I am an atheist thread 4

[NaturalEnquirer]

Jonathan

If you don’t take the OT literally, How do you account for the “fall of man”. ???

les

What does the row of 20 question marks mean?

 

[Jonathan82]

And by the way Hell does not exist yet it is a future event! So stay tuned!

 

[Jonathan82]

What does the row of 20 question marks mean?

It means hes on the edge of his seat biting his nails for the answer lol

 

[_A]

But he facts remain facts and as I see it you have 3 choices.

I recognize that just because the disciples think they saw Jesus doesn’t mean that they really did. There are three possible alternatives:

1. They were lying
2. They hallucinated
3. They really saw the risen Christ

There is no evidence outside of the bible which supports your hypothesis.
There is a fourth possibility -
4. They were misquoted, years later, by people who didn’t meet them.

People have come back to life as biology and science have plenty of documented cases where this has occurred. I will not go to references because you probably will not open them anyway and can investigate yourself. So your reference of once dead always dead does not stand.

Of course there are no references…no-one has risen from the dead (aside from fiction)

 

[_A]

Well thats the billion dollar question for an Atheist isn’t it.
look at this way a lot of the religions out there stem from Judaism, others have nothing to do with it. For the ones that stem from Judaism, Catholicism and Christianity(Jesus was raised Jewish and came to add to Judaism and take minor things out like slavery animal sacrifices etc.and in Judaism they are still waiting for the Messiah.) Both believe that Jesus is the son of God. then comes Islam they don’t view it that way but they see Jesus as only a prophet even though thats really not too bright, I will tell you why. They see Jesus as a great prophet yet if they approve of him being a prophet why do they accept him in the first place if he is calling himself the son of God? As for Hinduism I don’t know too much but I will tell you that Muslims and Hindus from personal experience treat women like dogs. Scientology=Tom Cruise, enough said.

Heres an Article I found after reading your comment. I think that If the Church is open to that then I don’t see why we would limit ourselves, like you say. I personally have always loved space and like star wars and star trek and I believe in different dimensions etc… and I still believe in God. ufoevidence.org/documents/doc814.htm

What I meant was that, if you believe in a creator, the universe is a much better creation than the bible. Why not learn from nature instead of a book which is wrong in so many areas?

 

[_A]

Hey, **you **are the one who brought up “minor offenses, like failing to believe”. I’m glad that you now see that was a misunderstanding.

So it is clear that failing to believe (which a person can’t force on themselves - the evidence is sufficient to convince or it is not) is hell-worthy. Ok, so why does your god need to hold such a large threat if he values free will?

OK, so your objection is not punishment, but disproportionate punishment, right? Tiny infractions justify a tiny punishment, large infractions justify a large punishment? Judging from your explanation so far, I think we can agree on that. As far as I know, that’s a concept that 100% of human societies have agreed on, so we’re probably on sure footing there.

Similarly, I think we can agree that the punishment for theft or property destruction should be proportionate to the value of the property, right? Stealing a candy bar doesn’t justify the same punishment as destroying someone’s car.

So, how about the willful destruction of something of infinite value?

Something of infinite value? If your god tosses the less than standard ones into a furnace of fire for all eternity, he can’t value it that much.

Asking for my opinion on something when I’m deliberately advocating a position I don’t personally hold is kind of unfair. But, no. I don’t like the idea of torturing human beings. I also don’t think that the most straightforward interpretation of scipture is always the right one.

‘Scripture’, as you call it, is full of contradictions which you must stretch long and hard to explain.
The universe, and scientific study of it is a much better bible.

Out of curiosity, do you know what word Jesus used for hell? Gehenna. Did you know that Gehenna is an actual, physical place near Jerusalem? It’s their dump where garbage is incinerated. It would be completely transparantly obvious to his listeners that there was a metaphorical aspect to the teaching. Sort of like if he was preaching in New York, and said that sinners would be sent to Jersey forever. Obviously that’s not meant as a literal truth.

Is Gehenna commonly known for being a furnace of fire where there will be a wailing and a gnashing of teeth?

But that’s an aside of my own. Right now, I’m trying to stick to the most simplistic, non-metaphorical interpretation. So, again – infinite retribution may be logically justified for infinite transgression.

But if he tosses even one soul into the eternal furnace, the value of the relationship is clearly far from infinite.

The question remaining is how valuable is a state of human grace, and I don’t see how anyone on this forum can possibly answer that. God seems to think it’s infinitely valuable.

Then why does he burn some of them?

I am absolutely not asking you to just sit down and accept the Bible. What I am saying is that these are not trivial concepts, so our knee-jerk responses will not always be spot-on. When the subject was the origin of life, you said “I don’t know” (please forgive me if I’m wrong, I’m not going to dig through 5000 posts for it). So why do you assume that you can effortlessly understand concepts like the true nature of eternity, which have baffled brilliant philosophers for millenia?

Why would you think that these concepts were understood hundreds of years ago by people who did not know that the earth revolved around the sun? (meaning the various authors/editors of the bible)

I think I’ve studied nature pretty thoroughly. If I may say so, I suspect that I’ve studied it more than you have. What’s your point? Oops, tangent!

Fair enough.

Peace.

ps - no offense to anyone in Jersey! I’ve never even been there, and I’m sure it’s lovely!

pps - no offense to anyone living near Gehenna.

It is possible that you have studied it more than I, so how can you still believe everything in the bible?
Do you think the earth having 4 corners and resting on pillars is accurate? Since some of the bible is so obviously not correct, it is fair to say that any claim of the bible may be true or may be false. Including the one about Jesus being the son of god.

 

[phooney]

Of course there are no references…no-one has risen from the dead (aside from fiction)

To be fair, people have been clinically dead and have been revived. Sometimes for several seconds, or maybe even minutes, but not for a day and a half.

It’s been a while since I’ve gone over the story, but I don’t think Jesus was crucified in near-freezing water, which would give him a better chance of being revived.

It is irrelevant anyway, they don’t think he was revived from a near-death experience, they think he really was dead for that length of time and magically came back to life.

It will take much more than a book that doesn’t tell us what is metaphor and what is supposed to be truth to provide even tentative evidence that this event happened.

 

[Minnie31]

Hello NE

What do you think of:
Mat 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

I always took this to mean that this was “the” unforgiveable sin. What punishment would be handed out for the only unforgiveable sin. Wouldn’t it have to be hell?
les

The first time I heard this was during a debate between Kirk Cameron and two atheists about the existence of god. It was an interesting debate in case you haven’t seen it. Here’s the link: abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=3148940

Also here’s a link to the Blasphemy Challenge website which Brian (one of the atheists) refers to in his debate: blasphemychallenge.com/

WARNING: I WOULD NOT TRY THIS IF YOU BELIEVE YOU MAY HAVE A SOUL. YOU MAY BE DAMNED FOR ALL ETERNITY.

 

[Jonathan82]

What I meant was that, if you believe in a creator, the universe is a much better creation than the bible. Why not learn from nature instead of a book which is wrong in so many areas?

But I do learn from nature, trust me on that. Nature itself is a mystery, we haven’t even fully discovered the bottom of the Ocean much less the galaxy.

If you could please show me some examples as to what you mean by God vs Nature (I summed it up that way to make it better) and we will have a real good topic.

 

[1234]

There is no evidence outside of the bible which supports your hypothesis.
There is a fourth possibility -
4. They were misquoted, years later, by people who didn’t meet them.Of course there are no references…no-one has risen from the dead (aside from fiction)

1. They were lying
2. They hallucinated
3. They really saw the risen Christ

or…they were relying on reports of *others *who saw him, or who saw people, who did not know Jesus, who said they saw him, or people who didn’t know Jesus who saw men who were impersonating him. The accounts of his appearances suggest all of this: the men at Emmaus didn’t recognize him–a man with crucifixion marks on his hands?–because he didn’t have them. Others say, 'he has gone ahead of us to Galilee. " There are also inconsistencies; Mary can’t touch the risen Christ but Thomas gets to explore the spear wound -(aside: which side was this on? Stigmatists who have it have it on either side–only one should be correct. Stigmatists get the wounds on their palms but in recent years it has been determined that people were crucificed through their wrists–but Padro Pio had the wounds on his palms–will stigmatists now get the wounds on their wrists?)

It is still possible that Jesus survived. Many other unfortunates hung for days on the crossl Jesus died ‘fast’ and may have been taken down still alive.

There is NO medical evidence that anyone else has ‘risen’ from the dead, once dead, after three days. People in cardiac arrest get revived and not a few have awakened in morgues if they were lucky or in their graves if they were not. But not after 3 days after being declared dead.

If yo want to believe, you believe; if you don’t want to, you don’t. It’s as simple as that. But I don’t think that there’s a lot of evidence out there.

 

[Jonathan82]

1. They were lying
2. They hallucinated
3. They really saw the risen Christ

or…they were relying on reports of *others *who saw him, or who saw people, who did not know Jesus, who said they saw him, or people who didn’t know Jesus who saw men who were impersonating him. The accounts of his appearances suggest all of this: the men at Emmaus didn’t recognize him–a man with crucifixion marks on his hands?–because he didn’t have them. Others say, 'he has gone ahead of us to Galilee. " There are also inconsistencies; Mary can’t touch the risen Christ but Thomas gets to explore the spear wound -(aside: which side was this on? Stigmatists who have it have it on either side–only one should be correct. Stigmatists get the wounds on their palms but in recent years it has been determined that people were crucificed through their wrists–but Padro Pio had the wounds on his palms–will stigmatists now get the wounds on their wrists?)

It is still possible that Jesus survived. Many other unfortunates hung for days on the crossl Jesus died ‘fast’ and may have been taken down still alive.

There is NO medical evidence that anyone else has ‘risen’ from the dead, once dead, after three days. People in cardiac arrest get revived and not a few have awakened in morgues if they were lucky or in their graves if they were not. But not after 3 days after being declared dead.

If yo want to believe, you believe; if you don’t want to, you don’t. It’s as simple as that. But I don’t think that there’s a lot of evidence out there.

You make all very good points, but I don’t see why anyone would compare God to man. Rising from the dead is not something man has ever done only in zombie movies.

 

[1234]

Hello NE

If you don’t, you will go to hell. It’s pretty simple.

Before Vat II, it was a mortal sin to eat meat knowingly and willingly on any Friday.

After Vat II, it wasn’t.

What happened to all those people in hell because they ate meat–prob. a lot of teenagers eating hamburgers and then getting killed in car accidents–did they get out?

What about all those unbaptized babies who went to hell before Vat II–and then after Vat II went to limbo.

I don’t think that any all-powerful, all-loving god would create something that would have the remotest possibility of suffering eternally.

 

[Jonathan82]

Hell does not exist yet. So no one is in hell yet.

 

[Jonathan82]

I copied this, I like it. I recommend reading.

Around the world, Christians wait in expectation of an event referred to as “the Rapture”. 2000 years ago or so, Jews in Israel awaited an event referred to as the “coming of the Messiah”. The Messiah did come as foretold, but as foretold by the prophets before him, not as expected by the people of the day. The priests and rabbis expected a great and powerful ruler who would sit with them and by force return Israel to it’s former glory. This did not happen. Jesus came into the world through a very humble beginning; He was born in a stable to a carpenter, grew up in Nazareth, an un-remarkable town that was actually despised by some, and fought the evil in the world with his tongue, not a sword. He despised the religious rulers of the day, calling them “hypocrits” and “vipers”. Yet, if one studies the scriptures of the prophets that foretold his coming, all prophesies were exactly fulfilled. The problem was not with the prophesies or with Jesus, but rather with the interpretation of the prophesies and the beliefs that had sprang from religious teaches.

So too, today, a wise man will not base his beliefs on religious or social teachings. The only way to be sure of the actual relevance of events is to constantly and faithfully return to the Bible for interpretation. Even these pages are not guaranteed to be accurate; My best attempts to interpret the teachings of the Bible are not binding on God. No, history will unfold exactly as God intended, not in the way we want or expect it to.

One interesting point is that the actual word “rapture” is never found in the King James Version of the Bible. The only concrete reference to it is found in 1 Thessolonians 4:17. Here, Paul is teaching to the Church at Thessalonia, and delivers this bit of prophesy to comfort them. One must keep in mind that the early Christians were persecuted to a degree that today would be unthinkable. Thus, they required comfort from the one man who was perhaps the strongest Christian since Jesus Himself.

According to Paul, when Jesus returns, the dead in Christ shal rise first, then those who are alive will be caught up to him in the clouds (sky). This will be our last experience without Christ Himself being with us in the flesh, for he says “and so we shall ever be with the Lord”. For those of us who are truly Christians, that will be a glorious day indeed. But when will it be? And how does it tie in with the prophesies of the end times?

Jesus’ return is mentioned in three separate accounts in Revelation. First is at the end of the sixth seal in Revelation 7:9-17, where John sees the great multitude arrayed in white. These are the loyal followers of Jesus of whom Paul spoke of. The second occurence is in Revelation 14:1 just after the description of the mark of the beast, and just before the seven angels with seven deadly plagues. Thirdly, it is mentioned in Revelation 19:11. This is where the title of this page comes into play (I know you were waiting on an explanation), so let’s read farther.

While all three episodes mention an army of Jesus, the 144,000 virgins, this episode goes into greater detail of the actual wars between heaven and earth. Here we find that the beast and the false prophet are cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. Now, brimstone is an old term for sulphur, which burns at an enormously hot temperature. So here, Hell is introduced as a place of extreme eternal torment. Note that only the beast and false prophet are cast into the lake of fire - no one else.

Next the dragon, Satan, is chained and placed into a bottomless pit for 1000 years. This is the “1000 years of Christ’s reign” that you may have heard of. During this time, Satan is exiled from the earth, so Christ reigns unchallenged and all is peace. The only inhabitants of the earth during this time are Christ Jesus, those which remained alive through the tribulations, and the “dead in Christ”, or those who remained faithful to Christ throughout their lives. Revelation 20:5 sums it up nicely - “But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.”

So we have a few myths dispelled here. People who die do not become angels. Angels are spiritual workers serving God. They were angels the day they were made, and they will always be angels. We are man, we were created as man, and we will always be man. Next, our dead do not go to heaven to be with god when they die. They sleep “in Christ” if they died a Christian, but they do not go directly to heaven. They will rise again, when Jesus returns, in the first resurrection. Conversely, the dead that are not “in Christ” do not go to hell, at least not the lake of fire, upon death. The word “hell” in the Bible is translated from a number of words meaning “death” or “the grave”. The lake of fire is not termed “hell”, but is simply described. There is no hell - yet. It is not a fairy tale, however, for it will emerge later as the final resting place for those who refuse to follow Christ.

 

[_A]

But I do learn from nature, trust me on that. Nature itself is a mystery, we haven’t even fully discovered the bottom of the Ocean much less the galaxy.

…and from our whole range of experience, there is still no evidence supporting one god over another. In fact, all the evidence is consistent with the theory that there is no god or gods.

If you could please show me some examples as to what you mean by God vs Nature (I summed it up that way to make it better) and we will have a real good topic.

Yahweh,great flood, natural world, no flood. Creation less than 10000BCE,natural world evidence says universe significantly older.

We can take either of those to start with, if they are not suitable, please say why.

 

[_A]

1If yo want to believe, you believe; if you don’t want to, you don’t. It’s as simple as that. But I don’t think that there’s a lot of evidence out there.

I must disagree with you here, 1234. I have read accounts from many people who have been unable to make themselves believe.
I think that if the evidence meets your requirements, you believe. I don’t think I would know how to ‘believe’ in this god (or any) with the current level of evidence. There are many people out there.

 

[Jonathan82]

…and from our whole range of experience, there is still no evidence supporting one god over another. In fact, all the evidence is consistent with the theory that there is no god or gods.

Yahweh,great flood, natural world, no flood. Creation less than 10000BCE,natural world evidence says universe significantly older.

We can take either of those to start with, if they are not suitable, please say why.

Well being an Atheist you guys are very sure of your answers or else you’d be Agnostic.

Heres a good theory supporting the great flood… enjoy: If your a man who enjoys learning new things you might enjoy this.

personals.galaxyinternet.net/tunga/Flood.htm

 

[_A]

No, history will unfold exactly as God intended, not in the way we want or expect it to.

So, in this worldview, there is no free will, since your god has decided how history will unfold.

 

[phooney]

I’m an agnostic atheist

 

[_A]

Heres a good theory supporting the great flood… enjoy

I had a look at some of it. It does not at all support the crazy bible fiction (no-one could, it is patently ridiculous)…Here is what I found…

A scientific approach might be to discount the Biblical account of the Great Flood as folklore or as a fairy tale. A religious interpretation might be to cloak oneself in dogma and discount science. Somewhere in between lies the true tale of one of the greatest cataclysms to ever befall mankind.

So in the first paragraph, the author has stated that they believe that it happened. Looks like it might not be objective…

According to the Bible, mankind was destroyed by a Great Flood. Noah and his family built a huge ship, an ark, out of wood sealed with pitch. …And the water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered." (Gen 7; 17-19). Noah floated in the ark for approximately 370 days.

Care to estimate how much boat you would need? It would not only need to carry two of every creature, but food for that many. Including insects. That should increase the necessary size of the boat to ridiculous proportions, now consider that this big, pitch-sealed wooden (!) boat needs to, as the floodwaters recede, visit every land mass to distribute the various species (there are no koalas in North America, and no wolverines in Japan).
That is quite a boat. How was it powered?

Is the Great Flood Story limited to just the Genesis account in the Bible and Plato’s history of the destruction of Atlantis?
No. Stories of the Great Flood are almost universal among the civilizations on Earth. Anthropologists who study legends and folktales from different geographical locations (China, Babylon, Mexico, Egypt, Sudan, S……Historians estimate that these legends number into the hundreds. In 95% of the stories, the flood was worldwide; in 88%, a certain family was favored; in 70%, survival was by means of a boat; in 67% animals were also saved; in 66% the flood was due to the wickedness of man; in 66% the survivors had been forewarned; in 57% they ended up on a mountain; in 35% birds were sent out from the boat; and in 9% exactly eight people were spared. The reality of a global Great Flood event is supported by the universal nature of these accounts.

These numbers represent beliefs, which are not the same as evidence.
How did Noah get the Koalas to Australia and the Muskox to Banks Island?

Glacial Lake Missoula, a North American inland sea, was as big as Lakes Erie and Ontario combined. The glacial lake covered over 3,000 square miles, and was over 2,000 feet deep at the edge of the glacial dam. The Missoula megaflood release over 520 cubic miles of water and ice across Montana, Idaho, Washington and Oregon. Flood waters roared across the landscape at speeds approaching 90 miles per hour, the lake drained in as little as 48 hours. Some argue that it was caused by a massive ice dam that broke releasing a massive flows of water and ice and the event repeated several times.

These ‘megafloods’ are teeny compared to what the bible is claiming, and while they might suggest why there are so many flood legends, they do not support the notion that the whole earth was covered with water.

If these massive megafloods, along with others, were triggered simultaneously by a large comet impact, they could hypothetically generate a global flood event.

Enough to cover all the mountains (by 20 feet of water, if I remember the bible legend) with water? I don’t think so.

How could the waters cover the entire earth during the Great Flood?
The crust of the Earth is flexible and deforms over geological time under redistributed weightloads. Mr. Anderson describes this process in some detail in his book. During the Ice Age, the weight of ice sheets miles thick effected the shape of the world; the ocean became shallower and the continental landmasses flattened out.

So I think he is suggesting here that the mountains were thousands of feet lower 10000 years ago. That is amusing. Also, there is strong evidence that it takes longer than that for mountains to climb up.

Is there any other evidence supporting a Great Flood?
Yes. Massive extinctions occurred at the end of the Pleistocene. Most of these are associated with the larger megafauna. The following disappeared from America, Europe and Australia:
All herbivores > 1000 kg
75% of herbivores 100-1000 kg
41% of herbivores 5-100 kg
< 2% of herbivores < 5 kg
This extinction of megafauna included: wooly mammoths & mastodons, the saber-toothed tigers, native American horses & camels, giant Australian kangaroos, wombats, the marsupial lion (Thylacoleo carnifex), the largest ever marsupial (the 2 1/2-ton Diprotodon), giant Irish deer or Irish elk, wooly rhino, peccaries, short-faced bears, as well as the armadillo-like glyptodonts, and the giant ground sloths (Megatheriadae).

There are an awful lot of species which survived, too. This suggests that each of these surviving species were either on the ark, or treading water for hundreds of days (without food) and surviving that way.
None of this touches on the other problem of the great flood. Yahweh really comes off like a wifebeater. (with humanity as the ‘wife’). With some humans being evil, he has a tantrum where he kills every living thing on the planet, except one boatload (what did all those animals do wrong?). After the flood, old Yahweh apologizes (again like the wifebeater) and offers presents (rainbows) and promises not to do it again (until the next time, I guess)

EDIT - quoting error