Feed on Posts or Comments 23 November 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism &Politics &Science Thomas on 19 Nov 2010 12:15 am

Can anyone please explain what is happening in this video?

The raised arms… the swaying… the trance-like state of the audience. Does this happen in any other context?

38 Responses to “Can anyone please explain what is happening in this video?”

  1. on 19 Nov 2010 at 2:15 am 1.dxt said …

    It an emotional response to Gods action for the atonement of sins through the cross of Jesus Christ for those who believe. The hands in the air are symbolic of “Surrender”. Meaning, the crucifiction of the old character and nature of the individual. The “new creation” ,or new character and nature of the individual, is to surrender their will to Christ in obedience to His Word. They sway because they are not statues and it does not happen often, other than this context, because few things are owed such reverence.

  2. on 19 Nov 2010 at 7:51 am 2.Anonymous said …

    What you see here is the same nonsense seen with “speaking in tongues” or “holy rollers”. It is all for show and done for peer approval.

  3. on 19 Nov 2010 at 12:49 pm 3.dxt said …

    Anonymous,

    Completely different situation. What you suggest are the consequences of bad theology and in fact are contradictory to the Word of God. The thrashing about on the floor and the mass confusion that goes with it can only be percieved as satanic.

  4. on 19 Nov 2010 at 1:33 pm 4.Lou said …

    W is great. A great artist and a godly man.

    Have you seen fans at a Pink Floyd concert? Can you explain their actions?

  5. on 19 Nov 2010 at 2:13 pm 5.Dimms said …

    Exclusively to the creator or administrator of this website:

    Interesting video: One concern that I have, however, is that the website, “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees.com”, constructs its own “straw man” of Christianity, and then proceeds to deconstruct this construction. As I follow this website’s discourse, it seems to target extreme Pentecostal and charismatic expressions of american Christianity in order to bolster its own truth claims. For me the onus is still on YOU: i.e. is there a god or isn’t there? (you certainly haven’t convinced (me) this Christian through reason and logic). Show me reasoned, rational (or, indeed, scientific) explanations instead of anecdotal, emotive claims (You seem to be employing the same emotional strategies as the Christian positions you post as evidences for the non-existence of a deity). Your position, “Why won’t God heal Amputees.com”, is still (for me) emotional manipulation and not purely based on reason and logic. Don’t get me wrong, I think you are providing a reasonable forum for this type of discourse; however, you are not as un-biased and irreligious as you think. Your claim that there is “no god” is still a metaphysical, dogmatic, faith claim, which, by its nature, demands evidence. This position is not borne out by the empirical scientific method, as I pointed out in my blog on your site a while back: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/blog/?p=472#comments.
    Please investigate and navigate the website: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer and engage with this philosopher (If I had the time and resources to do so, I would do this myself, however I don’t). However, if you choose to remain in your atheist faith (or presuppositions) and ignorance, that’s ok, just don’t presume to propagate this publically as “Truth” with an upper case “T”, as if you have the monopoly on this claim. Your atheist worldview still constitutes a position of metaphysical *faith* from both a philosophical and scientific perspective.

  6. on 19 Nov 2010 at 3:16 pm 6.Observer said …

    Splendid video. Christianity is as profound as the most generic pop; i.e. vulgar in the Latin sense.

    As for where else does this occur? The end game in professional sports, rock concerts, etc.

    #5 Dimms It is not apparent to me how one gets to a metaphysical point of faith from atheism. Would agnosticism fit better into your picture? You make an interesting point if you can show atheism is in fact a faith. I don’t see it though.

    #5 Dimms But on the Christianity side of things, it is a filthy belief system. It is the utter corruption of what is noble about humans. It is disgusting.

  7. on 19 Nov 2010 at 3:21 pm 7.Observer said …

    Another point I passed over was the implicit statement in the dirge that there is more than one “God”, hence making a clean break from the Abrahamic religions- Judaism, Islam, and some non-Trinitarian Christian sects. If this is a step toward the elimination of the Abrahamic religions, the age-old admonition “Be careful what you wish for.” is certainly carrying the day.

    The other thing, can you believe how these people are dressed? Fashion by WalMart.

  8. on 19 Nov 2010 at 4:12 pm 8.Dimms said …

    @Observer. I appreciate your first inquiry. The second, i.e. that Christianity is a “filthy belief system”, is not a reasoned argument (on the contrary, it is highly emotive) so I will ignore it. Moreover, your value claim in terms of the “nobility” of humans (if indeed you are a dogmatic atheist) is fascinating.

    Nevertheless, my thesis is simply this: Make no mistake: I am arguing that atheism (not agnosticism here) is a metaphysical truth claim which can neither be proven nor disproven through scientific enquiry. Rather, atheism, is one’s own epistemological imposition on the scientific data. In short, by scientific reason and methodology, you cannot “prove” to me the non existence of a deity. Yours is just as much an extraordinary faith claim. That is, you may believe there is no god, but this becomes difficult to defend logically or empirically from the data presented by scientific enquiry. You are still operating on faith (or belief). Check out the website: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer which may challenge your current faith claims and constructs.
    Thank you sincerely for your response “Observer”.

  9. on 19 Nov 2010 at 9:23 pm 9.severin said …

    8 Dimmas
    “I am arguing that atheism (not agnosticism here) is a metaphysical truth claim which can neither be proven nor disproven through scientific enquiry. Rather, atheism, is one’s own epistemological imposition on the scientific data. In short, by scientific reason and methodology, you cannot “prove” to me the non existence of a deity. Yours is just as much an extraordinary faith claim. That is, you may believe there is no god, but this becomes difficult to defend logically or empirically from the data presented by scientific enquiry.”

    How do you feel about Zeus or Ra (or Allah, mermaids, Santa, witches, Spaghetti Monster)?
    Do you believe they exist or existed?
    I guess you don’t.
    You (probably) believe in one god, and disbelieve other gods, and other mythological and supernatural creatures.
    Your feeling for Zeus or Ra, or Sphagetti Monster, is EXACTLY the same atheists feel for any god, including any other supernatural being. Atheist’s disbelieving is not limited to Christian god: we don’t believe in any.
    Unlike you, who probably believe in SOME god, we do not have a “spare” god to believe.

    Now, you do NOT find it necessary to prove that your god exists. You also do not find necessary to disprove any god (or mythological creature) you disbelieve, although many other people BELIEVE in them, and try to persuade others in their beliefs.
    You even do not expect believers in other gods to prove their gods existing.
    But you DO expect atheists do disprove gods they disbelieve!

    Very comfortable position!

    Why would YOU be allowed to disbelieve Zeus, Ra, Allah, Spaghetti Monster…., without calling your selective atheism: “metaphysical truth”, “one’s own epistemological imposition on the scientific data” etc, and atheists would NOT be allowed THE SAME?

    Disbelieving is NOT necessary to defend (remember: you do NOT defend your disbelieving Zeus, Spaghetti Monster…)
    Atheists only expect someone claiming something to offer some support to his/her claims. Otherwise, any fool could claim whatever, and – what? – I should just accept it without queastioning?
    Is that a way you do? Or you accept any BS someone imposes to you by just claiming it?

    Please have in mind:
    Atheists DO NOT CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO GOD!
    They just don’t believe it!

    If you find satisfactory to just SAY you do not believe in something, and expect me to just trust you, what do you expect of me: To swear? To offer some evidences that I DO NOT BELIEVE SOMETHING?O.K., I SWEAR I do not believe in god.

  10. on 19 Nov 2010 at 9:50 pm 10.Lightning Boy said …

    “Rather, atheism, is one’s own epistemological imposition on the scientific data.”

    I’m not so sure. When I was an atheist I never considered the scientific data. It was more attitude and philosophically drive, When I did consider the scientific data I came to a theistic conclusion.

    It is a difficult proposition to consider the new complexities in science discovered in the last half century and remain atheist.

  11. on 19 Nov 2010 at 10:44 pm 11.Hello21 said …

    Lightning Boy, I am curious as to what new complexities in science convinced you that there is a god, and which god it convinced you of.

  12. on 20 Nov 2010 at 12:14 pm 12.spiritual soldier said …

    spiritual warfare: a true deceiver will do anything to trick you… even if it is as simple as not believe in God or the devil . I am on Gods side and will not lay down , I will not walk away, i can not believe how so many smart people are fooled and tricked by lucifer… and those who just don’t believe have lost the battle for their spirit without a fight.. and to sit there and to be laughed at by the devil and his legions as they take you and your family and friends>> and all the had to do was to lie and say “don’t believe in the one or the other “\
    I WILL PRAY FOR ALL OF YOU!!! do not be deceived in Jesus name I pray amen.

  13. on 20 Nov 2010 at 2:56 pm 13.3D said …

    Can anyone please explain what is happening in this video?

    Mental illness.

    Harder questions please!

  14. on 20 Nov 2010 at 3:18 pm 14.3D said …

    5.Dimms said …

    Exclusively to the creator or administrator of this website:

    No, that’s what e-mail is for. If you post it in a public forum, it’s for everybody.

    Interesting video: One concern that I have, however, is that the website, “Why Won’t God Heal Amputees.com”, constructs its own “straw man” of Christianity, and then proceeds to deconstruct this construction. As I follow this website’s discourse, it seems to target extreme Pentecostal and charismatic expressions of american Christianity in order to bolster its own truth claims.

    I’m curious why you feel this claim belongs on THIS particular video, which is fairly strong circumstantial evidence of the opposite — an arena full of otherwise normal people, swaying and chanting a HUGELY popular Christian rock hit from the 80s, that got hours and hours of airplay on mainstream radio, containing paraphrased lines of Biblical witchery in praise to an invisible man.

    So clearly they aren’t ALL fringe nuts, Pentecostals, and fundamentalists. If it were only fringe nuts, this website wouldn’t be necessary, because the bullshit would be easy to laugh off. Unfortunately 80% of the country suffers under this delusion, to differing degrees.

    <blockquote?For me the onus is still on YOU: i.e. is there a god or isn’t there? (you certainly haven’t convinced (me) this Christian through reason and logic).

    Is there a Zeus or isn’t there? Show me, a non-Zeusian, through reason and logic. Less than 300 words please. Go.

    Wait, let me guess: you don’t believe in Zeus because there isn’t any evidence available that Zeus exists. I agree. Now apply that to the God in the Bible and you’re done, and you can watch videos like this with the rest of us.

    Show me reasoned, rational (or, indeed, scientific) explanations instead of anecdotal, emotive claims (You seem to be employing the same emotional strategies as the Christian positions you post as evidences for the non-existence of a deity).

    Show me reasoned, rational explanations of why there’s no Zeus.

    Oh wait, no… it’s the burden of the people who DO believe in Zeus to do that. Never mind.

    Your position, “Why won’t God heal Amputees.com”, is still (for me) emotional manipulation and not purely based on reason and logic. Don’t get me wrong, I think you are providing a reasonable forum for this type of discourse; however, you are not as un-biased and irreligious as you think.

    Why would you come to a website called “whywontgodhealamputees.com” and complain that it isn’t unbiased? Of course it’s biased. It’s taking a position and defending it with rational arguments. Did you flunk debate class?

    Your claim that there is “no god” is still a metaphysical, dogmatic, faith claim, which, by its nature, demands evidence.

    No, silly. The claim that there is “no god” is based on the lack of evidence for such a claim, thus it is dismissed. Extraordinary claims (like that there is a supernatural being that reads our thoughts and grants wishes) require evidence; when that evidence fails, the claim is rejected. Turning it around and requiring evidence to prove that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR SOMETHING is against all common sense.

    Your inability to understand debate rules we all learned in fifth grade renders you incapable of adult human thought. You lose, you get nothing. Good day sir.

  15. on 20 Nov 2010 at 3:23 pm 15.3D said …

    4.Lou said …

    Have you seen fans at a Pink Floyd concert? Can you explain their actions?

    Yes, and that’s frightening too.

    And as soon as someone runs for public office claiming they believe an imaginary man in a Pink Floyd song told them to drop high explosives on another country, as if the imaginary man is real, and actually gets elected, I will compare the two situations as analogous.

    Until then it’s just a bunch of harmless balding hippies on acid, vs. delusional people who make our domestic and foreign policy based on 5,700 year old wives’ tales.

  16. on 20 Nov 2010 at 4:39 pm 16.Ken Browning said …

    There seems to be a belief here by some Christians that the emotional demonstrations like lifting hands ans swaying are legitimate but that “Pentecostal” demonstrations are not. Yet the demonstrations on the video historically rise right out of Pentecostalism. I know this because I was there at the epicenter in the early 70′s when this sort of worship took off. It was simply a retooling of Pentecostal emotional expression for a new day.

    Dimms said: “In short, by scientific reason and methodology, you cannot “prove” to me the non existence of a deity.”
    If you expect to be able to “prove” anything by the scientific method then you don’t understand the scientific method. Further, the scientific method requires a skeptical attitude until evidence is established for any positive claim. Therefore one adheres to the scientific method by not believing in any god until evidence supports such a claim. So where is your evidence, perhaps the giving back of an appendage to an amputee, that your particular god exists?

    This video actually demonstrates how most believers sustain their belief — it feels good and therefore, congruent. Here’s a little experiment. Don’t do anything until after reading the whole experiment. You are going to say to yourself, “My pillow wants breakfast” while at the same time you run your fingers lightly up the hairs on your arm. Go ahead. What you felt is exactly what believers (including Mormons) feel as a witness of the Holy Spirit. It’s also what people feel when they have an Aha! moment. We’ve all had Aha! moments that turn out to be wrong.

  17. on 20 Nov 2010 at 7:55 pm 17.A said …

    3D

    Ha Ha Ha. R U for real?

    What a mess.

  18. on 21 Nov 2010 at 12:56 am 18.dxt said …

    #16 Ken,

    There is nothing wrong with the raising of ones hands, in concert or service. Its an emotional attitude of praise and/or surrender. Wheather this does or does not stem from a pentecostal history makes no difference at all. The problem with “pentecostal demonstrations” is the extra biblical revelation, “chaotic” services and the like, which are expressly prohibited by Scripture.

    Your example of the “pillow wanting breakfast”, while ridiculous, is an example of how some will heed extra biblical revelations and attribute their “Ah ha” moment to the Holy Spirit, even though it is contradictory to the Word of God. This can only show the result of erroneous teaching and/or study.

  19. on 21 Nov 2010 at 4:05 am 19.ABCDEFG said …

    WHY IS YOUR GOD AWESOME?

    HE LETS THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN STARVE EVERY DAY.

    HE KILLS PEOPLE WITH HORRIBLE DISEASES.

    HE STANDS BY AS CITIES ARE DESTROYED WITH HURRICANES AND TSUNAMIS

    IF YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE, HE KILLED THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE (WHICH HE CREATED IN HIS OWN IMAGE) IN A FLOOD.

    ACCORDING TO REVELATION HIS PLAN IS TO DESTROY THE ENTIRE PLANET

    AND HE WON’T HEAL AMPUTEES!

    WHAT IS AWESOME ABOUT THIS DEMON??????????

  20. on 21 Nov 2010 at 3:42 pm 20.Dimms said …

    @ 3D
    Thank you for your response. Just a few thoughts:
    Firstly, in relation to your statement: “No, that’s what e-mail is for. If you post it in a public forum, it’s for everybody.”
    Many apologies for my contravening your blogging criteria and ethics. I did not realize I cannot direct my comments to specific persons. If others want to respond, go for it. I am well aware it’s a public forum. Nevertheless, lets not get distracted.

    You stated that the posted video “… is fairly strong circumstantial evidence of the opposite….” However this website does not simply assert truth claims on the basis of “circumstantial evidence”. It claims that belief in a deity IS delusional (a pathological, mental illness diagnosis imposed on those who believe in a deity). Show me this from the authoritative DSM-IV of the APA. Or please demonstrate your own authority to diagnose such pathology on so many of the earth’s inhabitants! I mean, you would first have to discern the plethora of different beliefs practiced globally. However, if the website wants to use this emotive rhetoric, it’s its right to do so under some nations’ constitutional constructs.

    Moreover, I am not interested in circumstantial evidence. You need to provide reasoned, rational evidence from science, natural theology and/or philosophy that my belief in a deity is categorically unfounded. (Obviously we cannot use the OT and NT canon of Christian scripture as evidence since this site (and many bloggers), in their presuppositions, denies its validity to start with, so I will always exclude it here). The Flying Spaghetti Monster or Zeus (also, please first outline ALL the attributes of this “Zeus” deity, as far as you can within the Greek mythological narratives and framework, GO!) is not a valid philosophical objection to a metaphysically necessary, uncaused, timeless, spaceless, immaterial, personal Creator of the cosmos, borne out by a SOUND combined, cumulative philosophical argumentation of the Cosmological Argument, Argument from Contingency, Ontological Argument, Intelligent Design and the Moral Argument for a Deity (as developed by rational thinkers throughout history). Please note here, I am asserting that these arguments present what is MORE PLAUSIBLE to believe on a cumulative basis. Atheism, (and Zeus belief), on balance, if I am to use my logic and reason (as the site exhorts me to), are less convincing and plausible belief systems than the theism as propositioned within traditional theistic Christianity, Judaism or Islam. Dogmatic atheism is as rife with philosophical and rational inconsistencies as the Christianity it tries to debunk!

    Henderson’s Flying Spaghetti Monster (see Henderson’s website at http://www.venganza.org/), for example, is an amusing parody, but is deficient in any substantive metaphysical inquiry into the existence of a deity. Moreover, it was a specific, satirical counter to a particular ID theory propagated within the American educational context. Respected and thoughtful Intelligent Design Theorists would shy away from any hypothesized “Designer” in terms of his/her/its attributes. These theorists simply infer an intelligent design based on observable phenomena. Surely Zeus or The Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a serious philosophical or natural theological response of this website!
    Again, check out the site: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer for an intelligent counter to many of the views you may hold as forgone “proofs” for the non existence of a deity.

    Again I would still assert that the video clip posted above still bolsters and reinforces a Christian “straw man” constructed by the website, which is then convincing and easy to deconstruct within current, popular western discourse. You are just as biased as any human who endeavors to produce rhetoric or a text to bolster his/her own view. Some would hypothesize you yourself are operating within an Athiest “Bubble” of belief (I will not presumptuously use the term “delusion”) (to quote one of the website’s YouTube publications).

    @severin #9: “Atheists DO NOT CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO GOD!
    They just don’t believe it!”
    Ok then. But you can’t use this profession of non-belief as some passive “way out” of the discourse. Your non-belief still implies, or begs the question of what cognitive process leads you to that non-belief. Moreover, your non-belief still implies an active belief in its opposite.
    Moreover, to “believe” here can have 2 meanings, can’t it?:
    1. Either you do not “believe” or trust in a particular god who is actually there (or could possibly be there). Much in the same way I may not believe or trust in President Obama (who actually exists). Therefore you are an agnostic awaiting more convincing evidence to base your trust), OR

    2. You believe *there is no god*. Which is therefore an extraordinary positive metaphysical claim (implying, among other things, an omniscience as to the origins of the cosmos by the observer!)

    Neither 2 propositions above (especially the second), exempt you from an onus of proof. Either way, both positions are by their nature metaphysical, epistemological claims taken on faith. Surely you are not going to claim that you hold some high moral epistemological grounds, over and against theism, based on, and within your construct of atheism! Are you? You can only do this within your worldview which uses rhetoric which asserts believers are “primitive” and atheists (or philosophical naturalists) are “rational” or “progressive”. I suppose you have to use rhetoric to influence and provide your own “opiate for the masses”. If I was totally cynical I would see the website as an fascinating experiment in atheist proselytizing ;)(I hope you can handle a bit of sarcasm)

    Seriously though, thank you genuinely for the dialogue and space provided by the site. I will try and visit again soon. However, I am reasonably not convinced by your arguments.

  21. on 21 Nov 2010 at 6:51 pm 21.3D said …

    18.dxt said …

    #16 Ken,
    There is nothing wrong with the raising of ones hands, in concert or service. Its an emotional attitude of praise and/or surrender.

    I agree 100%. And there’s nothing INTRINSICALLY wrong with wearing your underwear on the outside of your body and growing a three foot long beard, either. But if you do those things because you think your dog told you to, then it is a strong sign of mental illness.

    The same goes for rocking back and forth singing a song at a concert (perfectly normal) vs. raising your hands and rocking back and forth singing a song at a concert to a man in the sky that isn’t there (sign of mental illness).

    So you see, it’s not the actions themselves, but the thought process behind the actions that is delusional.

    Wheather this does or does not stem from a pentecostal history makes no difference at all. The problem with “pentecostal demonstrations” is the extra biblical revelation, “chaotic” services and the like, which are expressly prohibited by Scripture.

    And of course, you do everything required by scripture. Yesterday was Saturday — I assume you went down to the mall and beat all the people working on the Shabbos to death with a rock. Yes?

  22. on 21 Nov 2010 at 7:18 pm 22.3D said …

    @ 3D

    You stated that the posted video “… is fairly strong circumstantial evidence of the opposite….” However this website does not simply assert truth claims on the basis of “circumstantial evidence”. It claims that belief in a deity IS delusional (a pathological, mental illness diagnosis imposed on those who believe in a deity). Show me this from the authoritative DSM-IV of the APA. Or please demonstrate your own authority to diagnose such pathology on so many of the earth’s inhabitants!

    You’re disingenuously using an inapplicable definition of delusional, in order to knock down a strawman. He isn’t diagnosing people as clinically delusional. He is saying they believe in something and devote their lives to it, with no evidence. That is the layman’s definition of “delusional”.

    Notice how the dictionary also makes a distinction between the lay meaning of the word and the clinical meaning:

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/delusion

    Moreover, I am not interested in circumstantial evidence. You need to provide reasoned, rational evidence from science, natural theology and/or philosophy that my belief in a deity is categorically unfounded.

    No, I don’t. My claim is that there is NO evidence for your unfounded belief. To ask a person to provide evidence of NO EVIDENCE is either stupid, or dishonest. (Since I don’t really think you are stupid, based on your sentence structure and spelling, I believe you are doing this intentionally, to confound the point.)

    (also, please first outline ALL the attributes of this “Zeus” deity, as far as you can within the Greek mythological narratives and framework, GO!)

    How about, instead of dragging this out longer than it needs to be, we just settle for the qualities that we both agree Zeus shares in common with the mythological God/Jesus character — immortality, omniscience, omnipotence, oversees the world, and punishes wrongdoers and non-believers.

    Under that framework, prove Zeus doesn’t exist, and do it with an argument that I can’t also apply equally to God/Jesus. GO!

    Atheism, (and Zeus belief), on balance, if I am to use my logic and reason (as the site exhorts me to), are less convincing and plausible belief systems than the theism as propositioned within traditional theistic Christianity, Judaism or Islam.

    [citation needed]

    Please explain how believing that a magical man will send you to hell to be tortured if you don’t believe in him, is more plausible than NOT believing that.

    Dogmatic atheism is as rife with philosophical and rational inconsistencies as the Christianity it tries to debunk!

    There is no such thing as “dogmatic atheism”. It just means ‘not believing in God.’

    Henderson’s Flying Spaghetti Monster (see Henderson’s website at http://www.venganza.org/), for example, is an amusing parody, but is deficient in any substantive metaphysical inquiry into the existence of a deity.

    Yeah, that’s because it was a joke, Debbie Downer.

    Moreover, it was a specific, satirical counter to a particular ID theory propagated within the American educational context. Respected and thoughtful Intelligent Design Theorists would shy away from any hypothesized “Designer” in terms of his/her/its attributes. These theorists simply infer an intelligent design based on observable phenomena.

    And you can prefer to call a chicken a duck, too. It’s a free country. But you can say it all day and all night and it’s still going to be a chicken.

    Wanting to believe God made the universe isn’t an argument that stands up to peer review. And all their attempts at trying to shoehorn the science into the Bible have failed.

    Surely Zeus or The Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a serious philosophical or natural theological response of this website!
    Again, check out the site: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/PageServer for an intelligent counter to many of the views you may hold as forgone “proofs” for the non existence of a deity.

    I don’t hold any views as “foregone proofs” for the nonexistence of a deity, because I don’t believe that you can “prove” that something doesn’t exist. It’s a stupid concept, which is why your whole argument is worthless. Atheists’ lack of belief in God isn’t based on evidence; it’s based on LACK OF evidence. Same as your lack of belief in Zeus, and (I hope) the Tooth Fairy. They just add one more name to the list of stupid things they don’t believe in.

    Asking them to provide evidence that there isn’t any evidence is a child’s game, and you’re throwing your credibility into the toilet by demanding it.

    Again I would still assert that the video clip posted above still bolsters and reinforces a Christian “straw man” constructed by the website, which is then convincing and easy to deconstruct within current, popular western discourse. You are just as biased as any human who endeavors to produce rhetoric or a text to bolster his/her own view.

    You keep saying “bias” like it’s a dirty word. Bias is a good thing, and it doesn’t discount your point if your arguments hold up to peer review. This is the case for things like evolution and the theory of gravity; not so much for the theory of the magical wizard breathing soul-snot into the clay person.

  23. on 21 Nov 2010 at 7:46 pm 23.Xenon said …

    3D, since you and Severin seem to have a propensity for a complete misunderstanding of the OT and the purpose that it serves; I deemed it appropriate to show you how Jesus dealt with Pharisees and in this case atheist who hold positions such as yours. Witness John 8:

    “In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
    But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
    9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

    11 “No one, sir,” she said.

    “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

  24. on 21 Nov 2010 at 7:51 pm 24.dxt said …

    #21 3D,

    Your reply seems to serve you well as to showing your lack of theological study and therefore barely warrants any meaningful response. Why would I feed someone steak, who would not even be considered an infant in the Word, who keeps choking on and spitting up the pure milk of the Word?

  25. on 21 Nov 2010 at 8:39 pm 25.3D said …

    24.dxt said …

    #21 3D,
    Your reply seems to serve you well as to showing your lack of theological study and therefore barely warrants any meaningful response. Why would I feed someone steak, who would not even be considered an infant in the Word, who keeps choking on and spitting up the pure milk of the Word?

    Translation: I am not indoctrinated into Christianity and have not wasted countless hours of my life learning the Rube-Goldberg-like elaborate excuses for horrible things in the Bible; and my audacious approach of “reading what is actually on the page and expecting it to mean what it says” is offending you.

    Want to understand the OT? Talk to Jews. They take the good with the bad, and try to draw morals from the bad stories. Christians make excuses for them, pretend they aren’t there, or sometimes, even change the meaning of the words in a new translation so that it means something less contradictory or obnoxious.

    The story of Jephthah is a good example. Jews will say “Jephthah killed his daughter; what can we learn from it?” Many Christians say things like, “Jephthah didn’t really kill his daughter; the word used there is different from what’s used in other places;” etc. And other obfuscations. Because the NT puts Jephthah into the inner circle of awesome OT characters to be revered, and they can’t have him being a daughter killer.

    So instead of just taking what’s on the page at face value, they twist it so that it fits their preconceived belief system. Like you are doing here.

  26. on 21 Nov 2010 at 8:49 pm 26.3D said …

    23.Xenon said …

    3D, since you and Severin seem to have a propensity for a complete misunderstanding of the OT and the purpose that it serves; I deemed it appropriate to show you how Jesus dealt with Pharisees and in this case atheist who hold positions such as yours. Witness John 8:
    “In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.
    But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
    9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
    11 “No one, sir,” she said.
    “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

    Methane, I am aware that some people believe that Jesus’s death gives them a giant do-over on the OT law. (Of course, in typical Biblical-self-contradictory fashion, other parts of the Bible disagree with this, but that’s another argument and let’s not confuse the issue.)

    My point in talking about stoning Sabbath-workers is to question why you would believe in a God that EVER thought this was moral — even if he doesn’t anymore. Believing in a God that sometimes believes stonings and burnings are OK, then changes his mind… this shows that you have no intrinsic morality, and twist in the wind from moment to moment.

    If God were to send another son down, tomorrow, to tell us all that slavery, rape and murder is A-OK again, you and many others would be gathering up rocks. That is the problem.

  27. on 21 Nov 2010 at 9:47 pm 27.Xenon said …

    Another Son? No

    “Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.”

    Proverbs 30:5-6

    A do over? No

    Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. Mat 5:17

    Anything else 3D? You only come back with an attempt at an insult and make up more silliness. See your objections are answered but yet you fail to see the light.

  28. on 21 Nov 2010 at 11:12 pm 28.Severin said …

    20 Dimms
    “Your non-belief still implies, or begs the question of what cognitive process leads you to that non-belief.“

    What „cognitive process“ can possibly lead someone to non-believe something?!
    Should I use some special „cognitive process“ to understand that David Copperfield’s passing through the Chinese wall was a delusion?
    Cognitive process, and the very COMPLEX one, is necessary to ACCEPT things, to start believing (trusting) them.
    To accept ANYTHING, I need proves, evidences, or at least plausible arguments (to START THINKING something COULD BE possible).
    God(s) does/do not fit my cognitive process of accepting things. They do not fit anywhere: common sense, science, reality….
    #20
    „Atheism, (and Zeus belief), on balance, …are less convincing and plausible belief systems than the theism as propositioned within traditional theistic Christianity, Judaism or Islam.“

    WHY is believing in Zeus , Ra, witches, marmaids, Quetzalcoatl, fairies…less convincing and plausible than believing in other gods/supernatural beings?
    Because you just say so, or – maybe – you have some evidences that your god really exists and no other supernatural beings ever existed?
    THAT would be the only acceptable argument, otherwise I do not see any difference. In my „hierarchy of supernatural beings people ever believed in“ none of them is privileged.
    #20
    „Moreover, to “believe” here can have 2 meanings, can’t it?:
    1. Either you do not “believe” or trust in a particular god who is actually there (or could possibly be there). Much in the same way I may not believe or trust in President Obama (who actually exists). Therefore you are an agnostic awaiting more convincing evidence to base your trust), OR
    2. You believe *there is no god*. Which is therefore an extraordinary positive metaphysical claim (implying, among other things, an omniscience as to the origins of the cosmos by the observer!)“
    „Moreover“, you are twisting my words and putting them (twisted!) inside your own “logical order“, SO:
    3. I do not believe in ANY god or any supernatural being.
    I never said (as you twisted my words!) that „I believe *there is no god*“!
    I said „I do not believe there IS god“. BIG difference!

  29. on 22 Nov 2010 at 12:23 am 29.dxt said …

    #24 3D,

    Right, you have been indoctrinated by evolution. You do not surprise me at all by your responses in fact, Scripture implies we are to expect them. Your example is weak and essentially meaningless, argumentatively speaking, when you consider Jephthah eventually suffered dearly for his rash vow(if you take it at face value). This argument has nothing to do with your initial claims of the Sabbath law or any relevance to any thought processes.

  30. on 22 Nov 2010 at 2:32 am 30.Burebista said …

    Sev

    Dimms did an superb job in refuting the illogical and unsupported positions of the site and atheism in general but it sailed right over you head. Not meant to be an insult but rather you need some training in logic. You just don’t follow the line of reasoning.

    I wonder if you realize just how much science you believe by faith.

  31. on 22 Nov 2010 at 4:23 am 31.MeatMachine said …

    “The raised arms… the swaying… the trance-like state of the audience. Does this happen in any other context?”

    A rave? Kids on X?

  32. on 22 Nov 2010 at 9:38 am 32.Severin said …

    29 Bur
    As usual and typical, Dimms based his logic on twisting my words.
    For example, I never said
    1. That I do not believe in a particular god
    2. That I said that “I believe *that there is no god*”,
    and (please see yourself!) THAT were the premisses he based his “logic” on.
    So, either he was deliberately lying about what I really said, or – I like to believe it – he just modeled my words to fit his logic, as you people do all the time to prove yourselves right.
    I can put in your or his mouth any words I like, then construct a “logic” on them to prove myself right, but that is not the way I talk.
    However, even with twisting (faking) my words, he did nothing but complicated (and illogical) “brain gymnastic”, making wrong conclusion from faked premisses.
    You guys are helpless:
    I do not claim there is no god, I just do not believe in any, EXACTLY the same (no difference) as you don’t believe in Zeus. Exactly as you don’t expect someone to ask you for explanation of the “cognitive process” of your non-believing in Zeus, and you have no “impulse” to spontaniously explain your non-believing to anyone, all the time, I do not expect anyone to ask me for my “cognitive process” of non believing in god, and am not ready to explain it.
    Why would you make “phylosophical tractates” of yur non-believing? And why would I do it?

    I JUST DO NOT BELIEVE in something, the same way and “mechanism” (“cognitive process”!) you disbelieve something!. As simple as that!

    If you want me to start believing something that YOU claim right, please provide some evidences for it.
    I am waiting.

  33. on 22 Nov 2010 at 10:10 am 33.Severin said …

    29 Burebista
    “I wonder if you realize just how much science you believe by faith.”

    You confuse “faith” with “knowing”.
    I never believed Einstein was right by having “faith” in him and his theories.
    Unlike you (and all religions, ever), he brought evidences for what he done, AND his theories WORK in practice!
    I UNDERSTOOD what he said, I could prove it, if I wanted, by recalculating his theories myself, and his theories WORK IN PACTICE.

    I can not understand gods and no one ever brought evidences any god eaxists.

    “Knowing” is a “fluid” process. “Knowledge” changes as people learn more and more.
    Gods never change or – oops! – do they? (Ra, Zeus, Allah, many Christian gods…)

  34. on 22 Nov 2010 at 12:17 pm 34.Tedder said …

    Sev

    Little buddy he didn’t twist your words – I don’t think Dimms was speaking to you. He addressed this site in general. He is 100% correct.

  35. on 22 Nov 2010 at 4:45 pm 35.Severin said …

    33 Tedder
    Buy glasses!
    Dimms did speak to me. See his post #20 (“@severin#9…”).

    He did twist my words. Neither I ever told that I do not believe in a specific god, as he “cites” me (fakes me), nor I ever told that “I believe *there is no god*”

    I told I did not believe in ANY god, and I did not believe there is god, which is, you must admit VERY different of what he claims I said.
    Obvious making of “logical construction” on wrong (faked) premisses.

    Buy glasses and read my comment #9.
    But, I think that you need “mental” glasess, because all of you see only something you like to see.

    We can not argue about who said what, when it is black on white visible here.

    If I was unpolite, I would call it lying, but I am a fine and polite “little buddy” (in age of 68).

  36. on 23 Nov 2010 at 4:05 am 36.KatieeJo said …

    In worship, raising your arms and hands can mean a different thing to everyone. Its a personal reaction to the intense feeling and power of Gods Holy Spirit. Sometimes it can be the feeling of drawing near to God like a child reaching up to a mother. It could be the feeling of surrenduring what you feel burdened on you to God. Its sometimes almost like litteraly feeling that God is taking your pain away. Dont dis relgion. At least some people have a little faith and hope in them. Just respect!

  37. on 25 Nov 2010 at 8:11 pm 37.3D said …

    29.dxt said …

    #24 3D,
    Right, you have been indoctrinated by evolution.

    What? Who mentioned evolution besides you?

    You do not surprise me at all by your responses in fact, Scripture implies we are to expect them. Your example is weak and essentially meaningless, argumentatively speaking, when you consider Jephthah eventually suffered dearly for his rash vow(if you take it at face value).

    That would be great if the story ended there (for the Jews it does, and their interpretation of it is basically what you say above — a nasty story about a nasty man who let his overzealous faith in God lead him to terrible violent acts, and misery).

    But the problem for Christians is, the New Testament mentions Jephthah again, with glowing praise, mentioning him alongside King David, Samuel, Gideon, and Samson ad a “man of faith” (Hebrews 11). Why would the New Testament hold Jephthah up with such high regard if, as you claim, we’re supposed to read his story and learn what a terrible thing he did and how he suffered for it?

    (Of course David, Samson and pretty much every “hero” that the Bible or Jesus mentions, also did monstrously terrible things, even worse than Jephthah, but that’s a separate argument.)

  38. on 17 Jun 2012 at 10:13 am 38.Observer said …

    They are worshiping and praying to their god.

    When they do that, they put their hands up.

    Apparently, they believe their prayer and worship works better when they put their hands up.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply