The Religion of Atheism

[JamesLast99]

Someone on this forum once tried to explain to me how people had been specially trained to copy out the Bible, from generation to generation, to ensure that no changes were ever made. Can't place who it was, but I'm sure it will come back to me. The point being that if he thinks like that and was taught to think like that, then I doubt very much that he's the only Christian who thinks in this way. Look at Paul/James's posts on one of the other threads - the 'fact' that Jesus existed is proof that he was the son of God, which proves that God exists. If you're able to swallow that logic, simply because the Bible says it's so, then believing the rest of it should be cinch.

Once you accept that any of it is untrue, you have to be open to the fact that other parts may be wrong. Who gets to say where you can stop?

I have stated very clearly that I have no idea if God exists - so that logic is not mine. If your are saying that is my logic = then thats a nice work of fiction to justify your belief Alc! I am not of the opinion that many believers at all have the logic you describe, let alone people like myself who are undecided. Lets not dishonestly pretend differantly.

 

[Alc]

I have stated very clearly that I have no idea if God exists - so that logic is not mine. If your are saying that is my logic = then thats a nice work of fiction to justify your belief Alc! I am not of the opinion that many believers at all have the logic you describe, let alone people like myself who are undecided. Lets not dishonestly pretend differantly.

That post has nothing to do with you or anything you've posted (congrats on the ego, though, it's growing nicely )

The comment was posted some time back, definitely before you changed aliases. I do remember the person posting was American, but I'm damned if I can remember who it was.

 

[JamesLast99]

Who is the James/Paul you refer to then? Can't wait for this one?

 

[Alc]

Who is the James/Paul you refer to then? Can't wait for this one?

That would be someone called Paul who got kicked off the forum for acting like a petulant child and swearing at people he disagreed with, only to quickly rejoin under the new pseudonym of James.

 

[Mike375]

Look at Paul/James's posts on one of the other threads - the 'fact' that Jesus existed is proof that he was the son of God, which proves that God exists. If you're able to swallow that logic, simply because the Bible says it's so, then believing the rest of it should be cinch.

I agree with you that using the Bible to prove the Bible is of zero use.

Once you accept that any of it is untrue, you have to be open to the fact that other parts may be wrong. Who gets to say where you can stop?

That can be applied to anything you read. Remember the Bible has compiled the wrtitings of many people and over a wide span of time.

If someone compiles a book on dinosaurs and it contained all the writings from the last 100 years you would have a mass of contradictions and it would be full of errors.

Also, each person is free to interpret the Bible they way they see it. What a particular church says is their business.

There are a lot of people like myself who believe the basics of the Bible. Using dinosaurs as analogy, I am sure that 65 million years ago and earlier there were a lot of large reptile type animals getting around and the average size was much bigger than the animals of today. But anything beyond that is up for grabs.

 

[Alc]

I agree with you that using the Bible to prove the Bible is of zero use.

That can be applied to anything you read. Remember the Bible has compiled the wrtitings of many people and over a wide span of time.

If someone compiles a book on dinosaurs and it contained all the writings from the last 100 years you would have a mass of contradictions and it would be full of errors.

But nobody has claimed that this dinosaur book was the word of some all-powerful being and so beyond question. That is said of the Bible. You have named a few of the limitations of such a book. These limitations are not allowed to be applied to the Bible, by religious zealots.

Also, each person is free to interpret the Bible they way they see it. What a particular church says is their business.

There are a lot of people like myself who believe the basics of the Bible.

The 'basics' of the Bible are common sense. If you want a society to last, it is imperative that some things are drummed into people (don't steal, don't kill, etc.). People were doing that stuff long before anyone invented God. If the rest of the Bible is so open to interpratration that one type of 'Christian' can kill another because of it, the value of the book as a set of guidelines is reduced to zero.

Using dinosaurs as analogy, I am sure that 65 million years ago and earlier there were a lot of large reptile type animals getting around and the average size was much bigger than the animals of today. But anything beyond that is up for grabs.

The difference being that fossil records, etc. give us some sensible, logical idea of the way things may have been. The Bible offers a collection of often contradictory stories, some based on behaviour that had been shown to work and others based on what people wanted to happen.

 

[JamesLast99]

That would be someone called Paul who got kicked off the forum for acting like a petulant child and swearing at people he disagreed with, only to quickly rejoin under the new pseudonym of James.

LMAO!So were you refering to me or not? One post you are unequivalent you weren't the next you say the opposite.Your starting to really entertain.

 

[Mike375]

You are giving reasons why you think the Bible is a collection of fairy tales. But believers see evidence that to them is clear.

Paleontologists with the same fossils etc

1) Dinosaurs were warm blooded
2) Dinsosaurs were cold blooded
3) Dinosaurs were in between today's reptiles and mammals
4) Dinosaurs varied with some being warm blooded and some cold blooded

1) Birds descended from dinosaurs
2) Birds did not descend from dinosaurs

Each opinion is a product from the same fossils.

From my perspective I can't see how you are missing the evidence and from your perspective you can't see how I see evidence. However, I have empathy with your position as I can't see what someone is "seeing" to be a born again. The few born agains I know are a dentist and some medical specialists, hardly people lacking in education and especially the latter.

The of course we have medical specialists that are atheists. So we have two sets of people who have been through identical education system and it is also a system designed to cull people, a very long and very fine filter....and one set are born agains and the other set are atheists. By the way, when I say "born agains" I mean blokes wo believe the Bible literally, earth is 6000 years old, Noah's Ark etc.

 

[Alisa]

You are giving reasons why you think the Bible is a collection of fairy tales. But believers see evidence that to them is clear.

Paleontologists with the same fossils etc

1) Dinosaurs were warm blooded
2) Dinsosaurs were cold blooded
3) Dinosaurs were in between today's reptiles and mammals
4) Dinosaurs varied with some being warm blooded and some cold blooded

1) Birds descended from dinosaurs
2) Birds did not descend from dinosaurs

Each opinion is a product from the same fossils.

From my perspective I can't see how you are missing the evidence and from your perspective you can't see how I see evidence. However, I have empathy with your position as I can't see what someone is "seeing" to be a born again. The few born agains I know are a dentist and some medical specialists, hardly people lacking in education and especially the latter.

The of course we have medical specialists that are atheists. So we have two sets of people who have been through identical education system and it is also a system designed to cull people, a very long and very fine filter....and one set are born agains and the other set are atheists. By the way, when I say "born agains" I mean blokes wo believe the Bible literally, earth is 6000 years old, Noah's Ark etc.

Last week you claimed you had evidence that god exists. I asked you what it was, and you still haven't answered.

 

[Mike375]

Last week you claimed you had evidence that god exists. I asked you what it was, and you still haven't answered.

But this is the point, you don't accept as evidence what I accept as evidence.

 

[Alc]

LMAO!So were you refering to me or not? One post you are unequivalent you weren't the next you say the opposite.Your starting to really entertain.

I'm not saying the opposite at all.
PaulDohert got a temporary ban just before you made your first post. Since the drivel you come out with matches his posts pretty closely, I - and I'm not alone, based on PMs - assumed you are he. If you're not, you're not, but please don't use this as another excuse to avoid posting anything approaching a proper point.

Edit: Just reread your post.
"One post you are unequivalent you weren't the next you say the opposite"
What does this even mean? Is unequivalent even a word?

 

[Alc]

But this is the point, you don't accept as evidence what I accept as evidence.

Is your evidence the fact that the earth is so complicated it must have been created by god? If not, what evidence do you believe you have?

 

[Alisa]

But this is the point, you don't accept as evidence what I accept as evidence.

What evidence?

 

[Mike375]

It is all around you.

 

[Alisa]

It is all around you.

The only thing that is all around me is air.
I can see you don't intend to have a serious discussion.

 

[Alc]

It is all around you.

That's not an answer. Don't you go all James on us.

In what way is what is around me evidence that god exists any more than it's evidence that he doesn't?

 

[JamesLast99]

I'm not saying the opposite at all.
PaulDohert got a temporary ban just before you made your first post. Since the drivel you come out with matches his posts pretty closely, I - and I'm not alone, based on PMs - assumed you are he. If you're not, you're not, but please don't use this as another excuse to avoid posting anything approaching a proper point.

Edit: Just reread your post.
"One post you are unequivalent you weren't the next you say the opposite"
What does this even mean? Is unequivalent even a word?

You know what I meant - and why the sudden doubt that James is Paul. Youve resorted to stating black is white clearly. In two succesive posts though - I grant you.

 

[Alc]

You know what I meant - and why the sudden doubt that James is Paul. Youve resorted to stating black is white clearly. In two succesive posts though - I grant you.

Where have I expressed any doubt?
I realise you have real trouble getting to a point without using insults and seem to hate the idea of answering questions, but where have I said that you are not Paul?

 

[Mike375]

That's not an answer. Don't you go all James on us.

In what way is what is around me evidence that god exists any more than it's evidence that he doesn't?

I will give you a small example of something that has been happening to me over about the last 18 months. This would probably fall in the telepathy area but all the same family.

I have cable TV and watch the movies a lot, although not many modern ones. I use two TV programs, one an internet site and the other is part of the cable TV itself. In both case I can only see the programs for the current day.

At different times I will think of a movie and how I would like to see it again. And presto, it will be on a couple days later. Is happening all of the time. About 6 months ago it started to intrigue me so when I thought of movie I would like to see, I wrote its name down and the date and time I thought of it. It was occurring with close to 100% accuracy.

 

[Alc]

I will give you a small example of something that has been happening to me over about the last 18 months. This would probably fall in the telepathy area but all the same family.

I have cable TV and watch the movies a lot, although not many modern ones. I use two TV programs, one an internet site and the other is part of the cable TV itself. In both case I can only see the programs for the current day.

At different times I will think of a movie and how I would like to see it again. And presto, it will be on a couple days later. Is happening all of the time. About 6 months ago it started to intrigue me so when I thought of movie I would like to see, I wrote its name down and the date and time I thought of it. It was occurring with close to 100% accuracy.

Okay, so let's say - just for the sake of argument - that you now have this ability. How does that provide evidence for god's existence?