|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|
Whether religion/God is real or not, i‘m sick of these fanatical soul destroying atheists who try and shatter any hope or peace of mind out of believers. What is it? Pure envy that you have no faith? One atheist once confessed that the most depressing day of his life was when he realized there was no God. Hypothetically speaking if a kid wants to believe in santa claus because this brings joy to their life, is it your right to take that away?. My argument is not about if God exists or not.. As my faith is not so strong, however why cant you athiests leave those believers who are happy in their beliefs alone? Is it too much to bear for you to see them having the peace of mind that they will see their loved ones when they die (if true or not) or you can't bear that their life holds a purpose, while you live yours lost. Or is it that you take pride in converting them into your world of depression and no hope?
Zealots of either kind are equally irritating for the same basic reasons.
But I must say "what is your problem" is not really indicative of a "live and let live" philosophy.
I agree. I took the OP as confrontational. Confrontational people might be what the hell Atheists problem is.
This is my rant as it's something that has been getting on my nerves. Same thing goes for religious fanatics
psycheskinner, you make an interesting, but shallow point.
If someone loves to murder little children, then we're not going to get all warm and fuzzy about their favorite pastime, are we?
When people are destructive, they do not show a "live and let live" attitude. So, child murderers and rowdy atheists are hereby being requested to chill -- put a sock in it -- try a non-abusive approach to life. What's wrong with expecting them to be "live and let live?" And I see nothing wrong in asking the rowdy or murderous, "what's your problem?"
Notice how the believer must equate the non-believer to "child murderers" in order to defend their own intolerance.
Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, not when the obvious bone of contention is defining when human life begins, not the murder of children.
Indeed, the only murderers I see are those bastions of religion, believing human life starts with fertilization, that go on to say it is OK to murder that life in case of incest, rape, etc. as if the fetus is no longer human because it is the product of a rape. I don't believe I've ever seen a non-believer taking that stance
It is the disrespectful speech that was equated with the murderous; clearly.
And, your religion has some of the most disrespectful speech ever uttered, clearly.
I got no religion. Lord knows... I'm just totally convinced that the spiritual realm is the place to go for life's answers. It is not at all difficult for me to believe. I don't really agree with holy-rollerism. But Jesus really didn't either. I prefer his truths. I enjoy his mannerisms. And I love the way he loves me. His message rings true for me. I don't recall him saying religion is the way. The church practices have been a bit unfulfilling personally. Not that I bash people who go to churches; I just don't.
Religion is not what you call my practice. I haven't considered a name for it. But since I am so familiar with Jesus, I guess I am somewhat Christian. But tgat denominational thing gets tricky for me. People make toi much of certain "words"
Sorry, but you have a religion, it's called Christianity.
Will want u to know that Christianity WAS not a religion until Rome hijacked it. So if someone who is going back to the basics describes him or her self as not having a religion please do understand why.
Christianity is a monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ as presented in the New Testament. Christianity is the world's largest religion, with approximately 2.2 billion adherents, known as Christians.
So, though I firnly believe in Jesus; I cannot state that I practice Christianity. I didn't though. Seems like someone is trying to "box" me. I practice a relationship with God. What is that Religion called?
Btw for future reference, not all who follow teachings of Christ call themselves Christians.
Its no religion. Its spiritual. The two are distinct. Anyway for those who choose to understand.
I believe the truth. You must choose to see it or choose not to. People don't understand...
Again it all became a religion after Rome made it one. If not Christians were more like a community of people who were merely living like Christ.
In light of the fact that I showed you what Christianity means and getirite showed you the definition of religion you insist that the language is wrong, we are wrong and the scholars are wrong. Perhaps you should take that up with wikipedia and those who right the dictionaries.
Since u mentioned Wikipedia I will want u to go ahead and post the definition of religion as presented there. To some extent it differs from the definition getitrite posted. All the same I didn't want to bring it up because I don't want to engage in a battle of definition. All am trying to say is that when someone who is trying to go back to the basics of Christian practice says he or she does not have a religion, you should understand that it's because Christianity started out as more of what we can call movement than religion. I am not saying ur definition of religion is wrong.
re·li·gion /riˈlijən/ noun: religion
1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
So do you not believe in a God, or is it that you do not worship him? It's disturbing how you can pretend to not be religious. Seems like outright dishonesty to me.
This is one out of many definitions of religion by the way. Again my point is that the adherence to the teachings of Christ was never meant to be a religion. Those who started the movement were still comfortable with some Jewish teachings until Rome pitched it against every other believe and now people like u consider it a religion.
Then qualify the definition that you choose to use. Show us how having a relationship with a magic superhuman, who died, and magically came back to life, does not fit the criteria.
The relationship a church less Christian has is with God not Christ who church doctrine says died and came back to life. Jesus teachings is what I subscribe to not what the church, the beacon of christian religion says about him. Religion comes with creeds and doctrines and often times denies us the unadulterated liberal relationship we can have with God no matter who or how we understand him.
One doesn't have to got to church to have a religion.
The argument of "words" begins here... To me, religion is more ritualistic than I. I don't call it religion because it doesn't feel as such. If you like the label; tag away...
All we can do is go by what the words means. If these words don't work for you you can pick another that does.
But Christianity is a religion.
Yes Sir!!! The "great big head" finally speaks. Lol
Haha very funny. Like calling an egg bald when it was never meant to be hairy.
Yeah... or like an atheist trying to understand the spirit of God. Funnier.
I would guess that your average atheist doesn't give a flying **** about the spirit of God.
You know, since they don't believe it exists... and most seem the better for it.
None of the atheists here are proof of that. We go back and forth about God day after day; that seems proof to me that they give a couple of flying things about the subject. I mean... would you go to a Tooth Fairy discussion day after day??? I wouldn't.
Oh, but you do got to a Tooth Fairy discussion day after day. However, your Tooth Fairy teaches good people to do bad things, that's why it's a discussion.
There's five, maybe ten tops, atheists that are active on this forum...
You really need to get out more.
No one will or can prove anything to Cgenaea that she does not want proven. I know it can be fun to argue with her, but it can also be a waste of time.
But then,don't let me spoil your fun, anybody.... The Lord won't mind!
Bah, I had a couple minutes between Dr. Who shows while hubby was taking a bathroom break. Wasn't a real investment in time...
And who knows, maybe it fired a neuron in there somewhere.
Oh Dear! That sounds ominous, Melissa. Sounds like you have taken up that new religion of Dr. Who. Just be careful you don't fall foul of the evil ones and be sure to keep a spare key to your Tardis, just in case you need to make a quick escape.
I don't really get too involved in these forums... a post here or there in a normal day. If I'm incapacitated in some way I might spar to pass the time.
On the days I do spend a lot of time here, I'm left with the feeling that I've lost a day of my life I'll never get back for no real reason.
So yes, I "graced" you for 10 seconds of my life... and now with another 30 seconds. I don't have much more to spend because I actually have a life worth more than arguing with strangers over things that don't matter.
I might grace you again at some point. Be assured though that it's pretty far down the list of priorities. Somewhere near dusting the underside of my dressers.
Alls I know is... they talk to me personally all day; bout God.
I see them mostly talking about you. You are not God... far from it. Way far from it. Like so far from it you can't even see it from where you're standing.
Seriously, I really do encourage you to meet some people. I'm worried that you seem to be wrapping yourself up a bit too much in the forums and online world. I believe it's warping your perceptions.
I'm not being sarcastic or snarky at all. You really do need to get out more.
Thanks again. But no thanks. They talk about me because I talk about God and his word and his love and his realness to me. They want to shatter my hope "that springs eternal" because they have chosen another hope... God is NOT REAL.
There are two choices: for or against. Which choice have you made?
For or against? What happened to the only honest "choice" anyone can make? That "I don't know"?
Well, "I don't know" has great propensity for having DECIDED to ignore; weigh away; "reason" out and/or deny the information provided. "I don't know" is a great argument. I think that is why God spews lukewarm. It is soooo safe. However a decision to give greater weight to the NO side.
Safe, yes. Also honest, even to the speaker - something that neither for or against can ever be in the matter of religion. You prefer the warm, fuzzy feeling of being loved along with a guarantee of eternal life and that's certainly your choice, but you also give up that honesty when you make that choice. It seems a little unfair to denigrate those that do not choose to lie to themselves or others around them in return for feeling good.
The lie is prefered. The bible tells us that now what do you think about that???
So, you prefer to live a life of lies because the Bible tells you that?
And you are the best "cherry-picker" of them all. No wonder...
And, what exactly do I cherry pick? Or, is that yet another childish response?
You haven't recognized how you cherry-pick even all of my comments to throw off the content of my responses??? Pay attention.
Ah, I see the problem now, you have no idea what cherry picking comprises, which would explain why you employ it so thoroughly in your posts.
The content of your responses are mostly gibberish and what appears to be fueled by confusion and a likely mental disorder, bipolar, perhaps?
Yes, it does. You really should take some time to actually understand the definition of words.
Have you ever heard of a "dictionary"? It's a book, you know, like the thing that is surgically attached to your retinas called the Bible.
Yes, seems like we all select the information that we pay attention to. For me, the retinally attached bible is most important to me; thanks for noticing and conveying. Most others like to waver from book to book in search of something else to hold onto.
Yes, it's called "knowledge and information", that which allows one to gain an education, thus not remaining ignorant to the world around them and being not being susceptible to believing myths and superstitions from one surgically attached book.
In other words, the Bible is your information.
Well, I homeschool my kids... because that's what the spirit told me to do. I do volunteer work, because that's what the spirit told me to do... And I work... because the spirit, I believe, would like me to eat and have a roof over my head. I can't say he told me to work, but it seems like the right thing to do. In my spare time, I spend time building my relationship with my husband...because that's what the spirit told me to do. I also take care of my parents... because that's what the spirit told me to do. And my mother in law... because that's what the spirit told me to do.
And in all of that, no one ever wants to shatter my hope "that springs eternal".Maybe because I'm slightly too busy to willingly wade among people that I think are trying to do that. Or perhaps because NO ONE IS TRYING TO DO THAT. In this thread there are several people I talk to on a daily basis that are not trying to shatter my faith... but you seem to think they are trying to shatter yours... That's neither here nor there though.
Seriously, isn't God telling you to spend more time with your children? Isn't God telling you to walk among the homeless and ill to help them? Is God really telling you to come here everyday and spend countless hours having arguments?
Because that doesn't sound like anything that Christ would do or say.
So what choice have I made? My whole life is about my faith. I LIVE my faith... You? Well it seems like you just talk yours.
Like I said, I think you might want to actually try living. I'm really not trying to be argumentative at all... You have all this energy that you are trying to put into proving your faith to people who don't care. Why don't you start tunneling that into loving the people who matter? That's not a rhetorical question either. I honestly want to know why the people on here are more important that your children, your family and those in need?
I have not categorized the people here as unimportant. Jesus actually asked some people "who is my mother?" His family, he attested were those who do the will of his father. I find fulfillment in what I do here though i have much more fulfillment elsewhere, thanks it seems funny that now my motherhood and civil service is spotlighted. Lol
God is most important to me. He leads me. Not fingerpointers. I realize that pleasing people is hard. I'm pretty easy to please. God does it everyday.
So you're fine with the fact that ever single moment you spend here is a moment that you are taking away from your children and those in need? That's cool, I'm just saying there seems to be a lot of moments.
I'm not trying to point fingers and I'm certainly not looking for you to please. I'm just saying that it seems to be such a waste.
I'm not questioning your faith. I'm not trying to spotlight anything. This was just between me and you.
It seems sad for anyone with kids to spend so much time away from them with nothing to show for it. I can tell you from experience that you're going to miss that time someday. You're going to want every single second of it back. Every single second. Trust me. You might want to make sure that there aren't too many seconds to regret.
Hilarious, you believers crack me up pretending to know and understand things that are just childish nonsensical rubbish.
Well, seems like you know a lot of other things I don't know... I'm sure of it.
Wow, you really don't get it. Do you actually think we are here trying to learn from you?
It doesn't matter what you feel about it, it is a religion by definition, and you've been heavily indoctrinated into it. Those are the facts.
What about tagging urself a churchless Christian? Am like u and thats how I describe myself.
Everyone wants to talk about having an open...until they come face to face with truth. That's when the lines must be drawn, because no one wants here that there is an absolute truth. That there is a right and wrong, they don't want to be punished for their crimes and hatred of God. Yet, by human standards we want justice for crimes done to us(child or adult)...why then get mad at God for doing the same thing...? this is the answer to 'What's your problem?' In Christ's own words...
This is Jesus speaking:
19 "This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed". (John 3:19-20 NIV)
Hey, wow. That sounds just like the Christian Church as a whole!
That was very exciting to me. Whew. Truth. Truth
10 stars... marvelous timing.
Sorry, but your God's justice is not justice at all, it is hatred, malice and selfish tyranny when compared to human standards. Your religion does not offer any truths, let alone absolute truths, it offers only myths and superstitions from the Bronze Age.
Do you call this justice?
Ephesians 6:5 (NLT)
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.
Exodus 21:20-21 NLT
If a man beats his male or female slave with a club and the slave dies as a result, the owner must be punished. But if the slave recovers within a day or two, then the owner shall not be punished, since the slave is his property.
Leviticus 21:9 NLT
If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father’s holiness, and she must be burned to death.
The instruction for the Isrealites were harsh! The Lord sends a message yo them/us about how seriously he takes sin. When Jesus came there was a living example of what God wants from his. No more need for killing. A complete sacrifice was available. God knows what he's doing.
Let's get this straight... There was a NEED for killing until Jesus showed up and was brutally slaughtered and God knows what he's doing.
God felt the need to do as he did. We can only speculate why. I think it was because it was necessary to keep health and peace among the wandering people. Fear was the tactic; and probably worked well for a while. When consequences are harsh, disobedience is less common. Jesus made the difference.
fear isn't the tactic of the new testament? "I am the way, the truth and the life - no one comes to the father but through me" "not everyone who says lord, lord will enter the kingdom of heaven" Hell is the fear of the New Testament. Love me, believe in me or burn forever. Sounds like the same tactic to me.
Do you know, for example that the jews do not believe in hell? That there was no hell whatsoever in the old testament? It was sheol. Everyone went there, including god who could go back and forth. It was not fire. It was not torture. It was a resting place.
Ok J, I feel that you never could have gotten where you are without knowing this one. Remember? The Jews rejected God. They felt that all their recitation of scripture was the key to the Kingdom. They forgot the DOING part. They did not get it. They liked the ideas that their brains came up with. They began a new level of self-righteous that goes against the point for the practices given. They sinned and they made no bones about it. They sinned and then went after other sinners full-blast.
I remember your story well. You found out that your God was a lie because knowledge has made you smarter than. You found the piece that "unhooked" you from it because it became necessary to not believe. People do it everyday. It is ok to not believe. Which brings me to my next point: if you do not believe in it; what hell are you referring to??? Is there another that you read about?
I'm quite sure you've found that piece that would unhook you, as well. Most people with morals do. Many, otherwise, good people just choose willful ignorance and blind faith, because of abject fear.
Jesus unhooks me, thanks. You unhook you. Theres a difference. Abject fear causes people to run away. Ya know, deny they saw or heard anything.
Seems an extremely transparent way to evade REAL reality....by going into confusing, superfluous, and meaningless drivel, instead of sensible exchange.
No...abject fear causes people to see phantoms where there are only shadows cast from the living. They hear the voice of the monster God inside their heads, while they pretend he's not a monster, because they took the bait, and decided to settle for the lesser of the two evils. God or Hell! Then the constant fear keeps them in a state of perpetual slavery toward someone else's imagined, and childishly brutal, fantasy. A rigid and ruthless program(indoctrination)
Though they have the acumen to discern this as folly, FEAR takes the wheel and drives, while they sit, in the passenger seat.....paralyzed.
You back to the "Spider man" convention??? I wonder what type of fear it is that you have. Hmmm... could it be... Satan!!!" (Saturday nite live crew laughing)
You are really afraid of "Spidey" and his supposed threats???
For the record "Jesus unhooks me" was in response to your comments about my finding the piece that would unhook me. Not drivel. Don't you even listen to yourself? Jesus paid the price; and I believe that.
Now I am free. Now YOU are free to not believe. But you are not comfortable with that are you? Spidey is not at the convention. But he will hear you whenever you call. Whatever your situation. Gays, murderers, whoremongers, thieves, liars, and Republicans (lol) are all welcome to call him. He is not tyrannical. He wants us all. He is available to all. He asks for your faith. Faith covers a lot. When the spirit is with you, you BEGIN to think like him. You BECOME new. Not tonight; but as you grow. Sin is here to stay. If somebody tells you they have none, the bible calls him/her a liar.
You and I know that you are not really answering the question. But you have decided to rewrite the question, then make it appear as if you are answering MY question. Then you go on, incessantly heaping accolades and slavish adulation upon a fictional character. Seems you are trying your best to evade ANY logic....coming from ANYONE. Buy I understand.....as accepting ANY logic would completely destroy your fantasy....and the fictional character would be put into the correct category. And you'll have to deal with reality. But....ha...ha...ha....you are way too vested to do such a thing. Reality is too scary to handle! Isn't it? And some people have to evade it at all cost?
Drivel. Why do you feel the need to keep preaching, and heaping all of these accolades upon some fictional character, in a book of ancient fairytales? You act as if you have proven his existence to us, but all you have is a belief in something that is completely absurd. Could you ever consider just being straightforward?
No....you are far from free.
Please understand that this entire paragraph is frighteningly disturbing.
Frankly, you are disturbing. As well; you have not answered my questions. You refuse to leave me to my "folly". It seems you want some (if only a very tiny bit). Why do you come? Why are you so obsessed with my fiction? I don't care what you say; I will not be at your hail Spidey fundraiser; nor your monthly getitrite gold medal reception. Yet you are STILL running after Jesus (this fictional character) who deserves each and every accolade I can muster. I say he's real. You are hoping... but believe that YOU are right. You elevate your opinion to dangerous levels for you'd rather see YOURSELF as all-knowing. I know better... wish you did. You wud probably see the err in your logic. (I sure hope there's a Spider-Man convention today so I can pass out my flyers about how utterly silly and stupid they all are. Cant forget my ray gun for the rowdy ones.)
I attack your comments, but you attack me, personally.
I have answered each of your questions clearly. Only someone needing remedial reading comprehension class would disagree with that.
That's like wanting to eat out of the dumpster, because I see hobos doing it. What I would like is for you to one day accept that there is a world outside of this nonsense that you have blindly accepted, while the real world is slipping right away, along with your years of life. You have nothing but a diversion from real life....the life you are allowing to be taken away by this childish and foolish religion.
No one is obsessed with your fiction. But some people care enough to try to right an injustice when they see one. Your beliefs are downright silly, however indoctrination did a stellar job in making you into the desired finished product. You can't be changed. Your mind was taken over long ago, and so were your forebears, who, blindly taught you that a silly fairy tale was reality.....not having the awareness to even know they were lying to you. Unlike what you would like to think, I have no desire to believe my forebears, as they were tricked as well. Therefore your claim that I am chasing some silly imaginary foolish "savior" is completely absurd....and would suggest that my mind and will are just as weak as the fearful blind followers. I despise all religious stupidity. I seek NOT Jesus, because, unlike you, I have the courage to accept that there is no Jesus. That's the benefit of accepting reality.
With no evidence whatsoever, that would make you appear to be woefully dishonest. Of course morals are not required to be a believer, just emotional weakness....a weak will, and a propensity to fear authority.
If you could really see your religion for what it really is, you would be hoping that I was right too. The deity that you give all these accolades is nothing but an extreme monstrosity, demanding the most childish and ignorant things, and commanding no one question his ignorance of science, or his countless abuses. Yet you believe you want to spend eternity with a piece of garbage like that.
You say that you know better than I know, yet I have deconstructed everyone of your arguments. You haven't provided even the smallest challenge to my assertions. All you have done with my arguments is evade...while stating inane and whimsical nonsense about a deity that you have not provided any proof of. At least I have credibility on my side. Yours has been long lost.
Again, I ask: DO YOU SEE "IN SPIDER MAN WE TRUST" ON OUR MONEY? DO YOU SEE CITIZENS ASKED TO SWEAR ON A MARVEL COMIC BEFORE GIVING TESTIMONY IN A PUBLIC COURT ROOM?
You can ignore delusional believers in Spider Man because it has no effect on your life....unlike your intrusive ancient fairy tale.
Man, this debate has been going on for a while and the anticipation is killing me! I can't wait to see if the Christians or the atheists win. No pressure here, but I heard that the Pope and Richard Dawkins are also watching closely to see the outcome.
Just let me know before Sunday so I will know if my church will open the doors.
Keep up the good work!
The desire to continually converse concerning something considered fiction says more about one's piece of mind than anything.
As for your money: I would not accept a piece of paper that states in Spidey we trust. If I were you, I'd toss those "greenbacks." Better still... I'd give them all away.
It speaks well for MY argument that the establishers of this country believed and became one of the world powers. I like that.
Yes, the "establishers" made it America's motto in 1956 and put it on paper money in 1957. Or is American History another thing that you think Christ forbids learning?
Sure, find it there...Quote it here. And "In the year of.." doesn't count. That's just how they said A.D. back then.
Good luck with that.
God isn't mentioned in the Constitution...The word Creator is used...Oh and the motto for the USA from our founding fathers was... E pluribus unum...Latin for "Out of many, one"
** Edit** as Melissa has pointed out...Neither God nor the word Creator is in the Constitution...But the word Creator is used in the Declaration of Independence...My Mistake..And thanks to Melissa for the correction...
so you don't know anything about biblical history, early church history OR U.S. history. Interesting.
You do understand that a large number of our founding father's despised Christianity and the church and that the "God" mentioned in the constitution is in reference to deism, not Christianity, yes?
Just to point out and assist...God is not used in the Constitution...The word Creator is though...
No, it isn't DS. Neither the word God nor Creator are in the Constitution.
Here's a link to the transcript...
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte … cript.html
I recognized my mistake after the fact. I was thinking of the term "creator" in the bill of rights, and attempting to point out that the use of the word creator doesn't mean what she seems to think it means. Although I'm not entirely sure she understands the difference between theism and deism.
Yeah...I was thinking of the Declaration of Independence myself...We all make mistakes on occasion...And I agree, I don't think she knows the difference between the two either...I could be wrong though...
Umm.. I am pretty certian I didn't miss the point as to what me and JM were talking about...
I thought you and JM were talking about the lack of sufficient Christians as founders. And as always my education or lack thereof on the Const. matter.
We were discussing what words were contained in those documents...
And your knowledge of the difference between a theist and a deist...
If the founders were Christians, they didn't want religion in government...See comments from some of the founders in my earlier post...
86DoubleScorpionposted 25 hours agoYeah...I was thinking of the Declaration of Independence myself...We all make mistakes on occasion...And I agree, I don't think she knows the difference between the two either...I could be wrong though...
Then you give me the pledge? Uh, difference between what? Deist and Theist?
Ok.. Lets go slow... That was me and JM discussing a mistake of the word Creator being used in the constitution instead of God...When it was actually it was the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution... and the Pledge was in response to this post of yours...
So you are saying the pledge was first? Ok, what does the pledge have to do with the first document the Declaration of Independence. You threw in the pledge which was not part of the discussion.
Yet another Straw Man creation. Just can't stay focused, I presume.
The pledge part of that, was to show...even Christians (Baptist Minister) Didn't put God into things concerning the government
Seems we've switched the conversation again. Are we trying to answer the OPs question or are we goingto bring up the holy people sent to find the new world.
It's not about something considered fiction. It's about how believers, in this fiction, have been used for centuries to commit the worst abuses upon their fellow humans. Therefore it is evil that we are confronting. And deep down inside you know that's what we are doing, as you keep trying to shame us into giving you a carte blanche.
Another flippant way to avoid answering anything.
You don't have an argument. This is an effort in irrelevancy....going on and on, asserting meaningless and disturbing drivel, dodging everything that would destroy the rotting foundation of these putrid beliefs. No shame in your game.
Just a quick note...
"In God we trust" didn't first appeared on U.S. coins until 1864 and didn't appear on paper currency until 1957.
When something makes no sense at all, it's most likely not true. You are now saying God felt the need to murder the people he loved in order keep peace. Do you even hear what you are saying?
They get a kick out of it...
anything else you want to know?
The fact that you were brave enough to stand up, on behalf of others, was generous of you. I understand where you were coming from so allow me to say thank you for speaking out for ppl you felt were being bullied. I assume it wasn't easy for you.
Thanks Beth, you're absolutely right just scrolling through some of the forums I noticed a lot of belittling and bullying happening.
Wow, the hypocrisy of the OP is overwhelming. Of course, it is the Christians who tell us what to believe and how to live. Then, they threaten us will eternal hellfire if we don't abide by their rules. They call us evil and followers of Satan along with a host of other names if we don't readily accept their beliefs. They lie about everything and anything to defend their faith.
It is the Christians who are the bullies.
As is yours, so please keep your religion behind closed doors where it belongs so we can all live our lives without hearing it.
And if I said that to a homosexual person? Would you tolerate that?
Again, I have yet to start a "religious" thread. How many have you started?
Homosexuals are not evangelizing.
What does that have to do with your evangelism?
I believe in God. I believe He is real and good and true and I have had dozens and dozens and dozens of experiences with Him, some miraculous.
Is that evangelizing?
If your response is to accuse, question or cast doubt, then I might respond with something that comes across as evangelizing... which is also free speech. You can silence me, but I believe it is simply a form of bigotry.
As far as starting threads, my point was, I usually respond to threads that an Atheist or Agnostic has started. I seldom ever respond to threads a Christian has started b/c 9 times out of 10 I don't agree with the original poster or the general tone set in the thread.
So if I am responding to a thread you or another has started, then I would imagine that you were the instigator... so why would you then tell me to be silent after having instigated the conversation. lol... It's an obvious ploy and it's repeated daily.
It is all you do. Odd you need to lie and claim you do not. Why is that?
So my bio is unacceptable to you?
Have you heard of censoring?
You are so far over the top, I don't think you can even see the moon anymore.
No - you asked if you were evangelizing. And yes - you are.
So my bio is off limits... am I allowed to talk about God to my friends or... could you tell me where I'm allowed to speak freely about my faith? In response to your threads is a no no... my bio is a no no... I just need clarification.
No - it is evangelizing. You asked. Still - you stop pushing it - I will stop telling you how divisive it is.
If you set up some forum rules for everyone it would make it easier.
You think this is about rules? Well - I guess that is what your religion teaches you. Don't think, just follow these rules. Except they don't apply to you of course.
No - this is about reasonable conversation. Not interested in the deal then? No believers ever are. They want to preach hatred and then play the martyr card when they are called on it. This is why your religion causes so many fights.
You sure we cannot come to an amicable arrangement? You would rather continue to fight?
Do the forum rules state that folks are not supposed to preach here?
If not, and you do preach, then we have every right to speak our minds, just as you have every right to bully us.
But, that is not what you do, you have even admitted to evangelizing and stated that is what you are here to do, commanded by your religion.
No, that is delusion and dishonesty.
Agreed, your religion is full of bigotry, lots of it, and do indeed have the right to propagate it. It's not a matter of silencing you, it is a matter of education.
Of course, that isn't true at all, but I don't expect much, if any honesty from you.
Well, I am proud of you at least. Look at you posting on both accounts at the same time. You are really working hard.
mean mean mean. but, you don't see it that way. you never will. How come?
According to Melissa's astute observation: I am calling the kettle black. How I don't know. Proof please. Quotes.
BTW You are certainly allowed to believe there is no God.
Certainly...(by God himself, in my humble, little tiny individual opinion.)
Actually, most people go through periods in their lives when they do not believe in God. So we really are on the same page more than you comprehend.
How can that be an excellent question when it makes no sense whatsoever? Are you saying homosexuals evangelize their homosexuality door to door? Are you serious?
It would only make sense if you hated homosexuals.
Gay people, like me, are not "evangelizing". We're trying to gain equal rights and stop persecution. Gay persecution is a real thing - gay people get spit on, yelled at, beat up, raped, and even murdered. Guess what one of the biggest reasons discrimination and homophobia exists is? Maybe you guessed: religion.
I have no problem with religion if they aren't hurting or discriminating against other people, but I do have a problem with you telling gay people to leave it behind closed doors - when exposing the horrors of intolerance is the only way to move forward.
Do you believe that ppl of faith do not understand persecution?
"but I do have a problem with you telling gay people to leave it behind closed doors"
When did I ever do that? I was in fact the one who made the very point that in today's world, that is not acceptable. That's my quote above that your responding to.
Have many ppl who called themselves followers of God done terrible things in His name? Without a doubt. There are many officers of the law who have done atrocities, as well as parents, teachers, ppl in authority who should be trusted, basically. This is sad, evil and wrong. It's the very reason I believe today's world needs Jesus and if you believe you and I have equal rights, I should be allowed to express that belief without persecution.
Those who yell persecution simply because others don't accept the irrational beliefs shoved down their throats most certainly have no understanding of persecution.
History is replete with ample examples.
You are not being persecuted, so don't complain about it. We don't need your Jesus and we don't want to hear you telling us that. Your evangelism is not the same as having equal rights, it is an abuse of those rights.
Does Sally love Sue? Does Suzie have a right to say that to the world? If you believe she does, then you should not tell me I can't say Jesus loves me, or even that Jesus loves you. If Suzie wants to stand on a pedestal and tell the world their love story, and why their love should be considered beautiful and acceptable, you cannot tell me I can't do the same.
And PS, you claiming it's not persecution, does not mean it's not persecution. It's simply denial and that's on you.
Sally and Sue are probably real people, Jesus is a myth. Sally and Sue do not tell people they are evil or will spend an eternity in hellfire if they don't accept the love they have for each other. Your comparison here is ridiculously off the mark by miles.
Jesus doesn't tell you anything and He doesn't tell me anything. You are getting that from a book written by other men hundreds of years ago.
But, they would not do that because they have respect for others, whereas you don't.
That would show clearly you don't know what is persecution and what is not.
But... who ever is saying that you can't say you're a Christian, be proud to be a Christian, and share your "love story" with Jesus? Like, no one (assuming it's at the appropriate time and place, i.e. not in a classroom in a public school)?
I am kind of offended that you would even compare a lesbian coming out with her struggles, and a Christian coming out as... a Christian.
If someone is bothering you for being a Christian, that is unfair. However, is someone is criticizing you for using religion to persecute others, deny academia and science, and going around telling everyone that they are going to hell, well, that's a different story. The fact is, systematic persecution of Christians doesn't exist in Western countries - but it does exist for gay people, and dare I suggest, non-Christians to some extent. You might sometimes struggle as a Christian, but in the end, you are of the majority religion and are better off than any other belief.
Persecution? When have you ever been persecuted for your religious beliefs in North America?
+1,000,000,000,000, Rad Man, Atheists are demonized and stigmatized in this religious majority society. Atheists are oftentimes viewed as "the lesser" and "the other". Religious people are glorified in this society, even in this postmodern culture. Religion in American society is viewed as the BE and END ALL. Religious people are viewed as more respectable and moral than a person who is an Atheist although religion and morality are mutually exclusive. Religion is the cloak of respectability and inclusiveness in many parts of American society. It is only recently that Atheists and other non-traditional spiritualists are respected and recognized.
We need Jesus huh? After all the horrible atrocities caused by believers of Jesus, you think we, somehow, still need this garbage....like Jesus is some kind of an answer. Just pour some more fuel on the flames. Jesus is not the answer, Jesus is the problem.
And I should be able to express that belief without persecution.
I apologize if I somehow am misinterpreting your post, but it sounds like
a) you're saying that Christians are routinely persecuted on a level compared to gay people
b) or you should have the right to tell gay people they should keep it behind closed doors.
For the record, I don't agree with the above poster that religious people have to keep it behind closed doors, I think everyone has the right to live their religion as they see fit - however, respecting separation of church and state, respecting the choices of other people, not persecuting others. There is a difference between asserting your religious belief, and actively denying the rights (and safety, and life) of people you disagree with.
I don't necessarily agree that religion is inherently the problem. But I would say that people using religion for bad reasons is a problem, and a lot of people have suffered and continue to suffer for that.
No, its the atheists who are the bullies. How dare you say we are bullies. Christians are not bullies by their very natures! Proof please? Quotes.
Do I? proof please. quotes. What a bash this is!
You're about a couple clouds of digital spittle away from having automated machine gun turrets on top of your rhetorical fortress. That's quite defensive.
--->what is a cloud of non-digital spittle? can spittle of any type be shot from turrets? Have you ever illustrated that image?
Clearly interpreting metaphors is something you're lacking in.
"Your vehement defensive posts are metaphorically creating a fortress, and you're just a few more away from having automated defenses on said fortress." <-- Is that clear and obvious enough for you yet, or do I have to simplify it further?
...what is an "automated" defense? What does that look like? I guess we will never be friends. Okay, I will stop trying now.
I will take my fortress and go. Draw me looking very sad... a tear drop escaping my glancing eye. Snow capped Edo in the background. Waves of egg shell blue in the foreground. I am hanging on with one hand in a storm to the bows of a lone pine...
But never mind, I'll be fine.
...An automated defense is a defensive mechanism that activates automatically. An alarm when you open a fire door. A set of sprinklers turning on when a fire is detected. A robotic machine gun turret that fires at a target area where it detects motion.
So, Christians (and others) have automated defense systems that fire at atheists. DID YOU HEAR THAT THEISTS? Stop with your automatic defense tactics already!
Maybe we can all get along now.
And be friends.
do Christians not call atheists names or tell them that they're going to hell because they don't believe in god?
Christians don't have a very good track record of being tolerant. They burned people at the stake for believing a different religion - or even suspecting someone of being a different religion. They accused people by the hundreds of witchcraft for using herbs. They burned, tortured and slaughtered people in the hundreds of thousands ever since Christianity became the official state religion of Rome. Does that sound tolerant to you? How about the Christians who tell homosexuals that they don't deserve equal rights because they're immoral or unnatural. How about the Christians who want to put religion back into public schools - but only THEIR religion. The same Christians that would pitch a fit if someone offered an Islamic prayer in the same school. DO you not see these events as bullying?
Are Christians the only people who should have the right to freedom of religion or free speech? Don't atheists have the right to express themselves? I'm sorry you don't like it, but that doesn't mean we can't say it. The fact that we express our opinions does not limit or restrict your rights. If you want the freedom to believe and say whatever you want, the opposition shares the same. That's just the way it works.
You should know that those Christians were not following the teachings of Jesus. Please don't base your facts on a bunch of psychopaths that gave Christianity a bad name
The point is that the people who did that DID believe that they were following the bible - and saying what you just posted in that one post would be enough to get you tortured, condemned and burned at the stake. You know that, right?
And what about the Christians today? They don't torture people, but you've got some of them saying that homosexuals should be executed and the only way possible for a Christian to attend a gay wedding is if they make and hold up a sign quoting Leviticus that says they should be put to death?
the "oh those people weren't true christians is the No True Scotsman fallacy. It's a logical fallacy common but still irrelevant in debates.
Beliefs do not exist in a vacuum. They affect other people - often negatively. That's what atheists care about - the true separation of Church and state. Don't you think it's slightly hypocritical for someone wearing a cross around their neck with a Jesus fish on their car to want me to change my shirt if it says "atheist" on it because I am "pushing my atheism" on them by wearing a t-shirt in a free country that allows them to prominently display their religious icons?
Yes but I believe that violence is the nature of man. Also many Christians don't condemn they volunteer time to the community to help and better it to those who want it. You can take extremist from every section of society in the world not just religious groups. I have had atheist attack me, and tell me to call to my god for help if he was real. I'm not even a bible thumping Christian. I believe all have the right to live as they please, and none know if what they believe is real.
Also although we hold opposing views, I admire you. You are a great writer and also a amazing thinker JMc may I follow you?
you have had an atheist attack you? In what form?
Did they physically hurt you?
I'm sorry, I find that hard to believe.
Yes I was attacked physically by a group, grant it they were young and you might label it as mere bullying but the reason for the attack was my religion as they took turns beating on me.
It doesn't really matter if you believe it because the fact is that it did happen. I have never met a violent Christian or Muslim but I do not deny that they exist. Nor do feel this is the major view of atheist. My friends that hold a atheist view point tend to be more understanding and easier to talk to, but my point is that due to personal experience I know that some atheist just like any other group has radicals too.
How do you know they were atheists? I personally have never seen a group of young Atheists roaming around. Your story seems a little hard to believe.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nigeria-mi … -1.1872387
I know this because I knew them. I never said they were just roaming around, otherwise they would not have attacked me, because I don't preach my beliefs. Why because all atheist are perfect humans? that's no more absurd then me saying all religious people are perfect.
Neither does this
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/06/02 … use-faith/
You made it sound like a group of Atheist attacked you because of your beliefs. From what you are saying now that doesn't appear to be the case. I not sure you could have known they were all Atheists and I'm not sure you could have know why they attacked you.
You do understand that those attacks from your post are not from Atheists right? It's believers killing believers.
""It’s easing in the old Communist world and it's rising in the Islamic world," King said, noting in particular countries like Egypt, Pakistan and Nigeria. King said that the first major killing spree in recent years happened between 1998 and 2003, when he claims 10,000 Christians were murdered in Indonesia alone during those years."
My point is to learn to respect people no matter what they believe, do or love. All people have done something wrong and no one is perfect, so radman stop trying to twist what I am saying onto being against atheist. I do not have time for anyone who is close minded and unwilling to consider others views and experiences.
You didn't even attempt to answer my question. How do you know they were Atheists?
I think you just missed one of his posts, Rad. Here is the pertinent part:
And how does he know they beat him up for his religion?
There are lots of reasons to beat someone up.
In the same vein, but completely unrelated to Fuginagasaki, I'm seeing from lots of people "Atheists hate me because I am Christian"
My general opinion is there are so many reasons to hate certain people that their faith ranks way down the list.
The truth is I've never meet a Muslim I didn't really like. I know they exist because I read the news. I have meet a few Christians I didn't like, but that's only because I'm surrounded by them.
I have to say, I've never heard of a bunch of Atheists attacking someone because of their faith. It's actually rather rare to see more than a few of us together and even when we are we most likely don't know it as we don't talk about it.
To be honest, I spend very little time discussing religion with the people around me either. I talk about it at services and possibly with my friends from my fellowship occasionally... but we like to argue.
I think it's like anything else, if one is obsessed with something then they talk about it constantly. Those more balanced have other things to discuss. I wouldn't imagine a group of atheists standing around talking about something they don't believe in. Those kinds of conversations just don't happen in real life. I mean I don't stand around with my friends discussing pink unicorns.
If the only thing in my life was pink unicorns though... I don't guess I'd talk about much besides them.
But I digress, sort of, my big thing is I can't deal with zealots. It has nothing to do with the philosophy of a zealot. It's all about the PERSONALITY of the zealot. If I'm telling someone to shut up and stop talking about Justin Bieber, it's not because I have anything against Justin Bieber, it's because I can only deal with someone yapping incessantly about one thing for so long before it gets on my nerves.
Of course the person I tell to shut up will automatically assume it's because I hate the Bieber. I guess that's because they have trouble believing themselves to be annoying.
But, that is not true, if it were, we wouldn't be here talking so pleasantly. It is actually bad ideologies like your religion that causes good people to do bad things. And of course, the bad things that occur are usually committed by a very tiny minority of the overall population.
You are agreeing with and defending them here on these forums.
Those are the facts. Sorry, if you don't like the label, but it is dead on correct.
I get told I'm going to hell all the time for not being a Christian.
It's much worse than a simple "you're going to hell" when many Christians find out I'm gay.
Sorry if I don't feel sorry for members of the majority religion and their whining about how victimized they are.
Hey man I have been following this forum and while you say that all Christians do is fight, fight, fight while you seem to be the antagonist. While I am not a "Christian" I cant say that they are all bad the majority I have met and befriended seem to be good, loving humans just as my Islamic, Hindi, and Sick friends. I you are truly a atheist who wants to change the world for the better, change yourself and stop being so argumentative.
accept peoples views as their own and be confident in your own, as Christians say " turn the other cheek."
If I come off as rude I apologize. Also what is with this getting upset about the fiery pits of hell? how is that a insult if you don't believe in it, I don't get offended by that anymore than I would if someone told me Zeus would come down and smite me with a lightning bolt. It is silly.
No, you're not rude, you're just not observing reality and what is going in the world. There would be no need to say anything at all if Christian simply kept their beliefs behind closed doors where they belong.
Of course, it's silly, but that doesn't diminish the fact that people are evangelizing that nonsense, that they are pushing it down our throats and all we ask is that they stop.
Your fight and anger is with God, So why are you continuously saying "Christians" this and that...Christ himself has said that those who do not believe "condemn themselves"
I understand now, as I read these comments, what Jesus meant when he said; if they hate me, they will hate you also .
Sorry, but God is not the one writing nonsense on these forums or didn't you know that?
Yes, I understand Christians are compelled to pass on what they believe to others especially when they are threats of condemnation, that is why they don't take responsibility for their own actions and cause so much conflict in the world, as you're doing now.
Me hating Jesus and you --->
Does the fact that something is enjoyable make it good? If you knew someone who enjoyed drinking battery acid and wanted to give it to their children, would you let them?
I have no problem with personal faith. The problem is that personal faith is rarely personal. When theists go out of their way to threaten me with hell, it's no longer personal and my free speech is just as valid as their's. When they vote to restrict or condemn gay rights, it's affecting the equal rights of others and it's no longer personal faith. If people want to be free to believe what they want, they have to recognize that other people have the same right to disagree.
I'm not out to deconvert anyone. I like discussing religion because I was raised in it and I've spent a lifetime studying it. If that's problematic for atheists to express their views, it's equally problematic for theists. Simple.
Comparing the teachings of jesus to battery acid is a bit far fetched. I do agree that some God lovers do go out of their way to preach however I have noticed that there's a huge growing atheist movement out there that spend their lives on forums and posting anti god slogans and they seem to take pride and go above and beyond to prove there's no God.
Sometimes, I wonder if they're getting a paycheck from... It's the same with the topic of socialism. Thank goodness that discussion has died down. Keep fighting, I say....for the sake of those who believe. But, If its too much for (any of) YOU, stop.
Some prominent atheists here are from other countries. Our country is based on religious freedom. Actually, I accept atheists just fine. I wish they understood this attitude.
Why would we fight
We believers fight for our right to believe, in my estimation.
Yes, that's what it all boils down to, you fight and fight and fight, and then pull the persecution card when folks get tired of your fighting all the time.
You give us reason to fight. Otherwise we would just be living peacefully without a care in the world...
Show us these anti-god slogans, or else retract your accusation.
This makes me think you don't know many atheists. We don't have to disprove a god until one had been proven. That's never happened.
So Christians can flood the forms with religious posts, but atheists don't have the free speech to respond with their opinions and thoughts? I like discussing religion because I've spent my life studying it. Should only people who agree be allowed to participate? If so, then each denomination should have their own specific forum as well. That's the pesky thing about free speech. It applies to everyone.
Shh! It's OK for the theist to follow the edicts of their god and browbeat everyone in hearing with threats of hellfire, but it's not OK for the atheist to ever say anything at all.
Reminds me of the Christian I saw in Vegas; set up a PA system outside the Bellagio, on the sidewalk, and harangued people waiting for the water show. Really, really irritating to have this Bimbo 10' away with her loudspeakers going after my soul when all I wanted was to see the dancing waters. I was glad when the show started as it kept me from putting a foot into the woofers or throwing the microphone into the pond.
There was a Japanese tour waiting with me; made me wonder what kind of view of Americans they were going to take home with them.
So, you take it out on us, here in the hP forums?
Who browbeats with threats of hellfire, here?
You want to know something funny? On any given day, I can walk and and see hundreds of crucifixes around people's necks. If I wear an atheist shirt, however, I am suddenly offensive and blatantly flaunting my atheism. The double standard is simultaneously amusing and disturbing. Apparently, only the religious have the right to flaunt their beliefs and anyone else who does the same is somehow infringing on THEIR rights, somehow.
So, you admit believers are just little children who need to believe in fairy tales?
Tell you what - you keep your irrational beliefs to yourself and I promise not to tell you how silly they are.
Do we have a deal?
Just to clarify... I think this is what she was addressing.
Really? How odd. Wasn't that a reasonable offer?
If I silence myself concerning all matters of faith, you promise not to mock and insult me and or my beliefs? I guess I should have thanked you.
If you believe garbage - that is your business. Sorry your beliefs are so silly, but you cannot honestly expect to share them without being mocked. Really?
Again, I believe this is the tone she was addressing.
(And no, you certainly don't have to share them. Your life is... Your Own.)
Please don't be such a martyr. Believe garbage - that is your business. Spread it and you will be mocked. I mean - have you read that garbage scripture you keep copy pasting? Odd - you don't want the deal either? Believers never do.
Mark Knowles - May I use you as the perfect case study (Bully) for my post. Kind regards
Sure, as long as you make sure that you admit you started an inflammatory, insulting forum thread and called people names. Like in the post I'm replying to.
There's a word for people who do what they call down others for doing...
Starts with an H.
The fact is you purposely started a conversation that caused at last look, 5 pages of the behavior you claim to be above... and you did it on purpose.
That word starts with a T.
No need to create fabrications. Quote"You did that on purpose" ... you must also have a natural talent as a psychic since you claim to also mind read. When and where did i call anyone the following.. evil, dilusional, garbage, dishonest, bigot?
Oh, so there are some names that are OK to call people and some names that aren't.
You know, it's funny I've never been called any of those things. (by atheists on this forum) Yet most of the Atheists know I am a Christian.
Let's ponder that for a while.
So yeah, in the future don't try and stand up for me. I am quite capable of doing it myself. I don't need someone like YOU defending MY religion. Especially not with this kind of display.
You said yourself you weren't a believer... so what dog do you have in this fight? Did someone call you a mean name so you decided to speak for all Christianity? Who gave you that right? I would suggest if someone called you a name you might want to think about whether it fit instead of trying to get everybody on your side.
Once again you are mind reading. Making assumptions you know my character and thoughts is quite amuzing. Just because I dont believe in God does not mean I dont have the right to stand up to bullying. Are you saying just because someone is a man they dont have a right to stand up for women's right? Or if i'm not gay I'm not allowed to stand up for gays. Please rather than attacking blindly try and make some sense. This discussion ends here. Have a nice day
Just reading what you wrote darlin'
And when you are "sticking up" for someone (An act that coincidentally gets you lots and lots of attention, although surely that isn't the reason... right?) You might want to ask their permission. Like I said, I surely don't need you to defend me. As a matter of fact, it's quite insulting that YOU think you could do a better job of it... you know considering how you've presented yourself so far.
So by all means, stand up to bullies.... ROFLMAO... sorry couldn't help myself.
Might I suggest you actually stand up for someone who is actually being bullied? Or does your ROFLMAO again selfless civic duty only apply to sitting on your computer typing untruths to defend people you could care less about?
You know... go to a school, go help the homeless, go actually do something that matters to people that ARE being bullied. Or does your sense of righteousness not extend past a writers forum with people you will never meet face to face?
Dang! This dude is ruthless! Imagine him as dictator
Are promises usually followed by question marks?
*The above is not a promise.
Ah, so you will continue to evangelize.
Unfortunately, this false hope has been tied to religions....pretending to be the comforter of the downtrodden, sick, and dying. But when you read the Holy Books, what you read mostly is about an insufferable torment, and persistent abuse, bullying and murder of everyone who doesn't conform. How can a monstrous concept as such provide any kind of comfort? People don't need this evil in order to feel hope. They just need to become adults.
You couldn't have said it better. I admire you. I am currently writing a new hub about Why I Have Come Back to the Catholic Church! blessings peace love
The truth is because they are terrified they may be wrong and are trying to convince Christians, or belittle them, to make them feel better and more vindicated. Usually those type of atheists are those how were formerly Christians.
No, it's that we understand that we are right, and would like people to stop telling us to believe as they do or we will burn in hell. It's only been a few years since I've been able to shop on a Sunday. We have a Pope who says "who is he to judge" and then tells his followers to refuse to perform abortions and that homosexuals acts are sins. We have the religious actively involved in promoting their beliefs in politics. So if you are allowed to voice your opinion so am I.
The Bible is a book of silly childish fairy tales. Only people with minds riddled with paranoia would allow themselves to be terrified by such primitive and foolish make-believe. If you fear fairy tales, that's fine, although cause for concern......but please stop slandering others. SMH
Slandering others? And you don't think you do exactly that?
No I don't. Slandering is making false, smearing accusations against someone. I have only stated facts about the absurd beliefs of Christians and other deluded minds. Of course you are welcome to, and I encourage you, to deconstruct my arguments at any time....to prove that I have committed slander.
You can't speak for all atheists. How can you say for sure what I said isn't true? You are also assuming that Christians have deluded minds. Who says that is true for all?
I never said that I did know for sure....but there is something called logic, and using simple logic, your beliefs carry the same weight as Rumpelstiltskin, or Dark Vader. I don't see anyone trying to make absolutely sure that Rumpelstiltskin isn't a true story. Seems kinda desperate.
What is your definition of deluded?
I guess it just all comes down to intellectual honesty.
getitrite, you have no idea what intellectual honesty is. Your "logic" has no basis in sound scholarship; it is merely sarcasm clothed in "intellectual" wording that may sound logical to the uninformed, but in reality, is actually riddled with flawed theories. In short, any scholar worth their salt would have no choice but to disagree with your flawed version of what constitutes actual truth. In other words, guidelines exist for determining what is historically accurate and what is not. You have not met any of those guidelines --ever-- in anything you have written with regard to Bible history. Furthermore, you have been especially arrogant and belittling in your comments toward Claire Evans, who unlike you, has always replied to your sarcasm without malice and with solid research. In fact, toward her, you have been the perfect bully. I am not impressed with your false intellectualism. You can delude your friends, or those who don't know any better -- but you don't impress me. Bullies don't have the discipline or courage for intellectual honesty-- that's why they're bullies.
And just who would you define as the "uninformed"...?
Could you cite examples of my flawed logic, then we can go from there?
Unless someone has been living under a rock, they should know that....the bible is NOT history!
"The historical narratives of the Old Testament are filled with legendary fabrications and the book of Acts in the New Testament contains historically unreliable information about the life and teachings of Paul. Many of the books of the New Testament are pseudonymous – written not by the apostles but by later writers claiming to be apostles. The list goes on."
Research? Hilarious! Those replies were all from a perspective of delusion, twisting logic and posing more illogical unproven rhetoric, as if that's the method by which one PROVES his/her point. However, I do sympathize with Claire.
I simply tried to get her to see that her assertions make no sense at all....in the REAL world. And, again, I do sympathize with Claire. It is the delusion, which has permeated her thoughts, that I am attacking.
Wow! Someone finally caught me....trying to pass as intelligent. I had a good con going until you came along and exposed me for the phony that I really am. Please don't tell any of my friends, as I still have them all tricked.
Good luck with your anti-bullying campaign. Let me know if I can help.
Bart Ehrman bases his discussions on variants in the Bible, which he has grossly exaggerated, by about 1000%, actually. He is a modern scholar who maintains an inflexible view of inerrancy in a manner that seems logical until one realizes that these variants he speaks of are of no consequence when interpreting the meanings behind the words in the Biblical manuscripts, ie. wrong spellings, words placed here, instead of there, etc.. Yet the meaning and inspiration behind the words remains clear, regardless. The Biblical manuscripts have already been proven as the best and most accurate piece of historic evidence that exists, out of any other piece of evidence that refers to any historical person, including Julius Ceasar, for example.
Furthermore, Ehrmans views are not respected by those who take textual criticism seriously, as he infuses his own inner views into his arguments. Serious historians would never do this; they only rely on facts.
That having been said, I know that the only thing that interests you is sarcasm, and belittling those who don't agree with you, so I'll pass on your offer. But, thanks for proving my point about what you do best.
So I guess it is perfectly logical to believe that a tribe of ancient goat herders knew the creator of the universe, and that the creator talked directly to them, and told them that He wants us to show continued sycophancy, although He is never going to show us one real shred of evidence. Yep, you have shown me the light....although it sounds a lot like wishful thinking, and abject slavery!
It is, distressingly, apparent that the Dark Ages are still here in 2013.
I answered your question, and "cited an example of your flawed logic" as you asked, and yet-- you have switched to another question, rather than choosing to defend your position in any reasonable way. Is that the best you can come up with? Goat herders and Dark Ages? Typical, but hardly interesting. How about defending Bart Ehrman, and sticking to the subject you brought up, instead of going off on another sarcastic tangent.
Or is Ehrmans position indefensible -- or maybe you just don't know -- That would be my guess, as you've yet to say anything about the "evidence" you claim to hold so dear.
actually (from someone who has actually read his books and audited a couple of his lectures that he gives at Chapel Hill, NC) only a small fraction of Ehrman's arguments have to do with variants in the text. Ehrman actually goes out of his way to make it clear that the large,overwhelming majority of these variants are minor and insignificant.
Where did you attend bible college, and what degree did you achieve? Where did you go on to secondary seminary? How many years have you spent working, researching and teaching in the field? I'm just curious as to what background you may have to assert that a well-respected (although often disagreed with) actual SCHOLAR is unqualified or overly biased to be able to comment on his professional field of study. Have you read his books? Attended his lectures? By what basis do you make this summary judgment?
Ehrman is an agnostic. He used to be a believer while at Moody Bible Institute, as well as Princeton Theological seminary. Does his bias or unbelief cloud his views? Possibly - although he is the bible scholar that most christians refer me to when discussing a historical Jesus. If that's the case, then, you should also toss out the majority of works produced by bible believing christians, because their bias must obviously cloud their work as well - or is it your assertion that bias only works for non-believers and since christians have "truth" everything they say must be true? If so, that's certainly not the case. Compare Lee Strobel's the Case for Christ against Robert Price (also a graduate and teacher at a theological seminary) and the case against the case for christ. Although I'm the first person to admit that I don't agree with everything that Ehrman (or any scholar for that matter) says, I've done the research myself - for over 15 years at a collegiate level and beyond.
Jim, I do not have to qualify myself to you. I am happy for your specific education, as it is a wonderful and important thing. That having been said, all you need to know is that I have good mind, as do you. However, like most people, probably including you, I do not have to become a scientist in order to believe the earth is round. I can trust that others more qualified than me have determined some truths and uncovered evidence. Ehrman does have valuable information, and he is a distinguished scholar, but he has also stated that historical manuscripts are unreliable. This is untrue, and unacceptable. My understanding is that Ehrman quoted approximately 4000+ variants, although only 49 exist. Please tell me where he went out of his way to explain this. I do not say this sarcastically, I just want to know.
Whenever anyone goes on a quest for truth, one examines the evidence they find from those who understand historical context, who understand Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, and who are sound historians. I have read many books by peer-respected scholars. I look for those who are the cream of the crop. If enough scholars determine that another has made up his own rules, this does not remove his level of education, but it does determine his reliability.
Insignificant point, but my name is not Jim. I'm a girl. People call me JM (for JMcFarland)
I never said that you didn't have a good mind. I'm saying if you're going to write off Ehrman's body of work because you think he's wrong about points that he's spent his entire professional life proving, demonstrating and writing (in peer reviewed books and lectures) then I would expect your educational level in the same field to be on par. I'm not a biblical scholar by any means, but I am pursuing a degree in ancient history and early christianity after obtaining my degree in biblical literature and theology. I'm not an armchair counter apologist either. So again, no - you don't have to qualify yourself to me. But since I do read ancient Greek, Hebrew and Latin (since none of the New Testament was written in Aramaic) I'd like to know your qualifications or sources to make such a statement. If you find Ehrman reliable, fine. If you find him unreliable, then he's hardly the reputable, respected scholar that you turn around and say he is. Which is it? You can look up Ehrman's lectures. You can find his debates online. You can read his books (specifically Forged, Lost Christianities and Misquoting Jesus) Is it your understanding of what he's said that's in question - or is it what he's actually claimed in his body of work - with references, examples and footnotes? Have you read his work? What he actually says in Misquoting Jesus is that there are more variants (misspellings, missing letters, sometimes words have been altered/changed - but this is admittedly the minority, which he himself states) than there are words in the new testament.) Additionally, these variants are not necessarily negative. Sometimes they help those in the field of biblical reconstruction and study because they help to determine the earliest versions and preserve the tradition of the NT stories. Seeing these variants as automatically bad is a detrimental view to the field of biblical study. It means no such negative thing. The reason for all of these variants is additionally relevant because we have so many copies and so many manuscripts. Again, the variants in the NT are only a small fraction of his position, and since it is a point that is commonly accepted in the field of biblical scholarship, I find it a minor point to squabble about. Hardly enough to write off a very reputable, respected author and scholar in the field - like you did in your original response.
Only 49 variants exist? In all of the New Testament? What are your sources? That seems unreasonable to me based on the simple reality of how the books were preserved and passed down. Scribes copy texts, and there are examples of things being inserted into the text that were not in earlier manuscripts. (for example, the woman caught in adultery story, or the second ending to the gospel of Mark). Without printing presses, it's fully understandable that misspellings and scribal errors occur. Additionally, 49 errors as compared to what, since we have no original manuscripts of any of the new testament books to compare the existing fragments and copies to?
This link (for someone who may be biased TOWARDS christianity and not agnostcism) may help.
http://www.denverseminary.edu/craig-blo … ent-alone/
Again, Ehrman does not reject Christianity because of these variants - nor does anyone I know. It's a small subset of a larger argument on the reliability of the bible as a whole, the claims made therein and the absolute lack of proof to back it up.
Faith at its finest... See how plain it is to see what "word" is preferred? Nobody saw his scripts or experiments, yet, because he said "I found some info and "y'all was right!!!" so many have faith in his accounts. The bible could not hold all the texts. No one book can. Hi JM without the i. Remember MY "Jim mistake? I remember... sorry again.
The words have been translated sufficiently. God is smart. And he can POSSIBLY out-think all of us. He knows that all who WANT to know his truth, will. The bible is where we get all of the debated information. To "argue over words" is not the way to a "happy" conversation. But the discussion is productive if just one person walks away with a lighter heart.
My apologies for calling you Jim. I have seen Ehrman on video. His manner of speaking is quite inflexible with regard to variants. It is Ehrman who is basing his agnostic beliefs on variants, not me. I could not care less about variants that make no difference in the actual meaning of Biblical manuscripts. Here is one such brief video of Ehrman.
At no point did I backtrack regarding Ehrman. He is a distinguished scholar, by virtue of having specialized in his field and having produced a number of publications. That does not mean I agree with him. As for your assertion that an education in religious studies is the only thing that qualifies me to discuss these matters, well, that is--to quote my brother, who does have a PhD. from a highly ranked Bible college, is "just plain crap."
Yes, I do know that the original manuscripts were not written in Aramaic. Aramaic writings came later. Nevertheless, it is helpful for historians to understand the language. I looked at the site you sent me. Thank you. My source for issues about variants, and the number of them that even matter is Craig A. Evans. Anyone can YouTube him debating with Ehrman.
Bruce M. Metzger is another excellent NT Scholar. He died in 2007.
again, Ehrman does NOT base his agnosticism on the variants. I've read all about Evans - including a scathing review from Stephen Patterson on his book that you seem so interested in. I find it funny.
Ehrman actually studied under Metzger, so I've read some of their collaborative work. I'm not saying that you have to be a bible scholar to study this stuff, you can certainly read - however - saying one scholar is "wrong" because he claims a large number of variants because another scholar says that there are only 49 (which seems to be an absurd number from someone who HAS studied in the field and has seen corroboration on Ehrman's number from numerous sources - including those who have a bias in the other direction) working in the field and having a degree in New Testament scholarship or ancient languages can come in handy for finding out the truth. I don't just accept Ehrman's numbers, nor do I accept Evan's. When two scholars (one with a bias according to you in the wrong direction, and the other with a clear bias in the opposite direction) disagree by this margin, it helps to research it for oneself.
Certainly you are not required to agree with everything any scholar says - but with no basis of understanding the other position or reading their written works, I'm not arrogant enough to assume that someone is WRONG without a lot of research on my own. Like 15 years worth.
JM, if I have over-reached with regard to my statement about Ehrman and his variants, then that is “my bad.” I previously provide a link for anyone to view for themselves on (Ehrman debating with Craig Evans) which featured Ehrman arguing about variants, which seemed to make no difference to the actual meaning of Biblical manuscripts. Evans argument was not included.
As for Stephen Patterson, he is a member of the Jesus Seminar, which is enamored with the Gospel of Thomas. The Seminar's findings have been criticized for their habit of ignoring 1st century Jewish cultural context in favor of their bias toward non-canonical texts. Actually, this criticism is only one of many, primarily because the Jesus Seminars have a predetermined bias against canonical sources. And then there’s that strange (bead) system of voting for what is historically accurate and what is not. My understanding is that approximately one third of the members are scholars, though not necessarily all distinguished scholars. Some of them have never written a publication, and there are some who teach at community colleges.
Consequently, if Stephen Patterson issues a scathing review on Evans, who is a distinguished historian with integrity, then I can hardly be impressed by Patterson’s criticism. I am surprised that you mention him, as you regard your education so highly – surely you realize that many of the Jesus Seminar members are regular lay people who are unpublished. The Jesus Seminars also give historical evidence a wide berth, by bringing documents from one generation into another without necessarily giving 1st century historical manuscripts the context and regard they deserve. For anyone else who is interested, the Seminar works from the premise and bias that Jesus was a sage --nothing more. The Seminar believes that Jesus was not resurrected, that he had another human father, who may not have been Joseph, and so on. Many other scholars disagree with or reject their methodology for "findings" outright.
For further reading, Bruce M. Metzger addresses the issue of why a good historian cannot have a bias against canonical sources (which the Seminar does) in favor of non-canonical sources, if one is to understand the accuracy of 1st century biblical manuscripts and how they apply to the life of Jesus and the apostles, within the proper time frame. Another author who addresses this issue is Craig Blomberg. Anyone can Google these authors or find their work on Amazon.
I guess that's part of the difference. While I don't necessarily agree with the findings of the Jesus seminar, I tend to not write off scholars just because of their participation in something that I may not wholly agree with. I said the review was scathing and interesting and it was, and I think Patterson made some decent points.
I don't just seek out scholars that I agree with, and I can't think of a single scholar that I agree with completely across the board. Does that mean the entirety of their work should be tossed out or disregarded? Not if you're interested in finding truth and being intellectually honest.
The rest of your straw man rant against the jesus seminar, which was not even a part of this conversation, was fun to read though.
JM, you assume wrongly that I throw the baby out with the bath water. Additionally, you know as well as I that bringing up the Jesus Seminar and Patterson's relationship with them IS intellectual honesty. The truth is that I wish you and everyone on this forum well. As long as we are all searching for the truth with intellectual honesty, we are doing the right thing.
do you not, therefore, assert that your opinions are the "right" ones, and that by default, all others are wrong? have you not mentioned hell as a fate for those that disagree with your interpretation of scripture? Is that intellectually honest to condemn others who have done just as much research, college study and reading and reached different conclusions?
Me arrogant? Heavens no. But I feel it to be a bit arrogant to believe that your studies make you a better candidate for biblical discussion. could get you confused? Don't you remember... think more highly of yourself than you ought? Lean not unto your OWN understanding...???
JM, t I've never mentioned hell--ever. Nor do I condemn others for their beliefs. I simply lay out the research I have discovered, primarily based upon knowledge gained from peer-respected historians, who consistently adhere to historical research with a high degree of integrity.
My favorite cousins is an atheist. Many people I am acquainted with are agnostic. I respect their right to believe as they wish. Likewise, I have the right to debate so that others may discover another side to the argument and decide for themselves.
However, I will and have called out bullies from time to time. Throughout my life, I've always tried to defend people who are being treated badly. That's why I called out getitrite, and entered into this discussion in the first place.
According to your logic you must also think that there is a possibility that Rumpelstiltskin exists? No atheist is threatened by Rumpelstiltskin so why should they invest energy into debunking a thing that they know doesn't exist. I believe that in the back of all atheists' mind that they believe it is a possibility that God exists even if they think so subconsciously.
Look it up in the dictionary. It's to deceive the mind. I will admit that I believe some Christians are deluded when they refuse to condemn something in the Bible which is obviously against what Jesus is. For example, Jesus said those who live by the sword die by the sword but how many instances are there in the Bible where it says God orders to the Israelites to go to war?
According to your intellectual honesty God may exist. So if Christians believe in God how can you believe they are all deluded?
No, that is not in the back of an atheist's mind, no matter how much you want to believe it is.
The point is that your God is no different than Rumpelstiltskin from an atheist perspective, there is no evidence for their existence You yourself most likely do not believe Rumpelstiltskin exists, yet you believe your God exists despite the fact both have no evidence for existence other than words in a book. No one needs to invest any time in debunking the existence of Rumpelstiltskin because no one claims he exists.
So you know the minds of ALL atheists? It's not that there is a lack of evidence of God. It's just that atheists do not know how to interpret that evidence. For example hypothetically speaking, if someone from deepest darkest Africa knew absolutely nothing about radiation got sick from exposure they would never even think it was radiation because they do not understand how radiation works.
I don't see you complain about Rumpelstiltskin all the time. You complain about Christians yet you fail to see they are all not the same. What do you achieve by interacting with Christians here? Absolutely nothing! So why waste your time?
I know where you are going with this. I don't think there is anyone on the face of this earth, unless they are schizo, etc, that claims to have a personal relationship with Rumpelstiltskin.
I fail to see how that differs from someone having a personal relationship with Christ. They are the same, as they are both fictional characters, written about only within the pages of fairy tales. Popularity of an idea is irrelevant in determining the veracity of any assertion....
So your desperate pleading that the "majority of people believe, therefore it's not crazy" is illogical.
It's still crazy.
Just b/c *you fail to see it doesn't mean it's not true... it just means you failed to see it. You are loved by someone you failed to notice, nonetheless.
But could it also mean that it is un-true, whether I fail to see it or not? Does it always have to be true? Is there anything I am to regard as really false.....then? Am I to, ultimately, lose all faith in my discerning faculties, and presume that I have no mechanism by which to discern truth?
Is that someone Rumpelstiltskin? I do fail to see such a character, although, maybe you can see him, with your special vision. And maybe he loves you. But why would he love you? Could you show me how I can magically see him like you do? Thanks
Jesus is a historical figure. That is even conceded by atheists. Do you believe someone who says they have a personal relationship with Rumpelstiltskin are sane for mentally well? Do you believe those who claim to have a personal relationship with Christ are insane or mentally unwell? I don't think, for example, there is a nuclear scientist out there that would ever believe they could enter a relationship with Rumpelstiltskin.
You are claiming to have a personal relationship with someone who may or may not have lived and died 2000 years ago? Are you sure this relationship is not a product of your mind? Ask yourself if Jesus can give you any information that your own mind doesn't already have? Does he talk to you or does he just make you feel good about your own actions?
You contradict yourself when you say Jesus is a historical figure. If so, he is long dead, hence it isn't possible to have a personal relationship with a dead guy.
Wow. Yep, you're going to... that place I don't believe in. But if I did believe in it, I would know you were going there..
The dead are cold and lifeless because they just want somebody to love. :>
You assume a person just has a physical body. The spirit lives on in death.
Sorry, but there is no evidence of that. It is you who is making an assertion.
Besides, one cannot have personal relationship with a spirit, by definition.
- of, relating to, or affecting a particular person
- carried on between individuals directly <a personal interview>
- relating to the person or body
a. The vital principle or animating force within living beings.
b. Incorporeal consciousness.
2. The soul, considered as departing from the body of a person at death.
3. Spirit The Holy Spirit.
4. A supernatural being, as:
a. An angel or a demon.
b. A being inhabiting or embodying a particular place, object, or natural phenomenon.
c. A fairy or sprite.
a. The part of a human associated with the mind, will, and feelings: Though unable to join us today, they are with us in spirit.
b. The essential nature of a person or group.
6. A person as characterized by a stated quality: He is a proud spirit.
Yes, I understand the definitions, just as I understand the definitions of leprechauns, unicorns and the boogieman. So what? Just because those words are defined in a dictionary doesn't mean they actually exist, Claire. That would be insane.
a. Of, exhibiting, or afflicted with insanity.
b. Characteristic of or associated with persons afflicted with insanity: an insane laugh; insane babbling.
c. Intended for use by such persons: an insane asylum.
2. Immoderate; wild: insane jealousy.
3. Very foolish; absurd: took insane risks behind the wheel.
The purpose of me giving the definitions of spirit had nothing to do with the existence of those beings. I am trying to tell you that the definition a spirit is an animating thing which you don't being.
And, I was trying to show you that the definition of spirit is as irrelevant as the definition of other things that have never been shown to exist.
But if he was the son of God, there should be a mountain of documentation throughout history. But all we have are desperate Christians trying to make something out of nothing, from one source.
That's only the historical person, which has nothing to do with the fictional person.
No they are not mentally well. It could either be a temporary disconnect from reality, or something more serious.
Religion is a brain disorder, but not a genetically based neurological disease. And in some cases it can be cured, because I was once a believer. Furthermore, If the conditions that promote this delusion(indoctrination) were eliminated, there would be an instant "cure"
Because they are smart enough to know that a real person can't spin straw into gold.
But are you suggesting that it would be logical for those same scientist to believe that a man can raise himself, and others, from the dead?
There are extra-biblical sources. One was a Roman historian Tacitus who wrote:
"Christus, the founder of the [Christian] name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, by through the city of Rome also." Annals XV, 44"
Of course it is only the historical person. They wouldn't be atheists if they conceded Jesus was the son of God.
You are an atheist who was once a believer that still is not at peace with his situation.
So why do we have some brainy scientists that are Christian?? It is not logical to believe in the resurrection. That is beyond human abilities and thus it was a supernatural act.
I think Tacitus was the equivalent of a contemporary tabloid writer. Hence, most of his "history" was probably just made up..
No. I am at peace with my situation. I just don't understand why people still believe in such silly childish primitive foolishness. I have NO DOUBT that your beliefs are pure delusion. That has long been settled. My mind is content, as it is guided by intellect, and not by neurotic fear. I laugh at the concept of a Holy Spirit....which I am not suppose to ever blaspheme. I hereby commit blasphemy by declaring the Holy Spirit a silly joke, played on uber gullible minds, filled with anxiety and fear.
Sometimes highly intelligent people are prone to mental illness. Their mental illness is separate from their remarkable aptitude. Tesla had OCD, and would walk around a building 3 times before entering. He also refused to touch round objects.
Resurrection never happened, because we live in nature....even Jesus....and in nature this never happens. If you want to live in an alternate universe, where the supernatural is common, then you will have to move to another location, as that doesn't happen in our realm.
"I think" and "probably" are the antithesis of evidence.
There is no doubt that a man calling himself Jesus and claiming to be the son of God was a real historical figure. It's just that logical, rational people see him for the cheap imitation of Apollonius of Tyana that he was.
Sometimes highly intelligent people are prone to mental illness. Their mental illness is separate from their remarkable aptitude.
Thank you for each illustration.
And, if they have a mental illness, they most likely will use their intelligence to admit it and seek professional help. It is those who lack intelligence that don't admit to their mental illness and don't seek professional help, but instead embrace their religious beliefs ad nauseum.
Yes, you think that but he was an historian! Historians don't write something as a fact when it is just hearsay. You have absolutely no basis on what you have just claimed.
I really do feel sorry for you that you have never experienced the love God bestows on those who love Him. He even works through others to bestow love on non believers. I know you don't want to believe you are not at peace. It would take some serious soul searching. It's just much easier to say the Holy Spirit is a silly joke.
So all theists have a mental illness??? LOL! I wonder what makes atheists have OCD>
Yes, in nature it doesn't happen but I'm talking about the supernatural which you assume does not manifest itself in this dimension. I didn't know you know of alternate universes where the supernatural is common? How did you know this?
Sorry, but that's a totally naïve way of thinking.
Thanks for setting me straight. But I would like to remind you that History is written from the point of the Victor, or from the perspective of the culture writing it.
Trust me...I have seen the "love"
Then He's not doing a very good job. Taking away freedoms, and discouraging free thought is NOT love.
That's because the Holy Spirit is absolutely silly. Why would anyone be gullible enough to fall for such simple childish trickery?
You are the one who introduced the term "supernatural" into the conversation, hence you are the one who has to prove that it exists in some realm, not me. Maybe somewhere the supernatural does exist, but until you prove this, I can only put it in the realm of the imagination.
Tacitus clearly made the distinction between history and superstition. He believed that Christians were superstitious for believing in Jesus being the son of God but did not dispute Jesus' crucifixion under Pontius Pilate. It's kind of like the Nazis were a historical fact but it was a superstition to believe they were Satanists.
Christianity was not the victor when Tacitus existed. He lived between 55 - 120 A.D. Constantine reigned between 306–337 and it was only during his tenure that Christianity became the dominant religion.
So what proof do you have that Tacitus was a tabloid writer? You can't just say things about historical figures without proof.
Tell me more.
Who says that God works through people who take away freedoms and free thought? That's not an act of love.
In your case, you are trying to tell yourself it is silly so that you do not have to have the onus of being a Christian who has the responsibility to truly witness for Jesus.
How do I prove the supernatural? I'm encouraged to see that you think it is a possibility God exists even though you think the idea is silly.
ALL atheists lack a belief in God, which is the point.
Yes, there is a lack of evidence for the existence of God, that is a fact.
That is entirely false and you know it.
So what? We could easily find out, your point is moot.
That is because we know he's a myth and so do you.
So what? That has nothing to do with evidence of God's existence and actually shows there is no evidence, if there was, Christians would all agree.
Why are you wasting your time writing nonsense about God?
They may believe in God but there can be a seed of doubt in the back of their minds.
Oh, I didn't know it is a fact that God doesn't exist?
It is true what I say. Jesus is knocking on the door of your heart but you can't hear it.
So who's to say God won't ever be considered a fact later on? There will be no doubt with the second coming of Christ.
How many people claim to have a personal relationship with Rumpelstiltskin?
You think that all Christians are trouble makers and deluded, right? Evidence tends to be interpreted differently due to people's level of understanding.
Don't turn it on me now. Answer my question.
Yes, I'm sure that's what you want to believe, despite the fact it isn't true.
Reading comprehension problems. Please read that again.
Sorry, but many of us don't hear the same voices in our heads that you do.
Yes, I understand you believe in those myths and superstitions, and really, really, really want to believe they'll come to pass.
How many people claim to have personal relationships with other gods? Millions.
Ah, the No True Scotsman fallacy. And, of course, YOUR interpretation is correct.
And you speak for all atheists?
Okay, so there is a lack of evidence of God's existence but it isn't a fact? So there is room for God maybe existing?
I didn't know you were a psychiatrist, either? Wow. Who needs to visit a psychiatrist when I can get a free diagnosis on line by you?
It was once considered a scientific fact that the sun revolved around the earth. It is only because of evidence later that disproved it. You are in for a nasty shock.
And who's to say that they don't have relationships with them? Satan can pose as many gods.
If I interpret evidence with what the Bible says Jesus is about then I don't see how it cannot be the incorrect interpretation.
And, of course, you ALWAYS ignore this question of mine. You are silently conceding that I'm right:
What do you achieve by interacting with Christians here? Absolutely nothing! So why waste your time?
Atheists lack belief in gods, that is the point.
As much room for existing as leprechauns and unicorns.
Sorry, but that is false, it was never a scientific fact. Please do not make up things to support your irrational beliefs.
And, everyone else is wrong. LOL.
Atheism is on the rise, it is the result of speech, just like the speech on these forums. Obviously, there is no reasoning with the unreasonable, like yourself. But, others reading these forums will observe your behavior and see the ridiculous things you write, which is what it's all about.
But do you know what goes on in their minds? Can you say for a fact that there is some doubt? Getitrite has doubt.
I don't think that is in the league of God. I think the worship of leprechauns could never be a world religion.
Correction. It was believed that the sun revolved around the earth.
Yes he can.
It's kind of like you thinking your interpretation of life is correct entirely. Nothing you say or think,could possibly be wrong.
Yes, atheism is on the rise thanks to a clearly laid out plan of the 19th century. Atheists here already think Christians are ridiculous. Your comments aren't proving things they don't already think. Other Christians won't definitely consider what you say seriously because of how you treat them. In fact, Christians probably are put off by atheists. They may tend to think all atheists are rude and condescending. You will never deconvert a Christian. So therefore you should not waste your time. You aren't achieving anything. And imagine spending a significant time in your day saying the same thing over and over again. At least I offer another perspective that other people may never had considered before.
Well, the mind is a terrible thing to waste. But leaning toward finite knowledge and understanding is also on the rise. The bible predicted that too.
If they say the don't believe, then they don't believe in gods. How much more clear can that be?
Yet, that is exactly how we view your belief in God, the same way you view leprechauns, expect we use the word reality instead of 'league of God'.
And, like many beliefs, they are shown to be wrong.
Sorry, I have no interpretation of life, reality does that for me.
That is because Christians behave ridiculously,.
Of course, despite the fact they will tell us we will fry for an eternity.
That would fly in the face of the fact many who were Christians before have deconverted.
Yet, atheism is significantly on the rise. Christians will soon be a minority.
Sure there is a difference between God and Rumpelstiltskin, while both are imaginary figments of the imagination, of the two some think one is real. Can you imagine someone knocking on your door and trying to tell you the truth about Rumpelstiltskin? Well Claire, you are at the door knocking and trying to convince people that Rumpelstiltskin is factual and if we don't believe as you do we will burn in hell. Us Atheists are here help those with that delusion, we understand it's too late for some, but perhaps we can help just one.
It's that simple.
Wow!!! Just imagine the OUTRAGE if someone started a 'Christians, what the hell is your problem?' forum. Just think about that for a second. I can see the words that'd be flying like daggers: religious persecution, God haters, Satan influenced, bully, bully, bully, (a lot of bully I bet) just to name a few. Sure looks like someone is picking a fight here but I could have it totally wrong...
Oh, and it's also very funny (but not so much) that when there is a forum started about 'Atheists, what the hell is your problem?' people (Christians?) respond with "Hey, thanks for sticking up for us!"
I SEROUSLY doubt that would ever fly well if it were the other way around.
I'm an atheist, Ranzi and I understand your feelings. I've run into the atheists you're talking about and it's rarely pleasant. It's almost as if they are so angry that others believe in something that they feel they must "enlighten them."
Sometimes, however, these atheists are acting out because believers, often a friend or family member - pulls that old "I'll pray for you stunt" that puts them on the spot.
My hope is that we all all agree to disagree. If it works for you - or anyone - I'm happy for you. Whether that belief be Christian, pagan, Muslim or Hindi - who am I to tell you what you must leave behind?
"or you can't bear that their life holds a purpose, while you live yours lost. Or is it that you take pride in converting them into your world of depression and no hope?"
Sounds an awful like you bullying atheists here, calling their lives sad and hopeless. If you can't even refrain from being hypocritical, why are you making this argument in the first place?
Christians are not bullied. I'm sorry, they are not. They are the majority religion, and (unfortunately) many of our politicians in power choose to vote and make laws based on that religion, unconstitutional as it is.
I have no problem with the idea of Christians, and most Christians I know are normal people, just as most atheists are normal people. But the fact is, there are a lot of Christians that actively want to persecute the lives of others in a way that is simply not comparable to an atheist ragging on the historical (and logical) inaccuracies of the Bible. There's nothing wrong with any belief if it isn't hurting others, but a lot of conservative Christians do have beliefs that hurt others.
I don't have to respect anyone who is telling me that I'm going to hell. Or anyone that hurts women, gay people, people of other religions and atheists because of their beliefs.
Granted, I don't see why people can't have common courtesy and respect, especially when dealing with issues that are important to some people, like religion. But most alleged "bullying" that Christians receive is just so laughable compared to actually oppressed minority groups. In a public forum, yeah, people are going to debate and disagree, and they are allowed their opinions. Religion can be critiqued, as well as scientific theories. If your faith is that strong, it shouldn't hurt you anyway, and who knows, maybe participating in debates will expand your way of thinking a little.
Also this whole thing is silly. None of you should be talking because none of you have taken the time to listen or consider the opposing views here please keep all your rubbish to yourself. Christian or atheist you sound like a bunch of hateful people pushing a agenda.
And being hateful and insulting is a great way to make threads more tolerant and life-affirming.
no this thread should have been ignored this person clearly was not wanting a real response. If I were to ask someone "why they are so stupid" I would not expect them to start listing off reasons. although it would be kind of funny to see that happen it's not likely lol.
Really? So, it is actually the atheists who are pushing an agenda? Atheists are forcing something down Christians throats? Do you actually think atheists would say a word if not for Christian bigotry and hatred?
Well Said Ranzi... But hey.. as the old adage says... Misery Loves Company right?
They have NO God... Who allows them to do and say whatever they want... so long as it is contrary to an existent God... so they want to serve their own Ego God by making everyone else to worship their same Self Created Ego-Non-God.. With that, they are Pushy.. and they are far worse in pushing their rights of Disbelief than those who have a God and are comfortable in their Faith.
Yes, that is certainly the atrocious behavior we've come to expect from so-called "loving" Christians.
Are you forgetting that Christians pushed their beliefs on innocent school children for years, and they still have not stopped. Putting religious quotes on our money....making people swear on a stupid book in a public court....changing the words in the Pledge by inserting a silly religious phrase....trying to teach Intelligent Design in school....voting against equal rights.....protesting at abortion clinics....and funerals.....going door to door to spread the "good news".....thanking God at award ceremonies.....
Comfortable in their beliefs?! How absurd
Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and lack thereof. The problem begins when people want to place their own religious views onto the government, when you want certain laws to be enacted or ban because they go "against your religious beliefs". That's where the problem lies;when your only excuse is that your bible or any religious text, is the only excuse you have. This goes on everywhere. From the religious radical groups from the middle east who believe women should not get an education, to the many victims who are threatened and killed because all they want is independence from an oppressive religion they do not believe in, all they way to a community who can not marry the ones they love because an ancient texts tells them it's abomination.
When religion is used to oppress,discriminate and spread hate, that's when atheists have to speak up and be vocal. If religious people don't want to be told about the flaws and lies within their own religion, then they shouldn't try to shove it down peoples throats.
The answer to your question is IN your question. "Atheists, what the HELL is your problem?". The issues that a lot of atheists have (Based on my conversations with some of them) isn't really God (which they don't believe in), nor is it really the belief in God (which some of them are more curious about than anything as to why people still believe). Their main problem is in their equally (and even more so) vitriolic Christian counterparts beating them over the head with scripture, calling them evil, satanic, ignorant, etc.., and telling them they're going to hell all the while proclaiming they're saved by grace according to the very bible that some of them don't even follow the principles for salvation of. Am I letting the atheists off the hook or their comments about believers being delusional, psychotic, hypocritical, etc...? Not at all. But the biggest issue is that by virtue of Christians professing belief in God and the bible, they are held to a higher standard of behavior as we are bound by that belief in what the bible says we are to treat others.. Unfortunately, given the history of the behavior of some of the more radical ones, the expectations of that standard has been greatly diminished except by those same vocal minority Christians that try to enforce their beliefs on unbelievers as well as believers that disagree with them. If more on both sides practice the "live and let live" philosophy, then there would be less conflict
I think God mongers deserve every atheist to poke into their beliefs because over the years, they have denied others the peace of not believing. Am not an atheist, but its okay that what we believe in is challenged even if it affects kids. So I think they have not even gone far enough.
It seems to me that for some people belief, relion, whatever one wishes to call it became a kind of "bargain".. I will believe in you if you do ABC" --- when ABC doesn't happen, in a kind of childish response the person will FIX G-d by becoming an atheist. And not just someone who doesn't believe but a fanatical proselytising fanatical atheist.
This sounds like the typical make believe of the radical theists. Did you actually read what you wrote - that atheists will reasonably conclude that God does not exist (because the ABC promised them didn't happen) and will thus FIX God by becoming atheist?
While failure to maintain a bargain often results in anger (and perhaps the fanatical proselytizing you mention), it would be foolish in the extreme to think one could FIX a make believe god by any means at all, let alone proselytizing to others.
Well what about "labeling" the "make-believe" a murderous, childish, rape okay-er, and starving children neglecter??? By the way, are you doing enough for your children and the poor??? I think someone forgot to ask you.
Notice that Cgenaea is compelled to detract from the question at hand so that she doesn't have to explain anything.
The question remains, did she learn this technique from Beth or did Beth learn it from her?
All too often the proper label for such a person is "Christian", or "Believer".
Not at all sure I'm catching the connection between labeling someone and the idea that anyone with even half a brain would decide to "FIX" an imaginary creature by becoming atheist. Can you elucidate that connection, please?
Yep - I do enough for my children and the poor. Do you? And can you explain that connection as well?
Hmm, let's see... the tooth-fairy is a whore!!! Lmao!! felt like Tourette's. Does it feel like that when you label a figment?
No connection with the last question; it was asked of me in such a way... and since we speak often, I just wondered about you. No one else seemed concerned about your children and poor people around you.
You know, if you have a problem with something I said, it should likely be me you address.
Jumping on somebody who didn't say anything because you are pissy about someone else saying something is passive-aggressive at best... bullying and cowardice at worst.
I don't have a "problem" with anything that occurs here. I simply got the urge to concern myself with the goings-on of my fellow poster since you know... we do that. I figured that you must've forgotten to ask him. Wanna spread the love too.
Ah, but he wasn't involved in the conversation about neglect.
Why not include him? We are all having these conversations. Are you biased? Does Wilderness or ATM belong in a different category? If so, why? If not, why does it matter that you did not ask him directly? Can we not each be the same neglectful? Could you? (being so busy dusting undersides of dressers...)
Nope, I was just addressing you. I have a very specific reason, but your heart is too hard to hear it.
Well there's more than one way to skin a cat... just try to prove your specific point another way
But if your point is only proven to me, what kind of bull is that? We are all on an even keel...yes??? Or is it that only I deserve your concern. awwwww... bout ta b honored
Actually, it was simply my concern. I wasn't trying to prove a point. My concern was specifically for you.
I noticed that too. I wondered why; but then I realized that it does not matter. I know THAT for sure...
You know, I once had a really stressful life. I mean I still do, but once it was really bad.
I loved my husband but we were having issues. I loved my kids, but it was damn hard to take care of them. My then youngest little boy was very ill and had been since he was born.
I was tired and angry, but mostly I was just lonely.
I had been going to a site, it was a game site... nothing big but something to pass a little bit of time. It wasn't the game that got me though, it was the forums. You would think since I was lonely that it would be the happy threads that drew me, but it wasn't. It was the ARGUMENTS. An entire group of people who I could argue with whenever I wanted. And I would win too... and enjoyed how clever it made me feel to get one up on someone else. First it was a few minutes a day, then a few hours, then I was constantly checking for replies. Waiting until someone said something, just so I could argue.
God it felt good.
My kids would come in and ask for me... I'd say "Just a minute" and maybe 15-20 minutes later I'd wonder out and take care of whatever they needed... then I'd be back on the computer.
40-50 posts a day... not a problem. Every one of them sarcastic and nasty.t
My kids were fed, my youngest son was taken care of... less and less by me but still taken care of.
I pulled away emotionally from my husband, from my kids... to that wonderful place where I could get out all my hostility and say what I wanted to say.
Anyway, it didn't last too long in the grand scheme of my life. Only about a year. A year that I did what was necessary for the kids but spent hours arguing in forums.
The husband went... I didn't really care all that much. I just had more to argue about.
A couple weeks after he left I got a phone call from him. Then I went to the hospital just in time to tell them to stop doing CPR on my son.
Now, what I see in you is a mom of a young child who is spending hours a day typing arguments into a forum. God can take them anytime. Any time.
Figure out your priorities... you only have so many minutes.
I love that you shared that. I am all about being real and true. But don't you feel all of that applied to all of us? I don't see her c'gna on here any more than any of us. Something drives us all here. We are all coping with something.
I didn't care about all of us. It was her that caught my attention.
I see something in her that reminds me of that time. Maybe it's the anger... maybe it's the need to constantly be right. The fact that she's talking but not listening. Most of the others here are having fun... she seems to NEED this.
Something tells me that you have a need. I see many. You tell me your story (no I won't call it "irrelevant" as you might've) to humble me into belief that you have seen through me and realize my "need" to get off the computer and "play" hmmmm but what else could be your motivation...? I analyze too...
My motivation is that you don't go through what I did. I want that year back. So much it hurts. I don't want you to feel the same way one day. I want that year back for the ones that have grown and almost grown, not just the one I lost.
Like I said, I see something of who I used to be in you. I wish I'd have had someone to tell me.
I know exactly what you see in me that you used to see in you; but it's not neglect. However, there is no chance for me of regret for the time spent here. Trust me. Maybe your feeling is really a concern you have projected onto me... my clue: specifically for Genaea. Seems like a bullet with a name.
I understand your situation but what does that have to do with me? Specifically??? You don't want all to benefit from your year of neglectful behavior to get one over on someone?
If you think that I'm just trying to get over on you, you really do have my sympathy.
That phrase was borrowed from you. And I believe you were referring to YOUR "past" behavior. Your motivation for neglecting your children was getting one over... remember???
Please, save your sympathy, you may need a surplus one day. Thanks anyway.
No, my motivation for neglecting my children was that I was angry and lonely. Getting over on other people was just my way of coping with it.
I think (now this is just my opinion) that you are still angry and alone. When I encountered you initially, it was like watching toxic poison swirl to the sky. Just one freakishly foul statement after another. Snarky in the flesh. You have evolved a bit. Now, it is more mind-freak. But at least a bit calmer. The "plea" is well-appreciated thanks. But I'm alright. Please reflect. I will too.
No, it doesn't feel like Tourette's when I label a figment, perhaps because I don't label figments as anything other than a figment. I'll leave that to the theists, labeling their many gods with all the things they would like to see in themselves.
I see - no connection but a new topic to discuss. If you really want to discuss my children (I won't, in a public forum, except to say they're great kids) or the poor in Idaho you should probably start a new thread.
It's not that the bargain makes one angry and bitter, it's an indication that no one is there. One doesn't become angry with God, one understands that there is no God.
The discontent is not against God, but rather against people who tell these lies to people. It is lyars who should be FIXED.....there are no Gods to FIX. If someone tried to sell you some land that didn't exist, would you be angry at the land(that doesn't exist)or the person that tried to trick you into buying it?
I think you went a little far with the title. Not all atheists have the problem you refer to. Most atheists don't. The ones who frequent hub pages in the manner you find irritating simply appear to enjoy it. I doubt it goes deeper. If it does, it isn't apparent in their arguments.
I don't know the "history" of this question for this forum but I do know we should accept each other as we are and that includes religion. I do not have to live the atheist's life and he doesn't have to live mine. Let him have his beliefs or non-beliefs, and I will have mine. Live and let live. Love one another, even the atheist
I have been suspecting bad religious upbringing which was forced upon them, (too many raps on the knuckles.) They are eternally rebelling and using this platform to do so. (If they are not being paid to bring down America.)
In God We Trust!
You, smugly, say that as if that is not a valid reason to despise religion. I think it shows dignity to fight back against a tyrant, whose soul purpose is to take control of my mind, and cause me to act as a child for my entire life....by attempting to force me to believe in a silly fairy tale. That's like the slaves, going back to the plantation, after having the means to be free.
If Christians really trusted in God, they wouldn't look both ways when they crossed the street....but they always do. I wonder why?
Christians get hit by cars too. lol
Maybe we trust that God will save our soul if they get smashed by a semi?
Yeah, basically, you are saved from everything. You can't lose. If at anytime you are killed, you go to live with Jesus....which is the ultimate goal of every denomination that I have been exposed to. So why be careful......at all? Just trust God. This life doesn't matter anyhow. Paradise is in the next life.
ahhh... thanks Beth. Now we can get pack to sailing in our ships without a care in the world. Look at that flock of pelicans!
What a Beautiful day!
Actually I'm glad it's not true, because although you think you would want to go live eternity with a monster like God, you really couldn't bare to be in the presence of someone that psychotic. Remember...He once drowned the entire planet, because He failed to create GOOD people. Poor defenseless humans paid dearly for His mistakes. Same with Adam and Eve.
Is it a bad thing to believe that there is something better then this world? Also from personal experience I have been hit by cars twice while jogging and told I would never walk normal again, but I am and I to this day still run 10 miles a week.so while you may say it is just luck I say maybe their is a higher power watching over us. Are we as humans really so cocky as to believe we are the greatest thing to ever live or exist in the universe?
Does it negatively affect you or your actions? Do you teach small children that a myth is true? Do you try to force others to believe OR to follow the edicts/morals of your personal god?
If your answer is "yes" to any of those questions then it is a bad thing.
That's nice that you were hit by cars and can still walk, but it is no reason to think a god reached down and touched such an insignificant speck as a human being. Are you really so cocky as to believe that you are important enough to draw a gods attention?
Actually If I believed in a God I would say yes because as Christians I would that he created me as most religions do. As a artist I don't allow my art to be destroyed and if starts to become withered I refurbish giving it its beauty back so yeah, I would believe that. That's not cocky. Nor do I push any view I hold on anyone, my rights end where another persons begin.
When did any Atheist ever say we are the greatest thing to ever live or exist in the universe? I've never seen such a claim as usually Atheists are the ones saying that humans are no better or no worse than any other animal.
You've been hit by cars twice and you think Gods looking out for you? I've been cycling and jogging my entire life and never been struck by a car. Dumb luck I guess.
It could be dumb luck. I'm not trying to argue but when my leg goes from being a mangled mesh of bone and muscle to being perfect as far as a Dr. can see, then I am inclined to believe a little more then luck played a part whether it be magic, God, or me being a super human lol.
I am not saying that you have to agree with what im saying bc honestly sometimes I wonder if there is a "God " with all that's going on in the world and all that has happened but it is not my place to say that religion is fake, bc I have no proof that its not either.
All I am saying is listen hear and if someone is preaching then by all means tell them to shove it because I hate bible thumpers too. religion is a choice no one should feel forced into it. Or feel like they have been attacked for not being religious.
No it's not a bad thing at all.
You can say that all you want, however, until you present some proof, that's merely wishful thinking, and selfish. Why is the higher power not watching over the poor starving children in Africa, and the children in cancer wards? They are dying everyday. And there were two bicyclist killed here last week, when they were hit by a car.. They will never walk again. Where was this higher power? I guess He only intervenes in your life.
This is a straw man fallacy, as no one here has implied any such thing.
I do not know. My grandmother and my uncle both died of cancer. My niece died before she was 2 from meningitis and my brother and his friend were killed by a drunk driver when I was 15. So I know how it feels to question a faith over loss and believe for many years I did but something just changed and that's all I am saying I feel we should respect everyone's personal opinion as long as they are sharing it peacefully and not cramming down our throats. Everyone of the billions of people on the planet have experienced circumstances that brought them to the ideals they now hold, I do not believe in a higher power because of my leg, I believe because of my life. and thank you for not responding rudely
Like anyone else, I would like to live with the security of knowing that there is something that cares about me, and that I am not just here to be the victim of randomness, however, there is absolutely no evidence for such a reality. I am not going to accept anything from the perspective of a whim or wishful thinking. That, to me, offers no fulfillment. But I do understand that some people are wired to circumvent logic, and embrace illogical superstitions, to gain a false sense of security, as any security will do....whether real or made up.
That's fine, religion is a outlandish thought, it leaves many questions the one most asked to me by many friends is where did these gods come from if they are real. a question that I myself can not answer. At the same time that is the definition of faith to most religious people faith is believing without the proof of seeing.
I am truly sorry for the action of any believer that has treated you wrongly for your beliefs. They are not acting as their god instructed he actually says not to judge for all have sinned and are not worthy of him and that anyone who condemns another person to hell will join them. So I am sorry for their ignorance of their own religion and hope that you can accept those who are not so vile.
So your God watches while you get hit by cars twice, fixes up your mangled legs, but is not watching out for your grandmother, uncle, niece, brother or his friend. So you are another person claiming miracles, I'd like to see the evidence.
yes if that's what you get from what I have said.
That is what I get from what you said. Perhaps that is what you should get as well.
well then you are sir are ignorant. All I am saying is that all people have their own reason for what they do believe in or don't. I am not a "Christian" but I am willing to listen. My point is to stop being selfish and consider that there is always a deeper meaning...
and if you dislike Christians so much for always telling you what to think and believe then how can you sit there and tell me what I should take away from what I say and to change my view? hmmmm contradictory a little? practice what you preach whether its religious or not.
Maybe it's as simple as being thankful, while understanding life makes no sense. It sure beats bitter asinine attacks because life stinks.
Oh my goodness, you've been thru hell. Im so sorry.
Hmm. Rebelling, are they? Rebelling against what?
You asked earlier for a quote as to being browbeaten, well here is your answer. The rebelling atheists are rebelling against the browbeating from the theists, who claim the atheists are forever rebelling.
No. It's almost my bedtime - if I take a nap I'll be up all night.
Besides, I need to recuperate from all the browbeating.
I've heard it takes almost as much physical effort as bible-thumping.
Can I get you a drink?
Or are you going to call me names again, you know like you have... well like you have never done.
But I know you're thinking it... you big atheist bully you.
I've got to say that Christians irritate me much more than atheists do. As a Christian, all atheists can do is argue with me. Christians can make me embarrassed for my faith and angry that their behavior is driving people away from Christ in droves.
As far as the vitriol here on the forums, I have to say I find the Atheists, in general, far more pleasant to converse with. If anyone on these forums ever made me deny Christ, it wouldn't be them, it would be my utter humiliation at being put in the same group as the "persecuted" Christians...
Good thing I'm comfortable in my faith, a new convert or someone considering the faith would likely run screaming from many of the representatives of the faith on these boards.
And as a side note to my post...
I would just like to say how impressed I am by the behavior of my sisters in Christ in this thread.
I'm simply waiting for "I know you are but what am I?" to wrap it up.
You all are truly full of the spirit of Christ... who argued on forum boards all the time...and spent so much time trying to prove he was right by flinging insults at those who didn't believe in him.
Please, do continue.
Welcome to our bash, Melissa! Don't stand on the sidelines or anything... right when the pelicans are flying by... some seagulls too.
And look into the distance...
Shadows take form
Ships on the horizon,
A new day is born...
Why did he call me Mrs. Pot?
I'm going to side with the atheists here. Only because they aren't specifically acting in a way contrary to everything they say they value.
Otherwise, both sides are behaving exactly like the other side... Christians are just violating the lessons in the Bible to do it... Since the atheists aren't held to those lessons, they aren't violating any of their so called personal ethics.
I would assume the Mrs. Pot had to do with pot vs. kettle. Look it up.
Yet, you are here MelissaBarrett...flinging mud at your so called "Sisters in Christ" and aiding the atheist argument about a divided faith. I see their position and purpose, I understand their unbelief and anger. But you?! What's your purpose? You said "You all are truly full of the spirit of Christ... who argued on forum boards all the time...and spent so much time trying to prove he was right by flinging insults at those who didn't believe in him".
But your spending time here...again, what's your purpose? What is the "Spirit of Christ' showing or saying to you about what you're doing in this arena?
I have no idea what the spirit of Christ is saying, and neither does anyone else in this thread.
I think though, that he might be happy that I'm not ruining his name and chasing people away from the faith by arsing myself in his name. I can do just fine arsing myself in my own name. At least by admitting that my own opinions are mine, instead of claiming some divine inspiration from Christ... it's not him I am shaming if I DO arse myself.
I also think he would be happy to know that I am not some bleating sheep going along with those who are screaming loudest and that, to some extent, I AM my brother's keeper. No one should be screaming louder about the horrible zealous, rude, self-righteous, judgmental, self-serving, embarrassing, ignorant behavior of some Christians than other Christians themselves. If none of them have backbone enough to do it, or WORSE if none of them believe there is anything wrong with it... then I thank God that at least the atheists are. In this, at least, I believe they are doing more good than the Christians in serving the spirit of Christ.
Any other questions?
Is it true??? You are really Christian??? Hmmm.we know a tree by its fruit. You Christian for real???
Aren't Christians supposed to exhort each other? Or does that only work when you are the one doing the exhorting? What do you think your fruit says about you?
I will let the spirit of God speak for me... can you hear him??? Christians are not to exhort rudeness and vile vomiting lips. The things being said cut even me and I haven't even been on the receiving end.
Nope. When I read your posts, I just hear you claiming to be spirit filled wanting to be right without The knowledge to back it up.
If you are speaking from the spirit and not just from yourself, ask the spirit what it would take for me to believe again. It's not a test. Your God wants everyone to follow him. I don't even know the answer to that question, but if your God knows everything, he does.
Naturally speaking; the right to be gay without having to feel the fear or conviction of being "wrong"
Biblically, all you have to do is say yes. "Believing" I don't believe is your issue. Remember God does not do Vaudeville.
what are you talking about? You think I'm an atheist and "reject" god because I'm gay? What are you smoking? Haven't you listened to anything I've ever said to you? THAT'S what the "spirit" told you? It sounds like it's what you told yourself. No spirit needed or required at all. Just your own prejudice.
I said it was my (naturally) opinion. Yes, I thought you were atheist because you are gay and feel unacceptable to God because of it. The spirit says all you must do is ask. Ask... reading the bible is only part of this faith. Living it is key. God really does take us as we are. Me and my filthy self... you and yours. Humility is also necessary. We be puffing ourselves up too much especially when we go ta readin'!!!
Smoking a Newport; btw
IMO, what it all boils down to is that it doesn't feel right for you to believe in God... and likely it never did. That's not Satan or being gay or even logic... it's your, for lack of a better word, conscious.
There is absolutely nothing that could ever come from the outside that would change that.
No one can be forced to believe anything that's not of their heart? nature? self? Whatever the hell you want to call it.
You aren't looking for a reason to believe clandestinely nor are you looking for a reason to NOT believe. It's simply who you are.
No reasons required.
And you think too much of book knowledge. Lean not unto your own understanding... God is spirit. ONLY spirit can discern spirit.
I'm talking about the book of "knowledge" that you adhere to. I actually know it. You just read it, interpret it the way that you want to and claim absolute knowledge of its "truth". Yet you know nothing of its history, its origins or its makeup. That's called willful ignorance.
Not willful ignorance. Selective study. Since no one we know was there we MUST only decide whose version we prefer to breathe in. "Many false prophets will rise." Some of them will say, "that God shit aint shit; here's why...do we choose to breathe that? Some of us do.
If believing in Christ makes someone this negative and insulting, I can do without it.
Christ is not negative or insulting. Those who follow are not either.
However wrong cannot go unanswered. Injustice, judgment, insult and selfishness is running rampant. Even from those who say they are faithful. You may choose as you wish.
When a tree stops taking sunlight, it dies. If a person refuses to learn, doesn't want to learn, the same thing happens.
You can't know that kind of Christian by their fruits. A dead tree doesn't make any.
Are you claiming to be one who follows Christ? A dead tree does not produce any fruit but the fruit that remains is all bruised and mushy; ugly and quite nasty. Yes???
Christians learn. But they have guidelines. Boundaries. God through Jesus has the final say.
I simply love your style. Beautifully put; 'm darn near floored.
Are we having fun yet? It's a shame we can't talk about the things we have in common every once in a while. You know, on the other non-spiritual threads... you don't know who is a person of faith and who is not, for the most part. We're just ppl who talk about life. It's nice to relate to your peers. I wish we could do more of that sometimes.
It too tempting to be more than we are or less than we are on line. It will never be as you have described... its the nature of the beast.
Of course, only you and I represent ourselves honestly, Beth...
And I'm not so sure about you...
(Joking, joking... )
That would be fine, however in your mind, you have already decided there are those who indeed have things in common with you, but since they don't share your beliefs, they are evil, you must hate them and they will burn in hell.
Notice how it is YOU who makes that distinction, which is the real shame of talking about things we have in common?
Atheists chill out seriously - these are the words you are using to describe people with faith
THIS IS PURE BULLYING
This forum was not created to prove religion exists or not, but rather why the disrespect and taking pride in trying to take away people's beliefs that brings them hope and peace of mind? Although I'm not a believer of a particular God myself,. I find your insults rude and disrespectful. And if a Christian said the same things to you, I would tell them the same thing?
This is what I'm talking about, you do have a HUGE problem. Each to their own (same goes for those annoying Christians calling out on microphones and threatening hell
Atheists now days seem to be more obsessed with God than the actual believers of God, as you spend your days and lives in forums talking about him.
STOP TRYING TO PROVE SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT TO SOMEONE THAT MAKES THEM HAPPY. Whether you believe it's real or not. This goes both ways, for Christians and atheists. However I have noticed there's a huge atheists movement out there, with many fanatics going out of their way trying to prove God doesn't exist and calling Jesus is Evil. At my sisters Uni there's about a hundred of them handing out leaflets, posting on walls 'your God doesnt exists" and speaking on microphones. What are they getting out of trying to shatter peoples faith?
Why are you people so disrespectful about a man who was trying to teach about love and forgiveness? How is Jesus evil btw?
May I ask all of you one question? What is so bad or evil about the following? (I'm not trying to preach to you about Christianity as I can't call myself a Christian, but I respect Jesus the same way people would respect Buddha, as a great philosopher and guru)
This is for the people who keep calling Jesus evil -WHAT IS SO EVIL ABOUT THE FOLLOWING?
-Love each other
-Love your enemies
-let him who is without sin cast the first stone
-Forgive one another
-Judge not, and you not be judged
The fact that it comes from the same book that says:
- Racism is not only okay, but is mandatory
- Women are property and should always be submissive to all men
- Rapists must not be punished, but instead get to marry the girl they rape (unless the girl is already married, in which case the rapist pays her father, like, fifty bucks and the girl is sentenced to death)
- Slavery is absolutely essential and morally right, so if you're not a Hebrew, you'd better learn to like shackles
- Disobedient children, people who wear clothing made of multiple fabrics, and men who shave their beards are just a handful of people God says must be brought to the town square and killed ASAP
- Thou shalt not kill...unless they don't believe in God, in which case you put a cap in their ass before they breed and/or convert you
You should read the *entire Bible and have someone who has studied it extensively explain the things you don't understand.
Please, point out something I posted that is not, in fact, in the Bible.
I'll be waiting. And then I'll slap you in the face with the verse that proves you wrong.
That is exactly what JM has been doing for you.
I have read the bible multiple times. I hold a PHD in Biblical Studies and I must point out...For the most part...It is the Atheist who understands the bible correctly, based on what is taught in schools, and the Christian who has the problem with the understanding.
And I am not picking or anything to that nature, I am just pointing out my observations.
You as well Melissa. I have been very busy as of late. I see you are still fighting the good fight.
You know... the life of a liberal Christian.
I come here because I can't yell at my children or husband. So it's this or climb a clock tower.
I hear ya!
It will never cease to amaze me how sometimes it is the simplest things in life that can bring about peace and serenity to an otherwise hectic day.
Reading the bible muktiple times as well as a doctorate in the study of it implies that you read and fully understand the admonition to "lean not unto thine own understanding, but in ALL thy ways acknowledge him and he will direct thy path"??? Did he direct your studies? My bet is no. You???
And it would seem to me that you are making assumptions. Or you have read my profile and do not believe the same as I do. Either way. I understand completely what that means. I am curious as to if you understand " judge not less ye be judged. By the same measure that you judge, you shall also be judged"...Just to clear this up...If you are in anyway pointing out flaws in others, you will be held accountable to that same standard by God himself. So since we are under grace in todays time, we can rest assured that forgiveness for our own human errors can be readily forgiven in the simplicity of asking.
Christians are not to judge, they are to spread the Good News of the Kingdom of God (Straight from Jesus himself)...Last time I check, men are not the ones to hold another man accountable for his/her spiritual well-being, God takes care of that...Spreading the Good News does not include judging, condemning or assuming that another is not following God and is doomed to Hell...
And on a last note...Did God direct the writing of the bible? If so, then why did it need to be edited and revised by other men (assumed also directed by God) and why is there conflicting sections? Also...Just to note...Recent studies show that the New Testament was written around the early to mid-second (125-150 C.E.)century, with the exception of some of Paul's letters which were written between 56 and 64 C.E. give or take a few years. Also why is there Two different creation stories in the first two chapters of Genesis? Could it be because it wasn't written down until 1000-500 B.C.E. and was written by two different Schools of Thought...Yep...That would be the reason...Not one single author...but a compilation of writing from Multiple Jewish Schools of Theological thought.
And just a note...Biblical Studies and Theology are two different things. One deals with the text itself and the other deals with the beliefs based on the text
Judgment is Gods alone. Here on Hubpages, we cannot see the behaviors of the persons on the other end. Until things get crazy. We may only go by what is typed. If you tell me that you have no faith in God; the chances are, biblically, that you have no place in heaven or the kingdom of God. Is that judgment or regurgitation? It is called judgment to thwart feelings of conviction. Somewhat a defensive stance. It takes the spotlight that God is shining internally and throws it onto the reporter in an attempt to not feel as convicted. That tactic is ages old, I'm sure
Interestingly enough. I have not once said that I have no faith in God..nor have I stated my personal believes in anyway in this thread.
Yes, I know. That part of the discussion was a simple scenario. It responded to your previous post regarding judgment. Remember??? In my scenario, it is not judgment. No judgment necessary. You ( my scenario being of course) actually told me that he/she does not believe. In the bible, that person has consequences. And I didn't make those up. It is written. We discuss the bible. We say what IT says.
Yeah I know. Study of the bible without God is simply study. You cannot understand the bible without the mind of Christ. You may not live its pages without faith. You may not come to know God without faith that he is.
The bible contains the pertinent information. God saw to that. He knows that those who want him will have him or spend their lives trying to. The people who wrote the bible are authentic scribes. The info rejected from the pages was not absolutely necessary. We know all we need to know to decide yea or nay. The squabble over who wrote/translated the bible is simply more deviation from scripture; and a way to justify indecisiveness.
And the Majority of those who study the bible or make these type of "decisions" are Christians....The Atheist doesn't decide what is or isn't contained in the bible or any of the such. They just ask for clarification for bible verses and the meaning. Sadly, very few Christians can offer this service.
Bible knowing "Christian" here. What may I help you to understand more clearly? Now dont go asking me about no edited versions left out; I read, and understand what actually made it into the final edition. So, no one biblical studies Phd holder is capable of understanding it better. (Not even two ) I put my heart into it. My HEAD is totally incapable. You need God's head.
You know the bible? Or you know your beliefs based from the bible? They are two different things.
Question on the bible...Who is the author and in what year was the Book of Mark written, Who was the authors intended audience and why is this information important in understanding the message contained within the Book of Mark.
Question on your beliefs based from the bible...If the bible is based on divine guidance from God...Explain why Jesus said the Law would not go away, yet Paul says it isn't required and we are under grace now.
We will start here and see where we end up. I am sure there are many who are interested in hearing these answers. I will ask more later based on your responses.
As for your first question: You're reaching I know both.
As far as The Law that Jesus spoke off: It WILL never go away. The spiriit of God knows the law and abides. We ARE under grace now. Flesh has a way of blinding us who depend on God. We fal. Then we remember... are forgiven; and we keep depending.
I have no idea about the year that Mark was written. I was NOT there. And I don't think any of my friends were either. That sort of rhetoric is built for the knowledgeable. But the Bible says to tell of his goodness. I do that. And no... the year the bible was written aint important at all. That may NEVRR be pinpointed. God has secrets known to no one.
The intended audience? Really? Listen, please. God is not stupid. He probably has about 2 or 3 Phds. the bible was built for ALL of the ages. We understand. Those of us with faith in one who was actually present when all of this occurred. Instead of an "educated" guesser??? The book of the bible is old!!!
I believe. But, Science was always my worst subject. I may be biased.
I only asked two questions...The first part you took as a question was actually a statement.
And You did not answer either of the questions I asked.
1 Corinthians 2:13-15 "Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
Proverbs 14:12 "There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death."
Not judgment. Scripture. Good ones too!!! We must know what words go where.
Man receives his wisdom from God. If this verse is to be taken completely at face value, then there is no need for seminaries or ministers/priests nor the Christian to spread the word as the Holy Spirit will guide all of Mankind in all matters of religious beliefs
Your close. No need for seminaries or salaried clergy.
2 Cor 9:7 "Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver."
I suspect, based on the math of what is accomplished, that most of those I fellowship with give much more than a "tithe", but do so as we feel led to, not under command for some percent.
I know what the bible says.
I was curious as to your take on tithe, since that you mentioned that clergy shouldn't be paid? What should the tithe be used for? And for what purpose does God need money for? He is more than capable of providing for his children without the use of money. You have heard of Manna from Heaven I am sure.
Oh come on!!!
Did you ever read the bible during your studies??? Did you at least pay attention to the red words???
Jesus said, and I quote: that aint the most important thing y'all. Think about somn else. (Ok, maybe that wasn't a DIRECT quote. But pretty accurate. What do you think? OH!!! The tithe, tge tithe, the tithe. That is one of the BIGGEST money makers of the church. Jesus said, well you remember. Well I guess it aint preached on Sunday morning that often (LIKE EVER)
I am curious...Do you actually read posts before you respond to them?
Your rant has nothing to do with the conversation I was having with someone else...
I know that Jesus said money didn't mean anything..."Camel through eye of needle" "sell all you have and give to poor" "Take nothing with you, God provide"...
I was asking that persons opinion on giving tithes when they stated clergy should not be paid...and what should that money be used for if not in part to support Gods worker...As God doesn't really need money.. and can provide for his own...
my bad... I took your post at "face" value, and didn't read any further to fully grasp the concept/meaning. Let that be a lesson. Don't make the same "mistake" I made.
LOL. I am not perfect either...Not by a long shot...I do try my best to grasp the concept and meaning of something before tossing in my two cents...I get it wrong sometimes...But I hope that when corrected to the meaning that I am open-minded enough to see my error and then take it from there or say my apologies and back out.
It is good talking with you. Hopefully, you have taken nothing personal...And even if we don't agree we can still have a conversation in a cival manner.
Civil's my middle name!!! I enjoy this conversation so much. It is faith-strengthening for me. I get a kick out of watching, as if from the sidelines, the spirit speak through me. I am a fascinated student of HIS. and I enjoy his lesson plan. I am cool with the lot. Even ATM who challenges me with all. I am such a people person though I prefer solitude.
Do tell how I am wrong...I am curious...
Seminaries, priests and the like are only capable of providing knowledge. Not wisdom. Only God msy provide the wisdom it takes to understand his word. Wisdom and knowledge are kinds different.
Umm...That is what I said...So how was I wrong?
Speaking of Knowledge and Wisdom being different things...Do you know the difference between the two?
Knowledge is knowing...Wisdom is knowing when and how to use that knowledge...
DS: Would it be too much of an imposition to ask your age?
That is NOT what you said. You asked if God put it in your heart then why the need for srminaries etc... NO! I think it was more like, if God gave wisdom, why the need for...
You were a little off.
Then "I" explained the difference between knowledge and wisdom. Right???
Ok. Here is what I said...
"Man receives his wisdom from God. If this verse is to be taken completely at face value, then there is no need for seminaries or ministers/priests nor the Christian to spread the word as the Holy Spirit will guide all of Mankind in all matters of religious beliefs"
Here is what you replied...
"Seminaries, priests and the like are only capable of providing knowledge. Not wisdom. Only God msy provide the wisdom it takes to understand his word. Wisdom and knowledge are kinds different."
Read both again very carefully...If God provides the reason...And public schools teach you to read...Then all that is required is God for the Reason and a Bible to read for the knowledge...The rest is not required...
And Just because my definition differs from yours does not mean I am wrong...or off...Just that it differs from yours...Unless of course you are God and know all things...? Are you?
BTW I will be turning 40 here soon... Not that my age really matters...
Also I would be interested to see your answers that JM posed to you...
Because so far you haven't answered mine...And you did make the claim to know the bible...So both of my questions should have been fairly simple for you to answer...
What year was tge bible written? Did I NOT answer that? Mark, somethin about Mark and his bible writings? Oh!!! You did not like my answers; so you discarded them. clever...
I did not disgard your answers...You did not provide any...
It seems you don't even remember the questions I even asked...
I ask some very simple questions...Here they are again...
Question on the bible...Who is the author and in what year was the Book of Mark written, Who was the authors intended audience and why is this information important in understanding the message contained within the Book of Mark.
Question on your beliefs based from the bible...If the bible is based on divine guidance from God...Explain why Jesus said the Law would not go away, yet Paul says it isn't required and we are under grace now.
I hate copy and paste. But I remember answering each question. I repeated my response on my previous post. You just don't like my answers. You threw them out the window. I don't know what year the book of Mark was written; if you had not placed so much faith in the deliverer of that message; you would be aware that you dont either. But his intended audience was definitely you. Take it or leave it. There are no reasons (did you hear me? I said reason! ) why that should bother you. It's nonsensical! Right?
Ok. So...You don't know the answer to the questions...You have your opinions...but not the answer...
This is the point I was making...When it comes to debating or talking religion with Atheist...The Christian (Who is defending the bible) MUST know the answers to questions of this type and not just give the preaching type of answer that you provided to the questions I posed.
I don't care one way or another myself...But one cannot make a claim of knowing the bible to someone who is atheist and then expect them to accept the type of answer you gave...It completely defeats the purpose of the message you are trying to pass on...They don't believe in God, Jesus or anything related to that, so to attempt to use these as tools in your argument with someone who is not a believer is counter productive...They are looking for "facts" or "evidence"...
Just a thought...
Thank you for this post! You have proven my point. The bible is spiritual in nature. The atheist is not. Those two don't coexist. Light and dark don't mix. You cannot expect to receive the message of the bible when you read it to see the flaw. Or nit pick at it to find its incontinence. See??? Our arguments remain somewhat flawed in that you are trying to "see" spirit with natural eyes. The facts on my side are that the bible is the word of God and has everything it needs to paint the entire spiritual picture. You either believe that or you don't. It is ok, to mark a big red X on it in your educated mind. But you cannot convince me that I should X it too because "somebody" said he has information that shows this God character is just a farce. Because the dates don't add up in the graphs somebody else used very sophisticated measures to come up with. Can't that be ok with you?
You do realize I am not debating God or anything else with you...I am only pointing out that when one wishes to point out "facts" to someone who doesn't believe as you do...Then you must use what they understand to get your point across or it will never work. And it helps to have actual knowledge of the material at hand...One can not have wisdom without first having knowledge...
Precisely what I am saying to you. The bible is spiritual. You must switch; not the bible. You cannot understand without ITS tools. So studies of its origin and its message are hinged upon where your faith lies. I am not trying to understand atheism. If I were, I would speak in "knowledge" of the so-called factual evidence. You are trying to understand spirit. You NEED those "goggles"
So the atheist must have faith to read the bible properly to learn faith in god.
I trust you see the problem?
I think what they mean is we have to start with the assumption that the bible is fact and turn off our brain while we read. I had a sales man in the house a while ago attempting to sell me an over priced door. He told me I should agree to buy it before he gives me the price as it will be such a good price. When I said no, I'd like the price first, he asked me if I was Scottish because I was both stubborn and cheep. After about another half hour he gave me a price (one time offer of only $1600). I sent him packing. Another guy walked in and said I don't need the whole door, just the window insert ($400). I said done, and it was installed a few days later.
So the sales person wants us to agree before we read the fine print.
This "salesperson" WANTS you to read the fineprint and understand it too. Yes, turn off your brain turn on your spirit. The bible says you cannot lean to your own understanding. God knew that you would not be able to understand it all, but he asks that you trust him with your heart. In turn, Darwin knew that we would not understand his entire message either ( hell... he sure didn't) yet look at all the people who trust him. But he only asks. He doesn't demand.
Sure the bible says God demands worship, it even threatens with eternal hell fire if you don't Give your God his undivided attention. Not a pleasant trait in a human.
What difference is that to you if biblical words are just nonsense?
You cannot learn faith. You either have it or you don't. The atheist cannot understand the things of God (the bible in this case) because it is foolishness to him. (Scripture)
Wow, you understand. Except you need to replace God with religion.
Then your god has created billions of people destined for hell because they were not made with faith built in.
Thanks a lot, God!
Right, so why are we here? You are going to stop preaching now I guess/hope.
OK...If what you are saying is in fact 100% true and that is how you truly feel and believe...Then you should never once have a comment to offer to anyone other than to yourself. Because if you are not trying to understand the ones you are wishing to help "save" then how are you going to know how to "save" them?
Let me mention one other thing...If I was concerned with Theology...Then what you are saying would matter in the points we have been discussing...
Biblical Studies is all about the text itself...It has nothing to do with faith or religious beliefs...
Not trying to help save anyone. I'm merely speaking as I have been given. Seems as if you are trying to understand the topic that I know so well. You need to follow instruction on how to understand if in fact you are trying to understand. But I think debunk is more like what you are trying to do. And you have already
You have proven that I did not study the origin of the text, nor do I know it in Latin. And that is true for all books. But biblical truths stand firmly.
Do you then acknowledge that you're Biblical Truth may be different from someone else's and while it might be truth to you, it is technically opinion?
I am not trying to understand your personal theology. I am not attempting to debunk anything either. Our discussion was nothing more than an example of answering the Thread topic...
Just a note. The original text is in Hebrew and Greek..for the most part...The Latin is the Catholic Churches translation of the "original" texts...
Have you read the topic? Pushy atheists with the faith sledgehammer hammering away with their SELF.?
Yes I have. I also read the question as to why they act that way...Which is the question our discussion was directed at...
Usually, adults are able to discuss matters of this nature without escalation in anger and frustration. I am not frustrated about you not agreeing with me. It almost seems as if you choose to attribute your "problem" to Christians who dare to disagree with you especially without a "doctor" paper. Knowledge however extensive is fleeting. There is a learning cap in certain matters. You just cannot learn it all.
My problem? I never claimed to be atheist....And I don't care if we disagree...
Everything I have stated or asked...was in getting clarification on your postings...and using our discussion as an example...in short...playing "devil's advocate" to prove a point...Nothing more...
I am sure that the devil appreciated your assistance. And the point that you proved to me was that my faith is equal in resistance to your education. But I already knew that. The bible told me that. See?
I wasn't making a point just to you...it was in general...And the term "devil's advocate" is tongue in cheek...But of course...What else would one expect...LOL...And as I keep saying...we wasn't discussing your faith...But since you keep mentioning it...You stick to your faith as it is...despite any facts or other opinions which may in fact better your faith...Being educated can only increase your faith and understanding...Or for some...if their faith is already in question...cause it to go away completely and be replaced by secular reasoning...
Some choose to live by facts alone...Others by faith alone...and some by both...
Don't be so sensitive. Your tongue in your cheek was obvious. I only expressed that you were a marvelous "advocate." You argued a convincing point for "his" side.
Living by faith is what the bible asks. That's a fact. knowledge is fleeting. It will never satisfy the soul.
Actually I was arguing for the side of the believer...To be used as defense for the questioning of the non-believer...
Go back and read our conversation again. I repeatedly mentioned that our conversation was not about your faith or beliefs...I even said that the same type of conversation that I was having with you was one I used with non-believers and that when it comes to the "Atheist" they didn't have a problem...we just don't agree in our beliefs...Cival conversations..nothing more nothing less...and we both leave the wiser for our talk...The atheist with a better understanding of why Christians belief the way they do...and me with a better understanding of why they view things the way they do...no fighting and no judging or name calling...nothing of that sort...
I have been talking on hubpage forums for a good while...And the only person I have ever had any type of issue with was Brother...But I am not alone in that...But other than that...on here or in real life...I have always been about to discussion religion...pro or con...without the discussion falling into name calling or saying "because the bible says so"
Arguing or discussing the bible pro or con on a regular basis seems to me as the biblical doublemindedness. Hmmm... devil's advocate/bible defender??? He would rather you be hot or cold. Both sides is kinda worse.
No, it's really not... It actually comes closest to anything resembling productive on these boards. It's the willingness to see from another point of view and the willingness to concede points from that point of view. It's the kind of thing that PREVENTS arguments...
But only if arguing is not your goal and only if conversion is not your goal.
DS has never, ever attacked anyone or anything. He is quite possibly one of the most intelligent and open minded posters on this forum when it comes to religion.
He's only frustrating if one is trying to prove their point without acknowledging his.
His absence as well as the absence of a few other posters like him, is one of the reasons these forums have fallen prey to the kind of post we saw in the OP and he has my respect... Which is a damn hard thing to earn.
I cannot agree with somebody to keep them from arguing; nor win their irrelevant respect. I say what "I" feel. Not what DS feels. And he certainly has my respect. Opening your mind to each new wave of doctrinal persuasion is not healthy. If you don't stand for something, you fall for anything. I won't change my heart because a new doctor wrote a new book with "really" bible damning news. I am not trying to convince you or anyone else. I am telling things as I believe they are. (Opinion) we ALL have one or two. I am open minded. About dinner, movies, vacation spots. But one thing I will NOT compromise is my faith. Its just too precious to me. How the masses feels about it... irrelevant.
Well all I can say is if you can't open your mind to someone else's point of view, you don't deserve anyone opening their mind to yours.
Then you have your answer to the question raised by the OP.
I, as a Christian, have no desire to hear your views now. I can't learn anything from you. I have no desire to hear you preach, I have a desire to discuss and grow. There is no growth in spirit by stagnating your own mind, so I feel you have nothing to offer.
If I feel that way as a Christian, I can only assume that your preaching would be more unacceptable to an atheist.
I don't know about the Jesus you know, but the Jesus I know likes people who think. He like people who discuss him with an open heart and an open mind.
I just try to wrap my mind around what goes on in her mind. She seems to be of the mind that we seek what she has, but I think she can't see beyond her self so she can't understand how anyone else can think differently.
I know this will make you cringe Rad, but when I listen to other Christians I am actually seeking spiritual growth. She doesn't offer that opportunity... so she can offer me nothing in the way of anything I'm seeking.
Thanks for the kind words Melissa.
One thing that I find interesting about some persons is when they choose to stop learning...Why someone would not want to know more, even if it isn't what or how they believe, is beyond me. Sometimes we need to learn what it is we don't believe so we can better understand what it is we do believe.
If it wasn't for believers asking questions, then all Christians would still be Catholic...There would not have been a Protestant reformation and some of the posters on here would hold a very different outlook on their faith.
One of the reasons some people become Atheist is because they have questions that the "Church" cannot answer...And this is not because an answer doesn't exist, but sadly it is because the "Church" doesn't know the answer because they refuse to learn anything past what they think they know.
Thanks again! "What they think they know" is a good theme for you two too
We accept the fact that what we think we know can be changed based on receiving new data or information.
This is not the case for everyone...
Good observation! In your case; tossed to and fro by every new doctrine. My case; blessed assurance that keeps me firmly planted. Nice work.
Only tossed to and fro if at every new doctrine I change my beliefs...Learning about them does nothing more than strengthen my beliefs or better define them...
Learning on a subject does not have to change one's beliefs or faith.
I would say...the person afraid of learning anything new is not very secure in their belief or faith as they are afraid learning something new would change that belief or faith..
Bingo! We must guard our hearts. I have received lots of information on this site to have learned a lot. I learned; I rejected most of it. As you have. Learning new things does not shake faith. Allowing the learned material that goes against what you already feel deep down in your heart, to crowd out your focus; is the problem. Rejecting God is sin. For the atheist, rejecting God is a way of life. For the agnostic; rejecting God is a STRONG possibility. For the "learned" rejecting God mostly becomes a must if the spirit is not employed in research. The brain can't fathom forever.
A perfect example of my thread, "Do Atheists Reject God?"
Rejecting a BELIEF in God is the better way to state the Atheists position. Since you, and ALL other believers, have provided NO evidence whatsoever, the only thing that you have done is accepted a BELIEF in God....nothing more.
Atheists reject your illogical beliefs, NOT GOD, as there is no evidence to support any existence of a God or any of the supernatural. If you had an illogical belief in Spider Man, would Atheist be rejecting Spider Man, or a belief in Spider Man? All illogical beliefs are to be rejected, would you not agree?
Well to me, rejecting a belief in God leads to believing that there isn't one. That's an acceptable position and you get no flack from me. What you fail to realize is that evidence has been provided biblically. You do not accept that report. And that too is an acceptable position. So again I ask, "What the hell is your problem?" Really laughing out loud.
Sorry, but the Bible is not evidence of anything other than myths and superstitions.
Just as your, logically, rejecting the belief in Spider Man, leads to believing that there is no Spider Man.
There would be no problem just declaring believers completely delusional, like all others who suffer from such disorders, and proceed to just ignore them...except....
"In Spider Man We Trust" is not on our money.
No one has changed the Pledge of Allegiance to include "One nation...under Spider Man"
I am not required to swear on a Marvel comic book when testifying in court.
People don't knock on my door asking, "Have you heard the word of Spider Man today?"
Are you getting this, or are you going to misread this, as well? In conclusion, your delusional beliefs are intrusive, demanding and compulsory on the lives of others, while other psychotic beliefs are kept in their appropriate places.
However, you run (swing) over to each and every "spider man" conversation. I simply would not do that. When I get a knock about "spider man" I know how to say a kind "no thanks" and keep it moving. I personally will not go to Spidey conventions to TELL them that they are deluded. Do YOU get that?
Somehow, amazingly... I have learned some of the history of the Bible (obviously not all) some of the culture/politics at the time it was written... and have listened and even agreed with Atheists on certain points.
Yet I'm still a Christian.
I guess I'm sure enough in my faith that I'm not scared to listen and learn. I never reached that point in my life when I said "Yep, I know everything I need to know" If I ever do, then I really hope someone puts me out of my misery.
Oh, well you need broken all the way down huh???
Listen: your scripture taken at face value leads you to the conclusion that seminaries etc are not needed because God gives wisdom. The preacher gives the info and breaks it down. Spirit of God shows application of learned material.
Umm...Again we have a communication problem...
Read the first three parts again...We said the same things...
"Ok. Here is what I said...
Man receives his wisdom from God. If this verse is to be taken completely at face value, then there is no need for seminaries or ministers/priests nor the Christian to spread the word as the Holy Spirit will guide all of Mankind in all matters of religious beliefs"
Here is what you replied...
"Seminaries, priests and the like are only capable of providing knowledge. Not wisdom. Only God msy provide the wisdom it takes to understand his word. Wisdom and knowledge are kinds different."
Read both again very carefully...If God provides the reason...And public schools teach you to read...Then all that is required is God for the Reason and a Bible to read for the knowledge...The rest is not required..."
The rest was in answer to the remainder of your post...Our definition of knowledge and wisdom...my age...
"And Just because my definition differs from yours does not mean I am wrong...or off...Just that it differs from yours...Unless of course you are God and know all things...? Are you?
BTW I will be turning 40 here soon... Not that my age really matters..."
God gives wisdom about learned material. I think that is where we break in communication. You learn the material through reading or being taught. then the holy spirit gives knowledge about said material. Get it? God doesn't really micromanage. That's our job. We are to learn what he presents via his written words by any means usually our seminaries and stuff; then we get the wisdom given by WHO?
here's a question for you.
You say that only those that believe can truly understand the scripture, correct?
The bible is one of the most widely published and distributed books on earth. Missionaries hand them out when they don't have the time or capability to preach or mentor. What are these people supposed to do with those bibles if not read them? How are they supposed to come to believe based on the bible if they can't understand it unless they believe already? How are you supposed to believe something before knowing or understanding it when you can't know or understand it until you believe it?
are you really saying that you know, understand and interpret the bible just as well as people who have actually spent their lives studying it in the original languages, taking college classes and writing research papers on it? Does that not seem boastful or arrogant to you?
From our previous interactions, I've often pointed out bible verses to you that you were unaware of and had to go check them. Then you told me what they were SUPPOSED to mean, as opposed to what they actually said - even in comparison to the original languages which you neither read or understand. Yet other Christians disagree with your interpretations. Do you claim that you trump believers and non-believers alike and you, alone, are correct?
Some very interesting points JM...I am curious to the answers you receive.
Penn Jillette said it best:
"Reading the Bible is the fast track to atheism. Reading the Bible means starting at 'In the beginning...' and throwing it down with disgust at '...the grace of the lord Jesus be with all. Amen.' I'm sure there are lots of religious people who've read the Bible from start to finish and kept their faith, but in my self-selected sample, all the people I know who have done that are atheists."
"Take some time and put the Bible on your summer reading list. Try and stick with it cover to cover. Not because it teaches history; we've shown you it doesn't. Read it because you'll see for yourself what the Bible is all about. It sure isn't great literature. If it were published as fiction, no reviewer would give it a passing grade. There are some vivid scenes and some quotable phrases, but there's no plot, no structure, there's a tremendous amount of filler, and the characters are painfully one-dimensional. Whatever you do, don't read the Bible for a moral code: it advocates prejudice, cruelty, superstition, and murder. Read it because: we need more atheists — and nothin' will get you there faster than readin' the damn Bible."
Then we'd have more scientists, physicists, inventors, and artists.
And things like religion, racism, censorship, and the Tea Party would be another sad peculiarity of the past.
Ummm... how can you ask of God if you first do not believe that he is (present)? He gives liberally to all who only ask. And he doesn't upbraid. remember? You have to have faith before you ask. How ddoes this sound? God I know you don't exist, but teach me your ways. ?
Blessed are they who believe without seeing. Do you know that this paragraph is all taken from scripture?
Years of schooling don't mean nothing. It just means that you took your brain to a book. A craxy old book that you have a sneaking suspicion... how can you learn anything of him? That is scripture too.
Again, you may spend a lifetime in bible college and NEVER EVER "get" it. It takes the mind of Christ. Not cram sessions to pinpoint each assumed inconsistence. The spirit ties it together.
"to argue with a man who has renouced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead."
(Thomas Paine, The Crisis, quoted in Ingersoll's Works)
You must be talking about the old testiment which christians use for historical purpose
without the Old Testament, there is no need for the arrival of Jesus Christ. Either the Bible is all true (and therefore these passages are valid) or Jesus just appeared out of nowhere with no cause or need. Without the fall in the garden of eden, salvation was unnecessary.
Additionally, a lot of Christians like to pick and choose. For example, they'll use the Old Testament to condemn homosexuals, but IGNORE completely the other verses about stoning disobedient children because they don't like it. Which is it?
Yep...automated defen?....what was that word? So predictable.
please send me the scriptures that say these things bc while studying Christianity I never came across them and also yeah I'm pretty sure that almost every CULTURE has used slaves at some point in the last umpteen thousand years. Please stop giving atheist a bad name with your un-thought out responses
They say the bible cannot be trusted to have even been recorded accurately or that Jesus existed at all. They would rather believe that God and metaphysics cannot be proven. Period. They say that ethics and morals come from common sense and in fact are part of human nature, which evolved through survival of the fittest. They laugh at anyone who would believe in "fairy tales." The real question is why do we take them seriously and put up our automatic defenses as Zelkirro has just explained to me? They can't believe in God because they do not use the part of the brain which requires imagination. They seem to be very left brained. They truly believe that mankind is naturally good and that no one needs to be told by anyone to believe anything one way or the other. They believe in thinking for themselves and not imagining stuff. Looks like they also see a lot of unacceptable stuff in the OT.
Simple, we are presenting facts and you are denying or rejecting them in favor of your holy book.
That is a very good statement showing the dishonesty the OP is complaining about. Many Atheists can imagine more than you. And, if you say you don't ever think for yourself, that would be dishonest, too.
This response reveals a good example of an ever ready, up and running automatic defense system. I was just stating facts. Not opinions or criticisms. Many atheists do not feel comfortable imagining a god. They think it's like cheating.
For others, they like to imagine a god as the first step to discovering the real essence of God.
These are the words used by believers to describe those who don't share their beliefs...
- followers of Satan
... the list goes on an on.
Then, why aren't you telling them that? Atheists would never say a word if it were not for believers saying these things about them in the first place.
Let me get this straight, you're defending those who use those words against atheists because it makes them happy?
Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but with a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy. (Matthew 10:34-37)
Do you think I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division; for henceforth in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three; they will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. (Luke 12:51-53)
If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:26)
...a Canaanite woman ...came out and cried, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely possessed by a demon. But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, "Send her away, for she is crying after us." He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." But she came and knelt before him, saying, "Lord, help me." And he answered, "It is not fair to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." (Matthew 15:23)
Just a few passages that show another side...
The bible was written for the children of God. It is a spiritual book. It is NOT for use by those who fo not care to take it seriously. The mind of man works against the mind of Christ. The "fight" is "God mindedness vs no God whatsoever. This "fight" precisely.
I take the bible very serious. And since the bible states that Christ is the head of man and the head is where the mind is located...How is not the mind of man not also the mind of Christ?
Ok now you're scaring me. We each think differently. We all have a different mind. (Never thought I'd ever have to explain that to a Doctor). However God's mind is the one that we are to take on and conform to. So NO, we have our own minds. Until we deny self and allow God to do our thinking for us.
So what you are saying... is that the Christian person, since they are under God's guidance, all think alike when it comes to God? They should as Christ is the Head of the believer.
Of course all humans don't think alike...I don't think that...And you are not explaining anything to me...I am asking and making comments that are asking you to clarify your statements...
And since God's mind and understanding is beyond the Human one we can never begin to reach his mind or understanding. We can only do our best and seek forgiveness for our flaws.
Your last comment though worries me just a bit and shows why this thread even exists. To many people are completely giving up their own ability to think and freely allow themselves to be led to what they are told is God's plan via the Church or their own limited understanding of the Bible itself. Every single Christian should take a few classes on the bible and their belief system so they know how to better answer questions/ or debate the atheist. Because you can trust that the Atheist knows it.
Yes!!! Not even many "Christians" understand that God only has one mind. One way to truth and life. God decides who "has it" and who does not. We can see often times based upon certain things like declaring no faith in God.
God decides who has it and who don't? So we humans don't have freewill to choose?
You are clever... Let me break it down for you.
God knows who accepts and has faith in him based upon what we have ALREADY decided. Also, for further clarification; he KNOWS who will and who will not accept him. He does not force your decision. He simply knows if you are hot or cold.
Ahh..ok...So if God is already aware and knows this, then what is the purpose of spreading the Good Word...Shouldn't those who are going to choose God be able to do that without the assistance of man interfering with God's plan?
You seem to be making this easy.
"How can they hear without a preacher?" Ummm... the answers are all there. Will you please challenge the heart?
Sure. This is actually quite easy.
From what you have written...You have implied that the only way for God to get his message to the masses is via a "Preacher"...So...Why did God only divinely inspire a few select men to spread his message (Writers of bible) knowing that men are flawed and that the message would be done as it has been seeing the first product of the bible and what we see today.
Also if God is able to divinely inspire someone to write his word without the help of men, then he can divinely inspire anyone to his message without the help of a "Preacher"...
So to sum this up...From how you said what you said. The only way for God's message to get out is by man doing it. Thus, Everyone is learning God's message from the man and not God himself....Think about that for a minute and see if you can realize what you have implied...And I'll ask any atheist what they think you have implied...Lets see what the answers are...
Thanks for the word implication. It helps a point that I have.
First, I never implied that the father of lights is incapable of getting his message across without the aid of a preacher. He can use a donkey; a fig tree, or a brand new baby boy. the "they" in my example were a few. Since we all have different minds (remember) and some of us are auditory learners. "They" need to hear it. And some of us are not so good at thought proceses; for this bunch, explanation may be needed. All will come to know and agree that Jesus is lord of all. (And yes, I believe that EVERY knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess; know why??? He covers ALL bases. I wud not be surprised if atheists are part of the plan too. All will bow and confess.
As for implications: When you hear a quote of someone it usually helps a great deal to know the person being quoted in order to completely understand their implication. The spirit knows what the spirit means.
Atheists who do not know God nor have his spirit are not capable of deciphering any message of God. Only the spirit of God may "try" the spirit of God.
Attempting to explain God's "reason/motivation" is a daunting task. Wouldn't you agree? I have no idea why only the select few; however only a few can even find the path to heaven much less walk along it. Right??? There are only a few select men who want the "job" I think ALL are "capable"
I would think God would be quite capable of handling this...man not required This is just "preaching" not part of the topic And seeing as we are "unknown" to each other and our communication is via a forum with typing, we should know this and use the limitation to get our point and/or implications across correctly if we are able to communicate in a correct and effective manner This is more "preaching" and not really part of our conversational topic really.
I will say this...Some of your responses are the typical answers one expects to hear from Christians who really don't have answers (Not saying you do or don't) A question is answered, but nothing is really said...
Nothing was really asked.. it does not matter to God if you use charts and graphs to "verify" his version of the truth. He did allow you to be aware that some things you will NEVER find out. To wrestle with dates of materials ages older than anyone alive is for the knowledgeable. They will be chasing their tails for a really long time to come up with a better "GUESS" than anyone else using THEIR charts and graphs that have been made MORE "accurater" God knows the truth. So no, I do not know what year the bible was written. Or the book of Mark. Or the "real" author. But I do know who holds my future. And he told me to learn of him through his most controversial work of ALL ages. His spirit confirms. When you put on the mind of Christ, (learn of, agree with, and do to your best ability to immulate) while following the inner prompting of his spirit you "get it" and you find that since you will never know the answers to your investigative questions it REALLY does not matter.
Jesus showed us the point of it all. He KNOWS FOR SURE that he who wants to know him will.
oooh, this is kind of a short cut, but that helps me if youre actually open to different ideas about the Bible.
Soooo... if you would like to post the verse(s) that say that racism is mandatory, I will address those. Until then, please read these verses that will hopefully at least give you pause when assuming God is a racist.
Women were considered property. That is not uncommon even today... ask OJ Simpson.
Please actually read all of this excerpt instead of just a sentence.
21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.
22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[b] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.
"Rapists must not be punished, but instead get to marry the girl they rape (unless the girl is already married, in which case the rapist pays her father, like, fifty bucks and the girl is sentenced to death)"
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay her father fifty shekels[a] of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
So that's the verse. Deuteronomy is part of the law of their time. This verse is simply saying, like any law book... if this act is committed, this action will be taken against the offender.
So if a man raped a woman in their time and was caught, according to the law, he would pay her father for the crime... maybe this had to do with dowries? And he would marry her and never divorce her for he violated her. Now a days, we would like to see him castrated, but of course he would probably just serve a few years in a reasonably comfortable cell, working out and making a tiny sum of money until his release date. In case you hadn't noticed, this world is not kind to women. If you want to know how God feels about women, read the verses I posted on my last two posts concerning your first two questions. Are you still with me?
Zman writes"- Slavery is absolutely essential and morally right, so if you're not a Hebrew, you'd better learn to like shackles"
There are tons of verses telling both slaves how to serve whilst in their circumstance and masters how to treat the slaves whilst in their circumstance... however your statement is not supported that I have ever seen. Maybe you could give me the verse? Can we stop there for a bit so I can pee and get the kids to bed?
Yes, I understand. They had laws in their land concerning how they were to treat their slaves... probably on how they should pay taxes... etc. etc. They had laws for everything. Thank God, slavery is not legal anymore. If you noticed... they were talking about Hebrew slaves by name in some of those verses... you do recall God split the ocean to set the Hebrew slaves free?
Given the context of the story, I'm fairly certain the Sea of Reeds wasn't "the ocean." Likely, it was a swampland north of the Gulf of Suez or a lagoon in the Sinai Peninsula.
21 Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the Lord drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, 22 and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left.
23 The Egyptians pursued them, and all Pharaoh’s horses and chariots and horsemen followed them into the sea. 24 During the last watch of the night the Lord looked down from the pillar of fire and cloud at the Egyptian army and threw it into confusion. 25 He jammed[d] the wheels of their chariots so that they had difficulty driving. And the Egyptians said, “Let’s get away from the Israelites! The Lord is fighting for them against Egypt.”
you know, don't you, that there is no evidence whatsoever that Hebrews migrated en masse from Egypt where they were held as slaves and that even several jews deny that this ever historically happened, right?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/staks-ros … 08123.html
I hold the Bible in higher esteem than the Huffington post.
Allegations of supporting pseudo-science[edit source]
The Huffington Post has been criticized by several science bloggers, as well as online news sources, for including articles by supporters of alternative medicine and anti-vaccine activists and for allegedly "censoring" rebuttals written by science bloggers before publishing them.
Steven Novella, president of the New England Skeptical Society, criticized The Huffington Post for allowing homeopathy proponent Dana Ullman to have a blog there:
Dana Ullman, a notorious homeopathy apologist, actually has a regular blog over at HuffPo. For those of us who follow such things, the start of his blog there marked the point of no return for the Huffington Post – clearly the editors had decided to go the path of Saruman and "abandon reason for madness." They gave up any pretense of caring about scientific integrity and became a rag of pseudoscience.
I hold Green Eggs & Ham in higher esteem than the Bible.
Well that is a good book.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/rel … tian_N.htm
yes, and the post linked to many other journals of more repute that you may find more interesting - if you bothered to even read it. The fact that the Exodus is not historical has been studied and accepted for CENTURIES. The fact that you, as a Christian, still claim it as absolutely true when the people that it supposedly actually happened to don't speaks volumes. Or there' even a book written by two Jewish scholars: The Bible Unearthed – Neil Asher Silberman & Israel Finkelstein
In addition, the Exodus (if it happened) and the resulting Passover is one of the more immoral, unjust and horrific actions of your god in the entire biblical text. First, god allows his people to be enslaved because he's punishing them. Then, he commands Moses to free them - and god himself hardens Pharaoh's heart. Several times, Pharaoh was convinced to let the Jews go - and god hardened his heart so that he wouldn't - all so god could justify torturing and killing more Egyptians. It sounds like a petulant, angry child torturing an ant under a magnifying glass, pretending to let it escape over and over again just so it can burn again. After all that, right before god commits mass genocide of all of the first born of Egypt, he has the Israelites slaughter lambs and smear the blood on the doors of their homes - so this all-powerful, all-knowing deity would recognize his own people and remember not to kill them. And Christians think this story is wonderful and miraculous. Amazing. Then, to top it all of, when an understandably furious Pharaoh pursues the retreating Jews, god smashes him with an ocean (or, you know, a small lake) and kills him and the entire army for a situation that god himself initiated and caused.
There are a few ppl whose posts I do not read any more. Im sorry.
As I told you, I shook the dust from my shoes. I wont argue for the sake of arguing, but Im happy to have discussions with ppl who are not haters of God disguised as non believers.
you read my posts enough to respond with disdain over my sources (namely the one I linked to others) but now you supposedly don't read my posts? I may buy it if you actually never responded to me, but you do. So either you're lying or you're just convinced that you're correct when the evidence shows otherwise. You may want to rethink. Telling someone "i'm not listening to you, i'm not listening to you, I'm not talking to you" only work if you don't actually keep saying it TO the person that you're supposedly ignoring.
Why come to threads created by or directed to atheists if you don't like arguing with them? "the Lady doth protest too much"
I don't hate god. I don't believe in god. You can't hate something you don't believe in. It sounds like a convenient excuse when you're unable to come up with a rational answer because someone knows more about your religion and your book than you do.