<!--QuoteBegin-Legionnaired+Sep 22 2004, 09:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Legionnaired @ Sep 22 2004, 09:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->In my opinion the reason that there are contradictions and so forth points to the idea that the Bible is alot more "Man inspired" than "God inspired".
The fact that women are not supposed to hold official roles in the Church is hardly surprising. For centuries men have dominated women in most cultures. It was not all that long ago that women were not allowed to vote in the good ol USA. So why should religion be any different ?
After all, Eve is supposed to have come from Adam, and thus is secondary - "a companion" if you will. Eve tempted Adam of course, which seems to indicate that women are more to blame than men for being kicked out of Eden...etc etc. Again, this illustrates the dominant sex making sure that women hold a secondary role even in matters of faith. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've never seen a fully conclusive proof that the bible is as ridden with contradictions as skeptics would like to believe. There was a rather comprehensive list of supposed contradictions floating around here a while ago, but Tektonics.org shot it full of more holes than swiss cheese.
Unless it can be proved that the bible is in fact flawed, it's painfully difficult to dismiss it as outdated mythology.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Part of the problem is one of translation. People can't seem to agree upon things like is it "thou shalt not kill" or "thou shalt not murder". I've seen arguments for both. Such is the problem when studying an ancient text - it is difficult to be certain of the meaning without knowledge of the corresponding context.
Translation issues aside though: When I read about Yahweh not wanting to be like the other gods - by not wanting idols made of him - but then wanting to be praised like the other gods, by borrowing poetry such as a Baal Hymn ... it does make one wonder no ?
In any case, the basic concept of being damned because you don't believe Jesus is Lord is one I cannot reconcile.
You do realize this man (see below) , who has dedicated his life to spreading the message of compassion for all sentient beings is "doomed" right ?
<!--QuoteBegin-TheCheeseStandsAlone+Sep 22 2004, 01:50 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheCheeseStandsAlone @ Sep 22 2004, 01:50 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-kavasa+Sep 22 2004, 12:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (kavasa @ Sep 22 2004, 12:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I agree with you, to be christian is to rize above the challenges of the world for the glory of God.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
lolz <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I probably shouldn't but I did laugh uncontrollably. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> .... I hope your laughing at the spelling of rise by whoever wrote this.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Prove it. Show me the verses that have been warped. And yes, you'd better hope it all happened before 100AD, because what they had then and what we have now are about 97% the same, with all variations in words that dont actually change meaning of passages. Interesting that all this warping, manipulation and translational errors were rampant right up until the septuagint and various other early sources, then spent the next 2000 years with nearly zero changes. Interesting that many of the events they reported on were corroborated by secular historians as well.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Miraculously, the legend goes, the translators came up with identical texts of what would become the Christian Old Testament. Same words, same punctuation. Identical.
<b>Most biblical scholars agree that the story is probably inaccurate.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Much blending and editing went on before the Bible even came to be, and the early translations weren't exactly the most accurate depictions ever. Stories were forced together in an attempt to create continuity, and a greater overall point that suggested Christianity was right. The very fact that the people who were writing and merging the books, stories, and fables of the Bible managed to do so with as few errors and contradictions as there were is a testament to their ability and intelligence, but that leads me to believe even more that those who wrote and rewrote the stories of the Bible had an agenda of their own.
Who are we to say that the original authors of the Bible didn't change the stories they were writing down to make them more favorable to their own cause? To me, the Bible is a book designed and solely designed to bring people together as Christians, not a book sent down from God as the message to the people.
If I am missing any aspect of the Bible's creation, please inform me, I haven't read the book in 6 years (back when I was a Christian), and by no means have it memorized after only 3 run throughs. And there are some more links below that show some of the contradictions of the Bible, I'm not saying they're true and exact contradictions, but you wanted some proof Marine, so I figured I'd give you some fodder to shoot at.
*Note about the above links* While these are all hosted by and linked to from atheism.about.com, they are not essays from that site, and are merely hosted/linked to by atheism.about.com for ease of use. *Not about the above links*
The old testament is a different story what "fable" (lol wow what a word to use....) of the new testament has been altered. As for atheism prove to me GOD doesn't exist then we'll discuss the nitty gritty about religion.
<!--QuoteBegin-TheCheeseStandsAlone+Sep 23 2004, 10:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheCheeseStandsAlone @ Sep 23 2004, 10:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Every religous person here is so sure it is the word of god since well, I guess they saw him write it or hear him speak it. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> All the atheists are so sure GOD doesn't exist then I'm sure they were there when the world was started and will enlight us how it happened? The big bang works for me excepts something can't come from nothing. So where did the cases come from. Is this not part of GOD's divine plan. Tell me the answer to that and we'll all be happy because SOMETHING CAN'T COME FROM NOTHING.
Atheism isn't a belief system, its a persuasion. I don't believe in a god for whatever reason. Its not about disproving anything its simply not thinking there is one.
Also don't mix bigbang+atheism. Its alot like a religious fundementalists saying there can't be aliens because there's a god. See? Dosen't make sense. At all. But honestly I think its OK to believe in a god. We all had imaginary friends as children.
<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 23 2004, 11:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 23 2004, 11:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TheCheeseStandsAlone+Sep 23 2004, 10:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheCheeseStandsAlone @ Sep 23 2004, 10:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Every religous person here is so sure it is the word of god since well, I guess they saw him write it or hear him speak it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> All the atheists are so sure GOD doesn't exist then I'm sure they were there when the world was started and will enlight us how it happened? The big bang works for me excepts something can't come from nothing. So where did the cases come from. Is this not part of GOD's divine plan. Tell me the answer to that and we'll all be happy because SOMETHING CAN'T COME FROM NOTHING. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Atheism isn't true because we can't prove your beliefs to be false?
<!--QuoteBegin-camO.o+Sep 23 2004, 11:19 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (camO.o @ Sep 23 2004, 11:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 23 2004, 11:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 23 2004, 11:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-TheCheeseStandsAlone+Sep 23 2004, 10:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheCheeseStandsAlone @ Sep 23 2004, 10:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Every religous person here is so sure it is the word of god since well, I guess they saw him write it or hear him speak it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> All the atheists are so sure GOD doesn't exist then I'm sure they were there when the world was started and will enlight us how it happened? The big bang works for me excepts something can't come from nothing. So where did the cases come from. Is this not part of GOD's divine plan. Tell me the answer to that and we'll all be happy because SOMETHING CAN'T COME FROM NOTHING. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Atheism isn't true because we can't prove your beliefs to be false?
Failed Logic Warning! Failed Logic Warning! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Trying to disprove something we dont already agree with. Hah
Talk about about failed logic. Everything must come from something. The world being created is the PROOF of GOD. wow you guys do have no proof to back up your beliefs and yet you run around saying that everyone else has no proof. The proof of your beliefs you indeed be disproving that a higher lifeform of any kind does not exist, which you seem to not be able to do, so at this point christians, muslims, and jewish ect... have proof that there is a higher lifeform, so at least we all have some marginal proof, while you all have what NONE? you cant prove your beliefs and have faith that we all just appeared out of nothing. Way to be hypocritical <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> GG
Meh, you can probably change my opinions on many issues, assuming that I am wrong and you are right. But hard as you might try, you won't be able to convince me that there is no God, because I have experianced God in to many ways that I can not deny, but unfortunately without hours to spend with me in person, I also can't articulate. Thus I am forced to belive that on at very least one major point you are wrong.
Accepting the fact that there is a God, because I have heard him, I have seen him, and I have been part of his works and plans, I must now look for evidence on who God is. God didn't come and tell me who he is and what to do, that would be screwing around with my free will, I need to make some of those decisions and mistakes before I will understand more. So I am looking for God, well, God is a big guy, and I can find mention of him in alot of places, but I just happen to find a story about a guy who lived 2000 years ago who preformed hundreds of miracles, and preached with a wisdom that is comprehendable by very very few people, and in the end died, just to rize to life again after only three days... Well to say the least, I was a bit sceptical at first, but on further examintation I found out that this story was the result of at least 6 differnet primary and secondary sourse documents dated within 100 years of his death, and not only that, but about 2 were acctual eye witness accounts, and the authors of which, were killed for thier belifes, and yet they did not recind them. Now I'm not saying that my story will instantly convince everyone who hears it, quite the opposite acctually, your imbedded sence of superiorty compels you to belive that, being smarter than me, you caught on to something I didn't. But the fact remains, from where I am sitting, there isn't alot of ground I can yeild to you...
<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 23 2004, 10:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 23 2004, 10:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Talk about about failed logic. Everything must come from something. The world being created is the PROOF of GOD. wow you guys do have no proof to back up your beliefs and yet you run around saying that everyone else has no proof. The proof of your beliefs you indeed be disproving that a higher lifeform of any kind does not exist, which you seem to not be able to do, so at this point christians, muslims, and jewish ect... have proof that there is a higher lifeform, so at least we all have so marginal proof, while you all have what NONE? you cant prove your beliefs and have faith that we all just appeared out of nothing. Way to be hypocritical <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> GG <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hey there....proof of god(s)?
If you use that logic, then there actually isn't any reason why Christianity is the One True Religion? .
That's why I find it more convenient to be agnostic. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Though I do take athiest positions for debate.
<!--QuoteBegin-Swiftspear+Sep 23 2004, 10:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Swiftspear @ Sep 23 2004, 10:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Meh, you can probably change my opinions on many issues, assuming that I am wrong and you are right. But hard as you might try, you won't be able to convince me that there is no God, because I have experianced God in to many ways that I can not deny, but unfortunately without hours to spend with me in person, I also can't articulate. Thus I am forced to belive that on at very least one major point you are wrong.
Accepting the fact that there is a God, because I have heard him, I have seen him, and I have been part of his works and plans, I must now look for evidence on who God is. God didn't come and tell me who he is and what to do, that would be screwing around with my free will, I need to make some of those decisions and mistakes before I will understand more. So I am looking for God, well, God is a big guy, and I can find mention of him in alot of places, but I just happen to find a story about a guy who lived 2000 years ago who preformed hundreds of miracles, and preached with a wisdom that is comprehendable by very very few people, and in the end died, just to rize to life again after only three days... Well to say the least, I was a bit sceptical at first, but on further examintation I found out that this story was the result of at least 6 differnet primary and secondary sourse documents dated within 100 years of his death, and not only that, but about 2 were acctual eye witness accounts, and the authors of which, were killed for thier belifes, and yet they did not recind them. Now I'm not saying that my story will instantly convince everyone who hears it, quite the opposite acctually, your imbedded sence of superiorty compels you to belive that, being smarter than me, you caught on to something I didn't. But the fact remains, from where I am sitting, there isn't alot of ground I can yeild to you... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> You believe strongly in something, and I admire you for it. However, for the purposes of rational debate, that does not suffice as evidence.
agnostic, isn't that where you consent that there is a GOD (or could be maybe), but don't have an organized religion. That's still a lot more reasonable than atheism when looked at from most perspectives.
<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 23 2004, 11:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 23 2004, 11:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> agnostic, isn't that where you consent that there is a GOD (or could be maybe), but don't have an organized religion. That's still a lot more reasonable than atheism when looked at from most perspectives.
*edit spelling* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not actually. It's where I take the stance that there could or could not be a $DEITY, but damned if I know. Generally, my personal belief is that it is unknowable, in the scientific sense. Though for the purposes of this and any other debate about religion I like to take the athiestic stance.
<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:yellow'>SOMETHING WE SHOULD ALL BE AWARE OF IN THIS DEBATE:</span></span> is that this is a <i>rational debate</i>. Meaning, we take arguments of evidence, and nothing else. For the purposes of such discussion, statements of pure faith are as untenable as those of mere hearsay.
<span style='color:red'>I do not wish to imply, however, that faith is necessarily inferior to logic.</span>
I have faith in many things; the sound constitution of our country, the forward march of human progress, that Bush is a dumbshit and shouldn't be in office, etc. Faith is every bit as important to a person as logic. But implicit in the act of engaging in debate is the agreement that we will be talking <b>facts.</b>
But what people aren't understanding is that atheists have faith that they are right, they are the deviant from the norm and they have no proof of their beliefs. So they have the biggest leap of faith of all. Faith that there is truely nothing whereas there is no proof, but rather much against such according to many religions. They suddenly create a group on non-believers and call themselves right. Well where is their proof, I just find it amazing that atheists are the only group that can make so many ballsy statements and get away with it simply because we cant disprove them because they have no facts. What any atheist has yet to answer is how was the Earth created. When they answer that with evidence then I'll be happy.
<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 23 2004, 11:20 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 23 2004, 11:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But what people aren't understanding is that atheists have faith that they are right, they are the deviant from the norm and they have no proof of their beliefs. So they have the biggest leap of faith of all. Faith that there is truely nothing whereas there is no proof, but rather much against such according to many religions. They suddenly create a group on non-believers and call themselves right. Well where is their proof, I just find it amazing that atheists are the only group that can make so many ballsy statements and get away with it simply because we cant disprove them because they have no facts. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Ah. Here you fall into the trap of arrogance <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->. Your arguments are no less correct (if indeed they are) because of it, but by this arrogance, you are inviting flamebait. So lay off of it please <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And besides, you are commiting the same error that you accuse us of commiting. You calim that, because believers are the "norm", non-believers have to make the biggest leap of faith. Well, this distinction you make with such clarity is really arbitrary; suppose that then I define us athiests as being the "norm". Then you guys are making the Matrix-style skyscraper jumps here.
Based on your usage of "we", you're now "creating a group on believers and call themselves right". It is just as well for us to call for your proof, is it not? If you agree with this reasoning, then the only issue really at debate here is whether or not the origin of the universe implies the existence of a $DEITY. Ah ok then. Everything must have a cause, you say.
<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 24 2004, 12:20 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 24 2004, 12:20 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->But what people aren't understanding is that atheists have faith that they are right, they are the deviant from the norm and they have no proof of their beliefs. So they have the biggest leap of faith of all. Faith that there is truely nothing whereas there is no proof, but rather much against such according to many religions. They suddenly create a group on non-believers and call themselves right. Well where is their proof, I just find it amazing that atheists are the only group that can make so many ballsy statements and get away with it simply because we cant disprove them because they have no facts. What any atheist has yet to answer is how was the Earth created. When they answer that with evidence then I'll be happy.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Evolution, Big Bang Theory, History, Archaelogical evidence, Astrology.
It would be pointless to cite any of these because you've proven time and again that rationale and reason aren't for you. You're not welcome in this debate unless you can come to grips with the possibility that others may be correct. In laymen's terms, stop babbling.
Personally, I'm sick of you using popularity to justify your claims. It was popular in Nazi germany to persecute Jews, and it was popular in America to imprison the Japanese. Popularity does not define right. The amount of times you manage to contradict yourself on this point makes me laugh.
Swiftspear: While I have a lot of respect for you as a Christian who doesn't stuff it in my face, and is willing to acknowledge, if not accept, the arguments of both sides, consider the possibility that perhaps your entire psychological construction of faith may be the result of being surrounded with a belief in god since your youth. Do you recall making an active, informed decision that god was doubtlessly real, and that it was worth your time to spend the rest of your life worshipping him?
<!--QuoteBegin-camO.o+Sep 23 2004, 11:52 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (camO.o @ Sep 23 2004, 11:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Evolution, Big Bang Theory, History, Archaelogical evidence, Astrology. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It would be a lot easier to debate this without bringing in more controversy.
And FYI "astrology" is the practice of fortune-telling using the stars <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
kabo0mKT of Insomniacs Anonymous Gaming CommunityJoin Date: 2004-08-06Member: 30415Members
edited September 2004
<!--QuoteBegin-TheCheeseStandsAlone+Sep 23 2004, 11:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheCheeseStandsAlone @ Sep 23 2004, 11:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Every religous person here is so sure it is the word of god since well, I guess they saw him write it or hear him speak it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I quote this from the Bible:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->John 20 27 Then he said to Thomas, Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and also ..
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This post has been edited by camO.o on Sep 24 2004, 01:53 AM
Evolution, Big Bang Theory, History, Archaelogical evidence, Astrology.
It would be pointless to cite any of these because you've proven time and again that rationale and reason aren't for you. You're not welcome in this debate unless you can come to grips with the possibility that others may be correct. In laymen's terms, stop babbling.
Personally, I'm sick of you using popularity to justify your claims. It was popular in Nazi germany to persecute Jews, and it was popular in America to imprison the Japanese. Popularity does not define right. The amount of times you manage to contradict yourself on this point makes me laugh.
Swiftspear: While I have a lot of respect for you as a Christian who doesn't stuff it in my face, and is willing to acknowledge, if not accept, the arguments of both sides, consider the possibility that perhaps your entire psychological construction of faith may be the result of being surrounded with a belief in god since your youth. Do you recall making an active, informed decision that god was doubtlessly real, and that it was worth your time to spend the rest of your life worshipping him?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know what you mean because I was born Roman Catholic and I think if I was not raised to believe in God then I probably would not. I haven't seen much proof in the way that the normal human eye looks for. The only thing I have to go by is when I was 9 years old and a voice in my head said that something bad just happened and my parents wouldn't be seeing me today and I cried (I was in the hospital a VERY lot as a kid). Then the next day I found out my grandma had died. My mom said that voice was probably an angel. Maybe my 'Guardian Angel'.
kabo0mKT of Insomniacs Anonymous Gaming CommunityJoin Date: 2004-08-06Member: 30415Members
<!--QuoteBegin-john_sheu+Sep 24 2004, 01:18 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (john_sheu @ Sep 24 2004, 01:18 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 23 2004, 11:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 23 2004, 11:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> agnostic, isn't that where you consent that there is a GOD (or could be maybe), but don't have an organized religion. That's still a lot more reasonable than atheism when looked at from most perspectives.
*edit spelling* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Not actually. It's where I take the stance that there could or could not be a $DEITY, but damned if I know. Generally, my personal belief is that it is unknowable, in the scientific sense. Though for the purposes of this and any other debate about religion I like to take the athiestic stance.
<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:yellow'>SOMETHING WE SHOULD ALL BE AWARE OF IN THIS DEBATE:</span></span> is that this is a <i>rational debate</i>. Meaning, we take arguments of evidence, and nothing else. For the purposes of such discussion, statements of pure faith are as untenable as those of mere hearsay.
<span style='color:red'>I do not wish to imply, however, that faith is necessarily inferior to logic.</span>
I have faith in many things; the sound constitution of our country, the forward march of human progress, that Bush is a dumbshit and shouldn't be in office, etc. Faith is every bit as important to a person as logic. But implicit in the act of engaging in debate is the agreement that we will be talking <b>facts.</b> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> ya .. that is what an agnostic is. I learned that from my ex-bf (yes a Roman Catholic actually dated an Agnostic) but even though it didn't work out he respected my beliefs and I understood that he was just a 'Doubting Thomas' who hasn't seen proof of God so he wouldn't believe what he didn't see cold hard proof of.
That is understandable.
I just take offence when people start saying we are believing in our 'Imaginary Friend' or we make our lives a living hell for a Diety that may or may not even exsist. Please don't insult anyone (this goes for everyone as I am not pointing fingers) but like when Jesus was spreading his word he didn't force people to see his side. You hear or read what you will and decide for yourselves.
<!--QuoteBegin-Matthew L. Barre+Sep 24 2004, 12:20 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Matthew L. Barre @ Sep 24 2004, 12:20 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But what people aren't understanding is that atheists have faith that they are right, they are the deviant from the norm and they have no proof of their beliefs. So they have the biggest leap of faith of all. Faith that there is truely nothing whereas there is no proof, but rather much against such according to many religions. They suddenly create a group on non-believers and call themselves right. Well where is their proof, I just find it amazing that atheists are the only group that can make so many ballsy statements and get away with it simply because we cant disprove them because they have no facts. What any atheist has yet to answer is how was the Earth created. When they answer that with evidence then I'll be happy. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Atheism isn't a belief structure, religion is. Atheism is a word to describe a person who does not believe. To be an atheist is to have NO faith in a god.
I also want to state that creationists believe the earth is only 2000 some years old when science has proved it is much older.
ugh, science vs. religion, let's not go there. as pointed out in several previous SvR threads, science actually supports creationism and Christianity at this point of time.
anyway, atheism is as much a belief structure as theism is. it's just faith that there is no God.
<!--QuoteBegin-TheCheeseStandsAlone+Sep 24 2004, 01:41 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (TheCheeseStandsAlone @ Sep 24 2004, 01:41 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Atheism isn't a belief structure, religion is. Atheism is a word to describe a person who does not believe. To be an atheist is to have NO faith in a god.
I also want to state that creationists believe the earth is only 2000 some years old when science has proved it is much older. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Meh, seems like I got into this thread too late ^_^;; At least there are others here who can intellectually debate Atheism <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Iirc, creationists believe that the Eart is around 6000 years old, starting at around 4004 B.C. - I'll try to dig up the references.
Edit: Because I suck at math.
Edit II: <a href='http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42917&perpage=40&highlight=creationist%20date&pagenumber=1' target='_blank'>Linkage</a> - Just a note, generally on those boards, religion has been debunked oft too many times that in the end it's the subject of much humour, as is evident by the thread starter's facetious joke about the wrong creation dates.
<!--QuoteBegin-DarkDude+Sep 23 2004, 10:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkDude @ Sep 23 2004, 10:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Prove it. Show me the verses that have been warped. And yes, you'd better hope it all happened before 100AD, because what they had then and what we have now are about 97% the same, with all variations in words that dont actually change meaning of passages. Interesting that all this warping, manipulation and translational errors were rampant right up until the septuagint and various other early sources, then spent the next 2000 years with nearly zero changes. Interesting that many of the events they reported on were corroborated by secular historians as well.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
*Note about the above links* While these are all hosted by and linked to from atheism.about.com, they are not essays from that site, and are merely hosted/linked to by atheism.about.com for ease of use. *Not about the above links* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <a href='http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/jebusites.html' target='_blank'>Link 1 owned.</a> <a href='http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Book%20of%20Judges' target='_blank'>Link1 owned again.</a>
All these arguments are out of context. Luke's genealogies are different than Matthew's because telescoping genealogies were used to portray different things - It is thought that Matthew's genealogy traced through firstborn (heirs to the line of David) sons and Luke's was directly.
Maybe if you actually did research instead of listening to what deceptive people throw at you.
Btw, Link 2, i didn't really understand the point of, Link 4 - i have no idea what kind of christians he's talking about, because it's like he's never even read the Bible, or listened in Sunday school like he should have. he misses the point of Christianity so badly it hurts.
I don't really feel like rebutting the rest of the links, because i didn't feel like reading through them. the first 4 were ridiculous enough.
*edit* btw, religion and reason are not diametrically opposed. many of us base our faith on rational decisions.
<!--QuoteBegin-camO.o+Sep 24 2004, 12:52 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (camO.o @ Sep 24 2004, 12:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Swiftspear: While I have a lot of respect for you as a Christian who doesn't stuff it in my face, and is willing to acknowledge, if not accept, the arguments of both sides, consider the possibility that perhaps your entire psychological construction of faith may be the result of being surrounded with a belief in god since your youth. Do you recall making an active, informed decision that god was doubtlessly real, and that it was worth your time to spend the rest of your life worshipping him? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I'm not going to pretend that I did no grow up in a christian household. But for a signifigant period in my life I very much doubted the existance of God, in fact I would say that it wasn't a real stretch to call me athiest for a short period, and for a much longer period, at very least agnostic. To decide that God is real is much less a sudden informed decision than it is a process, or a journy. It is really alot like a relationship with a person, you generally don't all of a sudden decide that this is the person you are going to marry, there is alot of long term thought and consideration that goes into the issue. That being said, I can tell you that it was only within the last 2 years, through much inbickering and soul searching that I really came to the conclusion that I belived that God was real, and I have really only been doubt free for around the last 9 monthes. My journy has been a long, and for the most part, uninteresting one, but rest assured, the various input factors that really contributed to the belifes I hold today, compiled, could easily fill a novel, but it definately was a very active and intentionally informed decision. If you want a good example of someone who went through a similar walk as mine, pick up 'a case for faith' by Lee Stroble. Stroble was an athiest who set out to prove finalisticly to himself that God did not exist, 5 years down the line, he was very much a dedicated christian with a complied record of what brought him to the place he ended up at. Many christians reading the book find it reminisent of thier own journies in faith.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Sep 24 2004, 02:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Sep 24 2004, 02:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> um, you mistake that 2000 for 6000, thanks.
ugh, science vs. religion, let's not go there. as pointed out in several previous SvR threads, science actually supports creationism and Christianity at this point of time.
anyway, atheism is as much a belief structure as theism is. it's just faith that there is no God. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Atheism is the lack of faith. You can't have a following of nothingness. And 6,000 years? Wow, the world must be flat as well!
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Sep 24 2004, 02:33 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Sep 24 2004, 02:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-DarkDude+Sep 23 2004, 10:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkDude @ Sep 23 2004, 10:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Prove it. Show me the verses that have been warped. And yes, you'd better hope it all happened before 100AD, because what they had then and what we have now are about 97% the same, with all variations in words that dont actually change meaning of passages. Interesting that all this warping, manipulation and translational errors were rampant right up until the septuagint and various other early sources, then spent the next 2000 years with nearly zero changes. Interesting that many of the events they reported on were corroborated by secular historians as well.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
*Note about the above links* While these are all hosted by and linked to from atheism.about.com, they are not essays from that site, and are merely hosted/linked to by atheism.about.com for ease of use. *Not about the above links* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <a href='http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/jebusites.html' target='_blank'>Link 1 owned.</a> <a href='http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Book%20of%20Judges' target='_blank'>Link1 owned again.</a>
All these arguments are out of context. Luke's genealogies are different than Matthew's because telescoping genealogies were used to portray different things - It is thought that Matthew's genealogy traced through firstborn (heirs to the line of David) sons and Luke's was directly.
Maybe if you actually did research instead of listening to what deceptive people throw at you.
Btw, Link 2, i didn't really understand the point of, Link 4 - i have no idea what kind of christians he's talking about, because it's like he's never even read the Bible, or listened in Sunday school like he should have. he misses the point of Christianity so badly it hurts.
I don't really feel like rebutting the rest of the links, because i didn't feel like reading through them. the first 4 were ridiculous enough.
*edit* btw, religion and reason are not diametrically opposed. many of us base our faith on rational decisions.
*edit2* uhoh, what's this??? <a href='http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties.htm' target='_blank'>LINK 1 OWNED AGAIN!?!</a> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> What about the other links
Comments
The fact that women are not supposed to hold official roles in the Church is hardly surprising. For centuries men have dominated women in most cultures. It was not all that long ago that women were not allowed to vote in the good ol USA. So why should religion be any different ?
After all, Eve is supposed to have come from Adam, and thus is secondary - "a companion" if you will. Eve tempted Adam of course, which seems to indicate that women are more to blame than men for being kicked out of Eden...etc etc. Again, this illustrates the dominant sex making sure that women hold a secondary role even in matters of faith.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I've never seen a fully conclusive proof that the bible is as ridden with contradictions as skeptics would like to believe. There was a rather comprehensive list of supposed contradictions floating around here a while ago, but Tektonics.org shot it full of more holes than swiss cheese.
Unless it can be proved that the bible is in fact flawed, it's painfully difficult to dismiss it as outdated mythology.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Part of the problem is one of translation. People can't seem to agree upon things like is it "thou shalt not kill" or "thou shalt not murder". I've seen arguments for both. Such is the problem when studying an ancient text - it is difficult to be certain of the meaning without knowledge of the corresponding context.
Translation issues aside though: When I read about Yahweh not wanting to be like the other gods - by not wanting idols made of him - but then wanting to be praised like the other gods, by borrowing poetry such as a Baal Hymn ... it does make one wonder no ?
In any case, the basic concept of being damned because you don't believe Jesus is Lord is one I cannot reconcile.
You do realize this man (see below) , who has dedicated his life to spreading the message of compassion for all sentient beings is "doomed" right ?
<a href='http://www.motherjones.com/news/qa/1997/11/thurman.html' target='_blank'>H.H.</a>
lolz <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I probably shouldn't but I did laugh uncontrollably. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
.... I hope your laughing at the spelling of rise by whoever wrote this.
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> (jesus) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
May GOD forgive you.
<a href='http://www.awitness.org/essays/bizarre.html' target='_blank'>Link</a>
<a href='http://www.texnews.com/1998/religion/bibles0301.html' target='_blank'>Link 2</a>
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Miraculously, the legend goes, the translators came up with identical texts of what would become the Christian Old Testament. Same words, same punctuation. Identical.
<b>Most biblical scholars agree that the story is probably inaccurate.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Much blending and editing went on before the Bible even came to be, and the early translations weren't exactly the most accurate depictions ever. Stories were forced together in an attempt to create continuity, and a greater overall point that suggested Christianity was right. The very fact that the people who were writing and merging the books, stories, and fables of the Bible managed to do so with as few errors and contradictions as there were is a testament to their ability and intelligence, but that leads me to believe even more that those who wrote and rewrote the stories of the Bible had an agenda of their own.
Who are we to say that the original authors of the Bible didn't change the stories they were writing down to make them more favorable to their own cause? To me, the Bible is a book designed and solely designed to bring people together as Christians, not a book sent down from God as the message to the people.
If I am missing any aspect of the Bible's creation, please inform me, I haven't read the book in 6 years (back when I was a Christian), and by no means have it memorized after only 3 run throughs. And there are some more links below that show some of the contradictions of the Bible, I'm not saying they're true and exact contradictions, but you wanted some proof Marine, so I figured I'd give you some fodder to shoot at.
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infidels.org%2Flibrary%2Fmagazines%2Ftsr%2F1993%2F2%2F2any93.html' target='_blank'>Link 3</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dimensional.com%2F%7Erandl%2Ftcont.htm' target='_blank'>Link 4</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2FAthens%2F5195%2Fbible.html' target='_blank'>Link 5</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infidels.org%2Flibrary%2Fmagazines%2Ftsr%2F1991%2F3%2Findex.html' target='_blank'>Link 6</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fweb2.airmail.net%2Fcapella%2Faguide%2Ferrors.htm' target='_blank'>Link 7 (last)</a>
*Note about the above links* While these are all hosted by and linked to from atheism.about.com, they are not essays from that site, and are merely hosted/linked to by atheism.about.com for ease of use. *Not about the above links*
All the atheists are so sure GOD doesn't exist then I'm sure they were there when the world was started and will enlight us how it happened? The big bang works for me excepts something can't come from nothing. So where did the cases come from. Is this not part of GOD's divine plan. Tell me the answer to that and we'll all be happy because SOMETHING CAN'T COME FROM NOTHING.
Also don't mix bigbang+atheism. Its alot like a religious fundementalists saying there can't be aliens because there's a god. See? Dosen't make sense. At all. But honestly I think its OK to believe in a god. We all had imaginary friends as children.
All the atheists are so sure GOD doesn't exist then I'm sure they were there when the world was started and will enlight us how it happened? The big bang works for me excepts something can't come from nothing. So where did the cases come from. Is this not part of GOD's divine plan. Tell me the answer to that and we'll all be happy because SOMETHING CAN'T COME FROM NOTHING. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Atheism isn't true because we can't prove your beliefs to be false?
Failed Logic Warning!
Failed Logic Warning!
All the atheists are so sure GOD doesn't exist then I'm sure they were there when the world was started and will enlight us how it happened? The big bang works for me excepts something can't come from nothing. So where did the cases come from. Is this not part of GOD's divine plan. Tell me the answer to that and we'll all be happy because SOMETHING CAN'T COME FROM NOTHING. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Atheism isn't true because we can't prove your beliefs to be false?
Failed Logic Warning!
Failed Logic Warning! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Trying to disprove something we dont already agree with. Hah
cam0 has you there.
Accepting the fact that there is a God, because I have heard him, I have seen him, and I have been part of his works and plans, I must now look for evidence on who God is. God didn't come and tell me who he is and what to do, that would be screwing around with my free will, I need to make some of those decisions and mistakes before I will understand more. So I am looking for God, well, God is a big guy, and I can find mention of him in alot of places, but I just happen to find a story about a guy who lived 2000 years ago who preformed hundreds of miracles, and preached with a wisdom that is comprehendable by very very few people, and in the end died, just to rize to life again after only three days... Well to say the least, I was a bit sceptical at first, but on further examintation I found out that this story was the result of at least 6 differnet primary and secondary sourse documents dated within 100 years of his death, and not only that, but about 2 were acctual eye witness accounts, and the authors of which, were killed for thier belifes, and yet they did not recind them. Now I'm not saying that my story will instantly convince everyone who hears it, quite the opposite acctually, your imbedded sence of superiorty compels you to belive that, being smarter than me, you caught on to something I didn't. But the fact remains, from where I am sitting, there isn't alot of ground I can yeild to you...
Hey there....proof of god(s)?
If you use that logic, then there actually isn't any reason why Christianity is the One True Religion? .
That's why I find it more convenient to be agnostic. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> Though I do take athiest positions for debate.
Accepting the fact that there is a God, because I have heard him, I have seen him, and I have been part of his works and plans, I must now look for evidence on who God is. God didn't come and tell me who he is and what to do, that would be screwing around with my free will, I need to make some of those decisions and mistakes before I will understand more. So I am looking for God, well, God is a big guy, and I can find mention of him in alot of places, but I just happen to find a story about a guy who lived 2000 years ago who preformed hundreds of miracles, and preached with a wisdom that is comprehendable by very very few people, and in the end died, just to rize to life again after only three days... Well to say the least, I was a bit sceptical at first, but on further examintation I found out that this story was the result of at least 6 differnet primary and secondary sourse documents dated within 100 years of his death, and not only that, but about 2 were acctual eye witness accounts, and the authors of which, were killed for thier belifes, and yet they did not recind them. Now I'm not saying that my story will instantly convince everyone who hears it, quite the opposite acctually, your imbedded sence of superiorty compels you to belive that, being smarter than me, you caught on to something I didn't. But the fact remains, from where I am sitting, there isn't alot of ground I can yeild to you... <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You believe strongly in something, and I admire you for it. However, for the purposes of rational debate, that does not suffice as evidence.
*edit spelling*
*edit spelling* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not actually. It's where I take the stance that there could or could not be a $DEITY, but damned if I know. Generally, my personal belief is that it is unknowable, in the scientific sense. Though for the purposes of this and any other debate about religion I like to take the athiestic stance.
<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:yellow'>SOMETHING WE SHOULD ALL BE AWARE OF IN THIS DEBATE:</span></span>
is that this is a <i>rational debate</i>. Meaning, we take arguments of evidence, and nothing else. For the purposes of such discussion, statements of pure faith are as untenable as those of mere hearsay.
<span style='color:red'>I do not wish to imply, however, that faith is necessarily inferior to logic.</span>
I have faith in many things; the sound constitution of our country, the forward march of human progress, that Bush is a dumbshit and shouldn't be in office, etc. Faith is every bit as important to a person as logic. But implicit in the act of engaging in debate is the agreement that we will be talking <b>facts.</b>
Ah. Here you fall into the trap of arrogance <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->. Your arguments are no less correct (if indeed they are) because of it, but by this arrogance, you are inviting flamebait. So lay off of it please <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
And besides, you are commiting the same error that you accuse us of commiting. You calim that, because believers are the "norm", non-believers have to make the biggest leap of faith. Well, this distinction you make with such clarity is really arbitrary; suppose that then I define us athiests as being the "norm". Then you guys are making the Matrix-style skyscraper jumps here.
Based on your usage of "we", you're now "creating a group on believers and call themselves right". It is just as well for us to call for your proof, is it not? If you agree with this reasoning, then the only issue really at debate here is whether or not the origin of the universe implies the existence of a $DEITY. Ah ok then. Everything must have a cause, you say.
Then who created $DEITY?
Evolution, Big Bang Theory, History, Archaelogical evidence, Astrology.
It would be pointless to cite any of these because you've proven time and again that rationale and reason aren't for you. You're not welcome in this debate unless you can come to grips with the possibility that others may be correct. In laymen's terms, stop babbling.
Personally, I'm sick of you using popularity to justify your claims. It was popular in Nazi germany to persecute Jews, and it was popular in America to imprison the Japanese. Popularity does not define right. The amount of times you manage to contradict yourself on this point makes me laugh.
Swiftspear: While I have a lot of respect for you as a Christian who doesn't stuff it in my face, and is willing to acknowledge, if not accept, the arguments of both sides, consider the possibility that perhaps your entire psychological construction of faith may be the result of being surrounded with a belief in god since your youth. Do you recall making an active, informed decision that god was doubtlessly real, and that it was worth your time to spend the rest of your life worshipping him?
It would be a lot easier to debate this without bringing in more controversy.
And FYI "astrology" is the practice of fortune-telling using the stars <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I quote this from the Bible:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->John 20
27 Then he said to Thomas, Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
and also ..
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This post has been edited by camO.o on Sep 24 2004, 01:53 AM
Evolution, Big Bang Theory, History, Archaelogical evidence, Astrology.
It would be pointless to cite any of these because you've proven time and again that rationale and reason aren't for you. You're not welcome in this debate unless you can come to grips with the possibility that others may be correct. In laymen's terms, stop babbling.
Personally, I'm sick of you using popularity to justify your claims. It was popular in Nazi germany to persecute Jews, and it was popular in America to imprison the Japanese. Popularity does not define right. The amount of times you manage to contradict yourself on this point makes me laugh.
Swiftspear: While I have a lot of respect for you as a Christian who doesn't stuff it in my face, and is willing to acknowledge, if not accept, the arguments of both sides, consider the possibility that perhaps your entire psychological construction of faith may be the result of being surrounded with a belief in god since your youth. Do you recall making an active, informed decision that god was doubtlessly real, and that it was worth your time to spend the rest of your life worshipping him?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I know what you mean because I was born Roman Catholic and I think if I was not raised to believe in God then I probably would not. I haven't seen much proof in the way that the normal human eye looks for. The only thing I have to go by is when I was 9 years old and a voice in my head said that something bad just happened and my parents wouldn't be seeing me today and I cried (I was in the hospital a VERY lot as a kid). Then the next day I found out my grandma had died. My mom said that voice was probably an angel. Maybe my 'Guardian Angel'.
*edit spelling* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Not actually. It's where I take the stance that there could or could not be a $DEITY, but damned if I know. Generally, my personal belief is that it is unknowable, in the scientific sense. Though for the purposes of this and any other debate about religion I like to take the athiestic stance.
<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:yellow'>SOMETHING WE SHOULD ALL BE AWARE OF IN THIS DEBATE:</span></span>
is that this is a <i>rational debate</i>. Meaning, we take arguments of evidence, and nothing else. For the purposes of such discussion, statements of pure faith are as untenable as those of mere hearsay.
<span style='color:red'>I do not wish to imply, however, that faith is necessarily inferior to logic.</span>
I have faith in many things; the sound constitution of our country, the forward march of human progress, that Bush is a dumbshit and shouldn't be in office, etc. Faith is every bit as important to a person as logic. But implicit in the act of engaging in debate is the agreement that we will be talking <b>facts.</b> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
ya .. that is what an agnostic is. I learned that from my ex-bf (yes a Roman Catholic actually dated an Agnostic) but even though it didn't work out he respected my beliefs and I understood that he was just a 'Doubting Thomas' who hasn't seen proof of God so he wouldn't believe what he didn't see cold hard proof of.
That is understandable.
I just take offence when people start saying we are believing in our 'Imaginary Friend' or we make our lives a living hell for a Diety that may or may not even exsist. Please don't insult anyone (this goes for everyone as I am not pointing fingers) but like when Jesus was spreading his word he didn't force people to see his side. You hear or read what you will and decide for yourselves.
Thank you.
Atheism isn't a belief structure, religion is. Atheism is a word to describe a person who does not believe. To be an atheist is to have NO faith in a god.
I also want to state that creationists believe the earth is only 2000 some years old when science has proved it is much older.
ugh, science vs. religion, let's not go there. as pointed out in several previous SvR threads, science actually supports creationism and Christianity at this point of time.
anyway, atheism is as much a belief structure as theism is. it's just faith that there is no God.
I also want to state that creationists believe the earth is only 2000 some years old when science has proved it is much older. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Meh, seems like I got into this thread too late ^_^;; At least there are others here who can intellectually debate Atheism <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Iirc, creationists believe that the Eart is around 6000 years old, starting at around 4004 B.C. - I'll try to dig up the references.
Edit: Because I suck at math.
Edit II: <a href='http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=42917&perpage=40&highlight=creationist%20date&pagenumber=1' target='_blank'>Linkage</a> - Just a note, generally on those boards, religion has been debunked oft too many times that in the end it's the subject of much humour, as is evident by the thread starter's facetious joke about the wrong creation dates.
<a href='http://www.awitness.org/essays/bizarre.html' target='_blank'>Link</a>
<a href='http://www.texnews.com/1998/religion/bibles0301.html' target='_blank'>Link 2</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infidels.org%2Flibrary%2Fmagazines%2Ftsr%2F1993%2F2%2F2any93.html' target='_blank'>Link 3</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dimensional.com%2F%7Erandl%2Ftcont.htm' target='_blank'>Link 4</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2FAthens%2F5195%2Fbible.html' target='_blank'>Link 5</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infidels.org%2Flibrary%2Fmagazines%2Ftsr%2F1991%2F3%2Findex.html' target='_blank'>Link 6</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fweb2.airmail.net%2Fcapella%2Faguide%2Ferrors.htm' target='_blank'>Link 7 (last)</a>
*Note about the above links* While these are all hosted by and linked to from atheism.about.com, they are not essays from that site, and are merely hosted/linked to by atheism.about.com for ease of use. *Not about the above links* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/jebusites.html' target='_blank'>Link 1 owned.</a>
<a href='http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Book%20of%20Judges' target='_blank'>Link1 owned again.</a>
All these arguments are out of context. Luke's genealogies are different than Matthew's because telescoping genealogies were used to portray different things - It is thought that Matthew's genealogy traced through firstborn (heirs to the line of David) sons and Luke's was directly.
Maybe if you actually did research instead of listening to what deceptive people throw at you.
Btw, Link 2, i didn't really understand the point of, Link 4 - i have no idea what kind of christians he's talking about, because it's like he's never even read the Bible, or listened in Sunday school like he should have. he misses the point of Christianity so badly it hurts.
I don't really feel like rebutting the rest of the links, because i didn't feel like reading through them. the first 4 were ridiculous enough.
*edit* btw, religion and reason are not diametrically opposed. many of us base our faith on rational decisions.
*edit2* uhoh, what's this??? <a href='http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties.htm' target='_blank'>LINK 1 OWNED AGAIN!?!</a>
I'm not going to pretend that I did no grow up in a christian household. But for a signifigant period in my life I very much doubted the existance of God, in fact I would say that it wasn't a real stretch to call me athiest for a short period, and for a much longer period, at very least agnostic. To decide that God is real is much less a sudden informed decision than it is a process, or a journy. It is really alot like a relationship with a person, you generally don't all of a sudden decide that this is the person you are going to marry, there is alot of long term thought and consideration that goes into the issue. That being said, I can tell you that it was only within the last 2 years, through much inbickering and soul searching that I really came to the conclusion that I belived that God was real, and I have really only been doubt free for around the last 9 monthes. My journy has been a long, and for the most part, uninteresting one, but rest assured, the various input factors that really contributed to the belifes I hold today, compiled, could easily fill a novel, but it definately was a very active and intentionally informed decision. If you want a good example of someone who went through a similar walk as mine, pick up 'a case for faith' by Lee Stroble. Stroble was an athiest who set out to prove finalisticly to himself that God did not exist, 5 years down the line, he was very much a dedicated christian with a complied record of what brought him to the place he ended up at. Many christians reading the book find it reminisent of thier own journies in faith.
ugh, science vs. religion, let's not go there. as pointed out in several previous SvR threads, science actually supports creationism and Christianity at this point of time.
anyway, atheism is as much a belief structure as theism is. it's just faith that there is no God. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Atheism is the lack of faith. You can't have a following of nothingness. And 6,000 years? Wow, the world must be flat as well!
<a href='http://www.awitness.org/essays/bizarre.html' target='_blank'>Link</a>
<a href='http://www.texnews.com/1998/religion/bibles0301.html' target='_blank'>Link 2</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infidels.org%2Flibrary%2Fmagazines%2Ftsr%2F1993%2F2%2F2any93.html' target='_blank'>Link 3</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dimensional.com%2F%7Erandl%2Ftcont.htm' target='_blank'>Link 4</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com%2FAthens%2F5195%2Fbible.html' target='_blank'>Link 5</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infidels.org%2Flibrary%2Fmagazines%2Ftsr%2F1991%2F3%2Findex.html' target='_blank'>Link 6</a>
<a href='http://atheism.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fweb2.airmail.net%2Fcapella%2Faguide%2Ferrors.htm' target='_blank'>Link 7 (last)</a>
*Note about the above links* While these are all hosted by and linked to from atheism.about.com, they are not essays from that site, and are merely hosted/linked to by atheism.about.com for ease of use. *Not about the above links* <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<a href='http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/jebusites.html' target='_blank'>Link 1 owned.</a>
<a href='http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Book%20of%20Judges' target='_blank'>Link1 owned again.</a>
All these arguments are out of context. Luke's genealogies are different than Matthew's because telescoping genealogies were used to portray different things - It is thought that Matthew's genealogy traced through firstborn (heirs to the line of David) sons and Luke's was directly.
Maybe if you actually did research instead of listening to what deceptive people throw at you.
Btw, Link 2, i didn't really understand the point of, Link 4 - i have no idea what kind of christians he's talking about, because it's like he's never even read the Bible, or listened in Sunday school like he should have. he misses the point of Christianity so badly it hurts.
I don't really feel like rebutting the rest of the links, because i didn't feel like reading through them. the first 4 were ridiculous enough.
*edit* btw, religion and reason are not diametrically opposed. many of us base our faith on rational decisions.
*edit2* uhoh, what's this??? <a href='http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties.htm' target='_blank'>LINK 1 OWNED AGAIN!?!</a> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
What about the other links
i find it laughable that they call themselves "critical thinkers" there. All I see is a bunch of sloganeering and catch-phrase-throwage.
I see no logic, just dismissal. No debate, just self-congratulatory back-patting. "If you don't agree, you're wrong. I'm always right."
o_O Can we say "groupthink"?