It seems to me that many of the atheists on here are just here because they hate Christianity.

[ArtieE]

Stalin's strategy was to replace one set of dogma with a different set of dogma.

My strategy is education. I'd like to see comparative religion taught in public schools - at an early age. Let the kids decide for themselves which - if any - religion they want to be a part of...

Don't everybody have that? In Norway I had comparative religion very early on in school in the sixties and seventies. What I learned is that some people are capable of believing anything as long as they have some holy book and are born into their belief system.

 

[james bond]

Your evidence is the Bible.
A Muslims evidence is the Quran.

To be fair to the Muslim, I have a higher level of ignorance of the Quran. I was raised Anglican. Even have prayer badges from when I was in the Church Scouts.

Anyway, you let the good book convince you of whatever it convinces you of. Rail against theoretical discussions on the evidentiary requirements to prove God.

It's all quite strange to me. God could prove himself to me anytime he wanted. Clearly he doesnt want to. Fair enough. Neither of us are losing any sleep over it. If he wants to throw me in a pit for it after death, then bravo. Not exactly much I can do about that now, is there?

Oh, just as a point of order...I never stated the Bible claimed only heaven as a post-life destination. I merely paraphrased your statement about 'afterlife' as 'heaven'. As I've stated more than once, I'm happy for that to change to afterlife and it makes NO difference to my original point anyway. Which you seem constantly unwilling to directly address.

Unless, of course, it's not merely the Bible you offer as evidence, but your own certainty in your particular interpretation.

The Bible is God's word. Can I help it if you do not take the time to read it? It took me a long time, too. Only since 2012 have I been reading it seriously and yet I have not read it all. I question it, too, but tend to follow the Bible experts and church leaders. It's not a simple book, but it can be. Next, you compare it to the Quran. I doubt you know either of these well. I do not know the Quran well, so I do not use it as an example. Yet, you do not seem to know either well and think it's fine as examples. Typical atheist. And thus, atheists are usually wrong ha ha.

Ok, so I was right about you and the Quran, but wrong in that you have background in the Bible. Maybe you know more about it than me since I do not have prayer badges from the time I was in the scouts and I went to a parochial elementary school. I ended up being baptized in 2012. I started comparing the science parts to what I learned about evolution from the evolution website and creation websites (from about 2009). In addition, I started to learn about Jesus of Nazareth in Bible studies after baptism (Methodist) from about 2012.

The good book didn't convince me. I started with having faith that God exists. I had to overcome having evidence or proof of God. In fact, I thought there is none! It is an experience that I thought Gandhi explained well when I was looking for answers during my college years. I probably read this or something like the following in a book. BTW I was not sure if he was referring to a Hindu God or the Christian God, but the way he described Him moved me and still influenced me -- Gandhi's Views On God - The Meaning Of God . In other words, the exact God Gandhi described wasn't important, but how he described Him as being was. Moreover, his description was not exact, i.e. to me it did not sound Hindu nor Christian at the time. It led me a universal God and monotheism. My parents also influenced me as they had a Christian background, but they weren't avid Christians nor Bible readers.

>>It's all quite strange to me. God could prove himself to me anytime he wanted. Clearly he doesnt want to. Fair enough. Neither of us are losing any sleep over it. If he wants to throw me in a pit for it after death, then bravo. Not exactly much I can do about that now, is there?<<

Your comment that God has to prove Himself is strange. Why does He have to prove it? If He gave us power like the angels, then it still would not be enough. Like I said, if I was God and you didn't believe that I was, then I would set your hair on fire and continue with this third degree pain and suffering approach until you believed. I would have to put pain and suffering to all atheists in the physical world for them to believe. That is power. Instead, God gave us free will. From it, He knew of the consequences. That's the part of Adam and Eve. At first, I didn't understand people living to over 900, Adam and Eve, Noah's Flood or a young earth at first. However, comparing it to evolution, I discovered it is a better answer than evolution which is not the truth. You'll probably say as I did at first that the former is impossible. Yet, how many times have you found the truth to be stranger than fiction. I think birds evolving from dinosaurs to be fiction.

All right, I'll accept your answer in your last two paragraphs. It's opinion. To me and I think most religions, the afterlife is final judgment and destination or reward/punishment. In Christianity, it is final judgment, rapture (resurrection) and destination. That's what it means.

 

[McBell]

The Bible is God's word.

Really?
Which one?
Please be so kind as to name the specific version.

Your comment that God has to prove Himself is strange. Why does He have to prove it?

If god is the all knowing all powerful being that he is claimed to be, would he not only know how to prove his existence to each and every person and also have the power to do so?

 

[icehorse]

Don't everybody have that? In Norway I had comparative religion very early on in school in the sixties and seventies. What I learned is that some people are capable of believing anything as long as they have some holy book and are born into their belief system.

Hooray for Norway! No, at least in the US, public schools would rarely - if ever - offer comparative religion classes.

 

[columbus]

Hooray for Norway! No, at least in the US, public schools would rarely - if ever - offer comparative religion classes.

Imagine trying to write a syllabus or lesson plans that would satisfy the various USA RF members.
And they're more reasonable than many parents of public schools. A local high school had to cancel plans for such an elective class because enough parents didn't want anything taught that contradicted their interpretation of Christianity even if their kid wasn't in the class.
Tom

 

[SkepticX]

I'm guessing the odds are at least fair that you have little or no trouble (particularly comparably) with those who "go into all nations" and spread your religion and those compatible.

To me, is it the large majority of Christians, or rather the large majority of 'so-called' Christians because Jesus taught that MANY (majority) would come ' in his name ' but prove false according to Matthew 7:21-23

Makes sense, but that's not what I was actually talking about. I was replying to Reggie Miller's question (Why not?), which was presumably about the last line of the post he was referring to (the part of my post, below, that was pointing out the likely perceptual inconsistency of the OP), because the rest of the post is a brief answer to the question otherwise.

I have little to nothing positive to say about any theistic aspect of any religion, but I'm a big fan of service/community-centered religious communities, and of most believers (even many fundamentalist types). The problem is that religious communities are really all about community. The religious aspects of these communities are distractions at best, and enablers for the darkest aspects of human nature at worst (so they run from neutral to seriously nasty).

But I'm guessing the odds are at least fair that you have little or no trouble (particularly comparably) with those who "go into all nations" and spread your religion and those compatible.

No?

 

[james bond]

Really?
Which one?
Please be so kind as to name the specific version.


If god is the all knowing all powerful being that he is claimed to be, would he not only know how to prove his existence to each and every person and also have the power to do so?

I was going to say you're wrong because I think you're trying to compare the Christian God with another one like Allah. Why can't I get past this is what you meant ha ha?

However, I must give you the benefit of the doubt. It's God the Father. Your second question is harder to answer as each church picks their version. The one given to me by my church is the new revised standard version.

 

[james bond]

I did have a strange frightening moment yesterday. There was a woman ahead of me at the gas line at Costco who spilled gasoline. I wasn't sure how much because it was raining and I think the gasoline rolled down the side of her car. The attendant was called and he wiped her car with a large paper/cardboard like towel. I assumed it was absorbent as he wiped her car and sprayed it with liquid detergent and wiped again with a fresh towel. Once she left, he put down several more of the cardboard-like towels on the ground and discarded. They he sprayed the detergent around the area she was standing and wiped with more towels. This took several minutes and finally he motioned me forward. I asked him if she spilled a lot and he said it was enough to warrant the towels and spraying. We chit chatted and he thought it wasn't enough to call the fire department. I thought it was okay until I smelled the gasoline vapors in the air. There was a lot more than I thought initially. It was under my car and had drifted toward the pumps. I pumped my gas while he was still cleaning. Finally, just before he finished he wished me well and left. I did the same and got out of there when I could safely leave.

There is a vid that I think I posted in another thread about how the earth will end. It's not religious, but a documentary based on science. One cause is global warming which I laughed at when I first watched it. The way the Bible explains how the world will end is with a global fire. Both warming, but altogether different. I have no idea how a fire could be global and I assume it will be nature-based.

Here's the end of the world documentary in case you missed it.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The Bible is God's word. Can I help it if you do not take the time to read it? It took me a long time, too. Only since 2012 have I been reading it seriously and yet I have not read it all. I question it, too, but tend to follow the Bible experts and church leaders. It's not a simple book, but it can be. Next, you compare it to the Quran. I doubt you know either of these well. I do not know the Quran well, so I do not use it as an example. Yet, you do not seem to know either well and think it's fine as examples. Typical atheist. And thus, atheists are usually wrong ha ha.

Funny. I usually find it's the person over-generalising who is usually wrong.
But yeah...I've read the Bible on multiple occasions, and have a copy (both testaments) at home. I'll admit, I have read the NT more than the OT. I also have various books on Christian history, which is more interesting to me than the Bible, actually. Focus mostly on Byzantine period, but I have a few books more generally which cover the history of the Church.

Not trying to be rude, but why haven't you managed to read it in 4 years? Seems...strange. As a believer, I mean.

>>It's all quite strange to me. God could prove himself to me anytime he wanted. Clearly he doesnt want to. Fair enough. Neither of us are losing any sleep over it. If he wants to throw me in a pit for it after death, then bravo. Not exactly much I can do about that now, is there?<<

Your comment that God has to prove Himself is strange. Why does He have to prove it?

He doesn't have to prove a thing. I didn't say he did. I said if he's worried about it, he could. I'm not worried about it in the least.

If He gave us power like the angels, then it still would not be enough. Like I said, if I was God and you didn't believe that I was, then I would set your hair on fire and continue with this third degree pain and suffering approach until you believed. I would have to put pain and suffering to all atheists in the physical world for them to believe. That is power. Instead, God gave us free will. From it, He knew of the consequences.

Nah, God is surely powerful enough to make me believe if he wants to, so I am going to reject all the pain and suffering stuff. But regardless...if he gave us free will, and then punishes us for our choices, it strikes me as behaviour I wouldn't respect. Just because he's super powerful and made me doesn't mean I'd respect any version of Pascal's Wager.

 

[Reggie Miller]

Wow, I never meant for this thread to go for 16 pages. Are we beating up on a dead horse here?

 

[McBell]

I was going to say you're wrong because I think you're trying to compare the Christian God with another one like Allah. Why can't I get past this is what you meant ha ha?

However, I must give you the benefit of the doubt. It's God the Father. Your second question is harder to answer as each church picks their version. The one given to me by my church is the new revised standard version.

So in your opinion all bibles are equally the Gods Word?

 

[McBell]

Wow, I never meant for this thread to go for 16 pages. Are we beating up on a dead horse here?

Seems to me the thread has gone off on a few tangents.
Which is actually the normal nature of threads.

 

[columbus]

Wow, I never meant for this thread to go for 16 pages. Are we beating up on a dead horse here?

Christians complaining about nontheists having opinions is kinda old. But Christians do bring it up a lot.
Like your OP.
Tom

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It was a significant driving factor. Quakers were disproportionately involved in abolitionist movements and were among the first to begin organised opposition to slavery. Evangelical Anglicans were also prominent in the movement and motivated by a religious conviction based on the idea that all humans have inherent dignity and shared humanity by virtue of being God's children.

OTOH, at the height of the slave trade, the Church of England was (IIRC) the second-biggest slaveowner in the Caribbean. What was the net effect of the Anglican community on slavery? It's hard to say.

 

[Reggie Miller]

Christians complaining about nontheists having opinions is kinda old. But Christians do bring it up a lot.
Like your OP.
Tom

Interesting. But you didn't answer my question.

 

[james bond]

Funny. I usually find it's the person over-generalising who is usually wrong.
But yeah...I've read the Bible on multiple occasions, and have a copy (both testaments) at home. I'll admit, I have read the NT more than the OT. I also have various books on Christian history, which is more interesting to me than the Bible, actually. Focus mostly on Byzantine period, but I have a few books more generally which cover the history of the Church.

Not trying to be rude, but why haven't you managed to read it in 4 years? Seems...strange. As a believer, I mean.



He doesn't have to prove a thing. I didn't say he did. I said if he's worried about it, he could. I'm not worried about it in the least.



Nah, God is surely powerful enough to make me believe if he wants to, so I am going to reject all the pain and suffering stuff. But regardless...if he gave us free will, and then punishes us for our choices, it strikes me as behaviour I wouldn't respect. Just because he's super powerful and made me doesn't mean I'd respect any version of Pascal's Wager.

I'm generalizing because I'm not a biology major nor do I try to pass myself off as someone who does. I majored in computer science and business. Thus, I can read what these articles are saying and be able to explain in a brief, cogent manner. The eye is complex, so it deserves it's own chapter. Even Darwin had trouble reconciling the eye to his thinking.

Enough about the eye, what's important to take away from that is the battle between mutation which the evolutionists favor to explain their theory versus how dangerous and destructive it can be views of the creation scientists. There is a line drawn in the sand over this. Today, genetic modification is taught at the high school level. It isn't such a big deal anymore, but the ideas coming from it are. GM products are not safe even though the evolution-based scientists such as Neil DeGrasse Tyson state they are. More and more GM products will be touted for your personal or social use.

I didn't read the Bible for many years because I didn't understand it at first, from God killing women and children, people living to over 900 years, story of Adam and Eve, Noah's Flood, abortion, homosexuality vs one man-one woman and so on. Thus, I read the easy parts like the Psalms and then got into comparing it and what the creation scientists were saying versus evolution. I avoided the people parts because that is what confused me. What parts I did read were those read during Bible studies. However, over time I did start reading the people parts and learned to accept them and what happened. The key is the Sermon on the Mount. That helps answer all the people questions.

(It seems you have found the historical basis of the Bible and went on from there. It is interesting and there is so much. The Bible scholars covered so much.)

For example, science does not know about cosmic rays and what they can do to humans. One has to accept that it came during Noah's Flood and this is what caused us to live only to around 120 today. One of the reasons evolution was created by man (starting with Charles Lyell and James Hutton to Charles Darwin) was to oppose Christianity during the 1800s. This creation using "science" is what causes all the arguments today. Except any theories of the supernatural has been ruled out by these atheist scientists in charge and won't be accepted for peer review. Also, there is discrimination against anyone using creation science and the Bible today. Science and the scientific method was created by Christians in order to pay homage to God. The atheist scientists usurped that used it for their own purpose. All of things atheists use today against Christians is laughable because they usurped Christian values to use for their own starting with Lyell and the rest.

>>Nah, God is surely powerful enough to make me believe if he wants to, so I am going to reject all the pain and suffering stuff. But regardless...if he gave us free will, and then punishes us for our choices, it strikes me as behaviour I wouldn't respect. Just because he's super powerful and made me doesn't mean I'd respect any version of Pascal's Wager.<<

Again, God isn't going to make people believe as I've explained. He'll have to torture people to do that. The easiest way would be to build a large pit of suffering and toss people who do not believe into that. No one walking around who could do that will be questioned by people. He'll easily live among us. Then certain people will curry His favor and may get some rewards and powers. I think you can see where I am going. It will be the God vs angels story all over again. As for someone like you and way of thinking, I think God will not mete out the same punishment for all. It will vary according to how great the indiscretions were. Sort of like Dante's Inferno. While that is fiction, many people think the punishments outlined there is justifiable.

Or do you mean take away free will? I think His version is to reward those who have free will and chose to follow Him. All of this came about from the angels.

 

[columbus]

Interesting. But you didn't answer my question.

It isn't really a dead horse when Christians trot it out regularly for a slug fest.
Tom

 

[Reggie Miller]

It isn't really a dead horse when Christians trot it out regularly for a slug fest.
Tom

We preach it. If you don't want to hear it, just reach over and change the station like you do on your radio.

 

[james bond]

So in your opinion all bibles are equally the Gods Word?

You're asking the wrong person for that. All I know is my version compared to like the Jehovah's Witness one are different. I'll go with mine in that case because of the Trinity and Jesus of Nazareth. I think one atheist usurped it to review it as a parody and is selling it. He'll probably get the spiritual blasphemy charge which gets one the lowest level as punishment. But again, I'm not qualified to speak for the versions except the ones I know or familiar with.

 

[columbus]

We preach it. If you don't want to hear it, just reach over and change the station like you do on your radio.

This is your thread dude.
If you mean Christianity in general, you can't be serious. They're all over the place here. There are advertising spots on the rock radio stations for churches.
Tom