Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rhutchin · 11-24-2005, 10:41 AM

Quote:

rhutchin
I think it would be correct to say -- Atheists are characterized by a lack of belief in God. Atheists have the strong belief that there is no God and they have a belief system built on this. From what I have observed, atheists have very strong beliefs arising from their lack of belief in God.

JPD
More that (speaking for myself) we don't concern ourselves with worrying about God but do concern ourselves with the social effects of belief in God. We also wonder how believers manage to accept their chosen text so freely when there are so many problems with it. Kind of a selective blindness.

How about the social effects of people who use religion to promote an agenda?

I suspect believers accept their texts so freely because they study it more. The more one knows what the Bible really says, the less are the problems with it. Problems come with ignorance, whether the Bible or anything else.

rhutchin · 11-24-2005, 10:52 AM

Quote:

rhutchin
Yes, there were caves. I still maintain that, “there would never have been a "Fred Flintstone" caveman type person,�? cave or no cave.

JPD
People sat around a fire in a cave. I fail to see why any question arises over this.

What is it about the "Fred Flintstone caveman type person" that you cannot accept?

I mean, asides from the transport and the use of dinosaurs in construction (!)

The original comment came from gregor where he said

Quote:

I'm not certain that you made any points - I'm just saying it's clear that this discussion will get nowhere. It's doomed to failure when your only response is "because the bible says so" and the only authority is AIG. Come on, ANSWERS IN GENESIS?!? You know, the guys who think Fred Flintstone is actual history.

It seems obvious to me that the ANSWERS IN GENESIS people (and I also) believe that Adam was pretty much a modern day man in terms of intelligence (but way smarter than the average) without the technological gadgets that we have today. I merely observed that the “caveman�? mystique derived from atheists (and espoused in their myth about evolution).

Ubercat · 11-24-2005, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

How about the social effects of people who use religion to promote an agenda?

I suspect believers accept their texts so freely because they study it more. The more one knows what the Bible really says, the less are the problems with it. Problems come with ignorance, whether the Bible or anything else.

No, most believers do not read their bible. many believers would lose their belief if they studied the "good" book more. That's why Mark Twain said "The greatest cure for christianity is the bible." or words to that affect. That's why so many christians are disbelieving when the evil attributed to their god is revealed to them. That's why so many spout the first rubbish which pops into their head, when they need to defend what they've never dared to consider critically.

Studying the bible is what made me lose my faith. I might still be a christian, if I hadn't been so conscientious of learning about my "loving" heavenly father.

-Ubercat

rhutchin · 11-24-2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John A. Broussard

Thanks, but repeating the verses doesn't explain what happened.

Want to try again?

Did Joshua actually make the sun stand still?

How could he do that, since the sun wasn't moving in the first place?

Or are you claiming that, at that time, the sun actually did revolve around the earth?

The verses you quote in no way explain the phenomenom described in those verses.

Thank you.

All I know is what the bible says. The historical text relates the story from the perspective of a person on the earth. Since people are unaware that the earth is spinning at a high rate of speed, people write as if the sun rises in the east and sets in the west (watch the weather and you will be told when the sun will rise and when it will set). The claim is not that the sun revolved around the earth, but that high noon lasted a long time (the sun stayed in that position for a long time, where it normally would have (seemingly) moved to the west.

rhutchin · 11-24-2005, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John A. Broussard

I didn't ask you for Internet sites claiming Adam was created about 15,000 years ago. I asked for evidence from the bible.

The verses you cite do NOT say that, as you admit. In fact, the good Bishop Ussher using the same reasoning came out with a 5,000 year figure.

What gives?

Bishop Usher used a different line of reasoning to get to his 4004BC date for the creation of the earth than that employed in the source I cited.

If you want to get a date, you have to work through the arguments that have been developed using the information provided by the Bible.

gregor · 11-24-2005, 06:11 PM

Rhutchin
In my experience, the people most ignorant of the Bible (who still try to quote from selected portions of it) are Xians. Preachers preach from about 20% of it. I bet no Baptist minister has preached about the pornography in the Song of Solomon.

And Usher didn't use arguments, per se, he simply counted back generations and came up with Oct. 4004

rhutchin · 11-24-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

rhutchin
How about the social effects of people who use religion to promote an agenda?

I suspect believers accept their texts so freely because they study it more. The more one knows what the Bible really says, the less are the problems with it. Problems come with ignorance, whether the Bible or anything else.

Ubercat
No, most believers do not read their bible. many believers would lose their belief if they studied the "good" book more. That's why Mark Twain said "The greatest cure for christianity is the bible." or words to that affect. That's why so many christians are disbelieving when the evil attributed to their god is revealed to them. That's why so many spout the first rubbish which pops into their head, when they need to defend what they've never dared to consider critically.

Studying the bible is what made me lose my faith. I might still be a christian, if I hadn't been so conscientious of learning about my "loving" heavenly father.

The biggest problem is that a great many people call themselves “Christian�? only because they are not Jewish or Muslim and it has nothing to do with anything God has done in their lives. Such people believe what preachers tell them to believe and have no real idea what the Bible says. That’s why so many people who call themselves, Christian, so easily end up as JWs, Mormons, or atheists.

John was correct when he said:

Quote:

1 John 2
19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

rhutchin · 11-24-2005, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

Rhutchin
In my experience, the people most ignorant of the Bible (who still try to quote from selected portions of it) are Xians. Preachers preach from about 20% of it. I bet no Baptist minister has preached about the pornography in the Song of Solomon.

And Usher didn't use arguments, per se, he simply counted back generations and came up with Oct. 4004

More accurately, people who call themselves, Christians. Preachers could preach from more than 20 percent if they did not have to keep going back and repeating the basics.

I have not really looked at Ussher's calculations but, given what others' say, I suspect you are correct.

Ubercat · 11-24-2005, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

The biggest problem is that a great many people call themselves “Christian�? only because they are not Jewish or Muslim and it has nothing to do with anything God has done in their lives. Such people believe what preachers tell them to believe and have no real idea what the Bible says. That’s why so many people who call themselves, Christian, so easily end up as JWs, Mormons, or atheists.

John was correct when he said:

But as I've pointed out to you at least a half dozen times already. I KNOW what it takes to be a christian, and I WAS one. Now I'm NOT anymore. Your beliefs don't mesh with the real world. So sorry.

-Ubercat

John A. Broussard · 11-24-2005, 10:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Bishop Usher used a different line of reasoning to get to his 4004BC date for the creation of the earth than that employed in the source I cited.

If you want to get a date, you have to work through the arguments that have been developed using the information provided by the Bible.

You didn't answer my question. If a renowned scholar such as Ussher could be so wrong while using the information provided by the bible, how can you be sure you are right, using the information provided by the bible?

I look forward to your answer.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-24-2005, 06:11 PM	#106
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	Rhutchin In my experience, the people most ignorant of the Bible (who still try to quote from selected portions of it) are Xians. Preachers preach from about 20% of it. I bet no Baptist minister has preached about the pornography in the Song of Solomon. And Usher didn't use arguments, per se, he simply counted back generations and came up with Oct. 4004

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.