PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
RULES
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
RULES
This is the
Kill Em
With
Kindness
Forum!
PLEASE MAKE
SURE TO
FOLLOW THE
RULES!
Offline 
GUYS! Remember which forum you're in here.
Fair enough if you get a bit passioned in Atheist vs Theist forum but this room is reserved for those with the utmost patience and manners. We're trying to discuss rationally in here and politely point out errors, not belittle beliefs we don't like and throw around ad homs and insults.
Come now, we don't want to drive theists away.
We want to encourage debate and those who question their beliefs.
I can understand this sort of insulting when the other guy is being a dick but this guy here is being polite and rationally trying explain himself. Sort it out!
Your history is a little off. From wikipedia:
Initially Luther had a low view of the books of Esther, Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. He called the Epistle of James "an epistle of straw," finding little in it that pointed to Christ and His saving work. He also had harsh words for the book of Revelation, saying that he could "in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it."[3] He had reason to question the apostolicity of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation because the early church categorized these books as antilegomena, meaning that they were not accepted without reservation as canonical. Luther did not, however, remove them from his editions of the Scriptures. His views on some of these books changed in later years.
Luther chose to place in the Apocrypha, an inter-testamental section of his bible, those portions of the Old Testament found in the Greek Septuagint but not in the Hebrew Masoretic text. These were included in his earliest translation, but were later set aside as "good to read" but not as the inspired Word of God. The setting aside (or simple exclusion) of these texts in/from Bibles was eventually adopted by nearly all Protestants (See Biblical canon).
Follow that last link and you'll see that there have been many different canons proposed and accepted or rejected by many different groups.
In the fine tradition of monotheistic religions, virtually every one of the disagreements (i.e. heresies, according to whoever disagrees with them) reflected by the different canons was the cause of persecution, murder and torture.
Interesting that an omnipotent and benevolent god never saw fit to step in and help people make this determination but instead silently and invisibly stood by wartching them slaughtering and brutalizing each other - specifically because of the their excessive devotion to him as presented in one canon or creed or another.
All of the faith and prayer in the world
All of your dumb show and circuses
You know it's a lie, it'll always be a lie
The invention of an animal who knows he's going to die
-Randy Newman
It makes you wonder where God mentioned which books should be considered his word and which ones should be considered false. All of the "holy" "revealed" texts were determined by a vote that was purely politicial. They have no more right to be considered holy than does the Gospel According to Mary or the Gospel According to Jesus. Anyone who follows the Bible is merely following the opinions of some person over a thousand years ago, not the word of any deity. By what decree has any person's opinion become more true than any other person's opinion?
I don't think I deserved that. We don't hate people. As a matter of fact, I have good friends who are believers. I love them even without being commanded to do so. I love them even though I believe they are incorrect in their theism. Matter of fact, I pretty much love most people.*
BUT - You cannot force someone to love another. You can command someone to act as if they do, but love isn't something that exists just because someone wants it to exist.
For instance, a child might obey a parent and act like they love their sibling. However, that doesn't mean they do, in fact, love their sibling. You can try to love someone. You can wish you loved someone. You cannot force yourself to love someone.
*A favorite quote from Will Rogers: There are no strangers, just friends I haven't met yet.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
"Belief in the unknown". There you have it right there. That is why atheists reject claims of the super natural. You might as well pretend that Klingons are real.
Atheists suspend judgment on unkowns and mesure life on knowns without incerting a magical friend in the sky. "I dont know" is an honest answer which doesnt require incerting mythology in the gaps of life. "My deity did it" is actually dangerous to learning and sets people up to not only be blind to possible real answers, but actually fight those who seak real answers.
If you are willing to smartly say, "I cant prove it" or "I have no evidence". You have taken the first honest step to recovering from your indoctrination. But to complete it, you should bravely continue this honesty which you rightly admitted to by asking, "Is this something real, or merely something I want to be real?"
It is a tough question for theists to be honest about and many of us here once struggled with wanting to believe something and intelectual honesty which eventually lead us to give up ancient mythology in favor of rationality and logic.
In laymen's terms, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probibly is". If you have no evidence for talking donkeys or spirits getting girls pregnant how would that be any different than me saying, "I have no evidence for my purple snarfwidget, but I have faith in it's existance even though I cant prove it."
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Heh, Susan, I'm sorry if I seemed like I was directing anything at you. I don't think you hate me. I think that there are those on this forum whom I don't wish to point fingers at who do in fact hate Christians, especially those who are "narrow-minded fable mongerors" as Lucretius would have put it.
As for your challenge. I've only doubted God twice. At least, on a serious scale where I had so much doubt I questioned what I good was I doing.
But answer me this, if there is no God and I do not have a relationship with Christ. Then why do I suddenly change and become different (emotionally, mentally, and sometimes physically) after a time of not praying, reading my Bible, and fellowshipping with my family in Christ?
All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. - Matthew 10:22
Still learning to use this site and I cant seem to make the quote part work so i will quote the old fashion way
<Quote>
But answer me this, if there is no God and I do not have a relationship with Christ. Then why do I suddenly change and become different (emotionally, mentally, and sometimes physically) after a time of not praying, reading my Bible, and fellowshipping with my family in Christ?
</Quote>
WalkOnWater,
Have you researched the human mind and how it reacts to diffrent situations? You have posed a very real question in my opinion. Why do you become diffrent ? Have you explored this question with out allowing yourself to use god as the answer for it ? Have you explored all other possible answers to this question. Or have you choosen the answer that works well in your belief system.
I wish I could find the link to a talk a psyciatrist once gave on causation. I will search it out for you as I do not expect you to take my story as true untill I have provided you with proof. However let me see if I can give you the gist of it.
During the period of 1980-1990 refridgerator sales increased in mexico at an a very high rate. During this exact period suicide rates in teens also increased at an alarming rate. IF we are to believe coralation always indicates causation then it would seem Mexico needs to stop the sale of refridgerators in order to save the teens from killing themselves.
not a link to the exact talk but a far more educated way to say what I am trying to say
http://www.stat.tamu.edu/stat30x/notes/node42.html
Now I may have messed this story up. But what I am trying to say is you have noted a correlation in a change in personality when you stop doing X thing. That does not prove that stopping x thing is the cause for the change in your personality.
I would encourage you to ask your self questions around your personality change - write it down. write down all events surounding it write down all events surounding your desision to not partake in reading the bible, fellowship ect. Brain storm all possible links and see what you come up with. I would recomend to start with a bit of reading on cognitive development. This can be a very personal thing and I dont expect you to "report" back to me your answer but I would be very intrested to know how this proscess finds you.
Sorry for the spelling.
Kaosgrl, swap the <> for [] in the tags and you'll be able to quote/format to your heart's desire!
I actually disagree with the 'coincidence theory' you posted.
I think there is a genuine connection between his 'spirituality' and the changes he went through. That doesn't mean that there's a theistic God, it just means that his spiritual practice had these effects on him.
I think the main appeal for modern religion is this 'spiritual' aspect as faith does have a real affect on people's lives, personalities and outlook on the world. Unfortunately, most spiritual/mystical philosophies carry superstitious baggage - especially theistic ones. Sam Harris made a particular point how we should separate spirituality from religion. Explore spirituality rationally and practically rather than it be a pleasant side effect of irrationality.
Strafio,
You're correct in what you are saying, and upon review of my post I seem to have gotten my wires crossed.
The information about correlation and causing is somewhat extraneous to my argument. Indeed what I was trying to say is very much along the same lines as your point, although I would not call it "spirituality".
My point was that just because there is a break in his religious activity and subsequently a change in behaviour, that does not imply that the correlation between workship of a deity and a change in behavior means that said deity (or abscene thereof) caused said behavior.
An alternative to the cause of this behavior being the direct result of a supernatural being might be similar to placing your hands together with your fingers interlocked. You will automatically place one hand higher than the other. Now if you deliberately reverse that, you will feel a 'twinge' or just a general feeling that something is out of place. This is what I believe is referred to as cognitive dissonance, and could account for a change in behavior pattern on a larger scale when something familiar in life changes.
Of course, this explanation may not at all be satisfactory to WalkOnWater, but the point I am making is he has a very valid question, and one that deserve to have all possibilities explored.
I suspect it's frustration rather than hate. I've even gotten frustration in a few threads on this forum.
psy·cho·so·mat·ic (sī'kō-sō-māt'ĭk) adj. Of or relating to a disorder having physical symptoms but originating from mental or emotional causes.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
I feel different after I haven't had coffee in awhile, does that mean I have a personal relationship with Starbucks?
Ah! I see.
People tend to not like "spirituality" as it is often associated with supernaturalism. I think it's the most suitable word for the job though. The breathing exercises, self reflection, 'transforming' perception of the world...