Sven

Umm, sorry, most of the arguments in this thread are not atheists one, but arguments from theistic scholars. (edited to add: OK, you were not talking about this thread specifically, but let me ask anyway: ) Do you also judge these as weak, taking far more on faith?

Something much greater than myself may exist. But until there's good evidence for this entity, I don't see any reason to submit to the ideas of some shepherders from the early iron age.

And I might add: Many of the people here were once Christians (including me, at least from my perspective; from your viewpoint I was perhaps always much too liberal ). Do you think they only deconverted because they were so prideful that they didn't can stand any longer that there's a being greater than themselves? Now, this would be really insulting.

Vorkosigan

Thanks! I have it from a reliable source that the person known hereabouts as "Peter Kirby" is actually triplets.

If there are no further replies on topic, then we can just let this one die...

Vorkosigan

Jack the Bodiless

Psalm 13:5...
I'm curious about this statement. What "arguments for atheism" require faith?

Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods. It doesn't really have, or require, "arguments". I've seen plenty of arguments against specific theistic claims (like fulfilled prophecies), but the facts seem quite straightforward: it seems odd to describe these as "weak, and take far more faith" than the notion that an actual prophecy occurred.

Much the same can be said for other Christian arguments. Lack of belief that Jesus actually rose from the dead doesn't seem to require a great deal of "faith" (generally, the dead tend to stay dead). And so it goes...

...Is this a reference to evolution and related issues? Again, it doesn't take much "faith" to believe what the fossil record, radiometric dating and DNA analysis shows so very clearly. And you should know by now that evolution and atheism aren't synonymous.
..."Submit" to whom? That's the question!

If there IS a god, maybe it would be a good idea to sumbit to his/her/its wishes. But if you're really asking us to submit to the claims of an old story concocted by ignorant Bronze Age goat-herders: why should we do so?

Is it "pride" to believe that we know better than they? Why shouldn't we?

Vorkosigan

The hilarious thing is, JtB, that while she wants us to "submit," she denies that Christianity is an authoritarian faith. It is, rather, just a faith that wants "submission" and treats assertions of individuality as "pride."

Perhaps this should vault over to GRD, eh? Someone has already asked for that.

Vorkosigan

Koyaanisqatsi

Wow. Anything to avoid dealing with the facts. She's depressed because we're all so full of pride?



It's like reading a goddamned Chick's track. There simply is nothing worse than cult programming. Sometimes I actually wish there were a god and that it would slap all these poor people senseless and wake them up.

Plastic Jesus

"CS Lewis also said that Jesus was wrong in thinking that he'd return before the generation that heard him died off "

I'd say that CS Lewis didn't really look into what was meant by "generation".


But thanks, all, you're really given me some good study material.

unknown4

In my opinion, the assertion that Jesus simply meant that the Jewish race wouldn't pass away until he came back, is a ridiculous rationalization to explain away the apparent meaning of many passages which say or imply that Jesus would be coming back "quickly." Another passage which tries this rationalization is the verse in 1st Peter equating "a day with the Lord is as a thousand years." Such a rationalization makes "I'm coming quickly" a joke, as "quickly" could mean one million years "in God's eyes." What's a million years in the eyes of the eternal God?

Plastic Jesus

I wouldn't say "race"....

Every other time that "genea" is used in Matt, it is used as we use "age". It is not talking about the literal "generation" that we use.

whichphilosophy

But didn't Egypt rule over Sudan at that time.
The Sudanese (Nubians) preceded the Eqyptians but were eventually absorbed/taken over.

A historian can verify. I'm lazy to check today as I have several assignments.

unknown4

Plastic, can you please show me that every use of "genea" in Matthew definitely means "age"? I did a search for the word, and I just do not see your claim as being the case. Matthew 17:17 has Jesus using "genea" saying "O faithless and perverse generation (genea), how long shall I be with you? I doubt it means "O faithless and perverse age of time, how long shall I be with you?" It makes sense though if he's saying "O faithless and perverse generation (of humans), how long shall I be with you?" So, at least in this case, it does not seem to support your claim that "genea" means age of time.

If you are saying Matthew 24 speaks of an age of time, then it seems kind of silly to me. You would then have Jesus making a tautological statement, that this age of time will not pass away until he ends this age by coming back. Well, of course. That's kind of tautological, and to me seems like an unnecessary statement. Remember, the disciples asked him when the temple would be destroyed, what shall be the sign of his coming and the end of the age. However, if he meant to say that the disciples generation wouldn't die off until he came back, then he's saying something very concrete.

If you read Matthew 24, you see Jesus speaking of his disciples, not "those living thousands of years from now." He mentions when YOU (the disciples) see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Then he goes on to say that this generation will not pass away until all these things be fulfilled.

Besides, just how do you get around the fact that the NT repeatedly says Jesus is coming quickly, and Paul said "we who are alive and remain" will join up with Jesus, not "those who are alive thousands of years from now"? If "quickly" means thousands or millions of years, then why play mind games with humans by using that term? After all, if "a day with the Lord is as a thousand years", then maybe all sorts of things in the Bible mean something different than their apparent meaning.