Jack the Bodiless

Helpmabob:
There is nothing to "disprove". The burden of proof is on you. If I claim that I have the supernatural power to levitate furniture, does your own inability to disprove my assertion mean that my claim should be taken seriously? I would have the burden of proof in this situation.
Absolute rubbish. Complete falsehood. Utter nonsense.
Why didn't YOU grasp the magnitude of what you were claiming earlier in this thread, when you said "Yes the fulfilled prophesies are a strong pointer to the worthiness of the Bible"?
And if you lived just over a century ago, you'd be saying exactly the same thing about powered flight: because that's reserved for the angels. Sinful humans will never attain the necessary perfection.
Another example of a vague non-prophecy. Where is the proof of supernatural inspiration here? There were no wealthy but unhappy people in existence when this was written? You can show that the author was referring specifically to Roman Abramovic? You can prove that no wealthy person throughout history ever HAS been happy?
No explanation of "purpose" is necessary, because there is no reason to assume that a universal "purpose" exists. Why must everything have a "purpose"? What is the "purpose" of the puddle which appears on your road during a rainstorm, or the dog faeces in the gutter, or whatever? You have a strange way of looking at the world: why do you expect me to share it?

Gullwind

So, to sum up this rather egregious derailment, the institution of slavery is "probably" not justified by a possible few that may have preferred to be slaves, the bible never specifically states that it is immoral yet it somehow is anyway, and the bible hands down an absolute moral code that must be interpreted on a case-by-case basis.

I think I got it.

Johnny Skeptic

An excellent case can be made that God does not have good character. One of God's worst atrocities against mankind is that he deliberately withholds information from some people that would convince them to become Christians if they were aware of the information. Now are you going to tell us that God is not able to to anything more than he has done to convince people to become Christians? No man can fairly be held accountable for refusing to accept information that he would accept if he was aware of it. Logically, the best decisions are the best informed decisions, especially if heaven and hell are actually at stake.

Since moral skeptics are loving, kind, considerate, and forgiving, and oppose murder, lying, theft, and a host of other immoral practices, it would be out of character for them to reject any loving human, or any loving God.

Why do you suppose that moral atheists, agnostics, and non-Christian theists reject Christianity? I do not object to oversight. Without human oversight, there would be anarchy. I am not opposed to divine oversight if it is fair. Hurricanes and starvation are not fair. I am certainly not opposed to miracle healings being available for the good of mankind. All non-Christians are willing to discuss various issues with God if he wants to show up, tangibly, in person, and be available to answer questions about his character. As it is, all that we have is a one-sided Bible where not any arguments at all from contemporary opponents are allowed. For instance, when ancient Egyptians first learned about the uncorroborated Old Testament claims about the Ten Plagues, I am quite certain that they immediately rejected the claims because they knew that they were not true. If the plagues occurred, they would have been the news story of the millennia. The stories would have been recorded by historians all over the Middle East. If the plagues occurred, and news about them was recorded by a number of historians, why did God allow only the Bible’s account to be preserved? The Old Testament says that the Philistines were aware of the plagues and as a result were afraid of the Jews, so no Christian can claim that news of the plagues did not leave Egypt. In addition, it is well-known that oral traditions are carried from generation to generation for many centuries. However, there couldn’t have been any oral traditions regarding the plagues because if there were, some of the oral traditions would surely have been written down, and would be available today. In addition, if there was a global flood, and Noah’s descendants repopulated the earth, why aren’t there any surviving records about the repopulation outside of the Bible? Why did most or all of Noah’s descendants who moved away from the Middle East reject the God of the Bible and never write about him, at least as far as we know? This is quite strange.

Can you ask God for any tangible benefit such as food, shelter, clothing, or medical needs and be assured that he will receive it? Well of course you can't. If a bear is chasing you, would he ask God to protect you and leave it at that or run? Of course, you would run, or try to kill the bear. The simple truth is that you do not have any credible evidence at all that all tangible benefits are not distributed entirely at random according the laws of physics. This is exactly what rational minded people expect would be the case if God does not exist. Love is partly about caring about peoples' tangible needs. James at least got that right. James 2:14-22 say "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?" The problem for Christians is that even though James got that right, God didn't. He allowed one million people to die of starvation in the Irish Potato Famine alone, most of whom were Christians, and most of whom surely asked God to provide them with food, but to no avail.

Either the God of the Bible does not exist, he exists and is mentally incompetent, or he exists and is a monster. Take your pick. Even Attila the Hun did not kill his own followers, but God sometimes seriously injures and kill his own followers, and babies, and innocent animals.

If I had enough power, I could run the world much better than God does. I would not run a world OF the people, or BY the people, but I would run a world FOR the people, ALL of the people. I am much more loving, merciful, kind, and forgiving than God is. If I had enough power, I could easily prove it.

Helpmabob

Who made up those rules? Why should I follow them? I follow God’s rules to promote God’s purpose, you follow your rules if you like.

I was not the instigator of this thread, which is basically claiming that biblical prophecy cannot be worth tuppence. I am disputing that.

It [If you love money you will never be satisfied] applies to Abramovic. In spades. That’s all we need to see that the prophecy is fulfilled.

It’s funny, because as I look a round about me I find that everything has a purpose. Try it yourself. I find that with the exception of my tonsils and appendix every part of my body has a purpose. Music entertains and books educate and art delights. Businesses, governments and economies all act with a purpose. There is purpose in the earth being just the way it is. There is even purpose in evil – robbers don’t do steal to go to prison, they do it primarily because they want things they can’t afford.

It follows that there is purpose within us and around creation. Purpose is observably universal. It is then counter-intuitive to maintain that the universe has no purpose. Can we be sure that we have any purpose if there is no ultimate purpose to the universe in which everything exists? Or are a multitude of purposes in a universe of meaninglessness and chance quite compatible?

Johnny’s World would be a disaster. There would be the same greed, hate, fear and war, but there would be no place for love peace and forgiveness. Peace comes from God, consideration of whom would not be allowed either.

If there’s any danger you’re going to be running the earth, I think I’ll take a leaf out of old Noah’s book and start building my rocket-powered escape ‘ark’ to the moon.

JPD

Do you select particular rules or do you follow them all? Do you slaughter populations because you disapprove of the lifestyle of the inhabitants? Do you make a moral judgement - or assess or judge in any manner whatsoever - what you perceive to be God's rules?

Where?

It is true that people who try to get their hands on more money for the sake of getting their hands on more money are not necessarily the happiest people in the world. But then take a look at the flipside - people who have no money and whose children die in infancy. Money is a tool - a not particularly well distributed one in places - but a tool nonetheless. It enables things to happen, it allows us to fill our lives with wide-ranging interests and activities.


Well doubtless that's because you want to find a purpose in everything - it seems to be necessary to fulfill the basis of your beliefs. However, try to demonstrate the difference between a universe in which things are, and one in which they are and have a "purpose". Are you suggesting that God has communicated with every atom and told it what it is supposed to be doing? Are atoms the innocent victims in a rape or a murder?

It follows? What do you mean it follows? The purpose you ascribe to the universe is a product of your mind - it has emerged from it. It is a perception that you have of it - a projection in effect. There is nothing to suggest - asides from a warm fuzzy feeling I venture - that you are right in assuming purpose in everything. You are reacting to your own emotion.

As distinct from what - this world which is great? The root cause of many of the world's problems - the dogmatic and fundamentalist religious outlook of many individuals - in-groups and out-groups on a fantasy foundation - would not exist. People could believe that when they died that their atoms became parts of other bodies and systems. Is that harmful? It's certainly the case that the evidence points to atoms distributing and nothing else happening. The evidence that you are after is unobtainable - or, I should perhaps say, that the "evidence" you deem to be acceptable and convincing will not satisfy skeptics. Is this why religious parents like to start early on their offspring - so that they can determine how they think for them before the children have a chance to work out what they think for themselves?

spin

I missed Helpmabob's previous ravings...
The importance of the fact that you judged me without checking the data is that you shoot from the hip: making unsupported claims, which is typical of someone who doesn't take the time to do the research necessary. You doggedly avoided showing that you were able to separate your position from that of a schizophrenic even to yourself. Youdon't need evidence. You only need to believe it seems. You could be just as off your head as any believer who might fly planes into buildings.

This of course is not an ubiased viewpoint.

The more you know about the context in which it was written the more you will be able to understand it. Reading it in ignorance is reading what you want into the text. It doesn't derive from the text.

Shame on you, Helpmabob. You are just showing the sorts of things I have complained about regarding the misuse of the text. You want to force the quote to be a prophecy, so you fudge the edges and pretend that it basically is. Shame.

Honesty is the best policy, Helpmabob. The atheists I've met are usually more honest than the christians.

Who'd ever have guessed that the christian would say that or maintain the claim?

Really meaningful there, Helpmabob. There is as much life there as there is with the christian and just as wayward in my eyes. You both go beyond what you can know. In the atheist's situation though it's a case of denial of a position rather than holding an unjustifiable one, like yours.

As there is no evidence for a god anyway, it would be reprehensible to acknowledge anything of the sort. We have to use the best evidence we have when we make decisions and a god has no evidence whatsoever, so any decisions based on gods seem to me to be a recipe for folly.

As you don't have any objective evidence for a god operating the world, as you put it, you should remove the concept from the equation.

The individual's wisdom and morals aren't worth much. Wisdom comes in social responsibility, as do morals.


spin

Johnny Skeptic

That is false. My word, I do not go around killing people like God does. If I was able, I would heal all of the sick people in the world, something that Christian doctors are trying to do, but that God refuses to do. I would feed all of the hungry people in the world, something that many Christians are trying to do, but that God refuses to do. I would not discriminate amputees like God does. I would protect people from murderers and terrorists, something that Christians are trying to do, but that God refuses to do. I do not wish to send anyone to hell, especially forever, but God endorses unmerciful eternal punishment without parole. If mercy is anything, it is forgoing eternal punishment without parole even though justice, in this case, God's justice, demands it. Otherwise, mercy is meaningless. God makes people blind, deaf, and dumb, reference Exodus 4:11. I would never do that. God punishes people for sins that their ancestors committed, reference Exodus 20:5. I would never do that. God kills people with hurricanes, including some of his most devout followers. I would never do that. Even Attila the Hun did not kill his own followers. God kills people with hurricanes, including babies. I would never do that. God turned a savage Devil loose to terrorize the world. I would never do that. In the Old Testament, God ordered the death penalty for a Jew who killed a Jew, but not for a Jew who killed a slave. I would never do that.

Jesus said that divorce is wrong except in cases of adultery, and that God allowed divorce during the time of Moses because the peoples' hearts were hard. It is virtual certainty that both of those claims are lies. If anything, the God of the Old Testament was authoritarian, bossy, and not permissive.

God deliberately withholds information from some people that they would accept if they were aware of the information. I would never do that. If Jesus returned to earth and healed all of the sick people in the world, not only would many people become convinced that he exists who were not previously convinced, but out of gratitude, some people would become Christians who were not previously convinced.

James says that if a man refuses to provide food for hungry people that he is vain, and his faith is dead. In the Irish Potato Famine, one million people died of starvation, even though God has food in adundance. What does that say about God?

Today, there are prescription mood stabilizing drugs that allow millions of people who have serious mood disorders to live normal lives. I would provide people who have mood disorders with much better drugs than the drugs that are available today. Obviously, God does not wish to make better drugs available.

If I had the power to do whatever I wanted to do, it would be a simple matter for me to run a world that is much better than the world that God has created. If the God of the Bible exists, either he is evil, or he is mentally incompetent.

God cannot possibly derive any benefits from his frequently questionable behavior, and mankind would be much better off if he decided to be more loving, kind, merciful, and forgiving. God should practice what he preaches. As it is, he is a hypocrite.

Now what do you suppose that God's intentions, motives, and goals are? Whatever they are, are you going to tell us that in order to achieve what God wants to achieve that this awful world that we live in is necessary to achieve that goal?

Today, there is not any credible evidence that all tangible benefits are not distributed entirely at random according to the laws of physics. If God does not exist, it is to be expected that all tangible benefits would be distributed entirely at random according to the laws of physics. If a man is dying of starvation, the logical and rational thing for him to do is to ask a human to provide him with food, not God. Non-existent Gods never provide anyone with tangible benefits.

Helpmabob

Is there such a thing as an unbiased view? There is such a thing as an unbiased fact. It is a fact that the Bible has relevance today. Not only is the Bible the most translated book in the world, it is by far the best all-time seller. No wonder - this is our God’s revelation. It reveals all that God has chosen to reveal to man through human authors directed by the Holy Spirit. It is relevant. It is therefore necessarily a prophetic masterpiece.

Read where Jesus predicts His death:

From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. [Matthew 16:21]

It’s black and white: no derivation, extrapolation or interpolation is required. It is Jesus prophesying His death. As we know, it happened just as He predicted. People accept it as a prophecy, even though they shun and suppress the truth.

Further contemporary evidence of prophecy around Jesus death relates to that of Peter’s denial before the cock crowed:

Then Peter remembered the word Jesus had spoken: "Before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times." And he went outside and wept bitterly. [Matthew 26:75]

So we have here two biblical reports of God speaking prophetically about matters concerning His own sacrifice for us. We can thus be confident that the prophecies are a fundamental component of the Bible, and are to be held in high regard.

These prophecies of His death come in addition to the predictions of matters pertaining to Jesus birth and lifetime as well as the personally verifiable promises by any that care to check, including the billion or so christian souls on earth. Not to mention the fall and rise of Jerusalem, the prefiguration of Jesus in Isaiah and the Messianic prophecies of the prophets like Jeremiah and Micah which I have already given.

All this prophecy increases God’s glory - it’s prime motivation.

It’s not too late to turn spin.

Thankfully you don’t, but in some ways hatred is as bad as killing. God has saved my soul and provided an abundance of joy, peace and health along with everything else I need. Your hypothetical paradise would remove these things and replace them with fear, despair and treachery.

spin

Reliance on cliches is no escape for you. Unbiased means to allow the evidence speak for itself following the rules of logic. (If you want to nitpick we can get deeper into the issue.)

Further cliche. By trying to take this line of defence, you are simply putting your head in the sand so deeply you won't be able to get it back out. Being in the dark is not a place you should be. It wouldn't even let you hold your religious viewpoint.

Popularity is a silly argument. You believe that the devil is more popular than your god. Cut the cliches.

OK, so you are labelling yourself a schizophrenic. You persist in your unobjectively held views of the world, refusing to deal with objective means of demonstrating that view. Fortunately, these days, they don't lock schizophrenics up or send volts through their heads.

Yes, mantras are relevant, aren't they, Helpmabob?

Typically unconnected thought of someone unable to relate to logic and objectivity. The "therefore" also doesn't follow from any premises.

As you don't know anything about when the texts were written, you'd have to demonstrate that this is not vaticinium ex eventu (after the fact "prophecy"). Worse still, as you don't have any way to demonstrate any truth value in the foreground content of the text, you cannot even demonstrate that there was a Jesus to fulfill this supposed prophecy.

Do you believe everything you read?? How do you verify your text as a reality check?

I don't have to "shun or suppress" anything there, Helpmabob. You are introducing something into the conversation as fact. To use it as a fact, you have to show that it is one. Don't shift the burden from demonstrating your claims. That's another cliche.

Who saw that he wept? You are citing something that is obviously literary. That's like who saw what Jesus did at Gethsemane when the three disciples went to sleep? Obviously more literary effort. Who reported the temptation of Jesus? Obviously another literary effort. How do you choose what is literary effort and what is not?

If I write a story in which one of my characters predict something that happens in the story, is that really prophecy??

Don't try to boggle people with numbers again, Helpmabob. As I've already pointed out the devil is more popular in your eyes than your god.

Hell, who didn't predict the fall of Baghdad. Even I predicted the utter failure of the neocon war against humanity. Forget obvious examples.

Partly wishful thinking, partly misunderstanding and partly poor translation.

For some reason you seem to think that your "prophecies" haven't been examined to death numerous times in the past. We've had so many christians tarting up the Hebrew bible so that they can squeeze out false post event prophecies. Oooh, look, the gospel says Jesus was crucified, let's mistranslate Ps 22 to say that his hands and feet were pierced... etc.

Oh, for a decent prophecy and not this rubbish we see time and time again from people who don't even understand the book the material comes from. Just look through the archives and see the fall of poor attempts at calling things prophecies regarding the fall of Tyre or the virgin birth. I would love you to come up with a decent prophecy. It would stave off the boredom of this subject. Prophecies of the ilk of George Bush is not going to be president in 2009 are not particularly meaningful, neither are ones where you fiddle the text (such as turning "one like a son of man" into "the son of man", Dan 7:13). But I guess you've got nothing better to talk about.

Yes, it's never too late to turn, Helpmabob.


spin

Johnny Skeptic

That is patently false. Thanks in part to God, fear, despair, and treachery are already in the world. If I had the power to heal all of the sick people in the world, which is what Christians doctors are trying to do, that would help humanity, not create fear, despair, and treachery. God frequently chooses to kill people, including babies, with hurricances. If I could prevent hurricanes, I would. Wouldn't you? If I could heal all of the sick people in the world, I would. Wouldn't you? God allowed one million people to die of starvation in the Irish Potato Famine in spite of the fact that he could have easily provided those people with food. That was a detestable thing for God to do. James says that if a man refuses to give food to a hungry person, he is vain, and his faith is dead. That means that God is vain, and that he is a hypocrite. God created the bacteria (Bubonic Plague) that killed one fourth of the people in Europe. If I had been able to prevent the Bubonic Plague from occuring, I would have. How about you?

You are a very ignorant person. I want to provide Christians with the very tangible things that they frequently ask God for, and yet you falsely claim, with no credible evidence at all, that the world that I would run would have fear, despair and treachery. If I had enough power, I would protect people from terrosists and murderers. Is that what you call creating fear, despair and treachery?

I never said that I wanted to create a paradise on earth. Humans need some obstables and difficulties to overcome in order to develop good character, and in order to be able to tell the difference between good days and bad days so they would be able to better appreciate good days. Killer hurricanes ARE NOT necessary in order to achieve those goals, nor are plagues and famines.