The athiests now seem to have nothing credible to say defending

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by TheBigPayback, Jan 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lyricalpriest

    lyricalpriest Rap Games Dawson Creek

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2000
    Messages:
    24,093
    why? because not only does my mind. my heart. my body feel that it's right. my soul convicts me of this also. i have a sense of honor, for my ancestry. so i "ignorantly" submit. but i am open beyond as reasonable doubt. personally i love all religion and all beliefs. i don't condemn anyone for them. i believe what the bible teaches me, and more so i believe the story of jesus. what he stood for.. i'd die for. if it ment maybe that sacrifice would save mankind.
    test
  2. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,468
    That's really low of you. Any sane person questions things about their religion.
    test
  3. SpillnMoney

    SpillnMoney Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2010
    Messages:
    210
    u asked the question.. ::dunno::
    Posted via Mobile Device
    test
  4. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    Much of what you posted here is interesting,but your application regarding the matter of space and String Theory is flawed.You're also missing the fact that if something exists in this universe,then it has to be created.Furthermore,even scientific annihilation is the absence of the matter and corresponding energy of a thing from this dimension...it may have been shunted into another dimension entirely.And that dimension is an act of creation.Therefore,the idea of a single Creator being the author of anything and all of Creation--the multiverse in its infinite variants--is every bit and likely far far more sensible than multiple Creators performing these acts.

    My comment regarding the fact that we humans being able to see universal constants and apply them being one of the greatest pieces of evidence that our universe and by extension all of creation is authored by THE CREATOR--whatever It may be--is frocked with the evidence of the latest science.

    Bobbo-"We are not, with current technology, capable of observing space independently of the matter "in space". The idea that there is anything there - in between the bits of matter - is a conclusion; the idea that space is something independent of the bits "there" is speculation. So far we have found nothing to directly identify "space".

    Mike Dubbeld-"There is no such thing as 'empty space' and space was created with OUR big bang. That is science today and almost all the rest above is just philosophers on drugs. The main reason for all these space philosophers is their complete lack of knowledge of Particle Physics and Quantum Mechanics so they invent things and then proceed to tell you to prove them otherwise. Pretty funny. As though these philosophers know more than science yet you do not see them published anywhere showing their brilliance do you?"

    --And lots more.
    test
  5. SpillnMoney

    SpillnMoney Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2010
    Messages:
    210
    Whos the one that founded the big bang theory that said everytime we think were getting to the anwser at the top of the hill we keep ending up reaching a conclusion the bible thumpers been sitting all along
    Posted via Mobile Device
    test
  6. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,468
    Does questioning your religion mean you think that it is wrong?
    test
  7. SpillnMoney

    SpillnMoney Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2010
    Messages:
    210
    Usually the questions i have is the hows and whats and explinations that could prove it scientifically. But no i dont question my religon.
    Posted via Mobile Device
    test
  8. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082

    I'm agnostic and without a doubt I would endure eternal torment for the sake of the people I love and even "merely" to perpeturate the existence of the beings on this planet (which includes quite likely tens of thousands of people I strongly dislike)."The few sacrifice for the many". Furthermore,and bluntly put,I think it's the right thing to do.
    test
  9. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    Maybe we're thinking of different people,but that's a misquote IIRC. In a nutshell,the irreconcilable difference between science and religion--not FAITH,but FAITH ORGANIZED AND EXPRESSED THROUGH SOCIAL,POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC HUMAN INSTITUTIONS--quite literally lie in the details.Science has thoroughly repudiated some of the most hallowed details that certain religions use as the cornerstone of their faith.Interestingly,science doesn't inflexibly refute every contention of religious folk out of hand,science merely invites those of various religious bents to provide rigorous evidence for their sweeping claims.The converse is NOT true,however.Religious orders are (in)famous for their intolerance and zealous overreaction to anyone who dares question them,their creed,or who might suggest something different.Not something COUNTER to "religion x's" belief...just something DIFFERENT from it.

    For instance,the existence of the first religion on earth--MAAT--and the fact that MAAT IS THE ABSOLUTE SOURCE for ALL EARTH'S RELIGIONS,complete with the first Resurrection story,the first story of Creation,the first Commandments (oftentimes called THE 42 NEGATIVE CONFESSIONS,as well as other names) from which all subsequent religions draw their basis,their Commandments,their Pillars of Faith,the whole foundational fabric and cloth from which Buddhism and even Native American religions draw their Gods and stories from,etc. completely eradicates any TRUTHFUL statement of The Creator having a single Chosen People and whatnot.The assertion that The Creator is a "jealous God and thou shalt have no other God before me" is complete trash.The idea that any Scripture contains the infallible wisdom of The Creator is also craptasticness to the highest degree.Science roundly repudiates these assertions by tracing the actual assertions to the humans who make these statements and then holding them rigorously accountable for their words.For instance,there is no "prophecy" made in any religion which couldn't be crafted by a reasonably intelligent human gifted with a way with words.Science doesn't deny the existence of prophecy,science only questions deeply those who claim to know of,receive,or believe in prophecy by asking these people to produce the evidence that said information derived from The Creator in the specific sense that "prophecy" is divine knowledge gifted to us.And then science goes out on a limb and makes daily "scientific prophecies" if you will.We know of maaaany of them; the most common is the weather report.Time,date,location,exact numbers,specifically which factors give rise to specifically which results,why that's the case,etc. Scriptural prophecies are vague sweeping oftentimes doomsday pronounciations which are purposefully vague enough to allow perpetual reinterpretation.This vagueness is quite suspicious to the scientific mind,as it's hard to accept that a perfect mind with perfect knowledge couldn't communicate with us perfectly enough to get its meaning across perfectly; sans vagueness.

    There is,for instance,NO EVIDENCE to support the story of Sodom and Gamorah.Does that mean that it never happened? No. However,in the absence of evidence it's difficult to lend credence to the story to the extent that believers do (or are said to do) without employing something beyond the scope of "rational faith" and that is "blind faith".Blind faith is probably thee single most dangerous emotion/characteristic of humans outside of hate.

    There are,for instance,gargantuan reams of data roundly repudiating the idea that premarital sex is frowned upon by God,is somehow or other a horrible thing,"fornication",etc. This kind of reactionary intolerance and fearful fundamentalism is the stuff from which ignorance and nightmares are borne and feed on.There are,for instance,colossal amounts of info indicating that a person who doesn't believe in The Creator the way you do or members of your religion do are NOT bad people or are frowned upon by The Creator.There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that The Creator views gays lesbians transexuals or gender benders (if I may use that phrase without offending anyone) of any stripe as an "abomination" by ANY means.Just basic common sense repudiates (or if ya wanna break out with Palin-esque speak) "REFUDIATES" lololol far too many asinine assumptions that have been popularized by various interpretations of various scriptures.

    Which leads us to the biggest and most important difference between Science and Religion: Science acknowledges that its information is limited and can change radically based upon the acquisition of new information.Religion asserts its infallible divine information,with wiggle room only in how one INTERPRETS that information.This gives CONSIDERABLY LESS WIGGLE ROOM,and locks adherents into literal interpretations of ideas which are preposterous on its face...like Revelations' statements about a 7 headed dragon with 10 crowns of infamy (is one head rockin 4 crowns of infamy and the others only rock 1? I mean...what's the breakdown here?) The problem with believers stating that various Biblical speakers are speaking in parables or whatever is...YOU HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE OF THE BIBLE FOR THAT INFO.I mean,EXACTLY HOW DID YOU REACH THAT CONCLUSION? The speaker DOES NOT refer to himself as speaking in parables.In fact,who wrote the Bible and approved the books therein? Who said it's okay to translate scriptures into different languages and who's in charge of said translation (it was THE CATHOLIC CHURCH back in the day,now it could prolly be freakin anyone)? There are too many questions which erode the trustworthiness of too many crucial assertions by religious orders.

    However,science as a whole does a marvelous job of rigorously affirming many maaany assertions that faith and religion came upon FIRST.Like essentially the mandatory existence of a CREATOR.Like the universal bond between all things living dead or in-between (if there IS an in-between). Like the existence of a universe (heavens).And much more.
    test
  10. KRich662

    KRich662 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,043
    I can't take the bible seriously at all. A group of people got together and decided what should be in it.
    test
  11. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    There's alot to be taken seriously from The Bible.The all-time bestselling book in human history which spawned wars and tens of thousands of charitable organizations is worthy of deep study and respect.Agreeing completely with whatever you read or are told is another matter entirely,though.
    test
  12. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Theres no evidence for sodom and gammorah? And the 10 crowns represent heads of nations. But u cant really nit pick revelations and say well hey see not everything can be taken literally cus it was a vision of the end times by daniel. He didnt know what helicopters were or missles an so he described them as he recognized. Jesus did similar by drawing reference to things they understood. But in the same instance. U understand many of those things as well. An thats the point.
    Biotch! You wish you had a phone like mine...
    test
  13. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    Again,all of this post you made--while interesting--supposes extrabiblical interpretation.Who exactly told you that the 10 crowns represent heads of nations? And who told the person who told you? Where did they get their info,as it's NOT IN THE (UNIVERSALLY CIRCULATED ENGLISH "MODERN ENGLISH" VERSION) BIBLE.In the absence of the specific Biblical person in question saying something to the effect of or taking actions that would clearly indicate the presence of or inclination toward "visions" or "parables" or whatnot,we can't rigorously conclude that the primary source is actually speaking in or of parables.We have only the text to go on and quite often a literal interpretation thereof.Besides,it's kinda hard to believe that The Creator would show Daniel a whole bunch of mess that made zero sense to him but which would make perfect sense to those of us who millenia later would be the recipient of AND HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ON PAIN OF ETERNAL HELLFIRE said info being passed down to us,and we are to interpret said info correctly.I'm thinking that thee ole Perfect Creator would have found a perfect method to pass that 411 on to us.Just my opinion.

    Ergo,there is a lack of decisive evidence in favor of the "parable" hypothesis being true.It's quite conceivable that the lack of said evidence is purposeful,too.

    Besides...nobody spoke English back then.So who translated your Bible into English or Latin or whatever language you use? Who told HIM that Daniel was speaking in parables?

    I would assume that Daniel could and would recognize the heads of nations even in other times because they'd be doing something reflecting their stature.President Obama doesn't look like a regular guy.Who at least looks like an office executive of some type.Daniel knew what Kings were back in his time and their bearing--their inner gestalt,their royal oomph--separates them from other men.
    test
  14. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Because it isnt nessicary for you to completely understand revelations for salvation. You dont even have to know it exists to be saved. The group that got together to decide the cannon was wether or not it was inspired of God. How did they get that? Wether the person writing it had done miricals 1, or cosigned the other 2. Like luke didnt nessicarily do miricals but was cosigned by paul that did. Thats how biblical cannon was decided.
    Biotch! You wish you had a phone like mine...
    test
  15. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    Sounds more than a little dicey and difficult to accept to me,but understand this: I'm not promoting the idea that complete comprehension is a mandatory factor for faith or salvation.I'm saying that the CONTRADICTIONS are EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO RECONCILE and in many instances are IRRECONCILABLE. Man,a dragon DOES NOT LOOK LIKE A MISSILE.We know what old skool dragons look like.So did Daniel.They don't look EVEN CLOSE to missiles.Furthermore,obfuscation of message via pathetic info is NOT the way that you save souls and make your message free and unencumbering.A mere human like me could craft a message a gajillion times better and which would stand the test of time and evolution of the human language AND species.

    The contradictions,fallacies,and untruths that are clearly exposed in the Scriptures are of HUMAN origin.This human origin,however,does not invalidate the primary premise of Scriptural doctrine...i.e. be aware of submit to and be down with The Creator.
    test
  16. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    What contradictions? I didnt say daniel thought missles were dragons. Everybody be saying that but never say whats contradictory about the bible. Im not saying there arent CERTAIN instances where translators were unable or mistranslated something. Ie samson the number of people he killed with the donkey jaw bone was 20 but the number from hebrew in SOME instances was translated to 1000. That does cause problems, because people go ohh 1000 ya right yadada, fairytale. But we still HAVE the hebrew bible, AND hebrew translators that caught that translation error. That doesnt make the truth untrue or the history.
    Biotch! You wish you had a phone like mine...
    test
  17. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    Sensible post,but I think you're missing my point here.In a nutshell: the Bible,the Koran,the Torah,and any and all other books claiming to possess the single sole and infallible divine wisdom of THE CREATOR paint themselves into corners merely by making such claims in the first place.Why? Because all of their statements must then be taken at literally face value...or else the validity of every word they champion comes under truly intense scrutiny and scathing analysis.

    The very first question would be something like: WHY WOULD THE CREATOR NEED US TO WRITE A BOOK IN ORDER TO INSTRUCT US? Why not,for instance,inscribe knowledge and questing etc. into our DNA? Knowledge doesn't preclude faith.That's a gigantic fallacy.I know math and I know I can study aeronautical engineering.However in the ultimate essential I have faith that whatever airplane I design will fly.I don't KNOW it.I hellafied BELIEVE IT based upon the rigorous testing etc. of all the factors that I can deal with that LEAD UP TO FLYING THE PLANE.
    the actual flying of the plane is an act of FAITH based on BELIEF...a RATIONAL FAITH.

    As anyone familiar with books knows,the construction of the book is difficult enough when it's ONE AUTHOR who's focused on their info...but nowhere in the Bible does God actually say MAKE A BOOK AND TRANSLATE IT INTO A BAJILLION LANGUAGES.Instead,we have the assertion FROM A HUMAN BEING that God said:"Spread My Word..." etc. etc. from which all manner of INTERPRETATIONS have arisen.Because of the clearly fallacious approach of all of this,the divine origin of the message is immediately cast into doubt.Furthermore,if we are to believe the Biblical scholars,THE BIBLE SPANNED MANY YEARS IN ITS CREATION.Why don't we have an exact calendar and/or chronology of the Bible? That would kill lotsa doubts.Who determined which books would be allowed into the Bible and in what order the books of the Bible would be in? Many people believe--and there's quite a bit of evidence to support--the idea that Roman Catholics got together in an enclave and decided what was what for the Bible.

    As for contradictions in the Bible? There are many.Jesus is supposed to be without sin...but I remember a story of ole dude takin a whip to people who'd turned a church into a bazaar."Vengeance is mine,sayeth the Lord." Right? Oh wait...Jesus is The Lord God incarnate.Right? Except...there would be no need to sacrifice anybody for our "sins". Even the concept of actually being able to "sin" is extremely dicey and difficult to accept.The idea that there could be any creature in Creation which could hope to oppose any of God's plans (Satan) is bluntly impossible,and it's next to sheer lunacy to assume that Lucifer (who was closer to The Creator than any other being) would suddenly take it into his head to OPPOSE the very being that he knows beyond any doubt is the source and font for Lucifer's own existence,for ALL OF EXISTENCE and ALL POWER.The story of Lucifer and his fall from grace is...highly highly flawed,if not an outright lie.In fact,there is conclusive evidence that Lucifer's story is simply another culture's reinterpretation of the story of Ausette (Osiris to the Greeks) and Set.We know,to put it bluntly,that the story of Lucifer is at best a modernization of the one of the oldest stories in human history at BEST and at worst IT'S A LIE.It's a useful cautionary tale,but it's not divine wisdom and spiritual manna.Flawless divine communication? Nope.Not that.Which again calls into question the veracity of EVERYTHING in the Bible,if EVERYTHING IN THE BIBLE GAINS ITS VALIDITY FROM THE CLAIM OF DIVINE ORIGIN.

    Science has decisively terminated the divinity of the stories of the Bible that we CURRENTLY READ.Same with the stories of the Hebrew Torah and Bible...as these stories originated in Creation stories that is many thousands of years older than the very people who first spoke Hebrew.Now,does that mean that there is no Creator? Nope.It means that the stories we've been told are NOT sent to us by the Creator because the stories are too laughably fallible.

    The Biblical prophecies are NOT divinely prophetic.They lack the precision and definitiveness of a true prediction...like weather reports.The distinction between a PREDICTION and a PROPHECY is that the latter is ALWAYS DIVINELY INSPIRED AND CLEARLY ORIGINATED FROM THE DIVINITY.Predictions can be bandied about for fights,weather reports,rap battles,whatever.Prophecies are another matter,but we don't have any of those.Prophecies can't be disproven.The many statements of the Bible that promote bigotry and intolerance--like the allegedly divine repudiation of gays,and the torment prescribed for witches,and the exhortations to go to war for God--are all transparently and pathetically human foibles and flaws.Intolerance.Zealoutry.Ignorance.All dressed up in Scriptural clothing to make their venom and stupidities seem sweet and frocked in the deepest wisdom."I am the Lord Thy God and thou shalt have no other God before me." Please.That means:"I'm hella insecure so you better stay jockin me and if I see you tryin tuh jock somebody else I'll hate on you and drop you in Hell." The Creator is by necessity not prey to such human patheticness.

    Like I said,these 'prophecies" are basically broad sweeping semi-poetic statements that were designed to be interpreted by the hearer and/or speaker into whatever is appropriate to their circumstances.Forever.But they lack exactitude,accuracy,truth,purity,rigor,practicality,precise translateability and that is what denudes them of true prophetic power.

    And I'd like you to answer my questions: who exactly told you that the 10 crowns of infamy represent nations? Who told that person who told you? What is the source of their information? I'm genuinely interested,as it seems to me that it's almost 100% impossible to avoid the acknowledgement that this information ABOUT the Bible came from sources that AREN'T the bible.So we have human sources adding depth and context,correct information...ON DIVINE BIBLICAL SOURCES.That's not possible,right? We humans can't roll up and be like:"What God MEANT TO SAY was blah blah blah blah.Makes more sense now,huh?" Because that would suppose that God is fallible.Which God ISN'T.Right?

    So basically we wind up having the prove the divine info and origin of the bible,and NOT the divinity and/or origin of THE CREATOR.The Creator exists,according to all info we have (the multiverse,lol).In fact,"exists" is too narrow a term and concept because the Creator created EXISTENCE.The Creator is not limited by EXISTENCE itself.Who told you Daniel wrote Revelations? Who told you the name of the book is Revelations? Isn't REVELATIONS an ENGLISH WORD and NOBODY SPOKE ENGLISH BACK THEN.I mean...there are too many holes here.
    test
  18. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Well seeing as though the bible is one of the only perserved documents through history until today, seems to me it did the job it was supposed to. Crowns always has represnted kings and since now we have nations rather than kingdoms the ones that represnt their nations are the "heads of the nations" where the crown sits. Most likely the ones that speak for the UN. A revelation is the translation from the hebrew word that ment "revelation" and since the book revelations is the revelation of john, daniel, ezikiel, and jesus, id say thats fair enough. And most of the old testiment prophecies were about isreal and the messiah, all which have been fullfilled so id say they can be trusted. The remaining 500 that have yet to be fullfilled should happen in our lifetime so well see. The biblical description of a prophet is that their prophecies are NEVER unfullfill. Thats how u can distinguish the real from the false.
    Biotch! You wish you had a phone like mine...
    test
  19. DethStryque

    DethStryque DethStryque theInvincible

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    Messages:
    2,082
    The problem with all the above is that the objective evidence either flatly refutes or calls into question all of the conclusions that you have reached.For instance,what compelling empirical evidence do you have that ANY Biblical "prophecy" has come to pass and how do we know that said "prophecy" is specific and peculiar to the Bible? Many of the Bible's prophecies are merely repetitions of prophetic statements that predated the Torah and all Hebrews (science has the literal hard data for that,such as the 10 Commandments being 10 of the 42 Negative Confessions from Maat).There are still Kings and Queens in this world.How exactly do you reach a conclusion that is weighted more toward the U.N. than literal monarchs? Why EXACTLY is divine information less than precise clear and specific regarding mundane human matters when flawed humans can and are very precise specific and exact in their predictions...and are MANY TIMES CORRECT? Where exactly did you get the information that the Book of Revelations is derived from Ezekiel,John,Daniel,Jesus,etc.? Who said that the Book of Revelations derived from the Hebrew word for "revelations" and how did they know? Do you not see that the very act of translation brings the information translated into question,and it becomes hundreds or thousands of times more questionable over the course of hundreds or thousands of years? Who are these nameless translators? Where did God say:"Yeah translante my Word"? Don't INTERPRET a passage to mean "Translante my Word"...I mean SHOW ME THE PASSAGE that says:"Translate my Word". And right after you do that? I'll have to ask...why would divine info that's perfectly transmitted need translation in any way...book or not? The fact of a book immediately calls into question the perfection and divinity of its transmission.Somehow,I don't think God rocks a Barnes n Noble in Heaven.So what's with the books? Oh...we humans need books? No we don't. We got along quite well for millenia without "conventional books" and oddly enough? These "nonconventional books" are the "keepers of knowledge" which literally kept the exact word and whatnot as written and stood the test of time...like the obelisks of the Black Pharoahs.

    Like I said,the entirety of your post is based upon questionable data.Maybe it's true,maybe not...but your conclusion of literal manifestation of Biblical prophecy is highly doubtful sans fireproof objective data.
    test
  20. TheBigPayback

    TheBigPayback God Particle

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,469
    Look at my fulfilled prophecy thread i posted. How do i know the hebrew or latin bible had the word we translate to vision or revelation well because english orginated from latin so many root words are similar. Also the jews of the day were very familiar with revelations and visions so they had a word for it which translates in english. The book thing is simply because it was taken from tablet to scrolls to books. Its a writing, people from the earliest millenia wrote information and history. And its survived through the generations as such. Thats the only form of storing history and what not people had so they used it. Reading itself also invokes a relationship between the reader writer and writing.
    Biotch! You wish you had a phone like mine...
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)