Quotes of the day

posted at 8:00 pm on March 25, 2012 by Allahpundit

“Atheists, non-theists, secularists and others who say they believe in reason, not God, gathered Saturday on the Mall for the first Reason Rally, where they pledged to stand up for their beliefs in a society that they say sometimes views them with skepticism and distrust…

“Organizers said the aim of the rally was twofold: to unite individuals with similar beliefs and to show the American public that the number of people who don’t believe in God is large and growing.

“‘We have the numbers to be taken seriously,’ said Paul Fidalgo, spokesman for the Center for Inquiry, which promotes scientific method and reasoning and was one of the organizations sponsoring the rally. ‘We’re not just a tiny fringe group.’

“According to the American Religious Identification Survey in 2008, the number of people who claim no specific religious belief was 34 million, 15 percent of the U.S. adult population.”

***

“Many people do not understand that it is possible to lead a meaningful, happy life as a heathen, but we maintain that it is and can point to any number of atheist philosophers and thinkers who have explained why this is so. But such meaning and contentment does not inevitably follow from becoming a heathen. Ours is a universe without guarantees of redemption or salvation and sometimes people have terrible lives or do terrible things and thrive. On such occasions, we have no consolation. That is the dark side of accepting the truth, and we are prepared to acknowledge it. We are heathens because we value living in the truth. But that does not mean that we pretend that always makes life easy or us happy. If the evidence were to show that religious people are happier and healthier than us, we would not see that as any reason to give up our convictions…

“We believe in not being tone-deaf to religion and to understand it in the most charitable way possible. So we support religions when they work to promote values we share, including those of social justice and compassion. We are respectful and sympathetic to the religious when they arrive at their different conclusions on the basis of the same commitment to sincere, rational, undogmatic inquiry as us, without in any way denying that we believe them to be false and misguided. We are also sympathetic to religion when its effects are more benign than malign. We appreciate that commitment to truth is but one value and that a commitment to compassion and kindness to others is also of supreme importance. We are not prepared to insist that it is indubitably better to live guided by such values allied with false beliefs than it is to live without such values but also without false belief.

“Our willingness to accept what is good in religion is balanced by an equally honest commitment to be critical of it when necessary. We object when religion invokes mystery to avoid difficult questions or to obfuscate when clarity is needed. We do not like the way in which “people of faith” tend to huddle together in an unprincipled coalition of self-interest, even when that means liberals getting into bed with homophobes and misogynists. We think it is disingenuous for religious people to talk about the reasonableness of their beliefs and the importance of values and practice, while drawing a veil over their embrace of superstitious beliefs. In these and other areas, we assert the right and need to make civil but acute criticisms.”

***

“Then Dawkins got to the part where he calls on the crowd not only to challenge religious people but to ‘ridicule and show contempt’ for their doctrines and sacraments, including the Eucharist, which Catholics believe becomes the body of Christ during Mass.

“That was a step further than Craig Lowery, a Dawkins fan, said he’s willing to go. Lowery, of Washington, D.C., applauded but admitted he’s not a confrontational atheist, saying:

“‘I might make fun of them in my head but I wouldn’t say it. Most people, religious or otherwise, are good people.’”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

***

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

***

Via the Daily Caller. Content warning.

***

Via Reason TV.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Sauer, I’m disinterested in debating the issue with you. You asked a question; I gave you the answer.

Now you don’t like the answer. There’s not much more I can do for you about it.

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:35 PM

From where do we derive our cultural morals?

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM

@Cleombrotus how does not worshiping idols and not working on friday nights and saturday set the context for personal property rights?

Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:38 PM

God Himself said this through the Psalmist: “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” In fact, He said it twice (Psalm 14:1 and 53:1).

You can’t argue with fools; they know it all. Trying to reason with a fool is a fool’s errand! Read the Proverbs and see what else Jehovah said about fools; it’s very enlightening.

Wisdom comes but one way: by the fear of God. This automatically excludes fools, because they don’t even believe in God, let alone fear Him! All they can do is rage and blather, but they can’t change the Truth. So all these derisive taunts and jibes come from reprobate minds, and you have to excuse and ignore them. Pray for them if you know the Lord; ask Him to send the convicting Power of the Holy Ghost upon them.

Our nation’s schools reflect the fruit of teaching our children evolution instead of the Truth. We’re now a second-rate nation, and fear is everywhere on the campuses. It wasn’t so in my day (’40s & ’50s); we had God’s protection back then — before the fools got hold of our society!

So have your 15 minutes of notoriety, fools; you will help bring America to an end, and then you will stand before the Lord Jesus Christ on Judgment Day and explain your folly to Him.

Don’t believe it? Hell is full of likeminded unbelievers who thought they were smarter than God. REPENT! Or PERISH!

Gordy on March 26, 2012 at 4:39 PM

@joe_doufu joe, he’s quoting from the old testament, same as me. You claim to worship a divine unchanging god, who said all that was ok. In fact in Hebrews, and Romans they claim the law was perfect but that men just couldn’t handle it.

If the bible is god’s resume, I wouldn’t hire him. Specially since he claims that he put different languages on the earth to incite hatred and war so that men wouldn’t be able to understand and work with each other. I mean when you claim to be the prime source of strife in the world and then say you’re perfect and worthy of worship maybe you have your priorities messed up.

Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:28 PM

First of all, he didn’t quote anything.
Second of all, his interpretation (as yours) is suspect. He also claims to be a former Christian. Probably from some nutty Protestant sect like yours, where the key principle is just to make up whatever meaning you personally feel you want the Bible to hold. No wonder you don’t get it.

My question has two actual parts:
Are those “morals”?
Are those in the Bible?
None of the things he mentioned are both.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 4:40 PM

@Cleombrotus our own sense of right and wrong based on a group sense of value and property as well as propriety. Bertrand Russell says it best if you want an explanation of that.

Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:40 PM

I can speak for you right now Joe… Do you believe women are lesser creatures? Do you believe it’s ok to trade and purchase slaves as described in the big book? Do you think women need to kill two birds when they menstruate?
SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Are any of those “morals” in the Bible?
Didn’t think so.
I’ll keep my Bronze Age morality, thank you.
You can have your 21st-century self-worship.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 4:23 PM

the definition of moral:
1. Concerned with principles of right and wrong or conforming to standards of behavior and character based on those principles

So yes, those are moral questions.

Come, join us in the 21st Century Joe.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:41 PM

So where are those in the Bible? And how are they “moral”?

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 4:46 PM

@joe_doufu so you’re falling back on the ol’ “You’re just reading it wrong” defense, coupled with the you’re faith and church wasn’t really “christian”.

Was slavery ok in the bible

sanctioned rape in the bible

Menstruating women

Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:46 PM

@Joe

and yes, they’re in the bible…

Women’s rights
“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:11-12)

Slavery
Exodus Chapter 21, verse 1:

Now these are the ordinances which you shall set before them. When you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, and in the seventh he shall go out free, for nothing. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s and he shall go out alone. But if the slave plainly says, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,’ then his master shall bring him to God, and he shall bring him to the door or the doorpost; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for life.

Women and menstruation
Leviticus 15:19-30 —- And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even. And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean. And whosoever toucheth her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And whosoever toucheth any thing that she sat upon shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. And if it be on her bed, or on any thing whereon she sitteth, when he toucheth it, he shall be unclean until the even. And if any man lie with her at all, and her flowers be upon him, he shall be unclean seven days; and all the bed whereon he lieth shall be unclean. And if a woman have an issue of her blood many days out of the time of her separation, or if it run beyond the time of her separation; all the days of the issue of her uncleanness shall be as the days of her separation: she shall be unclean. Every bed whereon she lieth all the days of her issue shall be unto her as the bed of her separation: and whatsoever she sitteth upon shall be unclean, as the uncleanness of her separation. And whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even. But if she be cleansed of her issue, then she shall number to herself seven days, and after that she shall be clean. And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:49 PM

If you really want to delve into a religions history, view what the other religions say about them.

Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:55 PM

@Cleombrotus our own sense of right and wrong based on a group sense of value and property as well as propriety. Bertrand Russell says it best if you want an explanation of that.
Zekecorlain on March 26, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Zekecorlain, why do WE this particular sense of right and wrong but people in earlier times apparently did not?

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 4:55 PM

This website keeps eating my answers, whenever I type a good one out. Long story short: the “you’re reading it wrong” argument has merit here because you’re reading it wrong.

#1 says nothing about women being “lesser”, nor is it about “right and wrong”, it’s a set of guidelines for how to organize a worship service.

#2 is apparently neutral on the question of whether slavery is “right” or “wrong”. where’s the moral?

#3 if i remember correctly is about ritual cleanness in the Hebrew camp. it’s not about “right and wrong” nor is it intended for all people in all times.

Try again.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 5:10 PM

LOL… Zeke. Funny how when you start quoting scripture to the believers they get quiet all of a sudden.

I guess it harkens me back to when I was a Christian and used to debate atheists and people of other religions where when they would shove these verses in MY face in a debate, my eyes would almost glaze over in anger and being made the fool. THEN I’d do all I could to wiggle out from under the obvious fallacies in my thinking with rationalizations and apologia.

I pity them.

The dissonance, it hertz.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 5:14 PM

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 5:10 PM

#1 Rationalization… You know damn well that the IMPLICATION is that women are lesser then men. gawd! quit it bro!

#2 Neutral? That’s the best you can come up with? So god is neutral on slavery. Pitiful.

#3 Rationalization…

Try again.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 5:18 PM

I guess it harkens me back to when I was a Christian and used to debate atheists and people of other religions where when they would shove these verses in MY face in a debate, my eyes would almost glaze over in anger and being made the fool. THEN I’d do all I could to wiggle out from under the obvious fallacies in my thinking with rationalizations and apologia.

That’s probably why you fell away. Belief without understanding can’t stand up to scrutiny.

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 5:20 PM

#1. Certainly not. What do you even mean by “lesser”?

#2. It is clearly a neutral passage. I don’t know what you’re looking for. Do you even know what “slavery” referred to in that place and time?

#3. How could anybody possibly think that passage was about a “moral principle” of right and wrong?

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 5:22 PM

That’s probably why you fell away. Belief without understanding can’t stand up to scrutiny.

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 5:20 PM

Exactly. This goes back to SK’s stated principles of how to reason your way through life:

Step 1: Be content with your ignorance.
Step 2: Define truth according to whatever your neighbors think.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 5:24 PM

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 5:20 PM

I understood full well the explanations I’d been brought up to believe, and professed them just as you do here and now.

Then I got fed up with the obviously wrong answers that you give me here and decided to discard religion.

Maybe someday you’ll get there. I hope so.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 5:32 PM

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 5:24 PM

It may not initially been his fault. Too many churches these days are no longer capable of equipping their congregations to grapple effectively with the faith. I’ve seen a lot of young people leave the lukewarm churches thinking it no longer made sense in their practical lives. Because it doesn’t.

If the main effect of our faith is to meet for pizza parties and Christian Rick concerts … well, that’ll only entertain for so long. Then they reach puberty and they’re gone and never give the big questions another serious look unless some trauma hits them.

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 5:39 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 5:32 PM

You never did answer my question at 10:13AM

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM

You never did answer my question at 10:13AM

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 5:44 PM

Well you could have at least reposted instead of making me search the comments…

I’ll relook at it in a bit. Dealing with a work related network outage at the moment (I’m a network engineer).

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 6:02 PM

In other words, it’s fine for non-believers to be non-believers but that doesn’t give them the right to attack those who hold a different view.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2012 at 9:18 AM

If by “rights” you’re talking Constitutional rights, then by all means they do have that right. If you’re using the term loosely to mean that it isn’t called for or unjustified I might agree.

MJBrutus on March 26, 2012 at 7:32 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 10:07 AM
OK, let’s hear the logical progression that took you from faith to non-faith that doesn’t rely on objection TO that faith.
We’ll wait.
Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Cleombrotus on March 26, 2012 at 8:00 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Try loving thy neighbor as thyself.

Paul in Philemon begs/prods Philemon to release his slave who was returning to him; it is the point of the letter.

Paul’s letters talk about slaves and free and the lack of distinction between them in God’s eyes.

Funny how Christianity spread rapidly through the slave population in the Roman world.

Bubba Redneck on March 26, 2012 at 8:10 PM

OK Cleo, you asked me the following…

OK, let’s hear the logical progression that took you from faith to non-faith that doesn’t rely on objection TO that faith.

We’re all seeking the truth Cleo, and everyone’s “truth” is different for the most part and is predicated on the experiences and knowledge that we’ve attained since we first started cataloging memories in our brains as children.

We’ve got how many religions on this planet, and how many religions that were on this planet but are no longer practiced or followed?

The common sense understanding of this predicament we find ourselves in as humans is that out of all the religions we have today, one of them is right, right? You as a Christian feel that yours is right and all the others are wrong, else why be a Christian? The same could be said about the Muslims or Hindu’s or the followers of the great Juju on the mountain.

What if the real answer is that none of them are?

Look Cleo, the grounds for recommending belief in something are that it is true, and you make a fundamental mistake if you fail to accept it. We can’t claim truth without justification, and we can’t claim justification unless our evidence rules out the alternatives. If we can’t judge between alternatives, then it doesn’t make any sense to insist that one of them is true and the others are mistaken. Faith is justification-less belief so faith precludes any claims to truth.

Reason is the set of cognitive capacities that make it possible for us to seek out evidence, sift through it, and draw conclusions. Our reasoning capacities are the only tools we have for separating reality from fantasy, fact from fiction, justified belief from nonsense. Once we abandon reason and evidence, there are no principled, coherent, non-prejudicial grounds on which to prefer one god over another.

How many supernatural hypotheses are out there for your consideration? How many gods vying for your faith? Is the only game in town from the church you grew up in? On what basis will you decide to opt for one and not the others?

If it’s ok to abandon reason and just believe without justification, then why not Baal, Ryangombe, Orcus, Mahamanasika, Kamrusepa, or Hatdastsisi?

My progression from faith to non faith is one based on human psychology and history. We have a plethora of gods who’ve been worshiped, and several major ones still standing. Those still standing are primarily standing because of social pressures that the adherents put on those who are on the cusp of leaving, and militant pressure is not far outside the realm of possibility. Much has been made about the Muslims and their militancy but it wasn’t too long ago that Christianity was militant and domineering.

Everyone wants to be right, but what if everyone is wrong about these religions? You think that everyone who isn’t a Christian is wrong, right?

As I’ve said, there may be a god, but he most assuredly isn’t the god of the bible, koran, insert religious book here.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:18 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Matthew 13:1-23. It is not the seed, it is the dirt.

Bubba Redneck on March 26, 2012 at 8:34 PM

Bubba Redneck on March 26, 2012 at 8:34 PM

quoting bible verses to me as proof of its claims is useless. the bible is not axiomatic.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:40 PM

@Bubba

Aha! I thought you were replying to my latest post…

At 4:22 I tasked you with the following

“Show me the verse where god says slavery is disallowed! SHOW me! I really want to know!”

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 4:22 PM

You replied with Matthew 13:1-23

I still don’t see any verses in the Parable of the Sower that have anything whatsoever to do with disallowing slavery…

Here’s what the new testament says about slavery though… certainly not an injunction against it. It actually appears to condone it…

“Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5)

“Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don’t work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord.” (Colassians 3:22)

“Slaves are to be submissive to their masters in everything, and to be well-pleasing, not talking back .” (Titus 2:9)

“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. ” (1 Peter 2:18)

Try again Bubba (always wanted to say that to a Bubba)

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

People that believe nothing became an ultra dense point that then exploded into a super hot expanding gas cloud that then condensed into stars and planets then the planets cooled enough for liquid water that then dissolved minerals from the rocks and then a spark of electricity combined the gasses and minerals and water into random collections of amino acids that are mostly incompatible with each other that then sort themselves out until they form a self replicating chain that then incarcerate replicate making more and more complicated forms until eventually we arrived denigrate Christians for believing in miracles.

Slowburn on March 26, 2012 at 8:54 PM

@slowburn

People that believe nothing became something because a god poofed everything into existence have the gall to denigrate anyone who tries to find out how it all really started.

FIFY

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Paul’s letters talk about slaves and free and the lack of distinction between them in God’s eyes.

Funny how Christianity spread rapidly through the slave population in the Roman world.

Bubba Redneck on March 26, 2012 at 8:10 PM

It’s a complicated issue and one that’s difficult to understand in the modern context. “Slaves” back then were considered human beings, you might think of them as serfs or indentured servants or a lower caste, but they could own property, have families, and sometimes pay off their debts or buy their freedom. They were not treated as livestock, as in the African/Islamic/Democrat style of slavery that we had here in the USA.

Paul talks about slaves and masters in a passage that is generally about how people should relate to those above and below them. Husbands and wives, rulers and subjects, masters and servants, and so on. Basically we are called to love one another as brothers in Christ while at the same time doing our “duties” faithfully in the “chain of command” that God has placed us into.

Everyone today has someone above us and most of us have people below us, such as our children. Christianity doesn’t say this is evil and to be opposed. Instead it tries to tell us how to behave within that system.

By the way, the concept of a middle class or yeoman class in which one is neither a master nor a servant is a relatively new one, and I don’t think it’s ever realized 100% for anyone.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 9:16 PM

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 9:16 PM

LOL! The ole slaves weren’t slaves like we know and hear about today slaves argument joe?

REALLY?!

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 9:20 PM

We’re all seeking the truth Cleo, and everyone’s “truth” is different for the most part…

…[a few paragraphs of zero evidence]…

…[a couple of asinine paragraphs defining "reason" as if nobody had ever heard of it before]…

…[a few paragraphs of congratulating yourself on being more reasonable and evidence-based than anyone else]…

As I’ve said, there may be a god, but he most assuredly isn’t the god of the bible, koran, insert religious book here.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:18 PM

Man, you are seriously not very good at this atheist thing. Posting a definition of “reason” isn’t the same thing as using it. Try actually evaluating the evidence and coming to a conclusion next time.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 9:24 PM

So what part of a “secular government” is about consigning the Bible or the 10 commandments to the ash-bin of history?

I know. Once they get a atheist and/or free-thinking government that doesn’t guillotine everybody or kill vast millions in pogroms or Great Leap, we’ll see that you don’t need to believe in God to uphold morality. It’s all there in the theory–and when we see that people can be “just as good” without God (and a redefinition of “good” for enough people), people will no longer have a need to believe in God.

In short, the same way liberalism operates, on paper. Once we’ve transformed the entire society to our model, it will succeed, and prove that we were the rational ones all along. And you’ll be sorry for standing in the way of progress–and what will your grandchildren think?

And we will be right, because we don’t believe in unproven things…. Because the smart, scientific way to read polls is to read the uncommitted as secretly on your side–and thus indicative of some potential for this to grow and become the trend…

Axeman on March 26, 2012 at 9:28 PM

LOL! The ole slaves weren’t slaves like we know and hear about today slaves argument joe?

REALLY?!

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Yeah, and he’ll probably be bringing in dodges like an Understanding of Historical Differences into it!!

HAH! Don’t try to fool me with that historic stuff!

Axeman on March 26, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Man, you are seriously not very good at this atheist thing. Posting a definition of “reason” isn’t the same thing as using it. Try actually evaluating the evidence and coming to a conclusion next time.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Ad hominems is all you got? That’s it? Call me an idiot and that proves it?

I did investigate the claims… I’ve been down those rabbit holes before joe…

The conclusion I came to was they were bupkiss. Rationalizations for continued belief in something that when comparing apples to apples is just as crazy as the next religion.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 9:36 PM

We’re all seeking the truth Cleo, and everyone’s “truth” is different for the most part and is predicated on the experiences and knowledge that we’ve attained since we first started cataloging memories in our brains as children.

We’ve got how many religions on this planet, and how many religions that were on this planet but are no longer practiced or followed?

We’ve got how many sets of values on this planet, how many sets of values were on this planet but are no longer held?

Thus there are not true sets of values, right? Thanks for playing…

So we can play a game called Slavery is Bad and Inequality is Bad, and we can get results that more or less follow along with this rule, but we have to say things that aren’t demonstrably true but, as the Vienna School put it, emotive. You atheists do such a better job at defending morality–by not really defending it, and then deeming it as defended.

How many things not proven true have failed? But isn’t the supposition that morality works best with no beliefs at least arbitrary? But the stance is that no matter how many unproven things fail, some things that succeed are previously unproven–so the statistics of unproven things succeeding is irrelevant to whether x consists of both categories. That’s the supposition of “Better living through atheism”.

Axeman on March 26, 2012 at 9:38 PM

I did investigate the claims… I’ve been down those rabbit holes before joe…

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Care to name a piece of evidence you looked at?
Or if I might give an example: what do you say to Greenleaf’s cross-examination of the gospel writers?

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

@slowburn

People that believe nothing became something because a god poofed everything into existence have the gall to denigrate anyone who tries to find out how it all really started.

FIFY

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:59 PM

If you are not willing to look at the evidence that contradicts your preconceived notions you are not trying to find out how it really happened you are practicing a religion.

Slowburn on March 26, 2012 at 10:07 PM

If you are not willing to look at the evidence that contradicts your preconceived notions you are not trying to find out how it really happened you are practicing a religion.

Slowburn on March 26, 2012 at 10:07 PM

And not a very good one at that!

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Atheism has become the anti religion religious philosophy….or theology of non religion? Eh, whatever.

Atheists, anti-theists don’t impress me at all. If you hate religion so much here’s something you could do…..two things in fact.

One, don’t practice religion.
Two, observe the constitution. You aren’t changing it with your repetitive ignorance, so you might as well observe it carefully….read it while you’re at it too.

Idiots.

Wolfmoon on March 26, 2012 at 10:35 PM

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

joe,

IF you think that the earth was poofed into existence 10,000 years ago and that god created man and animals and such in their present form, then looking at the “evidence” might seem like a good idea.

But when you see reality as it is and know that we evolved to be what we are over billions of years on the third rock from the sun?

We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people.
-Carl Sagan

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 10:42 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 10:42 PM

This must be an oversight on your part, but you again failed to mention any particular piece of evidence in your last post…

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 10:51 PM

You belong with them as much as “atheists” belong with Hitler and Stalin. They claim to believe in God and so do you.

Dan_Yul on March 25, 2012 at 11:22 PM

Here’s something Stalin claims, google “I believe in one thing only, the power of human will.” and then read Mein Kampf–not the pull quotes from it, but the actual book. Hitler reveals himself to be a nihilist and he thanks everything, in the fashion of Nietzsche’s “New Philosophers” in Beyond Good and Evil. Thus the force of Hitler’s public persona and cult character is that of a nihilist.

Axeman on March 26, 2012 at 10:57 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Show some proof. Billions of dead thing that are buried in rock layers that were laid down in water all over the earth doesn’t prove evolution. In fact it sounds like evidence of a catastrophic flood such as the one described in Genesis.

Your quoting your prophet is a nice touch.

Slowburn on March 26, 2012 at 11:08 PM

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 10:51 PM

LOL! Guess you’re right…

I studied the historicity of Jesus. Pretty much all the claims made by the bible. Obviously the kookier stuff like the Gospel of John which claims that entire cemeteries of people rose from the dead at the same time as Jesus was falsified. I studied relics and miracle relics like the weeping statues, the Shroud, etc… I read countless books by people like CS Lewis, RC Sproul, Lee Strobel, GK Chesterton, Aqiunas, and most recently Timothy Keller’s A Reason for God.

I’m sure a lot of the same “evidence” you have studied, I’ve pretty much studied as well.

The deal is this, it always comes down to faith… And faith is only needed by con-men, frauds and charlatans seeking to gain your support through giving money, time, and sweat and tears.

Don’t tell anyone joe, but I’m really a Satanist who’s just trying to garner another soul for my Lord. You see, I have my eyes set on a nice apartment overlooking the disembowling fields on the 7th level of hell.

;-)

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Your quoting your prophet is a nice touch.

Slowburn on March 26, 2012 at 11:08 PM

He’s not a prophet dipstick. He’s just a man like you or I (assuming you’re a man), but his words have way more weight and evidence behind them than your holy book holds on one page.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:28 PM

Show some proof. Billions of dead thing that are buried in rock layers that were laid down in water all over the earth doesn’t prove evolution. In fact it sounds like evidence of a catastrophic flood such as the one described in Genesis.

Slowburn on March 26, 2012 at 11:08 PM

But to answer the rest of your specious comment… You what would disprove evolution once and for all Slowburn?

Finding modern rabbit fossils in the pre-Cambrian geologic layers. Finding some modern animal that we know exists today mixed in with all the “fabricated” Dinosaur fossils and other ancient creatures.

Guess what? That’s NOT what we find. We find like aged fossils in successively deeper layers of the earth such that the oldest layers have the oldest creatures and the newest layers have the modern age creatures…

Why would god need to flood the world to rid it of us pesky, immoral, wicked humans when he could just wiggle his nose Samantha Stephens style from Bewitched and poof the perfect world into existence with the perfect humans he so insanely desires?

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:45 PM

The deal is this, it always comes down to faith… And faith is only needed by con-men, frauds and charlatans seeking to gain your support through giving money, time, and sweat and tears.

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Since you don’t even know what faith is, apparently, I don’t believe you read all the books you say you read.

How do you deal with the fact that you’re obviously arguing for a massive and utterly improbable conspiracy theory, for example? (See the Greenleaf essay I linked earlier.) That takes an astounding degree of faith.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Why would god need to flood the world to rid it of us pesky, immoral, wicked humans when he could just wiggle his nose Samantha Stephens style from Bewitched and poof the perfect world into existence with the perfect humans he so insanely desires?

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Try asking any ten-year-old who’s studied basic theology. This is not an argument that holds any water with somebody who has actually read any of the books you claim to have read.

I’ve got to assume that when you were a “Christian” it was some superfun-rockband non-denominational Protestant denomination. That’s a tragedy but it’s no excuse for taking pride in your ignorance.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 11:50 PM

So when do we get to see all the non-stamp collectors get together and claim how good it is to be with other people who don’t collect stamps?

Axeman on March 27, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Since you don’t even know what faith is, apparently, I don’t believe you read all the books you say you read.

joe_doufu on March 26, 2012 at 11:47 PM

LOL! You HAVE to say that to discount every truth I’ve said to you so that you can continue to live in your make believe world.

How do you deal with the fact that you’re obviously arguing for a massive and utterly improbable conspiracy theory, for example? (See the Greenleaf essay I linked earlier.) That takes an astounding degree of faith.

There is very little difference between Simon Greenleaf and Lee Strobel. Two guys with the same shtick who say they set about to disprove the historicity of Jesus and the bible only to find that they couldn’t do it and then switched over to being born again Christians.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:03 AM

So when do we get to see all the non-stamp collectors get together and claim how good it is to be with other people who don’t collect stamps?

Axeman on March 27, 2012 at 12:00 AM

What Would Jesus NOT Do?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:04 AM

set about to disprove the historicity of Jesus and the bible only to find that they couldn’t do it
SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:03 AM

Well, isn’t that something?

joe_doufu on March 27, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Two guys with the same shtick who say they set about to disprove the historicity of Jesus and the bible only to find that they couldn’t do it and then switched over to being born again Christians
SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:03 AM

Well, isn’t that something?

joe_doufu on March 27, 2012 at 12:05 AM

LOL@joe!

Quote mining! FIFY

LOL!

The joke is that they already WERE Christians joe. How dense are you bro? They’re particularly good deceivers for getting you to believe their lies.

LOL! Do you trust EVERYthing that others have written about Jesus and the bible, or only the stuff that supports the religion you chose?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:17 AM

I studied the historicity of Jesus. Pretty much all the claims made by the bible. Obviously the kookier stuff like the Gospel of John which claims that entire cemeteries of people rose from the dead at the same time as Jesus was falsified.

So the GOD that spoke the entire universe into existence can not raise a few of the dead when he has promised to raise all the dead.

I studied relics and miracle relics like the weeping statues, the Shroud, etc… I read countless books by people like CS Lewis, RC Sproul, Lee Strobel, GK Chesterton, Aqiunas, and most recently Timothy Keller’s A Reason for God.

Yes there has been fraud who preached religion. The only one of your authors whom I recognize is the author of The Chronicles of Narnia. But then there is also Piltdown man, and Lucy.

I’m sure a lot of the same “evidence” you have studied, I’ve pretty much studied as well.

The deal is this, it always comes down to faith… And faith is only needed by con-men, frauds and charlatans seeking to gain your support through giving money, time, and sweat and tears.

Don’t tell anyone joe, but I’m really a Satanist who’s just trying to garner another soul for my Lord. You see, I have my eyes set on a nice apartment overlooking the disembowling fields on the 7th level of hell.

;-)

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I developed my belief in Special Creation after studying paleontology and genetics.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 12:30 AM

Everyone knows this, anyway; even Dawkins. But his answer to this little problem is something like “Yes, but you are a moron.”

Axe on March 26, 2012 at 12:09 AM

Which might be the reason that Russell contemplated suicide at Goedel’s Incompleteness.

Interesting footnote is the Goedel claims to have completed a mathematical proof of the existence of God, but he was at least known to be working on one.

Axeman on March 27, 2012 at 12:49 AM

Yes there has been fraud who preached religion. The only one of your authors whom I recognize is the author of The Chronicles of Narnia. But then there is also Piltdown man, and Lucy…

…I developed my belief in Special Creation after studying paleontology and genetics.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 12:30 AM

Key point here… The most important frauds of all were the ones who foisted these religions on us in the first place(oldest to newest, and many not really included for brevity) Animism, Paganism, Dravidianism, Hinduism, Buddhism (not really a religion but a life philosophy with no god), Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Christianities bastard stepchild Mormonism).

As for Piltdown man, guess who called the scientist out who foisted that on the community? Other scientists…

As regards Lucy… She’s still one of our ancestors, and you know what? Since the time they first found Lucy, they have found many more of the same species in the same area of Africa from the same geologic layers. All the other newer and older fossils (australapithecus aferensis, Rhodesiensis, Neanderthal, etc) of hominid life forms that they’ve found since all have multiple finds as well. To date, scientists have found hundreds of samples of hominid lifeforms across several hundred thousand to several million years old, but I think Lucy lost her oldest hominid distinction recently.

I developed my belief in Special Creation after studying paleontology and genetics.

Is that right? What did you learn?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Why would god need to flood the world to rid it of us pesky, immoral, wicked humans when he could just wiggle his nose Samantha Stephens style from Bewitched and poof the perfect world into existence with the perfect humans he so insanely desires?

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Why not. If god wanted mindless slaves he could make them. He seems to want people who choose good over evil.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 1:03 AM

Why would god need to flood the world to rid it of us pesky, immoral, wicked humans when he could just wiggle his nose Samantha Stephens style from Bewitched and poof the perfect world into existence with the perfect humans he so insanely desires?

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Why not.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 1:03 AM

And so an “all powerful” god found his inability to persuade his creations to goodness frustrating enough that he had to wipe out the entirety of mankind, excepting one drunkard named Noah (and his family) who presumably have to repopulate the entire world in doubletime so that we have as big of a population as we have today? Don’t we know that incest breeds birth defects, but I guess god gave Noah’s family special dispensation and skirted that reality of nature that we know to be true today.

If god wanted mindless slaves he could make them. He seems to want people who choose good over evil.

Seems like that’s his ultimate goal anyway (being mindless slaves singing his praises in heaven ad infinitum). Seems to want people to choose good over evil? According to Christian doctrine, a life long murderer can still get into heaven after living a life killing others and being otherwise immoral if he just accepts Jesus into his heart before he passes through the veil. So why don’t you go about murdering all you like and right before they stick the needles into your arm at your public execution call Jesus into your heart?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 1:16 AM

Lucy is the remains of an African ape found in Africa. The drawing used to show her as an ancestor of man do not match the Fossils.

Is that right? What did you learn?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:57 AM

If you date the rocks from the bones and then date the bones from the rocks you can “prove” any date you choose. The geological column only exists in textbooks and there are numerous examples of fossils found in the wrong layer for evolutionary theory.

Most amino acids are very deadly poisons, that all the amino acids have to of the same hand, and that there is not a single good mutation known to man.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 1:22 AM

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 1:22 AM

Stop… Your ignorance is showing.

I’m out, I’m not getting into the proof of evolution now. Rest assured, you need to study some more and quit getting your material from Polonium Halo geologists and Discovery Institute websites.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 1:27 AM

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 1:16 AM

One incidence of drunkenness does not make a drunkard.
If the mathematical models are correct fermentation took much longer in preflood conditions. So while he thought he was drinking partially fermented wine he was drinking fully fermented wine.
Thinking that a Long Island Iced Tea was an iced tea with a shot of vodka I had two and got falling down drunk. Does that make me a drunkard.

You forgot the part about being repentant. Truly regretting your sins is necessary to accept Jesus into your heart. I have found truly regretting something is the worst punishment I have ever suffered.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 1:47 AM

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 1:27 AM

It was twenty odd years ago I don’t remember the books but I read them in Bemis Public Library.

Slowburn on March 27, 2012 at 1:54 AM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

I replied to your post regarding slaves earlier: Love thy neighbor as thyself.

As for your earlier quotes on slavery:

“Slaves, obey your human masters with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5)

“Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don’t work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord.” (Colassians 3:22)

“Slaves are to be submissive to their masters in everything, and to be well-pleasing, not talking back .” (Titus 2:9)

“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. ” (1 Peter 2:18)

These deal with how slaves, indeed all of us, should conduct ourselves, with dignity and self worth. You missed Paul’s letter to Philemon asking/demanding that Philemon free his returning slave. You also forgot Paul stating that in God’s eyes there is no slave or free. You missed the “turn the other cheek” quote. Slaves were commonly slapped and the expression was meant to tell them to stand up for themselves. As I stated before Christianity spread through the Roman slave population like wild fire because slaves were being told that they had self worth and that they, like all, were children of God.

The Parable of the Sower was a mistake; that was not meant for your thread but for a different one. I cut and pasted the wrong response line in the box.

Bubba Redneck on March 27, 2012 at 2:29 AM

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:57 AM
As regards Lucy… She’s still one of our ancestors, and you know what? Since the time they first found Lucy, they have found many more of the same species in the same area of Africa from the same geologic layers. All the other newer and older fossils (australapithecus aferensis, Rhodesiensis, Neanderthal, etc) of hominid life forms that they’ve found since all have multiple finds as well. To date, scientists have found hundreds of samples of hominid lifeforms across several hundred thousand to several million years old, but I think Lucy lost her oldest hominid distinction recently.

Lucy lost her title recently I believe. The question now is which one of these lead to Homo and which were dead end branches on the evolutionary tree. From what I understand chimps and apes are on one of those branches.

Bubba Redneck on March 27, 2012 at 2:40 AM

Don’t tell anyone joe, but I’m really a Satanist who’s just trying to garner another soul for my Lord. You see, I have my eyes set on a nice apartment overlooking the disembowling fields on the 7th level of hell.

;-)

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 11:26 PM

The Satanists would not care for you; no faith in the Devil and all.
‘Course, Screwtape might have just popped that thought in your head.
He is quite hungry.

Bubba Redneck on March 27, 2012 at 2:56 AM

SauerKraut537 on March 26, 2012 at 8:18 PM

That isn’t anywhere NEAR what I was asking. I’m not really interested in your subjective evaluations. I already got that.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 8:45 AM

You asked for a logical progression from faith to non faith. What led me there was psychology, history, geology, paleontology, archeology, cosmology, biology… Knowledge is power, and the knowledge I’ve gathered since I was a wee lad is what informed me that these religions are just BS.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 9:16 AM

And if I cited the same disciplines as confirming my faith you would dismiss that as unconvincing.

No, give me the steps. You started out convinced that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. Trace for me the logical steps refuting that supposition.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 9:35 AM

No, give me the steps. You started out convinced that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. Trace for me the logical steps refuting that supposition.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 9:35 AM

Most of the aspects of the Jesus-figure can be found in the stories of older gods and god-men. What are the sources for the virgin birth, the wonders, the disciples, the teachings, and the death and resurrection motifs?

Was Jesus really unique and who are these deities that came before Jesus?

Asklepios
Hercules
Prometheus
Dionysos
Osiris
Horus
Mithra
Krishna
Buddha
Apollonius of Tyana
Zarathustra
plus many more…

The problem for Jesus is that all these deities are MUCH older than him. You don’t have to be very bright to see where the authors of the Gospels got their “divine inspiration” when they created the Jewish version of the popular God-Man/ World-Saviour of Antiquity. The similarities to the Hellenic tales are striking and this goes back to what I’ve said in other forums here on HA.

Religions have been bastardizing and stealing from neighboring religions since time immemorial, from the earliest animist and pagan religions up through Mormonism’s melding of Islamic and Christian theology.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Sorry, major fail on a number of levels, Sauer. The Gospel accounts are not presented as fictitious accounts but as eye-witnessed and experienced events. The similarities in other traditional accounts, whether fictitious of historical are irrelevant.

Not to mention that you’re still giving me your subjective and personal opinions that this is a logical progression from certainty to doubt.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 10:27 AM

Dawkins gets his t*t caught in a ringer.

And an interesting take on it.

OccamsRazor on March 27, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Sorry, major fail on a number of levels, Sauer. The Gospel accounts are not presented as fictitious accounts but as eye-witnessed and experienced events. The similarities in other traditional accounts, whether fictitious of historical are irrelevant.

Not to mention that you’re still giving me your subjective and personal opinions that this is a logical progression from certainty to doubt.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 10:27 AM

“The Gospel accounts are not presented as fictitious accounts but as eye-witnessed and experienced events”
This nothing more than a rhetorical trick to boost the claims of Jesus Cleo. It’s what they HAVE to say to keep deceiving you.

Enough with the self abnegation my friend.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Not to mention that you’re still giving me your subjective and personal opinions that this is a logical progression from certainty to doubt.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 10:27 AM

And by the way, I find hilarious that MY subjective opinion can be so easily discounted yet the subjective opinion of others in history who’s thoughts support the tales can be so easily believed.

Why is that Cleo?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM

You’re forgetting the fact that my question asked you to support your philosophical conclusion without resorting to objections to the opposite conclusion.

Make your case on substance, not personal prejudices.

When Copernicus presented his proofs for the celestial movements he didn’t have to do it on the basis of objections to the Ptolemaic system. Understand?

Similarly, if I was to make an apology for the truth claims of the Bible, I wouldn’t have to do it on the basis of debunking atheistic assumptions. Get it?

I’ll wait.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 12:21 PM

I’ve given you the substance Cleo, that you aren’t satisfied with it isn’t because I haven’t given it to you but because you want to discount it as unsophisticated or not authoritative enough, any excuse you can come up with…

The issue is this, it’s not nearly as complicated as you make it out to be. With a bit of knowledge of human nature and human psychology it is easy to infer the inanity of religious belief and thought. It is easy to see how you overcomplicate the issue with excuse after excuse to continue to believe in what you WANT believe in when it comes to this god we can all imagine.

This is not a scientific issue where something real is being compared to something real like your example of Copernicus’ proof of the celestial movements. This is natural to supernatural. There IS no “proof” per se, there is only knowledge of the real world we live in and human nature as it is.

Ever since we learned of our pending mortality — the mosts unfortunate consequence of evolving a larger brain — we have done our best to mitigate its doleful message. Much of the greatest works in philosophy, religion, art, and music either exist to bewail our mortality or to argue that a spiritual continuity permits us to accept the physical decline, and eventual decay of our bodies. As the lyrics of Bach’s Jesu meine Freude insists: “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit.”

Stephen J Gould, Urchin in the storm

You WANT the stories to be true because it comforts you Cleo… You WANT to believe you get to go to heaven to be with your relatives already passed, and for those still left behind after you pass to come join you in heaven as well.

I get it. You’re afraid. I was too once.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 2:01 PM

LOL!

The joke is that they already WERE Christians joe. How dense are you bro? They’re particularly good deceivers for getting you to believe their lies.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Uh… so what does that have to do with their argument?

If the argument is sound, it doesn’t matter if it comes from a Christian, Jew, Scientiologist, or if you found it written on a piece of paper in a cracker jack box.

Greenleaf’s argument has to do with the fact that if the Gospels are fiction, it requires us to believe in a massive simultaneous conspiracy of otherwise good people, to promote a lie that none of them would benefit from, a conspiracy from which none of them deviated even at the cost of torture and death. It takes extraordinary faith. Someone like you who claims to have studied history and psychology knows that this theory is absurd. The Gospel writers, therefore, must be assumed honest and credible eyewitnesses.

joe_doufu on March 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM

joe_doufu on March 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Really? You want me to spell it out for you as if you can’t figure it out for yourself?

It’s called keeping/putting up appearances joe.

They put the appearance of objectivity, all while giving a subjective opinion on the evidence of Jesus and the bible. They lied, an un-Christian thing to do last I checked.

In their personal life stories they clearly state that they set out to disprove the historicity of Jesus and the bible, and yet they were clearly Christians all along while using their “objective” positions of power as a college professor and reporter to somehow show that they used to be “atheists” or non believers. I mean we all know far right Christians distaste for reporters and college professors, something that hasn’t changed much since Greenleafs time…

Greenleaf’s argument has to do with the fact that if the Gospels are fiction, it requires us to believe in a massive simultaneous conspiracy of otherwise good people, to promote a lie that none of them would benefit from, a conspiracy from which none of them deviated even at the cost of torture and death. It takes extraordinary faith

What about the founders of Islam or Hinduism or any other religions we find being practiced today? Don’t you see their exact same venture as a fraud and false? Didn’t they supposedly promote their own religious ventures with the same verve and fanaticism as those who started Christianity? Weren’t THEY willing to forward their religions on pain of torture or death? They had to overthrow the current religious institutions that dominated in their area right? They surely were persecuted like every new cult that pops up now and again…

You know, I live up the road from Mt Carmel Texas where David Koresh had his compound of kooks back in the 90′s. You obviously, I hope, looked at them as obviously wrong headed but his followers were willing to, and DID, die for him and his cause.

All it takes is charismatic person who can enthrall a group of followers to all manner of crazy things.

But get this… There are STILL Branch Davidians who still believe in David Koresh as the next incarnation of Jesus Christ.

What’s to say that in 2000+ years they don’t have as many followers as Christianity does today?

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 3:32 PM

What about the founders of Islam or Hinduism or any other religions we find being practiced today?
SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 3:32 PM

This is historical ignorance. Islam is derived entirely from a claimed eyewitness account by ONE man who had NO corroboration, benefitted significantly, and had EVERY incentive for the lie. Mormonism is the same. Both religions are also internally inconsistent. I don’t know the story of the origins of Hinduism (and I assume neither do you) so neither of us is qualified there.

Your continued unwillingness to engage with a rock-solid argument proves you are either a troll or are suffering from the subjective bias you accuse everyone else of having.

joe_doufu on March 27, 2012 at 3:49 PM

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 2:01 PM

That’s weak, Sauer.

The questions of life still need answers, Sauer. Putting your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes real tight, and shaking your head while screaming, “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you!” isn’t a solution; it’s a tantrum.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

The questions of life still need answers, Sauer. Putting your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes real tight, and shaking your head while screaming, “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you!” isn’t a solution; it’s a tantrum.

Cleombrotus on March 27, 2012 at 4:23 PM

LOL@Cleo. Talk about projection… This is what you’re doing…

The questions of life are what you make of it. What WE make of it. Ask your own questions my friend, quit repeating the ones recited to you in church.

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 4:30 PM

joe_doufu on March 27, 2012 at 3:49 PM

Mormonism, Islam and all other religions are internally inconsistent? Like Christianity is internally consistent?

God loves us SOOOO much that he’s going to torture you eternally unless you obey his orders?

How does the death of Jesus actually atone for our sins?

What about the 4 billion people who die outside of Christ, and/or who never heard? They are not in rebellion against God. They are searching for answers like any of us. But they were just not born where they could hear or believe.

God promises that the Jews will never lose their land or be disturbed again.

And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders over my people Israel. I will also give you rest from all your enemies… (2 Samuel 7:10-11)

And I will provide a place for my people Israel and will plant them so that they can have a home of their own and no longer be disturbed. Wicked people will not oppress them anymore, as they did at the beginning and have done ever since the time I appointed leaders over my people Israel. I will also subdue all your enemies… (1 Chronicles 17:9-10)

God promises that David’s throne will be established forever.

“Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me; your throne will be established forever.” (2 Samuel 7:16)

“I will set him over my house and my kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever.” (1 Chronicles 17:14)

“And I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever.” (1 Chronicles 22:10)

SauerKraut537 on March 27, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8