1/25/2008                                                                                       View Comments

You must be a Christian if...

By Brother Jeff

1. You believe that an ancient Book of Myths filled with contradictions, absurdities, atrocities, myths, fables, and plenty of nonhistorical "history" is somehow magically the inerrant, infallible "Word of God".

2. You believe that a Magical Being magically brought the universe into existence by speaking a powerful magical spell from Nowhere approximately 6000 years ago.

3. You believe, concerning the origins of mankind, that a Magical Being magically made us by fashioning a doll from a mound of scooped up dirt, which he then somehow magically brought to life via His Spook who is also somehow magically Him.

4. You believe that Three Magical Beings are somehow magically One Magical Being, and that the Three Magical Beings who are One Magical Being are somehow magically Each Other.

5. You believe that mankind "fell from grace" and deserves to be BBQed eternally because two primitive people who lived in an awesome garden located somewhere in the Middle East listened to a lying talking snake and ate some forbidden magic fruit from a magic tree.

6. You believe that this Magical Being who magically created the universe and us is "all-knowing" even though He lost track of Adam in the awesome garden and that he is "all-powerful" even though He has trouble with iron chariots.

7. You believe that you possess some sort of magical inner spook that is the "real" you. You believe that this inner spook can be magically transformed by a Sky Spook and even lived in by an Invisible Sky Man via that same Sky Spook.

8. You believe that because the first two magically created people disobeyed the Magical Being due to the influence of a lying talking snake and some magic inner spook-killing fruit, that all men are born with their inner spooks killed and in need of a magical transformation courtesy of a Sky Spook.

9. You believe that an Invisble Man who lives in the Sky is going to kick a talking snake's ass by sacrificing Himself to Himself and then Magically Undeadening Himself. You believe that if we believe that the Invisible Man is Magically Undead, that a Sky Spook who is also somehow magically the Invisible Man will Magically Undeaden our inner spooks and magically live inside of us and at the same time will "seal" our inner spooks as His so that it is kept safe from the diabolical attacks of the Talking Snake and his evil spooks.

10. You believe that this enormous universe which consists of approximately 125 billion galaxies was created specifically for mankind, and that human history reflects a cosmic battle between an Invisible Man who lives in the Sky and an evil spook who enjoys manifesting as a talking snake. You believe that humans are divided into two groups - those who serve the Invisible Sky Man and those who serve the Talking Snake.

11. You believe that since we "fell from grace" because of some magic fruit and a lying talking snake that we need redemption, and that to accomplish this the Magical Being sacrified Himself to Himself to save us from Himself. But, you also believe that the Magical Being's sacrifice somehow magically doesn't count unless we believe it and accept it.

12. You believe that a Magical Being somehow magically became a man, and that this Manly Magical Being murdered Himself and then Magically Undeadened Himself three days later via the Sky Spook version of Himself so He wouldn't have to toss us into an eternal flaming torture chamber because of the unfortunate incident involving the lying talking snake and the magic fruit.

13. You believe that a Sky Spook who is somehow magically the Magical Being raped a woman named Mary who somehow magically remained a virgin after being raped, and that this glorious union produced a child who was somehow magically the Magical Being embodied.

14. You believe that after the Manly Magical Being magically Magically Undeadened Himself, He somehow magically blasted off and flew up into the clouds to live in the Sky Kingdom with His Father who is also somehow magically Him.

15. You believe that at literally any moment you could find yourself magically floating up into the clouds to join an Invisible Magically Undead Sky Man in a long-awaited event known as "The Rapture". You are so convinced of the imminent nature of this absurd event that you have placed a bumper sticker on your car that reads, "WARNING: In the event of Rapture, this vehicle will be unmanned." Assuming that you are not driving a convertible with the top down most of the time, the issue of how you would float through the roof of your car has never concerned you. You have just left it up to the magic of the Magic Sky Man.

16. You believe that the sky can somehow magically be rolled up like a scroll, and you believe that a Sky Dragon can somehow magically toss a third of the stars down upon the earth, and that the earth will somehow magically survive this assault.

17. You believe that the universe is magically being held together by an Invisible Man who lives in the Sky.

18. You believe that the Magic Sky Man is preparing to ride His Sky Horse down from the Sky Kingdom very soon. You find yourself filled with joyous anticipation at the thought of the senseless torture and slaughter of billions of non-Christian people who will then be tossed into a flaming torture chamber forever to be BBQed without mercy and without any hope of reprieve because when these horrific events occur it signals the end of the line for the Talking Snake and his evil minions (including those pesky rational, thinking people) and the beginning of a wonderful magical eternal life for you up in the Sky with your Three Invisible Friends who are somehow magically One Invisible Friend.

Also see, "You might be a True Christian™ if..."

77 comments:

jim earl said...

Priceless, Brother Jeff.

I have a few friends that I'm going to share this with.

Brother Jim Earl

Anonymous said...

Brother Jeff, that was hilarious! The way you worded everything really brings out the absurdity of it all. By the way, I used to have that exact same bumper sticker on my car while in college. I walked back to my car after class one day and someone had ripped it off. I just figured it was some skeptic under the conviction of the Holy Ghost!

~Clear said...

In #1, you said there are contradictions in the bible. Can you tell me where I can find 2 examples of this sense you seem to think there are more than 1?

I hear that all the time but I haven't come across that.

Also, if you don't think there is God, then what is your purpose in life? Is it to get all that you can then lose it all when you die? One more question to ask.. If a POW is locked away in jail in a jungle somewhere in Asia and you checked most of the region but haven't found him, does he exist?

Yule Goat 2 Hell said...

To UNclear:

Lying for Jesus won’t get you far here, bub. If you claim you haven’t found any contradictions in the bible it’s either because you never read it or you’re lying. Just do a Google search on “biblical contradictions.” Or start here:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

MY purpose in life is to enjoy my time here without harming anyone else, take care of my family, and learn as much as I can. Since it’s the only life I have, I’m making the most of it rather than wasting a second contemplating some mythical reward in a mythical afterlife. If life in the here and now is just a waiting room outside the Pearly Gates, it really would lack purpose.

And, finally, your analogy about the POW fails big time. No one in their right mind would be searching for the POW unless he or she were proven to have existed at some point prior to being captured. No such proof exists for your god, who is MIA but not worth the search.

Enjjpt said...

God isn't 'MIA', he is 'NIA'....Never In Action...Therefore there is no need to look.

"If we go back to the beginning we shall find that ignorance and fear created the gods; that fancy, enthusiasm, or deceit adorned or disfigured them; that weakness worships them; that credulity preserves them, and that custom, respect and tyranny support them in order to make the blindness of men serve their own interests."

-Baron d'Holbach

trancelation said...

Christianity is bullshit. It has absolutely nothing to offer the world that cannot be found in a better form somewhere else. UNClear, you know this as well as we do.

goat 2 has the right of it. You're lying, UNClear. Through your teeth, right in everyone's faces. Since you have to resort to lying, you've just proven better than any of us ever could have that Brother Jeff is right in his post.

One does not need a God to have a purpose in life. To need a God to have a purpose in life is illogical. Start taking responsibility for yourself and your actions, UNClear. We humans answer to ourselves, each other, and the world around us. We have a responsibility to those three things. We have the sapience, intelligence, reason and common sense to know better. I can think of nothing better than a world without a God, where people hold themselves accountable for their actions. A world where people do not live in fear of beiing HUMAN, of finding beauty in the NATURAL ORDER and PRECIOUSNESS OF LIFE. None of these things has anything to do with God or religion.

You are welcome, of course, to prove me wrong. Prove to me there is a God, and that the God of the Bible is that God. Otherwise, UNClear, you're going to Hell, too.

I'm looking forward to not hearing from you again, either because of your own cowardice and knowledge that you are wrong, and as such unable to face us, or because the webmaster blocks your posts. This site is much better when we don't have to tear apart the same old piece-of-shit arguments that cowards and morons such as yourself, UNClear, post around here. Be warned, UNClear: the days of religion will end. There will come a time when people stop hating themselves for being HUMAN.

And one more thing: the POW thing?

1. We know POWs exist. There is evidence that POWs exist.

2. We know that God does not exist. There is no evidence that God exist.

Peace out.

liniasmax said...

Brother Jeff - that was incredible!!!

UNClear wrote: "Also, if you don't think there is God, then what is your purpose in life?"

Actually, I have more in common with Dolphins than with Christians... so I think I'll write "The Porpoise Driven Life." Afterlife madness really is a pathetic madness and it's an epidemic - it has UNClear terminally ill...

Thank [the Calendar] it's Friday!

Liniasmax

Anita said...

"Thank [the Calendar] it's Friday!" Brilliant, Liniasmax!

Aspentroll said...

Brother Jeff, that sums it all up perfectly, with your permission I will use this on some "good" folks I know.

UN-clear, you read this and still don't understand do you?
Read your bible again and this time pay attention, you will find it full of discrepancies.
But I rather doubt you will because you are probably brainwashed too completely.

Come back often we love to kick your ass.

liniasmax said...

Thanks Anita.

Hey Trancelation - you wrote:

"There will come a time when people stop hating themselves for being HUMAN."

That sentence is a diamond in the ruff - it has captured my thoughts. Rich beyond measure it is.

Max

Anita said...

"There will come a time when people stop hating themselves for being HUMAN."

I agree with liniasmax; what a thought-provoking statement this truly is.

Thanks, Trancelation!

sy said...

I have to admit, before I read this article, I was a lowly wretched sinner, because I was born in sin,(the penis touched the vagina) I begin to pray fervently and I have carpet burns on my knees, but now, I now have faieeth that I am saveeed by the holy spook and now I'm a new creature in kyryssst. Thanks to you BJ, I now know that he was strong up on the stick to suffer and save the world and the whole universe from their filthy rotten and nasty sins.

I'm now a kryssstian and I will be praying for all you sinners that do not believe as I do. I am now a follower of the blessed teachings of Bro. Jeff, a true kyrysstian.

I'll be sending you a love offering for your new church and to feed the poor.

Brother Jeff said...

Sure, Aspentroll, go for it! Glory!

Anonymous said...

Good stuff Brother Jeff.
I read your post twice. the second time i subtituted magical/magically with f@#k and f@#king and it sounded much better.

Anonymous said...

Good stuff Brother Jeff.
I read your post twice. the second time i substituted magical/magically with f@#king and it sounded much better magical magically

Anonymous said...

With subtitution:

You believe that Three F@#king Beings are somehow Fu@#ing One F@#king Being, and that the Three Fu#*ing Beings who are One Fu*!ing Being are somehow F#@king Each Other.

orgiginal:

4. You believe that Three Magical Beings are somehow magically One Magical Being, and that the Three Magical Beings who are One Magical Being are somehow magically Each Other.

~Clear said...

Goat 2 - All the contradictions can be answered. Here are some answers:

http://contenderministries.org/discrepancies/contradictions.php#9

But I was wondering if saying "there are contradictions" was just a blanket statement to not believe or did you actually read the bible and come across them?

Trancelation - You called me a liar but I'm not sure why. All of the contradictions can be answered so that is why I have not come across one.

On my purpose question - I wasn't implying that without God you don't have a purpose. I was looking to gain insight into someone who doesn't believe in God and what their purpose would be. I agree with your statement on "One does not need a God to have a purpose in life". Look at Goat 2, his purpose is to enjoy life while he's alive.

All - Every one of us will die one day. We all know this. Maybe not today. Maybe not tomorrow. Maybe not next year or 20 years from now. But your days are numbered. We don't like to think about it but that day will come. So let's say that day is today. Where does that leave you & your purpose? You just enjoyed life and that's it? Then why play by the rules. Why even have morals?

Can you honestly prove 100% you will wake up tomorrow (spare me the it's tomorrow jokes)? But honestly? Not 100%. It's by faith in your body that you say you will wake up tomorrow. That's the best way I can translate God exists.

~Clear said...

Here's the full link:

http://contenderministries.org/
discrepancies/contradictions.php

resonate11 said...

Clear, if I were a bible believer, it would bother me that there needs to be "answers" to contradictions. Why wouldn't the architect of the universe compose its message so perfectly that no apparent contradictions existed?

Clear, what do you do inside to remain clear? How do you avoid being bothered by the need for Christian apologetics?

trancelation said...

UNClear:

I called you a liar because you are a liar. Not all of the contradictions in the Bible can be answered. That someone provides a lame, illogical response to the pointing out of a contradiction does not mean that they have provided an ANSWER. Since you claim that ALL of the contradictions in the Bible can be answered, you are a liar. And still a coward, because you will not admit this fact to yourself and deal with it courageously.

Now, I will agree that there are seemingly Biblical contradictions that one can while away. Some websites are guilty of grabbing at the first seeming contradiction just rack up numbers. While I understand their purpose, this is nonetheless a dishonest practice that doesn't serve any sort of anti-Christian cause. But this doesn;t change the fact that the Bible is FULL of contradictions. I have a favorite one. It is as follows:

Genesis 1:25-27
(Humans were created after the other animals.)

And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image.... So God created man in his own image.

VS

Genesis 2:18-19
(Humans were created before the other animals.)

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Why is this my favorite ibilcai contradiction? Because it's one of the first ones. Right from the beginning of the story, we see that the writers of the Bible are EXTREMELY incapable of world-building and common sense. When I open up a book, I know what sort of ride I'm in from how well the first part is written. So here we are, with one account saying one thing, and a mere few paragraphs later, we have a different story! CRIKEY!

Well, let's see what the Contender Ministries have to say about this . . .

Well. Wouldja' lookee dur? They don't have anything to say about it! I guess that means they didn't answer it, eh?

I have read "answers" to this that there is no contradiction because this is a method of storytelling where basic details about a place or people are described before zooming in closer to specific characters. There are a few problems with this answer:

1. Admitting this means that you are admitting that the Bible is nothing more than a story. Either this is the literal creation account, or it is a story. It cannot be both, and if it is a literal creation account, then it must be more detailed than this.

2. As a literal account, it is too vague to be taken seriously. This, if we are to believe it to be the order in which the world was created, is what we have:

Beast of the earth

Cattle

Things that creepeth upon the earth

Man

Beast of the field

Fowl of the air

Woman

At first look, one might think that there is order here. But, I have to ask . . .

WHAT is a beast of the earth, and how does it differ from a beast of the field?

WHAT is a beast of the field, and how does it differ from a beast of the earth?

WHERE are the insects? Many insects fly, and saying that all insects CREEPETH upon the earth is like saying that all dogs CREEPETH upon the earth. Walking does not equate to CREPETHing just beause you are an insect.

WHERE do the fish come in? Apparently, before everyone else!

Genesis 1:20-21
And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

And in THAT verse, the FOWL come before everything else, too! Or is a fowl a beast of the earth? Is it a beast of the field? Why are fish and whales not included in the order of things later? Did God make the whale and the fowl, then make everything else, including a DIFFERENT kind of fowl much latter, after the beast of the field but before woman? Are there not-winged fowl? Flightless does not equal not-winged, so what kind of fowl is not-winged and came later while a winged fowl came before it?

As you can see, UNClear, there is clearly a contradiction here. Not to mention the complete and total lack of explanation as to what kind of animals are WHAT. As it stands, there are hundreds of Biblical contradictions, and I have yet to see every single one of them answered.

Hence: there are Biblical contradictions. Peace out.

trancelation said...

Damn, can't believe I missed this one. One more for you, UNClear; did life come from the waters or the ground?

Genesis 1:20-21
And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life . . .

VS

Genesis 2:18-19
(Humans were created before the other animals.)

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air . . .

There are those foul fowl again. Didn't it just say in1:2o that they came from the water?

Genesis 1:20-21
And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

Frigging unbelievable! Which is it, UNClear?

Ziggy Blacktail said...

That article was most excellent. The way it was worded removed a good degree of the suspension of disbelief usually involved when pastors and priests in church and/or on television teach these kind of things.

trancelation said...

UNClear:

I'm waiting. Which is it? Did fowls come from the water, or from the earth? If they came from both, which came first, and what kind of fowl comes from which?

Anonymous said...

Also see:

You may be a fundamentalist atheist if..."

stronger now said...

Hey thanks anony!

I always like to see how the fundy crowd can be so kind in their misinformed generalizing portrayal of what they think an atheist is or is not.

They really made an argument for the existence of a deity with that one....NOT!

~Clear said...

resonate11 - It doesn't bother me that Christian apologetics is needed. There will always be peolpe challenging or questioning the Christian faith for 1 reason or another. That's why it is needed. To give an answer.

Trancelation - The link I gave only answers some of the questions. There are more sites out there that answer all of the questions. But what you are refering to is not a contradiction. If you look at just those passages at face value, then your bound to get mixed up which looks like you have. If you read those passages in context, you'll understand the flow.

Gen 1:20-21 = Sea creatures are created and birds (Fowl)created.

Gen 1:24 = Here's what was created:
_cattle (meaning domestic animals)
_creeping thing (represents mice, reptiles, insects and so on)
_beasts of the earth (represents wild animals)

These 2 verses represent the total animal kingdom.

Gen 1:26-27 = Man & woman are created.

That is the creation account.
Could the author have provided more detail? Sure. But there's more to the story than just creation.

Now a change in focus, why woman was created.

Gen 1:18 and 19 are not directly linked in thought.

Gen 1:18 God is going to make a helper for man.

Gen 1:19 The beast of the field (meaning creeping things & beast of the earth) that God had already created from the ground in the ealier verses, came to Man to name.

From there, no helper is found so woman is created.

The focus then changes to the fall of man and so on..

So the order is a follows:
Sea creatures
Birds (fowl)
*Both were created the same day so which came first, it doesn't say.
Cattle
Creeping thing
Beast of the earth
*Which came next? It doesn't say. Just that all of these were created on the same day after the sea creatures & birds were created.

So as you see there is not a contradiction here.

Like I said, there are answers to all the so-called contradictions. But you have already mentioned they are either lame or illogical responses, so there's not much more I can say.

But what about the morals question I asked? If we are not held accountable in the after life for what we did in the "here & now", why have morals?

Fred Flintstone said...

Morals should be rational not based on thousand year old tribal people who kill animals to please an invisible god.

We don't do good things to, and for people because a god will burn us forever. We do good things because it makes sense to treat people as we want to be treated.

According to some of the writings put in the Christian bible, homosexuality is morally wrong simply because the writer says so. WTF.

The first 4 commandments of the 10 commandments are not even issues of morality or ethics. Yet just about every Christian points to the 10 commandments as an example of morality. WTF

Fred Flintstone said...

When I was in Bible college.....my school considered the creation account literal. Then I went to seminary and my school considered it non-literal.

They both used the powers of Christian logic to prove they were right. WTF

It's just plain funny how people, filled with the holy spirit and jesus can't get on the same bandwidth.

Looking at Clears definitions, he makes assumptions of the meanings. If it works for him, more power to him. Doesn't work for me because I've already paid good money at Christian colleges and seminaries to lean and debate stuff like that when I was a Christian.

All I really learned was that no two Christians are alike. They each have unique views on the bible, god, the holy spirit and so forth.

It's all a waste of intellect, money and time.

~Clear said...

Fred - To clarify, the question is "If there is no God, then why have morals?" What is the point in being kind to others? Why not just use them & take from them because we only get one life and we need to have & take as much as we can. Right?

Thackerie said...

To clarify, the question is "If there is no God, then why have morals?" What is the point in being kind to others? Why not just use them & take from them because we only get one life and we need to have & take as much as we can. Right?

I'm not Fred, but since this is a forum, I hope it's OK to throw in my 2¢.

I think the Golden Rule, which BTW was expressed centuries before Jesus supposedly lived on Earth, makes good sense from a human standpoint, without the involvement of any deity necessary. Look what would happen if no one followed it: If we just used and took from others, they would use us and take from us and pretty soon we'd all be f*cked.

I don't like jerks, I don't want anyone to be a jerk to me, and I certainly don't want to be a jerk to anyone else. It's as simple as that to me.

But, if some people need to believe in the concept of heavenly rewards or hellish punishment to control their jerkiness, it's probably best that they stay in their religion.

Fred Flintstone said...

~Clear

It should speak for itself, but you can't seem to look beyond your own bias.

If you really can't figure out why treating people well is the rational and right thing to do, without a god to scare us, then I have nothing more to say.

Fred Flintstone said...

Ok...I guess I do have one more thing to say.

My friend Thackerie, brings up a good point. I'd like to add that thousands of years before the Bible was ever strung together, people had morals and practiced them without Jesus Christ and hell breathing down their necks.

People still practice moral behavior without having a belief in god.

For that matter, Christians are immoral when they condemn gays and lesbians for their sexual orientation just because some ancient collection of tribal writings called the Bible says they should.

How wrong and immoral is that....to judge and condemn someone to hell for eternity because they like the same gender?

How moral was it for Joshua to kill all the men, women, children and animal because god said so?

Roger C. S. said...

Your right Fred Flintstone; Its a shame that most christians have to look to their god to have morals...sheeesh

~Clear said...

Maybe I stated the question wrong. I'm asking, what is the point in having morals? I understand all the points made about we should be nice to others because it's the rational thing to do & all. I get. But lets say you live the next 10 years of your life as a nice person doing all the right things, then you you died by chance. And suppose someone else acted like a jerk (or if we take it to the extreme) maybe even a serial rapist for their 10 years & did not get caught. Does it really matter how both acted during this life? There is not a consequence to either behavior (taking him being caught or being on the run from the law out of the equation. This is just a representaion of living the wrong life).

Bill F said...

Trancelation wrote:

"We know that God does not exist."

Unless you know better than Richard Dawkins, you don't actually KNOW that God does not exist. That may be your opinion, and, if you wish, you can say (as Dawkins says in The God Delusion) "God almost certainly does not exist". In an interview here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqYAjBMPOHY, when asked "You're leaving open the possibility that he does [exist]?", he replies "Of course, any scientist would leave open that possibility. You can't absolutely disprove the existence of anything."

Therefore "We know that God does not exist" is an unfounded assertion.

Fred Flintstone said...

~Clear, Like I said, you are operating under a bias. Morals make sense and yes, people get away with things!

The Bible has examples of people getting away with immoral acts without punishment. Just look at Moses. He murdered an Egyptian and does the Bible say god punished him?

You have an image of what Christianity is based on things people told you, things you've read, and your personal experiences. This creates a certain bias that needs accurate information to either substantiate your position or cause you to rethink your position.

When I was Christian I used to operate under my own version of Evangelical Christianity. I was part of a certain church, denomination and group of Christian friends. I also went to their schools and graduated with their degrees.

There are so many different versions of Christianity that one can not possibly learn them all and make rationally unbiased an informed choice as to which one is right. We need to evaluate the whole concept of a Christian god with as open a mind as we can achieve. This is hard to do if you can not allow yourself to doubt anything the Bible says. It's also hard to do if you fear retribution from Jesus.

Since you have come onto an exChristian web site, I recommend that you ask questions as to why all of us former born again believers left the faith. You might learn something. I learned a lot after many months of reading posts on this site before I ever posted anything myself.

But please don't come here thinking you have something new to add. And please don't come here to witness to us. :(

Take care

Fred

~Transparent said...

~Clear: "Does it really matter how both acted during this life? There is not a consequence to either behavior (taking him being caught or being on the run from the law out of the equation. This is just a representaion of living the wrong life)."

So, if a person has no one to answer to for their actions, in terms of an authority figure, then, it really doesn't matter what a person does - in your example.

Since you've removed individual consequences and the consequences of society from the example, you are suggesting that there must in fact be some "greater" authority to pick up the slack, to make one's life have meaning.

If you are living your life; because of what you believe an imaginary authority figure will think about your behavior, then you don't have a life, you are not independent, you are living a pre-canned script someone gave you - consider your life to be nothing but a play, with spectators who can't throw cabbage at you.

In such a scenario, you hold no meaning in life, you "give" meaning to the authority figure that you mind as a slave, but you have no independent meaning that defines "you" as a person.

Good luck with that life, I think I'll just find my own way in life - such that it "means" something to me - regardless, of what someone else wants my life to mean.

~Clear said...

Thanks for the input guys. I appreciate your comments. My intention is not to bring anything new to the table, but to get insight into a question that's been on my mind to ask an atheist. Besides, if you guys have degrees and such, and no longer believe, then what could I ever say that could change your mind.

Later,
~C

~Transparent said...

Bill F: "Therefore "We know that God does not exist" is an unfounded assertion."

We know that the word God exists, however, it remains to be shown that the word God has any meaning/existence beyond the source provided to you, or anyone for that matter.

If you learned of the word God from a bible, then the word God is only as real as a word in a book.

If you learned of the word God from a person, then the word God is only as real as the verbal word from the person.

If you learned of the word God from a dream, then the word God is only as real as your dream/imagination.

If you have a warm fuzzy and the word God popped into your mind, then the word God is only as real as you, expressed via the emotional event.

To suggest the word God, represents "more" than the cited source - requires evidence.

Without evidence, no one has any reason to believe that the word God exists as anything more than the evidence suggests; written word, verbal word, dream/imagining, warm fuzzy, etc.

No one, here, is obligated to give the word God more existence than the evidence suggests.

Just because someone really, really, really, wants the word God to mean more than a word, etc., doesn't improve the "possibility" that the "word", refers to the existence of more than just a "word", or its cited source.

So, while I know for a fact that the word God has zero existence per my life experience, I also know...

The word God, can have no more existence to "any" person, than the source from which they received that concept - that would be called a "fact".

If someone suggests otherwise, that would be called a "lie".

trancelation said...

UNClear:

Where does it say these things about these different classes of animals in the Bible? Nowhere. Another problem: there is no such thing as a naturally domesticated animal. No animal is BORN domesticated. ALL animals are capable of being wild to some degree, and domesticated to some degree. You domesticate tigers for long enough, they will evolve into a species that is more capable of being domesticated. Expose pomeranians to the wild for long enough, they will evolve to be more capable of living in the wild. As for the fowl; you are conveniently ignoring what it says, and thusly still lying.

Genesis 1:20-21

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

VS

Genesis 2:18-19

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

In one place, fowl come from the water, along with "sea creatures". Later, they come from the ground, along with "beasts". This is a contadiction. You are not answering this contradiction, and thusly it still exists. Since the Bible does not go into the detail that these are different fowl, we have to either assume they are the same fowl - at which point they come from two different places at two different times, which creates a contradiction - or that they are different fowl, which is not described. This is the problem. It is too vague to take seriously as a history of creation, and admitting it is a story is (for a Christian) an admission that it is nothing more than a story. So you have to answer from which location the fowl came from. This has nothing to do with CONTEXT. The CONETXT is that at one point, fowl come from the water, and then later the ground. PICK ONE, UNClear. But stop lying to yourself and others.

Bill F:

I've made this point already. Every version of God that has been claimed to exist has been shown to not exist. This leaves us with two options.

1. God does not exist.

2. God is a liar.

Or, you can have the third option of, there is a God that we do not know about. But what evidence is there of that? I really don't care if something can be disproven or not. It was Dawkins who ALSO said that, to admit the possibility of something just because it cannot be disproven is ridiculous. If you don't believe me, you can view him saying this in his ROOT OF ALL EVIl documentary. To admit the possibility of a God because we cannot disprove the notion of one is absurd. You might as well admit that there is a teapot flying around the Earth that we cannot see, if you're going to admit that. To make such an argument is a logical fallacy. It does not make sense to present the possibility of something existing, especially something that we have NO evidence of existing in any other case. where is the evidence for God? There is none. Why should we admit that it is possible that there is a God? We should not. Seeing as how there is no evidence for a God, and we have never seen a God before, including ones that have been claimed to exist before, we know that there is no God.

trancelation said...

Bill F:

Ya' know, one of the things wrong with this world is the sheer amount of people that waste so much time defending the notion of a divine creator instead of just admitting that we don't know, and that there is no evidence for a divine creator. Instead of being reasonable about this, people (specifically, people of faith) waste their time (and ours) moralizing. See, Bill F, morality does not require reason. Morality stems from such devices as religion, and religion is not a device that thrives on reason - otherwise, it would not require faith in the face of such unreasonable claims.

So, let's be reasonable here. What reason is there for seeking evidence for the idea of a divine creator, and then defending that idea when no evidence shows up? What good comes from defending the idea that because something cannot be disproven, it must be admitted to be possible, and thusly be admitted to be real (a logical fallacy)? Why is such a thing reasonable? I fail to see why such considerations are good - how such useless posturing accompishes anything. Is it good to admit that there are invisible pink unicorns flying around in VW Beetles converted to be intergalactic spacecraft that run off rainbows and produce sunshine in their wake, or admit that such a thing is possible, all because we cannot disprove its existence? Is a scientist to be taken seriously when they make this claim? I should think not. Why, then, should we take them anymore seriously when they will not fully discredit the idea of a creator God? Because it's possible because it cannot be disproven?

This is a vicious circle, Bill F, and it is ridiculous. We have three options in the discussion of the notion of a creator God. We know that God fails to meet any of the qualities men promise it has, therefore it does not exist, and is merely the fancy of hucksters and psychotics; or, God is lying, and therefore God is evil; or, there is a creator we do not know about. As I have said already, this third option is a ridiculous pursuit. There is no evidence for it, and when you propose an idea and then seek evidence for it, that defeats the purpose of the scientific process. We have to ask, where is the evidence for such a claim? Ultimately, there is none. It is only reasonable to say, then, that we know there is no God. God is the name people have given this supposed creator deity, but would a creator deity (which we know does not exist because there is no evidence for something called God) want to be called God? Why?

Now, when people cannot come up with any supportive evidence for such a claim, they moralize. They lose sight of reason. They start saying such unreasonable things as, "It must be possible because it cannot be disproven." They start making appeals to absolute authority, such as, "What point is there to morals if there is no Holy Teapot"? Indeed, there IS no point to morals.

Morals are systems of good and evil, black and white, right and wrong, that require no reason or evidence. KKK clansmen have morals. Africans commiting genocide have morals. Child rapists have morals. Muslims crashing airplanes into buildings have morals. Christians bombing abortion clinics and filling the pages of human history with hatred and bloodshed and suffering have morals. When they cannot reason about their claims, when they start to say their claims are valid because they are not disprovable, they moralize about them because they might be possible.

Basically, Bill F, no good can come out of asinine posturing. Down that road lies ruin, as it always has. I, on the other hand, refuse to moralize and be unreasonable. It is perfectly reasonable of me to say I know there is no God. It is perfectly reasonable for me to say I know there is no teapot orbiting the Earth. It is perfectly reasonable for me to say I know that there are no pink unicorns. You know how I know?

Because such claims are unreasonable.

trancelation said...

Bill F:

Don't bother accusing me of being overly skeptical. I'm more than open to reasonable claims. But fantastic claims require fantastic evidence. If that fantastic evidence never shows up, we know the fantastic claim is false. I'm more than open to hear ideas on who shot JFK. No one can blame me for laughing when you start talking about pink unicorns.

.:webmaster:. said...

Clear wrote, "
Maybe I stated the question wrong. I'm asking, what is the point in having morals? I understand all the points made about we should be nice to others because it's the rational thing to do & all. I get. But lets say you live the next 10 years of your life as a nice person doing all the right things, then you you died by chance. And suppose someone else acted like a jerk (or if we take it to the extreme) maybe even a serial rapist for their 10 years & did not get caught. Does it really matter how both acted during this life? There is not a consequence to either behavior (taking him being caught or being on the run from the law out of the equation. This is just a representaion of living the wrong life). "


I'll answer your question with a question: What is the reason for morality?

Answer: If a man is stranded all alone on a desert island, his personal morality is irrelevant. If, however, this same man lives in society with other human beings, his morality is important. Morality has everything to do with human interaction. The serial rapist is harming other human beings, and human beings generally don't appreciate being harmed, so society doesn't approve and will attempt to catch and punish the perpetrator. It's really quite simple. While it's true that some criminals don't get caught, society still finds criminal behavior repugnant. However, societies differ on the definition of immoral. Blasphemy, for instance, was considered immoral for hundreds of years in Christian societies. In some, it was punishable by death. Today, blasphemy is still a punishable offense in Islamic countries.

Now, consider this: If you suddenly stopped believing in a god, do you think you would adopt a lifestyle that included rape, murder, and theft?

Just because a person doesn't believe in a god, it doesn't mean he or she doesn't want to live in an orderly and safe society. And just because a person believes in a god, it doesn't mean he or she sees things clearly. Clearly blasphemy (for instance) should never be punished by death.

~Transparent said...

Well put WM, morality is a multi-person sport.

If one were to peruse the Maslow Pyramid, they would see that the use of social codes (morality), enables people to live with each-other such that they can achieve their needs; physical, safety, belonging, self-esteem, and self-actualization.

Morality is a word used to describe a means of mediating between people who have competing interests and needs.

When one person steals food from another person, they could be seen as immoral, if they are unfairly and unjustly debilitating the person from having their layer one needs met.

The word immoral/moral is a short-hand method to describe what a social community considers "fair".

If it is in the "best" interest of a person to achieve their needs which is the human thing to do, then we seek successful ways of achieving such a objective.

One way of doing this, is to establish social codes (which establish morality/immorality for a society), such that, when people neglect a code, society can "enforce" punishment by a means of justice (legal) - law enforcement can occur.

Morality to the individual, becomes a measure by which we compare our behaviors to the expectations of the social code we are obligated to keep - something we are subjected to by birth and the geographic area we find ourselves.

Morality to a social system is a means to "regulate" human needs, such that regulation leads to the successful cohabitation between people with competing and like needs.

It's interesting to think in terms of a single individual on the planet, because there is only "one" person with needs, and the success they have at achieving those needs, doesn't require some for of regulation between the individual and others who may hinder such achievement.

Thinking along those lines, if there were "one" individual, and a God on this planet, would there need to be a set of social codes (morality)? A God doesn't have needs, a God can snap their fingers and just have anything they wish. Therefore, it would appear that morality would only be necessary to protect the individual from the God, there would be no benefit for a moral system to the God.

However, it appears that throughout the bible, that non-adherence to an "ideology" (which doesn't show up on the Maslow Pyramid), brings down the wrath of God - wrath, from a God who has "no needs" to be met, but yet, "demands" and "imposes" an "ideology" on "all" people, such that it prevents social harmony between entire societies - that's not only "immoral", that's cruel.

To contemplate behaviors without consequences, or to suggest that acts that prevent another person from having their needs met is the same as actions that don't prevent another person from having their needs met, is an attempt to marginalize all behaviors and misses the point - morality is a word used to denote fair and unfair behavior(s) (as defined by the culture).

If the scenario is marginalizing morality, the means to regulate human needs in a society, in order to show that justice may not be equally served, I could agree - morality does not equate to justice automatically. Without the ability to control and enforce social codes (morality), no social justice can be enforced, except by the individual who is effected.

So, just because something is considered "immoral", doesn't mean that justice will be served - consider the example of God, does any religiously affiliated person believe that there will one day be "divine" justice served to a God, that demands the unnecessary sacrifice of human needs, because the God, finds "pleasure" (a want not a need), in demanding complete "servitude" - even to the bloodshed detriment of entire nations because of such servitude...

I think not, while I may note such a God as totally immoral, in terms of limiting humanity from being all they can be, there is no reason to "theoretically" (taking into account we are talking totally in the abstract here), believe, that such a God would be held to justice.

no god/no fear said...

`clear said: Besides, if you guys have degrees and such, and no longer believe, then what could I ever say that could change your mind.

Honestly, the atheist position in this discussion, or just about any other, has less to do with 'having a degree' than it does with simply educating oneself on the art of constructing a logical argument. The position from which you argue is fallacious.

Have you thought about the idea that if we exist and there is no god supporting us that morality, by default, is clearly a human construct? Are you arguing that if you discovered there was no god that your whole moral foundation were to collapse? You would immediately commence stealing from others or intentionally inflicting pain on those around you? Would you murder anyone who got in the way of your happiness just because you found out that you will never be punished (or rewarded)in the 'afterlife'?

If you want to really want to give yourself something new to chew on, read up on logical fallacies. The other thing you can do to really stimulate your thinking is to never assume god exists when you ask yourself questions like this. Try mental exercises where you eliminate the possibility of ANY god--you will be shocked to see just how much you have created your own limitations on your thinking.

Sophia

justaguy said...

So...how did the universe and beings come into existence? And you need to go deeper that the bang theory and evolution. Take the Theory of "First Cause". In Science, everything has a cause and effect right? Science is amazing and I love it, but science can also point to a higher power. If you think about cause and effect....what caused the gases, that cause the bang that caused the first cell and elements. What caused that first elements? What caused that the thing that caused the first gases and elememts? And what caused that thing that caused that thing that caused those gases and cells and elements. And what caused the thing that caused the thing that caused the thing that caused.... I could go on and on, but science can only take you so far. Something had to be first. Why is it so easy to believe a theory compared to the possibility that there is a higher power? Seriously...

~Transparent said...

justaguy: "Something had to be first."

Care to explain where the beginning of a circle is, thanks.

justaguy: "Why is it so easy to believe a theory compared to the possibility that there is a higher power?"

Who was the higher-power, before the higher-power, and who was the higher-power before that higher-power, times infinity. And why only worship one of those higher-powers, since there is a higher-power than that one.

.:webmaster:. said...

justaguy said...

"So...how did the universe and beings come into existence?"

Ah, duh... I don't know!

And guess what? You don't either. You just don't like "I don't know" for an answer, so you prefer to make one up -- i.e., magic!

Hey fellas! Science doesn't have all the answers to all the questions yet, so let's proclaim various gaps in our knowledge as irrefutable proof that our favorite flying, un-dead, god-man-on-a-stick is real!

Think about it.

Whoo-hoo!

Jim Earl said...

Unclear wrote:

Besides, if you guys have degrees and such, and no longer believe, then what could I ever say that could change your mind.

I don't have a degree or any further education than high school. I once was a dedicated follower but I came to my senses.

I can say that for me, a god does not exist. I have no problem with anyone else saying the same thing.

If you say a god does exist, then prove it. Simple enough?

Jim Earl

trancelation said...

You hit the nail on the head, webmaster. We DON'T know. Some of us can admit this, but others - so many others - are afraid. Thus enters religion from stage right. Religion appeals to our fears of the unknown, offering seemingly credible answers based on faulty logic. "But everything needs a creator, right?" Everything except that creator, apparently. All of a sudden, contradictions are okay, because it's better than not having an answer. COME ON, PEOPLE. Get a grip. It's okay not to know. That's the whole point of pursuing fact and knowledge. So we CAN know. Closing up the gap by covering your ears and wishing the scary not-knowing away isn't going to fix it. You're just replacing one problem with another.

~Transparent said...

Albeit, it's fun to poke on the insanity button of those running endless question loops; we should attempt to help out the insane.

Okay, all questions are spawned from one's experience. It's really easy, a person has an experience, let's say; someone experiences a second person talking to them about the beginning of the Universe that "experience", is limited to the conversation alone, and only questions specifically surrounding the events of the conversation can lead to "factual" answers.

Everything provided "beyond" the "evidence" of the conversation itself; would be considered hyperbole, hypothetical, opinions, pre-determined statements, etc.

All answers are not equally worthy of merit, a fact is much more "useful" than an "opinion", if one seeks to use such an answer to establish a more complex truth.

While a question may lead a person to further explore and receive experiences such that they can provide supporting information/data to their hypothetical, opinions, etc., we can rule out some experiences that are dead-ends for human analysis, to name but a few; death and all pre-recorded civilization (to include the beginning of the Universe questions).

However, facts can be accumulated and compiled, to illuminate pre-recorded history, when "all" the "known" facts today, stand side-by-side without "conflict", in a logical form, as to provide a clear response to a specific question - a "theory" is presented - an "educated" conclusion to a question that exceeds the limits of human experience.

Note, however, that when opinions, hyperbole, etc., are strung together, like paper doll orgami cut-outs, in order to present an explanation for a question that exceeds the limits of human experience, in-conflict with known "facts"; we tend to call that "fiction", "fantasy", "story-telling", "lying", etc., based on "uneducated" guesswork.

While "fiction" may give comfort to those seeking "any" explanation at all, to quench their tenaciously nagging curiosity, as they lack/refuse to accept anything else for explanation; "fiction" will not enable a person, to develop plans, strategies, etc., to meet desired effects or basic expectations with any great success in life. It would seem, that living a life based on "fictional" principles will prevent/hinder a person from achieving their goals, unless, their goals include living an unpredictable life, in anxiety, day-to-day.

So, while it's truly important to say "I don't know", when one doesn't know the answer to a question; it's also important to be able to identify and associate questions to answer possibilities/potentials and the quality thereof.

I find that religions tend to create questions, and then provide their own particular answers, using whatever technique allows them to support their message. Some use a combination of science, facts, and then pure hyperbole, in a mix that gives it an air of credibility.

All one need do, is be able to pick out the information that is internally inconsistent in its doctrine, or contradictory between the internal doctrine and any externally validated facts. If the information is amended to reflect the facts, then we have a history book. If not, we have a sci-fi writing, with a mix of facts and fiction.

Well... at times, it's entertaining to point out contradiction to facts, and at others; to just play the one-up game of factually unanswerable questions, to see how long it takes for it to dawn on them ;-)

.:webmaster:. said...

Transparent,

The bottom line remains: We don't know everything there is to know about the entire universe. However, that is not to say that we will not know much more in the future. We know considerably more about things than we did when Christianity ruled the western world. In fact, when Christianity had full control, we enjoyed the Dark Ages.

Now, if your mind, we will NEVER understand things. After all, we can never understand God or His ways, so it is virtually impossible to understand his creation!

Christianity is just an excuse to remain ignorant while feeling like as if all the questions have been answered.

~Clear said...

@no god/no fear & Jim Earl - I mentioned the degrees because of prior comments posted. Those guys who have degrees and were Christain at one time but walked away should know better than another one what the arguments for & against what is written. They just choose to reject the answers for whatever reason.

@no god/no fear - To your question of, If I found out there was no God, would I begin murdering people? What would it matter. That's my point. If I live life as a nice person, a jerk or a murder, it makes no difference. Suppose you live the dream life: The big house, tons of money, nice cars, great spouse, everything you wanted. The moment you die, what difference did it make that you lived the dream life? That's like going to the movies and watching a great movie then at the end of the show, the lights never turn back on. That seems very empty to me.

@WM - I see your point on morality. But let's go back to your island thought. If you landed on a stranded island, would you kill yourself (like swimming out to sea & drowning) or would you wait it out (until you died from hunger or age)? You would most likely wait it out because
there is a hope or a belief in you of being resuced from the island. That's like faith. Believing you'll be rescuded.

@Jim Earl - You want me to prove that God exists? Look in the Bible. Most of the bible is prophecy which history has proven true. Disagree with that? Then look in the mirror because you are part of that proof.. 1 Tim 4:1 "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter
times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils".

On a personal level, there have been 2 separate occaisons that 2 people of God have spoken to my spouse concerning things that have happened in my's spouse's life which NOBODY could have known. They didn't know each other, they don't know my spouse, but they of the knew of the situation because of the divine knowledge given to them by God. Now I know you don't put much weight into this because it's a personal story which can't be verified but
for me, I am convinced!

.:webmaster:. said...

Clear,

You don't get the point on morality. It would matter very much if you began murdering or raping or pillaging. It would matter to the people you were abusing. It would matter so much to those people that they would do everything in their power to make you stop.

Now, if you are trying to say that life and behaving in a civilized manner is pointless unless life lasts forever, that's extraordinarily simplistic. Nah, it's worse than that. It's stupid.

If I was stranded on a desert island I'd live, just like I live on this little tiny island in the universe called earth. I and most people keep living regardless of life's challenges because we all want to live. In fact, the survival instinct is so strong in our species that people like you embrace fantastical religions that promise you will never die and you embrace those fantasies with a vengeance.

How we treat each other matters to society, our neighbors, our loved ones, and ultimately to ourselves. If the only reason you behave in a civilized manner is because you think some god will either punish you or reward you for your efforts, then please continue to believe in invisible deities. I'd not want to meet you outside a church.

.:webmaster:. said...

Oh, and again, your psychic messages from god are either scripture or demonic or fake. You can't have direct revelation from GOD without it becoming scripture, can you? Shouldn't everyone read, study and memorize you and your wifes magical messages from GOD? Hmm?

Or are your wife's friends practicing witchcraft? I've heard that the devil can whisper secrets in people's ears too.

Man oh man. Religion really makes fools of people. Wow.

~Transparent said...

WM: "The bottom line remains: We don't know everything there is to know about the entire universe. However, that is not to say that we will not know much more in the future."

Totally agree on that point, we have a tremendous potential to know much more tomorrow than today, as humanity - unless we have a rise of illiterates to power via religion :-)

WM: "We know considerably more about things than we did when Christianity ruled the western world. In fact, when Christianity had full control, we enjoyed the Dark Ages."

Amen. And, the more we know, the more inconsistent most religious doctrine contradicts newly obtained facts, theories, etc.

WM: "Now, if your mind, we will NEVER understand things."

Oh, I hope we continue to learn, and think we know a lot already. But, am skeptical that for events that are pre-historic, or pre-date recorded history, we can only assemble today's facts obtained in our era, in order to establish a sound theory that satisfies any scientific hypothesis brought forth.

And, we can't study after-death experiences, so, any hypothesis brought up, can't be falsified using facts.

WM: "After all, we can never understand God or His ways, so it is virtually impossible to understand his creation!"

Let me add "God" to the list of things I don't currently have any facts for :-) based on my life experience and the definition provided to me, by the ever so considerate Christian meme :-).

It's a shame, though, how many Christians seem to lack the ability to just drop/let go, of nonsense questions, so that they can learn more about life and be free from perpetual anxiety.

WM: "Christianity is just an excuse to remain ignorant while feeling like as if all the questions have been answered."

Well said, the Christians I converse with don't seem to have one drop of curiosity, to spark some mental process to ask questions and seek answers - God is the answer for everything that they have no knowledge on.

The recorded message they were given by some religious leader, is their answer to any question they may have - I believe there's a term for that; God Parrot, godidiot, sheeple, etc.

Have a great one.

~Transparent said...

~Clear: "On a personal level, there have been 2 separate occaisons that 2 people of God have spoken to my spouse concerning things that have happened in my's spouse's life which NOBODY could have known."

What do you believe the job of a profiler is? What do you believe the job of a psychologist is? How about a psychiatrist?

~Clear: "They didn't know each other, they don't know my spouse, but they of the knew of the situation because of the divine knowledge given to them by God."

If you are in the dog-house, how hard would it be, to suggest that your spouse was not too happy with you? You are a walking billboard of your other half, if you haven't figured that out yet, you must be young in your marriage.

~Clear: "Now I know you don't put much weight into this because it's a personal story which can't be verified but for me, I am convinced!"

You should be convinced of only a few things, in my opinion. One, someone said something that was true about your other half, and you have no knowledge of the connection between them and your spouse.

What you lack, is knowing for a fact, that your spouse and them never met, unless you are going to suggest you have been tied at the hip with your spouse since birth, and two, that some unknown identified object fed these two people with information about your spouse. Ciao

~Transparent said...

Correction, "that some unknown identified object..." should be "that some unknown and unidentified object...".

Interesting, you have a working hypothesis that can't be falsified through the use of facts; that gives you the ultimate artistic license to create any story you want, and declare it as "what you believe".

Sure, whatever you have to tell yourself, in order to sleep at night - hopefully, you respect yourself enough, to not buy the BS you are promoting.

~Clear said...

WM - Wasn't Daniel getting real time info from God? Why can't that happen today?

Transparent - OK. Your right. I couldn't have been with my spouse 24/7 since they born to verify. But I'm 99% that was the real deal because:
A) They lived in different states up until that point.
B) Way different age group so that they couldn't remember each other.
C) No outward signs of inner issues.
D) 2 separete people & 2 different time frames with the same A though C circumstances.

So it appears to me to be an atheist I should magnify the 1% and forget the 99%. Is that right?

Also here's the answer to the fowl question:
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=7754525e02c2246d8d27

And for good measure:
http://www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=3d6cc88a4e50a170fc53

~Transparent said...

~Clear, here's a lesson on facts, theories, and total hyperbole.

You are not a credible source of information; nothing you can be corroborated, for instance;

A) They lived in different states up until that point.

Hope you've heard about the invention they came out with a while ago, it's called mass communication? Phones, Internet, social gatherings within similar religious groups, knowing common religious beliefs/practices and lifestyles regardless of where someone lives, etc.

B) Way different age group so that they couldn't remember each other.

That doesn't make any sense. If they were to "remember" anything at all, they must have at least "met" first. You can't remember something you have never experienced, that's how "memory" works. And, if you are suggesting that your spouse and these two people are of different age groups, I would have to assume that your spouse is older than them, because if your spouse was younger, then these two women were able to have met your spouse any time in their life.

C) No outward signs of inner issues.

Yeah, your unconscious and habitual mannerisms, actions and behavior don't reflect anything about how you think and your nature - that's interesting, so, you have lived the perfectly fake life, even down to your subconscious - that is amazing, do you strive to continue to live a lie? Even, though, that's not really possible, you can't hide everything over an extended period of time.

D) 2 separete people & 2 different time frames with the same A though C circumstances.

Two people, that you seem to be totally isolated from; yet, you seem to know a lot about them and how they came to know some information about your spouse.

What's interesting, is that while you suggest that no one can know what you believe or have experienced, you turn around and seem to know "exactly" what two other people know and have experienced - do you see the irony there?

Based on your statement, you should have no clue or statement to make in regard to these other two people, whom you have no idea about, in regards to their entire lives, or thoughts. If you suggest you do know their entire lives, then they knew yours as well, to include "all" of your married years.

And, to end, not only can you not know how they came up with this reported information on your spouse by method, you have no "source" verification, e.g. God.

However, if you would like to "define" the term God, such that it means more than an "idea" you have in your head, then, please, by all means - explain, and point to something that represents this idea you are having.

Of course, while you suggest no one can know your experiences, thoughts, etc., you seem to have a knack for knowing two people you only "slightly" knew, and an all knowing "God" and its intentions, behavior and actions.

~Transparent said...

~Clear: "So it appears to me to be an atheist I should magnify the 1% and forget the 99%. Is that right?"

No, no, no... it's easier than that. In order to be an atheist, you just need to lack belief in a God/god.

For instance, if you are thinking of the word God, then, it's a fact you have an idea, and have called that idea, God. However, it is "not" a fact, that your "idea", has any value beyond your mind.

So, just tell the truth, and magnify that; all else will fall into place, for instance, you will fall out of the good graces of your religion for making such a claim, and unless you just want to worship your own mind, you will no longer require a belief that your “idea” exists somewhere “else”, such that you need to “worship it”.

trancelation said...

UNClear:

Still not answering the question, UNClear. Those verses say nothing about God making ONE OF EACH ANIMAL from the ground for Adam to name. It says that the fowl of the air come from the waters, and then later that they come from the ground. Nowhere does it says that ONE OF EACH fowl of the air comes from the ground or from the sea. Nowhere does the Bible go into such detail, especially not in the Genesis verses. There would be no contradiction if it explained that God took the same fowl he made from the waters, and then remade those same fowl from the ground, after deleting the original fowl from the waters, to remake them again through the ground for Adam to name. Not only does this not make sense, such an explanation is not present. Besides that, why not just command the fowl from the waters to fly in front of Adam? Why does God need to remake them from the ground? What happened to the original fowl from the waters? So, guess what, UNClear - there is still a contradiction.

The funny thing is that on the first link, there is a response listing one of the more popular Biblical criticisms - the events surrounding Jesus' death and resurrection. Christians love to equate this to a group of witnesses seeing a car crash from different angles. The problem is, when a 1999 Ford Mustanf and a 2006 Toyota Tundra crash into each other, and several of the witnesses claim seeing entirely cars crash into one another, we have a contradiction. Same thing with the resurrection accounts.

As for the second video . . . it doesn't seem to address the fowl issue at all. Maybe I missed it because I skipped through a lot of it looking for the caption screen to say it was addressing the fowl issue, and when I couldn't find it there I skipped around again, mainly because the arrogance and voice of the video creators annoys the shit out of me. I don't intend to sit and listen to these lunatics ramble on for even five minutes, so if you can tell me EXACTLY where in the video (time-wise) they address the fowl issue, I'll be waiting.

Until then, either the fowl came from the waters, or they came from the ground. Pick one, UNClear.

Bill F said...

trancelation wrote:

"It was Dawkins who ALSO said that, to admit the possibility of something just because it cannot be disproven is ridiculous. If you don't believe me, you can view him saying this in his ROOT OF ALL EVIl documentary."

He seems to have changed his mind, then. The Root Of All Evil was broadcast in January 2006, but he said "Of course, any scientist would leave open that possibility" in September 2006.

trancelation wrote:

"Why should we admit that it is possible that there is a God? We should not."

Well, another quote from The God Delusion is that God is "very, very improbable". Not the same as impossible.

~Clear said...

Transparent - Thanks for the fact lesson but again your magnifying the 1% and tossing out the 99%.

Before I explain further, I did note on my personal level comment that I knew it was "a personal story which can't be verified" so I know you won't put to much weight into it. The explaination is, one of the ladies was part of a prophecy conference in a church that we have never attented. So that's why I say the information she knew was from God since only God know all things. Because the info she knew was so personal that it would be the same as repeating back to you a long off the wall dream you had when you were 7 years old which you told nobody about. Nobody can extract that kind of info from anything outwardly. The chances of her knowing this kind of personal info topped with the chances of meeting at a very unlikely location is just about 0%. But oh, wait. Since I don't know her history, and there is still a slim 1% chance she could have somehow known on her own, that 1% washes out the other 99%. That's not logical. But again, just my story.

Also the second vid had nothing to do with the fowl but more on the concept of contradictions which appears you weren't intrested in. Cool..

Well as for the fowl, you already explained the bible doesn't go into detail in the Genesis verses. So, a person can either fill in the missing detail with the most likely scenario or dismiss the whole thing all together because the writer didn't explain it to their liking. This is where we part ways. I will choose to see it as God's Word and correct. You'll see it as you see it in whatever way you like that suits you.

Therefore, since you believe your way & I believe mine AND we are just going around the same mountain, this will be my last entry for this post.

Be blessed..

~Transparent said...

~Clear, thanks for clearing up the story a little more. I understand, where you are coming from now.

Where I can not speak I will not. However, without evidence of some "force" in the Universe to guide prophesies, it would be honest for you to conclude that you have no more ability to explain such an event as I do.

There are fundamental differences between us though, from this conversation.

1-You trust your spouse's physical and mental ability, to make the connection between their past event and words provided by a psychic, as a prophet/prophetess or one who see prophecy, sees the future, not the past.

2-You trust that your spouse didn't interpret the words and fill in the blanks of the psychic, and make connections based on their desire, just as you propose the bible can be interpreted in multiple ways, depending on how one wants to interpret it.

3-You trust that a God exists, beyond your mind, although you have no evidence.

4-You trust that the unidentifiable source of power that helped out this psychic is the God you have no evidence for.

5-You trust that the devil/Satan is not responsible for assisting the psychic, although you have no means to verify the source of the psychic's inspiration, and by default, as a Christian, you believe that Satan exists, and is involved in this type of activity, in order to misguide.

6-You trust that the religious leader who taught you about God and Satan, etc., was qualified to teach you, based on their evidence of a God and Satan, etc.

You see, while neither of us can factually support any of those top six; you have chosen to just accept all of it, 100% based on unconditional trust.

I have just chosen not to blindly (without the ability to validate) accept those six as valid, because there isn't "one" fact, to support any of them;

Where I need facts, in order to make logical connections; you choose to just blindly trust.

While I may concede, that I would "trust" my spouse, based on my assessment of their mental capacity, etc., I would not trust a religious leader who has zero evidence or facts, or me and my ability to validate the power source by which the psychic was connected to their vision of the past.

If you accepted only the facts to make claims/statements, then you and I would be making the same claim here, likely.

However, your blind trust, in multiple parties, without any corroborating evidence; allows you the freedom to believe anything that your mind can present.

So, while you "hope" in life; I prefer to "know" in life. While, you may go far in life, with just hoping, and letting society sort of take care of you, there will be times, where "not-knowing" something will reduce your ability to live successfully - if success is to be measured by one's ability to live without anxiety and suffering.

Well, that's my final input also; peace.

Anonymous said...

Clear
I always wonder how people like Miss Cleo made a fortune out of stupid/naïve/lonely people. Now I know. It’s because of people like you clear. Wow you are a very gullible person clear.
Think, think, think, think, for once think for yourself

trancelation said...

Bill F:

Do you have children? If so, I fear for them. When your child awakens you in the middle of the night to tell you there is a monster under their bed, do you go:

1. There's no such thing as monsters

or

2. Well, sweetheart, since we cannot disprove the existence of monsters, it's possible that there are monsters that live under your bed, who also possibly eat your eyes and entrails while you sleep, or monsters that live in the toilet and enter your body that way and eat you from the inside out. I mean, we can't disprove it, right?

Is the second option how you respond to children? Why, Bill? Why would you say something like that to a child, instead of asking them for the evidence of these monsters? Is something wrong with you? Were you molested or beaten as a child? I'm just asking. I'm trying to understand the mental state of a person who would terrorize children by forcing them to admit that monsters under their bed is a possibility because you canot disprove their existence.

Are you that kind of person, Bill? It sounds like it.

When you provide evidence for a God, I will admit that God is a possibility. Until then, no evidence = no possibility. It's how I know there are no pink unicorns and leprechuans. There is no evidence for them.

As for the Dawkins video . . . Bill, I really don't care what names you drop in your posts in an effort to sound reasonable or intelligent. You are the worst kind of debater; instead of making your own arguments, you hide behind the taken-out-of-context quotes of others, while also intentionally misunderstanding them and bending their intent to your own. So Dawkins says that it is possible that God exists, and then makes the same argument for OTHER gods, and somehow this means I should admit that it is possible that God exists? You are missing the point, Bill. The point is that if we admit that the Abrahamic God is a possibility, we must make room for all the other gods in existence. This most certainly defeats the purpose of admitting that God is a possibility. You are relying on a logical fallacy, and you do not understand Dawkin's arguments at all. If this were a carnival, I would call shenanigans on you.

Admitting that God is a possibility, and then routing that argument by stating that we must make room for all the other gods, is an old tacti of Dawkins'. For as long as I have been researching the man, he had been making this case. And once again, the point is to show how ridiculous the idea of a God is. It's absurd to admit the possibility of flying spaghetti monsters just because we cannot DISPROVE THEM. Do you admit the possibility of the pantheon of Greek, Norse, Egyptian and Hindu gods, Bill? I doubt it. Do you admit the possibility of Allah? if you do, you admit that you will possibly be going to the Islamic Hell for not worshipping Allah. Yet I somehow doubt you will admit that possibility. Why? If one God is a possibility, why are not all gods such?

You have fallen for Dawkins' trap, Bill. Good job.

As for my position, it remains: no evidence = no possibility. I really don't care what names or quotes you drop, Bill. So you found some videos on YouTube. ohh n0es 11!1!11 i@mz d3f3@t3d! Whatever. Fantastic claims require fantastic evidence. Provide evidence for a God or admit that you are a liar, Bill.

Anonymous said...

"MY purpose in life is to enjoy my time here without harming anyone else" - Jeff

Hmmm.....I guess attacking the beliefs of others is completely harmless to them, or am I missing something? Oh, wouldn't that be a contradiction? I guess we need a web site to make fun of you now because you have no credibility and you contradict yourself just as you claim that Christ contradicts Himself. You are the same as all the others who hate Christ. You won't attack any other religion at all. I think that is so cowardly, and there are many more others than you think who would agree with me; Christian or not. Also, if there is no God, and death is the end, I would make much better use of the time that I do have rather than offending others by (harmlessly, of course) attacking their beliefs. But good luck with that.....I'm sure it will be so rewarding in the end. As for proof of God's existence, we know that the Bible does co-inside with history, even though I am sure you will duck that fact as much as you can. We know that no matter how hard we try, you, I, and anyone else who tries to live up to all the principles of the Bible 100% come up short. But if you are in control of yourself, then why can't you live a perfect life? What makes you so imperfect? What draws you to make mistakes? Obviously, no one can live up to all the principles in the Bible, but wouldn't that mean that you are somehow influenced by something? So what are you influenced by? Going back to your quote: "MY purpose in life is to enjoy my time here without harming anyone else". But you just can't keep that from happening can you, Jeff? Somewhere along the way, you have done something that scripture tells us is wrong. If there was no God, you should be able to live your life like you said "without harming anyone". In addition, your disbelief has nothing to do with evidence. I know this because at the time of Christ, there were those recorded in the Bible and in history who saw Jesus' miracles, and still did not believe. That's why I know you don't care if there is any scientific or historical evidence at all. You are doing this as a way to lash out at Christians like all the other anti-Christians out there. Sadly, while you continue to disbelieve and attack (without harming anyone, that is), there are many historical and scientific evidences that have been and are being discovered to prove various happenings in the Bible. But, the one thing I know you will not accept is Hebrews 11:1 "Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen". I have a child and I know that there are no monsters in her closet.....but look around you, there is no reason to believe in monsters anyway. Look around you again.....is there any reason to believe that all of this was created, or did it just happen by accident? Did your life and the life of your ancestors mean something, or did they just decide one day to stop swinging from the tree and go to college? That idea is much more insane than believing that we are the design of something greater than ourselves. It's your choice to believe as you wish, and certainly I am not here to stop you. But likewise, you should have a little more respect for those that do believe in Christ, and by that I mean as much respect as you would want for yourself. To disrespect others or their beliefs is to harm others. To this, you can reply all you want, but you have lost credibility seeing as how you contradict yourself. And for those who truly believe in creation, belief in God was the first belief seeing as how Adam and Eve would've walked with God in the garden, and all other forms of gods would've come after that. I do not claim that there is a possibility of other gods, but I do not attack their beliefs because it is their American and God-given right to believe whatever they so choose. Funny, I sound more tolerant than you, Jeff.

Well Jeff, I hope you find more purpose to life than just: "MY purpose in life is to enjoy my time here without harming anyone else". Good luck with that. I hope this is thought about and not deleted...because to do so would also be cowardly. And I say that because you seem to be able to call others liars without being deleted off of here, yourself. And if your only reply is to call us liars, it's because you have been backed into a corner and you can't find anything better to say. As Bill said, "think about it".

.:webmaster:. said...

Anony-too-stupid-to-make-up-a-name-or-use -paragraphs:

You scribbled, "I guess we need a web site to make fun of you."

YOU (as in you Christians) have thousands of websites that threaten all those who reject your religion with billions and billions and billions of years of horrific suffering at the hands of your wrath filled deity.

You really need to learn to laugh at yourself, anony. Your religion is silly.

Anonymous said...

I see someone is allowed to call people names without getting kicked off. But once again, I guess you think we are an accident. And you call us silly? It is....oh, sorry, I guess I should start another paragraph before you get to name calling again....

It is very unfortunate that there are many people who call themselves Christians, yet do not live up to it and they do give all of us a bad name.....and those are sadly the ones that you and all others like to focus on. The groups of people that picket funerals of people that they say are going to Hell: they are not Christians. Christ Himself said that He did not come to condemn the world, but to save us. To base your argument on fake Christians is wrong.

Another paragraph for you.....The fact that you hate just Christianity is not a laughing matter, and I laugh at no such thing. It's so weird.....and I cannot get anyone to tell me honestly now, why Christianity? Who knows, maybe you will be the first one to give a straight answer without spitting out the same stupid stuff that we have all heard before. "because it is silly" or "because you have no proof" Why not any other religion on the face of this planet that also believes in the things all of you pick on, such as one god, a heavenly place, and a place that resembles hell. The only answer that I can figure is not some great psychological reason, nor does it have anything to do with the belief. It simply has to do with the fact that you got angry at someone who, like you and I, was not perfect and did something that offended you, and they just happened to call themselves a Christian.

Look around you, there are no perfect people. There are only 2 kinds of people: those that try to live for God and those that try to live for themselves. And those that live for themselves can claim to live for God all day, everyday, but if we can agree on anything, it is that we both know and can see the difference.

So, that having been said...you really sound like you need to deal with the problem where it began. Once again, blaming God is just your escape, your release. If you really didn't believe in His existence, you would stop trying to hurt Him by throwing the blame on Him for what you have gone through. I dare say that I have been attacked by more people who are supposedly "Christians" than you, and some of them I deal with on a semi-regular basis. If I can get over it, I'm sure you can to. People will offend you all the time - Christian or not. Why? Because people are people. You agree with that, right? Well, that's why we need God. Wisdom would lead you to stop throwing the blame on Him or anyone else who is not involved and concentrate on dealing with the real issue in your own heart.

If you want to correct me and tell me that you hate Christ because of some other reason, that's fine. I know....I don't know you. But, don't give me that crap about our religion being silly, because indicating the idea that we are a random accident by any choice of words is by far the most unreasonable and mindless response. Respond with something real if you are going to respond with anything. Otherwise, you are wasting your time.

Oh, and your "no evidence = no possibility" is full of wholes. Sorry to break it to you, but there are infinitely many things that have no evidence to support that they exist, some of which just haven't been discovered. But I guess because your eyes have not seen these things, they are not a possibility. Sounds to me like you are trying to be your own God. In other words, if your little brain hasn't seen it, it's not real. I guess in a society that is constantly discovering new things, they don't exist until we discover them. Nice going, there.

My apologies for any offenses. I just hope you think about it without just responding with an angry, mindless response.

.:webmaster:. said...

Dear anonymous Christian,

First of all, a little housekeeping: If you would click on the radio button beside the words "Name/URL" and type in a pseudonym, it would greatly facilitate conversation.

Now, you wrote, "It is very unfortunate that there are many people who call themselves Christians..."

This may come as a shock to you, but nearly every Christian thinks he or she is a "True Christian™" and claims that those Christians who disagree with him or her in various ways are false Christians. That kind of thinking has been going on since Christianity began. Even though the Jesus character promised that HE would send HIS Holy Spirit to lead HIS people into all truth, there are thousands of competing Christian denominations. Isn't it interesting how there are so many denominations claiming to have "The Truth," yet there are so many in such stark disagreement on so many points?

More from you: "The fact that you hate just Christianity is not a laughing matter, and I laugh at no such thing..."

The implication I get from this section of your post is that the exclusiveness of the criticisms posted here against Christianity somehow show that Christianity is true. Please correct me if I'm wrong on interpreting you. If I interpreted correctly, here's the explanation: The reason Christianity is exclusively criticized here is because this is a website for de-converting Christians. Here you will find people who were once trapped in the mind-numbing cult of Christianity, some for years or even decades. I personally was trapped for three decades in the intellectual wasteland of Christianity, and it is infuriating and embarrassing to have to admit how stupid I was. I am mad at myself and I am mad at the people who lured me in. You might try thinking of this place as AA for Christians. Consider this analogy: In AA, people who are escaping alcohol talk about escaping alcohol. They don't talk about escaping cocaine, heroin, or marijuana addiction; they don't talk about escaping sexual addiction; they talk about escaping addiction to alcohol. Alcoholics talk about being slaves of alcohol. For some it's whiskey. For another it's beer. Regardless of the particular preference, for recovering alcoholics, all alcohol is poison. Most here were slaves of one or another flavor of the poisonous Christian cult.

As far as your conclusion that the reason the posters here left Christianity has something to do with being offended by some Christian, that's a bit uninformed. I suggest you read a few dozen of the hundreds of testimonials posted here. I for one did not leave because some Christian acted like an ass. If that's all it would have taken for me to leave, I'd have left after the first month.

You further wrote, "Look around you, there are no perfect people. There are only 2 kinds of people: those that try to live for God and those that try to live for themselves."

Please define "perfect people." Then, show me how Christians don't live for themselves. If your religion did not promise you an eternal life in heaven and threaten you with everlasting horrific torment in hell, would you remain a Christian? Have you given all you own to the poor? Do you hold all your possessions in common with your fellow Christians? You apparently have access to computers and the Internet. That costs money. Don't you realize there are millions of people without the essentials of life? Why do you selfishly spend your wealth on nonessential items? Do you also spend money on entertainment? I would suggest that Christians as a group are not remarkably more selfless or generous than any other group of human beings.

I can't speak for everyone here, but I can say that I don't hate HIM. I no longer believe HE exists. I cannot hate something that is nonexistent. However, I do get a sick feeling in my stomach when I interact with people who are still pathetically addicted. If I hate anything, it is Christianity the religion that I hate. I condemn Christianity, but not its imaginary three-headed deity.

You wrote, "Oh, and your 'no evidence = no possibility' is full of wholes."

OK. All you have to do is present some testable evidence and the argument is over. If you or any Christian would present some testable evidence to support the proposition that the Christian god actually exists outside of Christian mythology and imagination, then I would gladly accept that position as having some basis in reality. Until such time, remaining skeptical, I think, is a reasonable and even wise position to take. Think about it. Outside of your religion, what other supposedly fantastic, miraculous, supernatural things in this world do you accept without question or evidence? Is Christianity and its associated myths the only area where you don't require evidence, or are you in the habit of believing every story you hear? Why do you reject the myths and legends of the other 30,000 religions out there without a second thought?

Finally, you wrote, "If your little brain [...] My apologies for any offenses [...] I just hope you think about it without just responding with a [...] mindless response."

I'm sorry, anonymous, but an insincere apology sandwiched between a couple of sharp insults is just too ironic. Are you sure you are a "True Christian™?"

AtheistToothFairy said...

Anymouse said:
"In other words, if your little brain hasn't seen it, it's not real. I guess in a society that is constantly discovering new things, they don't exist until we discover them"
---
Oh such grand insight you have, little mouse.

So I guess what you're saying is that instead of waiting for evidence for a thing to possibly exist, we should instead just assume everything the human imagination can render, must be of reality; just because some human mind conjured it up.
Is that correct no-name xtian?

Okay fine, let's go with your premise then.....

That means ALL RELIGIONS, now and throughout all history, must be as correct and real about their gods, as your own religion claims it is about your own god, right?

That means TIME TRAVEL is surely possible, because humans thought that idea up as well.
Well, if you do find that time machine and go into your own past, don't even think about killing any of your ancestors that had anything to do with handing down their genes to YOU.

Let's see, I wish for some cool ALIENS to come visit earth, for surely there must be advanced life forms out there, somewhere, who have such technology and have visited earth.

Let's don't wait till we have real evidence to conclude they are 'here', but let us just assume that if such beings can exist, they surely have found this tiny earth by now and have some huge desire to perform sexual exams on us; usually while we are sleeping.

I once had a thought that the real god lives inside the core of a massive black-hole.

Okay, it was just a passing thought really, but because I thought-it-up, I now know such a god must exist and I'm building a space ship to go find god's--black hole, errrr, I mean the black--god's hole, errrr, I mean the hole--god of blackness.
Oh forget it, you know what I mean.
Trust me, I'm right about this god and plan to write a book so everyone will have no excuse to deny my new found god.

Many xtians believe in roaming ghost on earth. Ghost from humans that once lived.
We have nothing more than hearsay evidence and nothing in your bible says god is letting souls have free roam of the earth, as they are either still dead or in heaven or hell (depending on which xtian sect you buy into).

Yet, we have far more xtians that believe in roaming earthly ghost than atheist (percentage wise), by FAR in fact.
So even though such an idea seems to contradict their own bible, many xtians have no problem in accepting this very strange idea.
So, should we all believe in ghost before we have proof, just because some claim to have seen them?

How many other supernatural and far-fetched ideas would YOU have everyone accept, without a stitch of evidence on it's behalf?

Imagine a world where every crackpot idea had to be seriously considered in the realm of science. Scientists would spend all their time debunking rubbish, instead of making new valid discoveries. What would such a business model cost in dollars?

No my friend, this is exactly why we require the one's making the far fetched claims to provide the proof and not visa versa.
YOU want us to believe in your imaginary god, then hand over some proof.

Until then, I suggest you keep your personal delusions to yourself and your therapist !!!


ATF (Who's own therapist assures him that the tooth fairy is more real than the xtian god)

Anonymous said...

Well, first of all, to the Atheist tooth fairy, believing the scientific contradiction that something comes from nothing is more of a personal delusion than anything, yet your personal delusion is freely posted. Should I make the same suggestion to you to keep all of your personal delusions to yourself? In addition, you are comparing other religions to the one and only religion that has hundreds of prophecies by people who lived hundreds of years apart that came true. Some of those prohecies are even coming true as you are contemplating what you will say in response to this. Plus, there is so much historical and scientific documentation that backs up Christianity and the many things that scripture identifies in history. To believe in the God of the Bible is to believe that He is the only God. So many people try to beat around the bush and not hurt other's feelings. I don't want to hurt their feelings, but I believe what I believe. I don't force that on anyone, nor do I put down anyone for having their own beliefs, unlike you. But, I won't try to put it lightly just to keep you happy and un-offended.

Now Jeff, you don't need my name to facilitate conversation. Here is a quote from what you said, seeing as how you like to quote so much.

"Please define "perfect people." Then, show me how Christians don't live for themselves. If your religion did not promise you an eternal life in heaven and threaten you with everlasting horrific torment in hell, would you remain a Christian? Have you given all you own to the poor? Do you hold all your possessions in common with your fellow Christians? You apparently have access to computers and the Internet. That costs money. Don't you realize there are millions of people without the essentials of life? Why do you selfishly spend your wealth on nonessential items? Do you also spend money on entertainment? I would suggest that Christians as a group are not remarkably more selfless or generous than any other group of human beings."

First of all, let me tell you just a little about myself while you get ready to insert your foot into your mouth. I am poor, I work 2 jobs, and I am a full-time student. I make enough to get by, but not to have all of those "nonessentials" you are talking about. I use a public computer with public internet, mainly because doing without that "nonessential item" allows me to be able to sponsor a child overseas who without sponsorship, would have no education, or food and medicine. Meanwhile, you are sitting in front of your cozy computer thinking of what else you will say to be degrading toward Christians.

The "little brain" comment was not an insult. Stand in the Grand Canyon for a moment, and see just how little we are. See, just how un-knowledgeable we are when you look at all the things we are still discovering everyday. Once again, my apologies for any offenses. And I am sincere, and I do not appreciate an attack on my character, especially when your whole page is devoted to the "sharp insults" of believers. However, even if what I said was meant to be an insult toward you, don't try to hold me to a standard that you attack.

You are absolutely right in that there are so many denominations out there, but the idea of a "True Christian (with the little 'tm' you inserted, I see)" has become less dependent upon what scripture states, and more dependent upon peoples' own opinions. I'm sorry that you view Christianity as a cult, but it is not a cult. Those who profess a religion, yet, their beliefs in their god is controlled by their own opinions, and furthermore, they push their own agenda behind the 'mask' of their religion is a cult. Some of those are supposedly "Christians", and some are other religions. If people would read scripture instead of trying to claim Christianity with no scriptural input, you would have more "True Christians (tm)" and less people that would've turned you against us.

You quoted "Why do you reject the myths and legends of the other 30,000 religions out there without a second thought?" I reject them because I believe that the God of the Bible is the one true God. The Bible is not a legend, nor does it contain myths. If you follow the laws of scripture completely, your life will be much more peaceful. A simple and well-known example of this: "Thou shalt not kill". If you kill, even if you are never caught, you have to live with that for the rest of your life. Meanwhile, other religions command one to kill those that do not believe in their God. I would think you would try to attack them. But that just reiterates the fact that you only attack Christianity because you got ticked off.

Lastly, you ducked my question, just as all others do. The question of "why target Christianity" that is. The only thing I see in your ranting and raving is you target Christianity because you just don't like us. Your thoughts of "how can He exist" can be used in talking about any other religion - "How does their god exist?" Many other things that you complain about in dealing with Christians, you could also complain about in dealing with other religious groups. Stop trying to dodge the question at hand here, Jeff. I'm not asking why the web-site hates Christians, I am asking why do YOU?

I feel that this is a waste of time. As you read this, you are already thinking of something else to say. In other words, you don't really care to even try to understand. You can't be reasoned with. You are blinded by your own anger to the point that nothing else matters, even the fact that you only attack one religion and you have no answer as to why. Intolerance is all that you have to show me for an answer. I wish you could receive a better answer from you than that. Well, I really wish you would change your mind. But, as I said, I am feeling more and more like this is a waste of time. I hope that somehow when you take your last breath on this Earth, you can look back and say that you lived for something. But seriously, I know for a fact that you won't if this is all you do for the rest of your life. I don't believe in luck, but if there is such a thing, well then good luck to you, sincerely Jeff.

anonymous.

boomSLANG said...

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...Well, first of all, [ ], believing the scientific contradiction that something comes from nothing is more of a personal delusion than anything, yet your personal delusion is freely posted.

Question: Where does "God" come from? "It" either came from "nothing", or "it" always existed, yes? Well, a simpler explanation - one with less baggage/less assumptions - is that nature came from nothing, or it always existed. *See Occam's razor...and then see vacuum fluctuations for an example of something that "comes from nothing".

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...Should I make the same suggestion to you to keep all of your personal delusions to yourself?

The difference being, you came here; we didn't come find you. The name of the website is clearly posted, along with disclaimer. BTW, you might want to read that, if you intend to stick around.

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...Some of those prohecies are even coming true as you are contemplating what you will say in response to this.

I presume you are talking about the alleged "Prophecy" that people wouldn't believe Christianity?..that there would be "apostates"? Hmmmm, let's see...talking vegetation?...sleep-overs in a whale's digestive tract? Uh huh...zombies, unicorns, giants, curing disease with bird's blood?

Now honestly, would it be some great "feat" to "predict" that reasonable people just 'might' not buy into those claims in the future?

Moreover, if "biblegod" foresaw and "Prophesied" that people would "fall from the faith", then obviously, it is necessary that people fall from the faith, or else it would be a failed "Prophecy". Duh?

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...To believe in the God of the Bible is to believe that He is the only God.

I'm pretty sure no reasonable person would argue that to "believe" in a specific something, is to believe it. Honestly, don't you think that is a bit redundant? In other words, for a Muslim to "BELIEVE" in "Allah", is for them to "believe that He[Allah] is the only God". Obviously, if they didn't "believe" it, then they wouldn't believe it.

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...You are absolutely right in that there are so many denominations out there, but the idea of a "True Christian (with the little 'tm' you inserted, I see)" has become less dependent upon what scripture states, and more dependent upon peoples' own opinions.[bold added]

Is this an admission on your part that you only state "opinion" since your arrival here? I ask, because you, like any other person who reads "scripture", are merely giving us your interpretation of "scripture". If "yes", we finally agree on something.

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...Meanwhile, other religions command one to kill those [who] do not believe in their God.

Meanwhile, you evidently don't know your own "Holy book".

Observe:

13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

~ Deuteronomy

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...The question of "why target Christianity" that is.

Anony'-kid, this was already explained to you. Again, this is "EX-christian.net"...not, "Anti-religion.net". Although, while most exchristians are against all organized religion, Christianity is the focus here, just like "gambling" would be the focus at a facility that caters to people who want to overcome their gambling addictions. 'Get it?

Anonymous # 15,098,876, said...I hope that somehow when you take your last breath on this Earth, you can look back and say that you lived for something. But seriously, I know for a fact that you won't if this is all you do for the rest of your life.

Oh, goodness gracious! Anony'-kid, you attack a strawman. Tell me, who said, other than you, that "this" - whatever you mean by that - is "all" that any of us will ever "do" in our lives?

Furthermore, why, if one lives a secular, temporal life, does that imply that they didn't "live for something"? Please treat us to the philosophy that supports that. 'Listening.

AtheistToothFairy said...

Anonymous wrote:
..to the Atheist tooth fairy, believing the scientific contradiction that something comes from nothing is more of a personal delusion than anything, yet your personal delusion is freely posted. Should I make the same suggestion to you to keep all of your personal delusions to yourself?
----
Well hi there no-name xtian,

1. Where in this post's comments did I state that "something comes from nothing"?

While that might be what happened, as Boomslang pointed out already to you, it's not the only theory in town.
If you are so cozy with the idea that god came from nothing (or was always around, some--how), then it would be far more likely for something far less complicated than a super god, to have come into existence, such as the less complex matter/energy we well know, and love.

Obviously the big bang wasn't an 'explosion' of nothing, but rather something.
Who's to say that this first-substance that 'exploded', wasn't always with us, in some form or another?
If nothing had to create your god, then nothing could have easily created all-there-is in the known universe.
Heck, the latter doesn't require any super intelligence or other super powers.

If the known matter/energy that makes up the known universe, collapses back into a single point and then explodes again, we would have a repeating cycle of universes of matter/energy.

Even if the known universe doesn't 'crunch' back into that single point (as could be the case), then who's to say that this known universe of matter/energy is the only one out there?
If one big bang took place, who's to say a million others haven't also taken place.
Space is infinite in size (as far as we know) and would have no problem at all, holding many universes of the size we assume ours is.
If we have many universes, each as large and filled with as many stars/planets as our own obviously is, then that would ensure life would form somewhere in that infinite space.

You think it's so spectacular that human life formed here on this tiny planet earth, so of course because it seems like a miracle to you, a god must have done it.
Of course, the non-existent life of Jupiter isn't sitting around pondering why they don't exist, now do they?
You only ponder such things, here on earth, because that is where human life had a chance to spawn it's existence.
If human life had a 'fate' to exist, then it had to form SOMEWHERE, in some universe.
If it hadn't, you and I wouldn't be here arguing about where we came from, now would we?

2. "My personal delusion", as you call it.
Yes I feel no qualms with posting my atheist view here on THIS site.
My viewpoint on the matter, fits in quite nicely with what the webmaster designed this site for.

Many many ex-xtians are atheist. In fact, I'll bet on this site, most member would be atheist or at least agnostics, so it is YOU that is out of place here with your god viewpoint buster.

My so called 'delusion' is based on available evidence and does not have a need for mystical invisible mind-blowing creatures, to support it.
Science, observable evidence, and testable inquiry, are far from some mind delusion, such as is the case for your own god delusion.


In addition, you are comparing other religions to the one and only religion that has hundreds of prophecies by people who lived hundreds of years apart that came true. Some of those prohecies are even coming true as you are contemplating what you will say in response to this


So prophecy is what tickles your fancy, is it.

I predict I will eat dinner sometime tonight.
There, I just wrote down a prophecy, in a public forum.
Now, I can make that prophecy fail to come true by not eating till after midnight, or I can eat dinner at 10pm and wha-lah, a fulfilled prophecy by ATF has come to pass.

Your bible prophecies fall into three categories.
1. They were written down AFTER THE FACT;and how would you know the difference?
2. Humans read some prophecy that had been written and MADE IT COME TRUE.
3. The bible writers made up stories of fulfilled prophecy; especially in the cases where there is zero evidence outside the bible to confirm they ever came true.

In addition, to things like the end-of-times prophecies, they are so VAGUE in nature, that it's only those who wish them to be fulfilled, would ever see them as being fulfilled.
There is NOTHING SPECIFIC in those prophecies of the end-times, that is any better than having your personal horoscope reading being specific and accurate for you.

It's all cow-dung and nothing less!!!
As they say, been there, done that, and found out it's all a scam.


Plus, there is so much historical and scientific documentation that backs up Christianity and the many things that scripture identifies in history

Finally, something I can sink my teeth into now.
Okay bible thumper, bring on any and all your wonderful evidence that your jesus ever lived on this earth, let alone did all those wonderful miracles your bible claims he did.

You have virtually NOTHING from secular history to support your jesus belief.
Such a god-on-earth, with so many followers, who created so much turmoil in his travels, would surely have had plenty written about him OUTSIDE your bible.
Alas, there is no proof he ever lived and plenty to show it was all stolen from other god beliefs and/or a pure work of fiction to appease some group's agenda of those times.

We've had plenty xtains before you showed up here, trying to bring forth such proof and they all failed miserably and so will YOU, no-name person.

To believe in the God of the Bible is to believe that He is the only God.

Well DUH!!!!
To believe in Santa, is to believe he's the only Santa; who brings presents on xmas eve.
So your point issssssss what?


So many people try to beat around the bush and not hurt other's feelings. I don't want to hurt their feelings, but I believe what I believe. I don't force that on anyone, nor do I put down anyone for having their own beliefs, unlike you.

Well then, you should tell all your fellow deluded believers in christ, to keep their delusions to themselves, and keep it out of the public eye and politics and certainly our public schools.
Until xtians back-off from trying to push their crap upon the rest of us, I have every justification to fight-back when they push.
I especially have all the right in the world, to post my thoughts about the fallacy of your god on this website, as that is clearly within the purpose of what this site is all about.

It is YOU that doesn't belong here and you should have known that fact when you stumbled in here and had some urge to spread your xtian god opinions on those of us who left your delusion behind us in life.

You xtian robot, are the intruder here, not I, and not those those here who saw through the brainwashing that still holds you in it's vise like grip.
Some of us woke up from the delusion and found reality, like it or not my friend.

I suggest you start to get use to the idea because there is a new wave coming.
A wave that will greatly continue to challenge your faith and all your assumptions thereof.
If I were a xtian still, I'd be looking high and low for all the evidence of my jesus/god, that I can muster up, because your days of being the majority in America are clearly numbered.


ATF (Who can't help but wonder why xtians feel they have the right to dictate what we get to say in 'our' own web space??)

Jim Arvo said...

Anonymous said "Well, first of all, to the Atheist tooth fairy, believing the scientific contradiction that something comes from nothing..."

ATF said no such thing, but I'm curious nonetheless. Can you please explain what a "scientific contradiction" is (as opposed to a "logical contradiction"?), and why you think that "something comes from nothing" qualifies as such. I'm quite serious; I'd love to hear your reasoning.

Anonymous continued "...you are comparing other religions to the one and only religion that has hundreds of prophecies by people who lived hundreds of years apart that came true."

Have you carefully checked those "prophecies" in their original context, or are you simply repeating something that you've heard or read somewhere? I ask because in my experience the vast majority that make this type of claim have never bothered to check.

Anonymous continued "Plus, there is so much historical and scientific documentation that backs up Christianity and the many things that scripture identifies in history."

Fascinating. Please do expound upon one or two of your favorite examples of scientific or historical corroboration. I'm sure we'll all learn a great deal.

Astreja said...

I'm not Jeff, Anonymouse, but I have a few opinions on this matter.

"Should I make the same suggestion to you to keep all of your personal delusions to yourself?"

If *we* come into *your* personal space and start preaching at you there, then I would say 'Yes, absolutely; feel free to toss us out on our ears'. But this site is ours, not yours; and I, for one, do not go trolling at Christian sites because I consider them a waste of time.

"Some of those prohecies are even coming true as you are contemplating what you will say in response to this."

Those so-called 'prophesies' suffer from two major flaws, commonality and advance notice. If you mean things like wars, diseases, plagues and the like, such things have existed in every culture that I am aware of. Multiple times, in some cases.

Furthermore, are you aware of the concept of a self-fulfilling prophesy? If a holy book prophesies 'A city named Xorbling will go up in flames on the nineteenth day of the sixth month', eventually some idiot will name a city Xorbling and some other idiot will walk in there on June 19 and detonate a nuke to make the prophesy come true.

In similar fashion, the Gospels have Jesus riding into Jerusalem in a fashion already described in the Tanakh to deliberately 'fulfil' a well-known prophesy.

"To believe in the God of the Bible is to believe that He is the only God."

News flash: We don't believe either of those things.

"Meanwhile, other religions command one to kill those that do not believe in their God."

Islam, yes. The Old Testament, hell, yes. (Deuteronomy 13, as mentioned above by Boomslang). Not Buddhism. Not the Jain religion. Not Taoism. Not Hinduism, although I could be wrong about that. And, to the best of My knowledge, most polytheistic systems tend to indifference on such matters as someone else's unbelief. For instance, Ásatrú doesn't recommend that I do you an injury just because you don't believe in Thor or Idunna or Forseti. (It does, however, strongly advise Me to defend Myself with vigour if attacked. I do rather like that in a belief system.)

"I'm not asking why the web-site hates Christians, I am asking why do YOU?"

Family members and friends have experienced bullying, inflicted upon them by kids of evangelical Christian families. In one case, actual physical injuries occurred. In another, a long-standing friendship was destroyed by religious biases and some pretty damn stupid superstitions.

I was briefly harrassed by an extremely nosy and intrusive evangelical Christian.

Conservative Christians tried to force their version of marriage law into the secular laws of My country of residence.

My partner's sisters were mindnapped by the Christian Borg.

My ancestors were terrorized by Christian invaders, and their traditional way of life had to go underground for 900 fucking years to survive.

And there's more where that came from, including (but not limited to) Original Sin, glorification of human sacrifice, and the idea that the end of the world is a *good* thing instead of a horrific tragedy. Fuck Christianity and the Four Horsemen it rode in on.

"I feel that this is a waste of time."

Well, there's the door. Shoo. Shoo.