist speaks from a presuppostion that God exists!

Let's imagine for a moment that you met a full grown man who still believed in Santa Claus. I mean REALLY believed in Santa Claus. So much so that he preaches to others, about how Santa can see you when your sleeping, and he knows when your awake. He even knows if you've been bad or good, and if you "sin" against Santa you'll be punished by receiving only coal for Christmas.

Now, you and I know Santa isn't real... but how could we explain it to this man? We can either sit around and say "There ain't no Santa, there ain't no Santa..." or we can demonstrate the absurdity of believing in Santa by speaking as if Santa did exist.

For example:
---------------------
1) No known species of reindeer can fly. BUT there are 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while most of these are insects and germs, this does not COMPLETELY rule out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.

2) There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world. BUT since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish and Buddhist children, that reduces the workload to 15% of the total - 378 million according to the Population Reference Reference Bureau. At an average (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

3) Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to west (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good children, Santa has 1/1000th of a second to park, hop out of the sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings, distribute the remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been left, get back up the chimney, get back into the sleigh and move on to the next house. Assuming that each of these 91.8 millions stops are evenly distributed around the earth (which, of course, we know to be false but for the purposes of our calculations we will accept), we are now talking about .78 miles per household, a total trip of 75-1/2 million miles, not counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once every 31 hours, plus feeding and etc.

This means that Santa's sleigh is moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle on earth, the Ulysses space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second - a conventional reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.

4) The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming that each child gets nothing more than a medium-sized lego set (2 pounds), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons, not counting Santa, who is invariably described as overweight. On land, conventional reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that "flying reindeer" (see point #1) could pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we cannot do the job with eight, or even nine. We need 214,200 reindeer. This increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.

5) 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second creates enormous air resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as spacecraft re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of reindeer will absorb 14.3 QUINTILLION joules of energy. Per second. Each. In short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously, exposing the reindeer behind them, and create deafening sonic booms in their wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 thousandths of a second.

Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to centrifugal forces 7,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250-pound Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.

In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, he's dead now. Merry X-mas.
----------------------
(Quoted from here.)

Anyone reading the above proof would not say the author has a "presuppostion that Santa exists." It would be more accurate to say say the author demonstrated how IMPOSSIBLE it is for Santa to exist by speaking as if he did.

Atheists who talk about how evil God is are employing the same method. Most Christians claim God is an infinately loving and benevolent deity. Atheists demonstrate how absurd that belief is by showing the atrocities presumably created by, or ordered by, this "loving" deity.

Like Santa's reindeer, the loving God also bursts into flames instantaniously in light of all the evidence.

"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?"
-- Douglas Adams, from Last Chance To See


Insidium Profundis
Posts: 295
Joined: 2006-10-04
User is offlineOffline
My, some people really ought

My, some people really ought to brush up on their argumentative terminology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum

An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:Ever

MattShizzle wrote:
Ever notice how much time Christians put into rationalizing or explaining away the bad parts of the Babble? And how can you say the old laws were changed by Jesus when he himself said he came not to change the old law, but uphold it, and that he came not to change "one jot or tittle (whatever the fuck a tittle is)" of the old law?

is this all you have to say to my reply? interesting. I supposed no matter how many times seemingly contradictions in the "babble" are refuted and explained, mattshizzle will always close his eyes to the answers and spend so much time explaining away his reasons for diminishing the book's value.

your view on jesus and the law is skewed. highly unbiblical. of course, jesus did not come to destroy the law. he came to fulfill it. these are obvious quotes from the Gospels.

The purpose of jesus' life and work was to fulfill both the Law (the books of moses) and the prophets (other Old Testament books). He did not destroy the Old Testament. But that doesn't mean that Christians have to keep circumcision and all the other old laws. jesus' ministry caused many changes in the law -- changes so dramatic that laws were "set aside" or declared "obsolete" (Heb. 7:18; 8:13). Some laws remained the same, some were changed, and others were "abolished" (Eph. 2:15).

when jesus said, "I have not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets," he did not mean that each specific law would stay exactly the same. He meant that the purpose and message of the law and the prophets remain exactly the same. The law and the prophets pointed to him and were intended from the beginning to be fulfilled by him.

Some of the specific laws of the old covenant are still valid, but many of them were set aside when Jesus came and fulfilled them by his life, death and resurrection (for example: death due for sins).


adamgrant
Theist
Posts: 52
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
AZSuperman01 wrote: I hope

AZSuperman01 wrote:

I hope to demonstrate how poor your arguments are by demonstrating how easily they can be used to prove no theists exist.
-----------------
I'm not so dumb to really claim that no persons in the world claim to believe in God, nor that they don't really believe their own claims. Of course, people who believe in God do exist, and the do think they believe in God.

My point is that theists, though they may truely think they believe in this God, cannot escape the marks of their own evolution that they bear and deep down, do know he doesn't exist. Whether they currently realize it or not. As I stated before, this innate knowledge we all have is supressed by our religious upbringing and our conceit therefore causing us to be deceived.

You may say the knowledge of no God is not innate, it is only a brainwashing passed down through generations. If this is the case, then where did the very first person to start this brainwashing get the idea of "no god" in the first place? Or, if we are not evoloved creatures, with no perception of evolution to start from, how could we have ever discovered the concept of evolution?

Also, all you guys ever talk about is something that you say doesn't exist. You speak of evolution with such hatred, blaming it for mankinds faults and pronouncing teaching it as evil. Even the theist speaks from a presupposition that evolution exists! At best, all you can do is seemingly prove that teaching evolution is evil. This is because you exalt your own actions and thoughs as good, and in your rebellion to admit your own evolution you must therefore make it out to be pure evil... justifying your superstition.

And you can't hate something that doesn't exist. Eye-wink
--------------------------

Interesting analogy. However, where would you get the reasoning to even make such claims? Are there any books on the objective truths of evolution that say all men have an innate knowledge of evolution? See, i make such claims from a source outside of myself and outside of my own mind. It comes from something transcendent.

Again, please explain to me how or where the idea of "creation" and "god" could have ever originated if in fact there was no god and we were just evolved. You may say, "well, we can imagine a Flying Spaghetti Monster, but we know that aint real!" You would be correct in saying this. But it's not abnormal for us to create such a character, because we know what spaghetti is, we know what a monster is, and we know what it means to fly. You're simply putting 3 things together to create fiction. With God however, there shouldn't have been any possible way for anyone to imagine an eternal, perfect creator - because we couldn't have known what eternity is, what perfection is, or what creation is.

And as a side note, i never said I had a problem with evolution. as im sure you know, not all theists reject evolution.