Johnny Skeptic

Since I am an agnostic, I obviously believe that intelligent design is a reasonable possibility.

Of course, and my question was about the God of the Bible. I said:

You did not answer the question.

As I have told you several times, I have a thread at http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=259943 at the General Religious Discussions Forum that is titled "It is doubtful that a God inspired the Bible." I quoted some things that you said and replied to them. I made a number of arguments that I believe reasonably prove that the God of the Bible does not exist. I was willing to do that because I am confident of my arguments. Would you be willing to start a new thread at the General Religious Discussions Forum that is titled "It is probable that a God inspired the Bible"? If not, then you are obviously evasive, and you are not confident of your arguments.

It is fair and reasonable for me to ask you to start a new thread at the General Religious Discussions Forum and state why you believe that the God of the Bible exists since I have a thread where I stated why I do not believe that the God of the Bible exists.

Consider the following:

http://www.gotquestions.org/defend-faith.html

In the NASB, 1st Peter 3:15 says "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence."

Jude 1:3 says "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints."

Obviously, the Bible tells Christians to be willing to answer questions and defend the faith. I asked you why you believe that the God of the Bible exists. Please start a new thread at the General Religious Discussions Forum and answer the question. If you are not willing to do that, then I will win by default since I have a thread where I defend my position that it is doubtful that a God inspired the Bible. In debates it is always the party who is the least confident of his arguments who becomes evasive.

I would also like to discuss inerrancy with you at the General Religious Discussions Forum. In my opinion, inerrancy is one of the most ridiculous beliefs that some Christians have. Inerrancy in merely an appeal to emotional needs. I discussed inerrancy in the thread that I mentioned at the General Religious Discussions Forum.

sschlichter

A) other historical sources
B) children in jars of all ages with an inscription about passing thru the fire (not sure of the actual inscription and no time to look it up, sorry)
C) biblical sources

If the bible was writing propaganda against these other cultures then why would it also implicate itself in the practice of child sacrifice to the same false God?

sschlichter

I would be careful assuming truth is determined by those with the most spare time but go ahead and declare yourself the winner of a debate that I did not agree to. In the meantime, I will be in this thread about slavery.

Johnny Skeptic

Indeed, and there are not any good reasons for people to assume that ancient Hebrews actually treated their slaves well. Obviously, what the texts say does not show what ancient Hebrews actually did, only what they were told to do. It is doubtful that they "acquired" the land of Canaan fairly. In addition, it is interesting to note that the largest colonial empire in history by far under a single religion was conquered by Christian nations by means of persecution, murder, and theft of property. The victors frequently warred among themselves for the spoils of victory.

Without genetic intelligence, military power, and other secular factors, Christianity would not have become nearly as large as it is today, and a very small country like Britain would not have been able to conquer a large empire. British scientific achievements are quite impressive, and so were the scientific achievements of the ancient Greeks, which contributed a lot to the success of the Graeco-Roman empire.

sschlichter

genetic intelligence? Are you suggesting that Europeans are genetically more intelligent than others?

Johnny Skeptic

You said:

Since I answered your question by saying "yes," and since you have refused to discuss faith and reason like you promised to, it is reasonable for me to declare myself the winner regarding the issue of faith and reason.

That would be fine, and in fact quite good for skepticism since your discussions about slavery will probably never convince one single non-Christian to become a Christian. That is partly because what the texts told ancient Hebrews about how to treat their slaves does not tell us how they actually treated their slaves.

Your claim that you answered my question about Mount Ararat at the Evolution/Creation Forum is false. I asked you the question three times, and you conveniently never answered it. You believe that the flood was localized. If the flood was localized, and the ark landed on Mount Ararat, obviously, a localized flood would only have covered lower elevations, which means that some humans, animals, birds, and insects could have escaped to higher elevations.

The fact that many conservative Christians believe that the flood was global is proof the the Bible needlessly causes confusion is a God inspired it.

You made another false claim at the Evolution/Creation Forum. You said:

Regarding "Much further back, science had us believing that the universe was eternal and only Christians believed it to have a starting point," that is patently false and utterly absurd. As you probably know, several days ago I started a new thread at http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=260014 at the Evolution/Creation Forum and quoted you. Skeptics are having a field day with your absurd claim.

I discussed some more of your many blunders in my thread at http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=259943 at the General Religious Discussions Forum. The title is "It is doubtful that a God inspired the Bible."

I know, you do not have enough time to defend all of your claims, which invites the question "Why do you make claims in the first place that you do not intend to defend?"

One of the most absurd things that you have ever said at these forums was your statement that abortionists sacrifice thousands of children every year, but that is doesn't bother you when God sacrifices children. You might as well say that it is wrong for humans to tell lies, but that it would not bother you if God told lies.

Please be advised that might does not make right. In addition, you, a mere fallible, imperfect human, are not in any position to accurately judge 1) whether or not the God of the Bible exists, let alone that he is good, and 2) whether or not the Bible writers were in any position to judge that the God of the Bible exists, let alone that he is good.

It is an utterly absurd assumption that a God would inspire texts and refuse to provide everyone with the texts. Millions of people died without hearing the Gospel message because God refused to tell them about it. Or, a more likely conclusion is that he does not exist. If he does exist, it is quite odd that he played favorites based upon geography since in the first half of the second century, no one who lived in China heard the Gospel message, as least as far as we know. In addition, it is quite odd that every year, the percentage of women who become Christians is higher than the percentage of men who become Christians, which means that God discriminates against men. Further, it is quite odd that elderly Christians are much less likely to give up Christianity than younger Christians are, which means that God discriminates against younger Christians.

I discuss these issues in greater detail in my thread at http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=259943 at the General Religious Discussions Forum.

It would be best if you would stop making false claims, and stop making claims that you do not intend to defend.

Johnny Skeptic

I am suggesting that intelligence is a very useful means for a lifeform to favorably compete against other lifeforms for survival, food, mates, territory etc. The British invented radar during the Second World War, and they were able to break some German secret codes which told them where German submarines would be.

Genetics is obviously secular. Are you suggesting that Christianity did not grow entirely by secular means, and that scientific achievements did not help Christianity grow?

Johnny Skeptic

Yes, and you will continue to have discussions that do not have anything to do with slavery until you get into trouble, in which case you will conveniently ask me to stick to one topic at a time when you yourself obviously do not have any intention of sticking to one topic at a time. You are quite content to engage in off-topic discussions, but only if you believe that you have the advantage. As soon as you become aware that you do not have the advantage, which is frequent, you quickly take the next bus out of town.

sschlichter

as I said, go ahead and declare yourself a winner. I will be in this thread discussing slavery and celebrating your victory with you.

sschlichter

Do you understand how the threads work. Each thread has a topic. those people that find that topic interesting subscribe to that thread. Sometimes the conversation becomes unintentionally tnagential - that is human nature. If it is distractingly so then a moderator usually steps in.

I find your constant recruitment to other threads intentionally distracting. I simply do not enjoy discussing issues with you because you are only interested in glossing over issues and then moving on. Most of these issues are complex and you really only get to the bottom of where people are coming from after all the initial blustering (from both sides) is over.

Keep a list of all the topics you would like to discuss and when this topic runs its course (which it may do soon), I will return to the last topic that you recruited me to (the flood) and when it runs its course, i will be looking for a new topic. If you share your list with me, I can provide you with some books about those topics that will likely better represent a Christian prespective anyway. I expect that none of the topics are new ones.