I am an atheist thread 4

[_A]

Maybe its hard for you to understand. Attacking my Beliefs is attacking me and every Catholic, therefore that is personal.

If your beliefs cannot abide questions and the cold light if reason, then you had better set about protecting them. Facts contradicting religious belief are commonplace, not just here on the forum.
Also, you say that simply by disagreeing with you, I have insulted every Catholic. It sounds like something else I heard, when some cartoons were published, someone said that the cartoonist offended 1.5 billion Muslims.
I will not bow my head because of such threats. I will say what I have to say even if it does offend every Catholic. Why should Catholicism be protected from honest inquiry?

Well if you think he made the same point then why do you ask the same question?

Because it has not been answered yet, it has been dodged.
Why is the bible not colour-coded to indicate which parts are true, and which are simply the insane raging of a nomadic illiterate?

First of all I get your point, but we are not Muslims here. and you forgot to mention the crusades and pedophile priests etc… these are fanatical people who are insane. Jesus doesn’t teach those things. Its people that use religion as an excuse for their evil actions.

The pope authorized and supported burning witches. Real gentle and loving, that. If he had not had his religion to hide behind, he would have had to justify burning women alive with reason, which he could not have done.
Without the nonsense of religion, those women would not have been tortured and killed.

I wonder out of curiosity what exactly it is you talk about. Because personally I know I cannot prove to you what you want, therefore it is frustrating to explain something that I already know you will personally ask for more evidence of.

I am asking for evidence by way of pointing out that there is none suitable to support the claims of talking snakes, reanimating dead flesh and walking on liquid water. These are nonsense with no supporting evidence. If you want to believe them that is fine, but when you present them as fact, I call for supporting evidence.

For that matter, I wonder how anyone can believe with such a thinly spread body of evidence. I think it is almost willful. Like the believer takes some pride in the fact that it is impossible, but he believes it anyway.

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

If your beliefs cannot abide questions and the cold light if reason…

Why is the bible not colour-coded to indicate which parts are true, and which are simply the insane raging of a nomadic illiterate?

Thank you very much for bringing the cold light of reason to the discussion, A. It’s always a delight!

 

[_A]

Care to back that up?

Eghghghghgh… actually, never mind. It’s just not worth it.

I know you know that I can, and then it leads us back to me not understanding the words the way a faithful person can.

The fact is that condemning a person to an eternity of torture (“furnace of fire” and “wailing and gnashing of teeth”) is beastly and hateful beyond anything any human could possibly do.

This is what I am expected to worship? Why? Why would anyone?

 

[_A]

What if it is for our own good that God wants us to worship him? What if worshiping God in the fullest sense of the word is what is best for our spiritual/psychological well being? Or even more so, our eternal well being? Then God’s seeking our worship is an act of love.

You are presupposing the existence of your god, or the whole thing falls down around your ears.
People don’t worship gods, they worship the what the various churches tell them are gods, for the most part. This means that, at the most, one religion is right, and the rest are misleading people dangerously.
I have been given no reason to think any one of them is right.

 

[_A]

Thank you very much for bringing the cold light of reason to the discussion, A. It’s always a delight!

I know there is some of what is considered ‘absolute truth’, and other bits (like the parts where it says to kill children that curse their parents, or stone to death someone who works on the sabbath) which are generally believed to be fiction (use another word for 'not truth if you like).
There are indeed bits in the bible which appear to be the ravings of angry illiterates. Did your god write those, too?
If those nasty bits are for other people in other times, then why didn’t your god make them vanish when they went from being reasonable rules of conduct to being beastly horrors which any civilized person could not tolerate?

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

You are presupposing the existence of your god, or the whole thing falls down around your ears.

This is completely irrelevent. You yourself presupposed the existence of God, when you said that God is not loving because he wants worship. There’s really nothing to be gained by requiring that both sides constantly say “assuming that God exists,” or “assuming that God does not exist.”

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

I know there is some of what is considered ‘absolute truth’, and other bits (like the parts where it says to kill children that curse their parents, or stone to death someone who works on the sabbath) which are generally believed to be fiction (use another word for 'not truth if you like).
There are indeed bits in the bible which appear to be the ravings of angry illiterates. Did your god write those, too?
If those nasty bits are for other people in other times, then why didn’t your god make them vanish when they went from being reasonable rules of conduct to being beastly horrors which any civilized person could not tolerate?

A few points, not that I think they’ll make any impact.

Specifying capital punishment for a crime does not mean that God doesn’t love, it merely establishes his intolerance of sin.
I’m puzzled by why your repeated “angry illiterates” jab. Why do you think poorly of illiterates?
There is no need for God to rewrite the Bible. He came down and personally explained the new covenant.

 

[Jonathan82]

If your beliefs cannot abide questions and the cold light if reason, then you had better set about protecting them. Facts contradicting religious belief are commonplace, not just here on the forum.anyway.

umm… yea cold light of reason? is it the one you haven’t applied yet… What facts do you have about disproving me?

Also, you say that simply by disagreeing with you, I have insulted every Catholic. It sounds like something else I heard, when some cartoons were published, someone said that the cartoonist offended 1.5 billion Muslims.anyway.

You wouldn’t understand it so I don’t expect a non believer to get offended. Just like I wouldn’t get offended if someone slapt you on the face right now because frankly I don’t know you(don’t take that the wrong way its an example).

I will not bow my head because of such threats. I will say what I have to say even if it does offend every Catholic. Why should Catholicism be protected from honest inquiry?Because it has not been answered yet, it has been dodged.anyway.

As far as I know I answered the question I did not dodge it, you can look it up and then break apart my answer and analyze it, if you so wish. And no one is making you worship Christ in this forum that I know of, and I have not threatened you.

Why is the bible not colour-coded to indicate which parts are true, and which are simply the insane raging of a nomadic illiterate?The pope authorized and supported burning witches. Real gentle and loving, that. If he had not had his religion to hide behind, he would have had to justify burning women alive with reason, which he could not have done.anyway.

Again you miss the point like a bad penalty kick. I have already said Jesus didn’t teach that and the Church itself will tell you that not all Popes were good.

Without the nonsense of religion, those women would not have been tortured and killed.I am asking for evidence by way of pointing out that there is none suitable to support the claims of talking snakes, reanimating dead flesh and walking on liquid water. These are nonsense with no supporting evidence. If you want to believe them that is fine, but when you present them as fact, I call for supporting evidence.anyway.

I never said what I talked about was fact by its definition of fact. But you cant say yourself that you are using fact to disprove me.

For that matter, I wonder how anyone can believe with such a thinly spread body of evidence. I think it is almost willful. Like the believer takes some pride in the fact that it is impossible, but he believes it anyway.

Like I said way earlier in the posts, I believe in what Jesus said and personal experience which cannot be proven; just like you wouldn’t be able to prove to me tomorrow that you got up ducted by aliens today.

 

[Aleii]

I believe in the ten commandments from the OT and I don’t take the OT literally at all. What I do believe in Is the New Testament. Jesus didn’t believe in slaves.

How do you know you aren’t supposed to take any part of the OT literally?

 

[Jonathan82]

well as far as I know we aren’t supposed to, the OT isn’t exactly all for Catholics even though its in the Bible, but the commandments are there so thats why Catholics buy them and there is a couple other things like the foretelling of the coming of Christ.But its mostly refuted by Christ. Thats why there are also Bibles that include only the New Testament. But I would like to hear other thoughts from Catholics about the OT because I’m curious.

 

[_A]

This is completely irrelevent. You yourself presupposed the existence of God, when you said that God is not loving because he wants worship.

What I said was

I think that seeking worship is not loving, by the way.

Please don’t stuff my mouth with straw.

 

[_A]

A few points, not that I think they’ll make any impact.

Specifying capital punishment for a crime does not mean that God doesn’t love, it merely establishes his intolerance of sin.

Capital punishment is something I am opposed to anyway, but he does more than that. When this life is over, he attends to the eternal torture of those who disobeyed (according to the bible). That is beastly by any reasonable standard.

I’m puzzled by why your repeated “angry illiterates” jab. Why do you think poorly of illiterates?

I don’t mind illiterates, but I would expect a book backed by the creator of the universe to be a little better than the average angry illiterate rantings of the O/T. By the way, isn’t that Jesus guy credited with saying something like “I am not here to change the bible”?

There is no need for God to rewrite the Bible. He came down and personally explained the new covenant.

Am I just supposed to take your word on that, NE?
Others, equally studious of the bible reject the notion that Jesus was a god. Why should I listed to either? Is there something to recommend your interpretation over someone elses?

 

[_A]

umm… yea cold light of reason? is it the one you haven’t applied yet… What facts do you have about disproving me?

This shows what you know about reason. I am not making impossible claims (such as saying that people rise from the dead). If you make such a claim, the burden of proof is on YOU.

You wouldn’t understand it so I don’t expect a non believer to get offended.

I understand just fine, I just have a need of evidence before I start believing something that sounds so much like fantasy…

Again you miss the point like a bad penalty kick. I have already said Jesus didn’t teach that and the Church itself will tell you that not all Popes were good.

So once again, the god you invent gets credit for all that is good, and poor us get credit for all that is bad…
Does this sound reasonable to you?

I never said what I talked about was fact by its definition of fact.

Clearly, you have no facts attached to your belief. I knew that, I am glad you do too.

Like I said way earlier in the posts, I believe in what Jesus said and personal experience which cannot be proven; just like you wouldn’t be able to prove to me tomorrow that you got up ducted by aliens today.

None of it can be proven, that is why you should treat what you believe as belief and not as fact.

 

[_A]

But its mostly refuted by Christ. Thats why there are also Bibles that include only the New Testament.

Just where did your Jesus refute the O/T?

 

[Jonathan82]

Hopefully someone that could remember can answer that to its fullest but I remember small things like, sacrificing animals having slaves, among other things. those things were all accepted in the OT.

I mean he goes over things that I cant remember all. I would go look it up right now but Im gonna watch the latest Rambo movie right now:thumbsup:

And when you were quoting me you on the part were I spoke about fact you forgot the other part. The part were you don’t have fact yourself.

I will return!!!

 

[munan]

@munan

Ah, I see what you mean now. For me they would seem to be part of the same ‘how’

Well, I think I agree with you, though I think the word “created” is too charged for me to want to use it in this context. We know that the universe as we know it isn’t eternal, but the best we have are hypotheses as to what the cause of it might have been. I’m really looking forward to whatever evidence happens to be found, like when the large hadron collider is finished… damn delays!

And mine is, “I don’t know, how about we try to find out, and let’s hold off belief until we have some evidence.”

I think this is very well said, and I absolutely agree.

I agree! Let’s do all the good we can and then I’ll see you in hell, we can talk the universe over with Einstein.

Fair on all counts. And no kidding, what is up with that damned collider???

 

[c659smith]

This shows what you know about reason. I am not making impossible claims (such as saying that people rise from the dead). If you make such a claim, the burden of proof is on YOU.I understand just fine, I just have a need of evidence before I start believing something that sounds so much like fantasy…So once again, the god you invent gets credit for all that is good, and poor us get credit for all that is bad…
Does this sound reasonable to you?Clearly, you have no facts attached to your belief. I knew that, I am glad you do too.
None of it can be proven, that is why you should treat what you believe as belief and not as fact.

I’m back,

So what is proof and what is truth?

What is extraordinary and what is ordinary?

What is evidence?

These are the questions that must be answered by you for a benchmark should be established before one tries to meet such a heavy burden for you.

For your benchmark is already there with the words “you invented” and “fantasy” why that was quite a prejudicial statement by you.

 

[c659smith]

This shows what you know about reason. I am not making impossible claims (such as saying that people rise from the dead). If you make such a claim, the burden of proof is on YOU.I understand just fine, I just have a need of evidence before I start believing something that sounds so much like fantasy…So once again, the god you invent gets credit for all that is good, and poor us get credit for all that is bad…
Does this sound reasonable to you?Clearly, you have no facts attached to your belief. I knew that, I am glad you do too.
None of it can be proven, that is why you should treat what you believe as belief and not as fact.

I understand just fine, I just have a need of evidence before I start believing something that sounds so much like fantasy…

Your quote above

In giving sound evidence that ten Men had eyewitness testimony of Christ rising from the dead.

That they went throughout the world and stated this testimony.

That they were ridiculed, tortured, stoned, and crucified for this eyewitness testimony.

For to disbelieve that had happened would give no account on how the Christian Church rose to the pre-dominant religion in the civilized world in less than 300 years.

Now the answer I received back on this eyewitness testimonial evidence that ten men saw, ate, talked with, and touched Jesus was a delusion.

For the reasoning on disputing the evidence of these ten men having the same hallucination at the same time, interacting with this hallucination at the same time, were delusional all at the same time. and this delusion lasted for some decades until their horrible tortured death all for this delusion without renouncing such a delusion or lie under these extraordinary physical and mental conditions just does not compute.
I think the claim that this was a delusion or hallucination is more extraordinary and has a better chance of Christ rising from the dead. For this was not a belief but an eyewitness account by these 10 men(the Apostles)

That Christ was buried in a tomb and the tomb was was vacant in 3 days that was guarded by Roman soldiers.

The body was stolen ?

Who would have such motives ?

the Jews–documented the empty tomb and would not steal the body as definitely not in own interest, as this caused their down fall

the Romans–Documented the empty tomb .and would create a martyr on what they wanted to destroy. would take more of the populace against the establishment. do not think so.

the Apostles–Then they died for a lie? don’t think so for not in human nature.

I have set the reasonable ground for proof now the job you have is to disprove eyewitness and testimonial evidence.

Such evidence can sentence a man to death in todays society as is real evidence. (beyond a reasonable doubt) unless you can disprove the evidence with facts and sound reason then the evidence stands and we will use an alternate juror to come up with the verdict based on sound and real evidence.

Now can you?

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

What I said was Please don’t stuff my mouth with straw.

I’m lost. Who were you talking about when you said “I think seeking worship is not loving”, if not God?

 

[Armor_of_God]

well as far as I know we aren’t supposed to, the OT isn’t exactly all for Catholics even though its in the Bible, but the commandments are there so thats why Catholics buy them and there is a couple other things like the foretelling of the coming of Christ.But its mostly refuted by Christ. Thats why there are also Bibles that include only the New Testament. But I would like to hear other thoughts from Catholics about the OT because I’m curious.

Hi Jonathan,

I would like to recommend some books for you to read related to this subject:

Sacraments in Scripture: Salvation history made present. (Tim Gray)

Scripture Matters: Essays on reading the Bible from the heart of the Church. (Scott Hahn)

Worthy is the Lamb: The biblical roots of the Mass. (Thomas J. Nash)

I think you will find much food for thought in these books.