lpetrich

(Me earlier on Peter the Stalinist and Ananias and Sapphira as pesky kulaks...)

Radorth:
Semi-relevant smoke and mirrors, and from somebody who claims Acts is a late breaking myth at that.

I was evaluating it on its morality, not its historicity. Those are two completely separable aspects.

"Well if it did happen, Peter must have killed Ananias in the kitchen with a knife."

Don't forget about Sapphira!

I think that this story was invented by someone who wanted to ensure that the Church got people's wealth.

We've already had the "Paul promoted slavery" argument, where the skeptics took a rather severe beating as I recall.

The Bible does not tell us that slaves ought to run away from their masters, however.

We can return to the history of Bible-totin' "fundy" oppressors like Whitefield, Finney, and the like.

And their opponents. Radorth has been curiously unwilling to challenge such once-widely-believed things as:

Black people having the curse of Ham

Women always having to be subordinate to men (several places in the Bible)

Starboy

Rational BAC, quit while you are behind. There are lots of religions that have similar histories, why aren't you an adherent of one of those religions? How do you know that you won't like one of those even better? Until you can honestly claim to have sincerely explored all of the religions in the world past and present for you to accept one over another because it makes you feel better is irrational.

If someone claimed that someone came back to life today we would not assume they were resurrected and had supernatural powers. You misunderstood me. If you heard a similar story today but from the Raleans or some other crowd you would do the same as I, think they were a bunch of nuts, but you are blind to your own lunacy because it happened 2Kyrs ago and you have swallowed it hook line and sinker.

Starboy

Rational BAC

I have no problem adding onto my Christian beliefs ----spiritual ideas from other sources. That is a very common thing for mainstream Christians to do today.

It is only the Fundies who like to keep blinders on.

Starboy

Think of it as shock therapy.

Get real. You are so funny. Fact is you do use science to determine reality. If a new disease crops up or a new light in the sky appears, you will not run to a priest, or look it up in the bible to find out what it is and where it came from. You will look to the scientists. That is the funny thing about the religious, Monday through Saturday they live in the real world then on Sunday they live in the unreal world. But when push comes to shove they do not rely on claimed understandings based on their unreal world to understand the real world. This is a universe of quarks, photons, genes, molecules, forces, etc. not demons, souls, sin or god and so forth. You can dance around it all you like but fact is you are living in the past.

I beg to differ. The religious make all sorts of medical claims regarding their religion. They use the most specious arguments, arguments that if used in any other field would get them laughed out of the room. If you make claims about reality then you come under the scrutiny of science, plain and simple, no two ways about it. Now I don’t care about the questions the religious ask. There is nothing special about the questions the religious ask that are not asked in other areas such as philosophy. If religion restricted itself to philosophical questions you might have a point but they do not. They create explanative constructs, just as science, they use these constructs to create explanations, just as science, but that is where the similarity stops. The religious then just say “it’s gods truth’ and that is the end of it, whereas in science these explanations and constructs are criticized and tested. They are not claimed to be ‘truth’ and will most likely be replaced with other explanations. You can think of supernatural religion as fraudulent science, they make all the claims they like and they are ‘true’ by declaration even if they conflict with the facts. It is fraud.

Blackhawk, if you were right we would not be having this discussion. You could just tell me to do the experiments myself and draw my own conclusions. In other words it doesn’t matter if I believe in it or not. If it is real then I will see it. Fact is by today’s standards of evidence you got buttkiss. There is nothing your religion explains that is not explained just as well or poorly as scores of other religions.

That is such nonsense. If you were right it would still be called philosophy instead of science. You see philosophers are mind centric armchair realists. Philosophers claim that Bacon was the first philosopher to lay down the basis of science. The funny thing is if Bacon were alive today he would be the first to tell you that philosophy is full of sh*t. That actual exposure to and exploration of reality is how science should be done not sitting in a chair and presuming reality because you can think. Philosophers don’t get science and they never will, because the moment a philosopher gets science they will be a scientist.

You can’t help it. You are making claims about reality right now. When you say god exists you are saying that god is %100 real. It is no different from me claiming the sun exists and therefore is 100% real. The difference is both of us can check on the claimed existence of the sun easily, but no one can check on the claimed existence of god. To make reality claims with no evidence but insist they are “true” is fraud. Now if you wanted to be honest with yourself and others you could say - “there could be a god but I really don’t know”, but that is not what you are saying – “Next I will say that there is a God”. You can’t help it. To be Christian is to be a liar and a fraud. You see with no way to show the existence of god any statement about god is more likely to be 0% true than 99% true.

You are so funny. It is because science has experiment on nature that it is the de facto authority on reality. Not religion and not philosophy. That is the point. It is a new age! Get real! The “truth” traditions of the past are out of sync with the present.

Hello! Astrology also asks different questions and has different answers than astronomy, but it also makes claims about reality that can be tested and have been found to be without basis in reality. The questions of a tradition have nothing to do with the veracity of that tradition. It is the reality claims of Christians that put Christianity in the fraud category.

You just don’t get it. If you don’t want Christianity to be a fraud then get it to stop making reality claims. It is that simple, but until that time comes they will be as fraudulent as astrology, phrenology or any other quackery.

Starboy

livius drusus

Calling people morons and liars is insulting, puerile and unacceptable behavior in GRD or any other IIDB forum. I have deleted all recurrances from this thread and expect there to be no more. Regardless of your opinion of someone's beliefs, you will refrain from casting aspersions on his or her character.

Thank you,
livius drusus
Moderator - MD

Opera Nut

It looks like Blackhawk does not or cannot follow directions. I told him to read DEMON HAUNTED WORLD by Carl Sagan before he makes any more assertions about science and religion.

He has refused to do so. Or maybe he doesn't know where a real (not a Chrsitian) bookstore is? Or he doesn't like to be told to do things by a female?



:banghead:

livius drusus

Opera Nut, Blackhawk is not under your direction. He is in no way obliged to read anything on your recommendation or anyone else's before speaking his mind.

From the rules and policies of IIDB:

I am not pleased with the irascible tone of posts in this thread. Please respect the rules of this board and refrain from personalizing the debate.

Thank you,
livius drusus
Moderator - GRD

Bumble Bee Tuna

Hmmm. So before, RBAC backed up his beliefs with the fallacious argument from numbers. When shows how flawed that was, it appears he has changed arguments. Now we see the New and Improved, Argument from Fastly Increasing Numbers!

Unfortunately, RBAC, this argument is just as fallacious as the first one. And not applicable to your beliefs: If you want to go with the religion with the fastest growth, pick Islam! Islam has been around a full 550 years less than Christianity, and is growing faster. Islam rose to power much faster than Christianity, I'm pretty sure. For Christians it took 300 years until Christianity got anywhere (Constantine). Islam was a popular religion much faster. So, by your fallacious logic, Islam should be your chosen religion. Yet something tells me you won't convert...

-B

blackhawk

whatever you say but it just makes me value your opinion less and less.



WEll I agree if a disease pops p I would go to a doctor or scientist to explain it but that is their field. i would not go to a doctor or a scientist to explain to me the meaning of life though. I think that you do not understand what I mean about different types of disciplines answer differnt types of questions.


like what? i am sure you can find some religious people who believe almost anything just like I could find some atheist wackos also. But I want to know what kind of claims you are saying religious people make who are not wackos.

Hmm but you do not like philosophy either. You have siad before that they do not deal with reality at all. So this is confusing.


Like what? Besides the fundamentalists I do not know to whom you are talking to.



I have said that there are no experiments to do. however there are evidences. ARe you saying that the only evidence that matter is scientific evidence?


Okay then tell me by just using science how you know that the world is real and not just an illusion? And also tell me how you know that you can trust yourself or anything else that you have contact with day to day? But again only use science. See there is a thing called philosophy of science. Sorry there is just no way of getting around it.



Again I have said that this is just not true. But since you disregard anything but science then you would not understand that.



yawn. Again please enlighten me on how science can gain me any kind of truth or of reality when I ask the question about how can I know that I the world is no just an illusion.


I do not know what you are trying to say here. Philosophy and religion are both very respected fields. Astrology is not. I do not see how this really makes a point for you.


Whatever. You have not listened to what I have to say. You keep on saying that science is everything and that religion and philosophy are both just wacko. Well have fun answering questions that science can't answer by using science. I hope one day you will open your eyes to see how the disciplines that we use to gain truth and reality are diverse and worl together. But until then I think this discussion is over because we seem ot be talking at one another and not to one another.

blackhawk

Okay sorry but I did not see your first post that asked me to read the title above. Unfortunately though I have no time to do so as I have many books on my shelf that I need to get to before school starts again in the fall.

However I do not think I have shown myself not to want ot listen to the posts or advice of females in this forum at anytime so I do not know where that came from at all. Also your comment about me not knowing where a "real bookstore" is is just plain not appropriate for an adult discussion. So if you really think that I am ignorant or that I just do not want to listen to the truth then please do not reply to me. If you do and your replies are like the one above I will not reply back again. And this goes for anyone else also. Life is just too short to have to discuss things that I like to discuss with people who do not want to be civil and polite.