Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
General Religious Discussion / Re: Atheists, How Did Christianity Start?
« Last post by median on Today at 03:06:40 PM »
How did Christianity start? I don't know. But, I do know that even when the facts are easily researched, folks still find a way to believe what they want to believe. And what they want to believe isn't always good for them. Take homeopathy, for example. Not only has it not been shown to work, but it's been shown not to work. But, people still buy that stuff.

Scientology is another perfect example. Here we have a religion that was started in modern times, has no backing evidence, and even has some things directly pointing to it being a complete con. None of that stops believers from defending it with a passion.

It does not at all seem improbable to me that ancient peoples started believing something like the resurrection.

Now that is very true. Hubbard himself said that he made it up as a joke to make money and yet people still defend it. Excellent point. How does one differentiate a false belief from a true belief? Well, I would say the founder making a statement that it's a joke should prove it's false. We have no such statement about Christianity though. Of course, we don't have a statement from Joseph Smith either saying Mormonism is false, but Mormonism has been proven wrong by history experts who have proven Jesus never visited the Native Americans.

So that is 2 religions that are easily proven false and people still defend them. Of course, my belief is that demons answer their prayers and keep them in the religions, but why do you guys think people still believe it even with the proof those 2 are wrong? Also, is it reasonable to believe in Christianity, considering it has never been proven wrong?

This is called the fallacy of a Complex Question. Christianity (just like Mormonism and Scientology) has been proven wrong. It has been shown that its theological assertions are irrational and it's texts are in error (just like those other religions). And yet you, just like them, continue to defend it. So you are no different than they are in that respect.

But, I would say that I would believe your grandfather rose from the dead if he had the same evidence that Jesus does.

There is no "evidence" of a 'Jesus' rising from the dead. There are CLAIMS in old books but those are not evidence of resurrection - anymore than Mormon, Muslim, Hindu, or Egyptian texts are evidence of their alleged supernatural claims. It doesn't matter how many times people tell a story or repeat a claim. Repetition (i.e. - "manuscripts") do not demonstrate that miracles occurred. We already know that people throughout history lie, fabricate, make mistakes, spread rumors, and suffer misapprehensions about these claims. But merely reading a book about something does not make it 'evidence' of the claims that are found within it.
I believe that God is the "first cause" of everything and has no cause himself.
How does that work then?
I try my best to be a good partner, employee, father and neighbor.  I try to do good when I can and avoid doing harm.    I share my beliefs because I think that basing decisions on faith causes a lot of harm to people (just like following a horoscope or going to a psychic would).   I don't expect any answered prayers from God because he's imaginary, so I don't wait around for it.   I prayed for my step daughter anyway just in case.  I don't care what happens to me when I die, but if there's a chance I could help that kid, I would.

It is nothing like a horoscope or a psychic.  The Bible does not give you day to day predictions based on your actions.  The Bible relates that "you reap what you sow", which is similar to the law of cause and effect.  It then tells us how to reap the best harvest.  Some things are based on faith, yes, but many decisions don't actually require faith because you can see or forecast the pros and cons of actions.  For example, the Bible teaches against adultery.  It does not require faith for me to see that adultery causes harm.  The Bible teaches us to teach our children discipline.  It doesn't require faith to know the benefits of that.  Bible principles are not just pulled out of thin air for no good reason.  It is true that sometimes we may not understand the reasons and then faith is required.  But, generally speaking, many Bible principles are common sense.  We can see that following them would be good for us and those around us. 

You seem to try to do your best to be kind to the people in your life.  You speak politely.   I think you try to do good when you can.  You share your beliefs because you think there is an afterlife and people who share your faith might get to share in it.  You don't expect prayers to be answered because it's not a time for God to perform miracles, he only did that in the time of Christ, so you don't wait around for it or expect it.   You also pray prayers that you don't expect to be answered.

I do expect prayers to be answered, but I don't expect miracles on demand.  Primarily what I expect from Jehovah is his spirit.  I expect hardships and tragedy.  But I expect Jehovah to give me the strength of character to not only preservere but overcome these things.

I do not expect a job to fall in my lap, but I expect that if I'm out looking for a job that I will find one.  Therefore my mind is at ease because I don't worry.  I know that if I do my part, Jehovah will bless my efforts.  What I mean is I expect to reap what I sow.  I don't expect to reap a job by being lazy.  I don't expect good children by refusing to spend time with them.  I expect Jehovah to help me.  But he can't help unless I'm doing something.  But if I am doing my part then I fully expect his help, and he provides it.

But since you don't know for sure, why defend things like that?

For one, I know that while Jehovah does punish wickedness that he is not evil and vindictive so I am unwilling to imagine the worst possible scenerio.  All we have is imagination to go on.  I think he should be considered innocent until proven guilty and there is not enough evidence for conviction.  I certainly have reasonable doubt.

i cannot help you understand what "it" is... but "it" happened, whatever "it" is...

You are as confused as Alice.

Have you worked out yet if you have experienced an uncaused event?

have you worked your head out of your ass yet...?

I'll take that as "no" since you obviously don't want to admit you were wrong.
and when i mentioned the complexity of the universe comparatively with the human brain, i was simply contemplating the  phenomenon of consciousness.  consciousness being something that i believe to be true, but cannot prove.
The word gets knocked about a bit as an attribute of the universe. My wife has an otherwise intelligent friend who believes that "even rocks have memories".

You seem to have a way with words,
1. Why would it matter if the universe were conscious?
2. If something has a consciousness, it would also have somewhere physical to hold that consciousness - have you any idea what that might be?
3. As consciousness is an attribute of a living being, and the only [other?] attribute common to all living beings is reproduction, does the universe reproduce?
4. Do you think that the universe is a closed system?
5. What made you first think that the universe might have a consciousness?
Again, no one could do it, because even gods have to act through time.

Gods can't perform an action without time, as an action itself is bound to time.

And moreover, gods can't exist without a Space (THE space) accommodating his existence.

So, either you prove that actions occur without time, AND existence occurs without the only thing allows existence, Space.


Shift your position where god only existed in time and space, hence AFTER time began and therefore not involved in the Big Bang at all. ( Aka: Completely discredit genesis and the bible).


Drop your claim and admit you don't know.
Chatter / Re: Ghosts?
« Last post by Foxy Freedom on Today at 02:56:04 PM »
Coincidentally, I watched a ghosthunter TV series, last night, to see the people involved. I am considering going to one or more haunted house with them as a guest on the show. I really want to go to the worst place they can find. I am not afraid of these things at all. I will probably add a comedy element by laughing too much.

I have some experience because one of my parents' houses was very old and all kinds of weird things happened there. I thought it was fun to investigate everything when I was a child, so I know that I won't panic and knock over all the equipment.
i proposed no such thing... all i said was "it" happened.  that is all.

"It" being... what? The only "it"s coming to my mind right now are from the quote Victor Frankenstein said when he gave life to a body and a dish from a cartoon.

i cannot help you understand what "it" is... but "it" happened, whatever "it" is...

What are you attempting to refer to here? What is this "it"?
^^^^^Or something that rhymes with master debater.  :angel:

Maybe I wasn't clear enough :
Theology do not demonstrate the existence of God as a separate entity - separate from human brains.
Theology allow us to draw a theory based on real things. It allows us to define God theoretically.
This theory is then proved right or wrong by events.
Analyzing these events allows us to conclude on the existence of God as a separate entity - separate from human brains.

I've already responded to this claim and apparently your brain missed it. You do not have a theory! A theory is the highest point in science! It is the graduation point. It occurs AFTER certain hypotheses have been vetted by independent, skeptical, and/or disagreeing parties. But you do not have this for your alleged "God". You have pure assertions based upon ignorance. And that isn't even close an hypothesis - let alone a "theory". You have the same problem you had since the beginning: ignorance mixed with arrogance and credulity. You and your "theologians" assertions about what "fits" is insufficient to demonstrate that "God interacting with the world" has occurred - because again you have not demonstrated a coherent definition of that term, that such a 'thing' is real independently, or that 'it' actually does anything. So you still have all of your work ahead of you. Merely "analyzing these events" does not get you to "God did it" because (as has been mentioned to you a hundred times now) you have not eliminated other possibilities which requires less assumptions - nor have you provided an explanation. You (and your church) have merely appealed to a mystery in an attempt to solve a mystery, and that is the very definition of the argument from ignorance/incredulity fallacy. Anyone can claim that any alleged "supernatural" thing is the cause of anything. Yet without a mechanism, you have no explanatory power. "The African Witch Doctor healed me! He did a ceremony and I got better! Yay!" It proves nothing but credulity. Again, correlation does not equal causation. So it simply does not matter if anyone prays or not. Just b/c people pray and someone gets better, it does not logically follow that a "God interacted with the world" b/c it could also be the case that the person got better naturally, that a witch doctor did it, or that invisible magic pixies came along! So "It fits" is not sufficient to demonstrate independent existence or causation. Your assertion is an unwarranted conclusion because neither you, nor your church "theologians", have demonstrated that there is such a thing as "God" independent of human imagination.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10