FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Reload this Page Why are you guys so sure about Yahweh?
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM
Search

 
Page 6 of 11 « First 45 6 78 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-04-2002, 09:03 PM   #51
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 15
Post
Quote:
Originally posted by luvluv:
<strong>I've been reading a few threads on here lately about the different varieties of atheism, and many posters have stated something to the effect that while there are some gods they are not sure about, they are basically sure that Yahweh doesn't exist.

1) What is it about Yahweh that makes you so certain that He does not exist?

1b) Do you base your conception of Yahweh around the Old Testament or does your definition include Yahweh as fleshed out by Jesus, St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, etc. (For the record I don't believe in Yahweh as described in the Old Testament myself, but I'm quite fond of the fully fleshed out Yahweh).

2) What Gods do you find more logically possible?

2b) What is it about them that makes them so much more possible than Yahweh?</strong>
1. Which version of YAWEH, according to which sect of Judaism or Xianity??

1b. See 1 above, but to be fair about my beliefs: I find it particularly hard to put any stock whatsoever in a supposedly divine being that needs to be "fleshed out" by a devotee. Omnipotent God-entities should be quite capable of 'fleshing themselves out' --&gt; wait a moment, isn't that what supposedly happened with Jesus and all that 'virgin birth' and 'ressurection' boondoggle that was rehashed over and over (rather inconsistently I might add [see the story of the angel, angels, men in shining clothes, inside the tomb, sitting on the stone, talking to the women, or only two of them -depending on which story about the opened tomb you are reading on any particular day]) throughout the NT?

2. and 2b.

Logical possibility of other deities really has nothing to do with being sure that the biblical Yaweh is a load of hooey.

But, let me give you one of the epiphanies I had concerning the idiocy of belief in YAWEH, JESUS and Xianity

Yaweh supposedly loves us more than we can love ourselves or anyone else. I have a daughter, there is nothing she could do that would make me punish her eternally,

yet that is exactly what YAWEH will supposedly do if you don't follow his rules

right then and there I saw Xianity as the sham it is, a tool to keep the sheep in line [entirely hilarious the continual references to Xians being the flock [of sheep] led by the minister or Christ the shepherd --&gt; sheep do what they are told, they don't think for themselves]
karlydee is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 03:40 AM   #52
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Portsmouth, England
Posts: 4,652
Post
Quote:
Originally posted by tronvillain:
Well, something with one dimension would be completely invisible, but something with two dimensions could potentially be visible.
How?

Amen-Moses
Amen-Moses is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 03:50 AM   #53
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Singapore
Posts: 3,956
Post
Quote:
Originally posted by luvluv:
<strong>Answerer:



1) I don't know what that has to do with the question at hand.

2) I guess I believe that the simplest explanation must be true in regards to Jesus' story. His existence is central to Christianity. There is no significant Christian ethic that does not involve Christ. He is the religion. I don't know what in the world there would be to "add" Jesus to. He is central to the parables, the ethics, just about everything. So I assume there must have been somebody in the middle of all of that. Whether or not He said everything that is attributed to Him is a valid point that I am not qualified to answer (you're the answerer anyways). But I can't really conceive of a plausible alternate explanation for the religion of Christianity other than the existence of someone who either took claim of or had attributed to Him the title of Christ.

Again, though, I'm not sure this is relavent in the discussion of whether or not Yahweh is plausible. The concept is central to this discussion, not the author.</strong>
Yeah, you had guessed correctly as it is completely relevant to our discussion about Yahweh as we will first have to prove Yahweh's 'son' is mere fiction before discrediting his Father. Anyway, you have not answered my question yet, is there other historical sources other than the bible?
Answerer is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 08:44 AM   #54
Contributor
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Down South
Posts: 12,879
Post
Quote:
I reject Mohammed's revelation, firstly, because he was referring himself to Allah and not to Yahweh
Study your history, Yahweh and Allah are the same deity.
Viti is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 09:48 AM   #55
Beloved Deceased
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 2,704
Post
Do you reject Paul because he refers to God and not Yahweh?
MadMordigan is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 08:06 PM   #56
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Post
Amen-Moses:
Quote:
How?
Well, something with two dimensions has surface area, so it could potentially be visible. Now, whether it could actually be visible depends on whether that surface area is large enough and whether it can interact with visual light sufficiently.
tronvillain is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 08:09 PM   #57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: new york
Posts: 608
Post
Quote:
Originally posted by LadyShea:
<strong>

Study your history, Yahweh and Allah are the same deity.</strong>
Objectively, they cannot be. Either God is part of the Trinity or He is not, period.

Gemma Therese
Gemma Therese is offline  
Old 07-05-2002, 09:47 PM   #58
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mount Aetna
Posts: 271
Post
Again Gemma, you enter our circle with claims for objective truths that you can not even begin to support.

You prove nothing but your own tottering upon the precipice, blindfolded and on the run from knowledge of life, knowledge of self, and knowledge of truth.

Gang warily.

.T.
Typhon is offline  
Old 07-06-2002, 03:31 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: new york
Posts: 608
Post
Quote:
Originally posted by Typhon:
<strong>Again Gemma, you enter our circle with claims for objective truths that you can not even begin to support.

You prove nothing but your own tottering upon the precipice, blindfolded and on the run from knowledge of life, knowledge of self, and knowledge of truth.

Gang warily.

.T.</strong>
There is nothing to prove, dear Typhon. It is an objective fact. I didn't try to "prove" or "disprove" the existence of either deity.

You know, you're almost obsessive-compulsive when it comes to disproving God's existence.

Gemma Therese

[ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: Gemma Therese ]</p>
Gemma Therese is offline  
Old 07-06-2002, 03:46 AM   #60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: new york
Posts: 608
Post
Here, Typhon:

<a href="http://forum.catholic.org/discussion/messages/41/544776.html?1025626441" target="_blank">http://forum.catholic.org/discussion/messages/41/544776.html?1025626441</a>
Gemma Therese is offline  
 
Page 6 of 11 « First 45 6 78 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:21 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.