(April 9, 2016 at 4:23 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(April 9, 2016 at 4:06 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Yes, he said everybody who calls him lord lord will not enter his kingdom. But if you're not a Jew, how do you obey a guy who said he came only for the Jews and told his disciples that the reason he spoke in parables was so that outsiders would not understand and be saved?

Technically, what he said was "NOT everyone who says Lord Lord will enter the kingdom of heaven". Not trying to disrespect you, but if we're going to attack them, it must be on the merits.

I understand the difference you're making and am usually more careful. In fact. I usually quote exact verses.  If I did not have friends like you to correct me  when I get lazy, I'd never get any kudos. Thanks.

Matthew 7:21 Wrote:New International Version
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven

Mark 4:10-13 Wrote:And when He was alone, they that were about Him with the twelve asked of Him the parable.  And He said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables.

“That seeing they may see, and not perceived: and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted and their sins should be forgiven them.  And He said unto them, Know ye not this parable? And how then will you know all parables?  

(April 8, 2016 at 3:49 pm)drfuzzy Wrote: Rekeisha wrote:
"There are many thing that you don't believe nor could understand that are real. Just because you deny it doesn't make it not exist. "

-- And just by asserting that these things exist doesn't make it so.  I can assert that silver unicorns exist until I'm blue in the face (just like you are doing with your assertions) and until you can do better than make statements, it's all a waste of effort.  

[b]Rekeisha wrote:[/b]
[b]"I am not going to be ashamed of the truth. What is a shame is that you don't have proof the there isn't a soul or God or an afterlife. I have the Bible, I have the presence of God, the fellowship of believers and history, and nature. You may say this isn't proof, but God deemed it enough." [/b]

[b]--Again, you declare it's the truth, but just because you've been told it is by a congregation, or a book, or your feelings doesn't make it so and isn't convincing.[/b]

[b]"How much of your "truth" is a regurgitation of the world and how much of it is actually reality?"[/b]

[b]--How much of your "truth" is a regurgitation of what you've been taught to believe, because you were born to Christian parents instead of Hindu ones, and how much are fairy tales?  At least we can measure and prove what is in the world.  Until I have more concrete proof of your god than your assertions that you're right and we're wrong, I will not believe that god exists.   The Bible is not proof.  Anecdotes and personal stories are not proof.  Nature is not proof. Feelings are not proof.  [/b]

You say that making an assertion doesn't make it so then prove that I have just been told to believe by the congregation or a book or my feelings. 
As for the argument that I am just a Christian because my parents were there are people who were born to Hindu, Muslim, Atheist, Jehovah's Witness and Mormon parent who believe in God. Are you an atheist because your parents were? 
None of the accounts that the writers of the bible wrote down are fairy tales they are backed up by historians and archaeology. The accounts came from a real culture with real people and has not been honestly denounced. You suggested that my feelings make me believe in God. If I had to hold on to my emotions for my belief in God I wouldn't be a christian because it doesn't always feel good. At time my feelings are wrong and lie. I may feel different about a thing for day to day or moment to moment.   My life is not run by my emotions and I don't believe in God because of a "burning in my bosom".

(April 9, 2016 at 9:06 pm)Rekeisha Wrote: You say that making an assertion doesn't make it so then prove that I have just been told to believe by the congregation or a book or my feelings.

Simple. Got any proof to the contrary? History suggests that one's beliefs are from one's environment. Some of us, however, grew up and dismissed Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, Tooth Faerie, and god as we accepted reality over faerie tales and myths.

Quote:Your god doesn't serve you and won't save you.

Actually He has, is and does. Every Day I don't draw a breath without Him. I can't keep myself together, physically, without His direct help. You can't either. You curse Him with your words but God still takes cares of you.

Quote:Statistics. Nonreligious people are the fastest growing group of the population in most modernized countries, and some countries are even predominantly atheist now and have been for a while. You can thank the internet for the spike in atheism, by the way. Having all the arguments and information in the world makes it a little easier for some people to be exposed to new things and parse out which ones are bullshit.

I said "directly proportional", which means that both overall violence and religiosity have both been decreasing. That's not to say that one caused the other, but if a lack of religion actually caused violence, crime, or immorality, then we would expect to see an increase in these things as religion declines.


We don't, though. We see the opposite, which suggests that either religion is unrelated to morality and they just happen to have a directly proportional relationship, or the rise of secularism has actually had a measurable, positive impact on the globe.



I would take time to dig out the actual stats and link to them, but I honestly don't believe you'll even click on them, and even if you did you'd just gloss over it with your religion-glasses and spit out something from the Bible.

Post them and I then hold me accountable if I do or don't.

Quote:Hitler was a Christian, and the Nazi party was an overtly Christian group. There was virtually nothing secular about the German government during the years the Nazis were in charge

Fact check that friend. Many of His political leaders have attested to the fact that he wanted to abolish the church. You should read the biography of Bonhoeffer.  If he were a christian then there wouldn't have been a section of the christian leaders lead by Bonhoeffer to denounce his "church". He just used christianity to get in because that is what the culture identified as by tradition. He is a christian like Donald Trump is a christian. Here are some things I have found http://www.amazon.com/The-Nazi-master-pl...B00CH5XL5M if you can find it look at the New York Times "National Reich Church" where Hitler hollows out the chruch and places himself in it as god. 

Quote:Morality (even yours) was invented by humans. I am every bit as capable of making moral judgments as anyone else is, and I seem to be more capable of moral judgement than you, since I don't have to depend on an allegedly "divine" command to tell me what right and wrong is. Unlike you, I get to think for myself.

Then there is no right and wrong if it is invented by humans. You don't get to judge whether one is more right or wrong because they have their own systems. You say that the ones that are more right because they are based in some kind of physical truth is just you system of judgement. If someone else does not want their moral system to be done that way then who are you to judge? Everyone will change with the wind and when murder is in it is ok and don't judge it no matter how much suffering it causeses. When it is out don't say it is better because it is all made up anyway and people are just organisms anyway they don't matter they don't have worth. 

Now, you say you think for yourself so why do you believe that Homosexuality is right? What are you basing that moral judgement off of? Did you sit home one day and it just popped in your head that you thought "today I think Homosexuality is ok!" Would you have had the same mindset 50 years ago? You say you think for yourself, but then you say that moral are a social construct. Which is it? There are somethings I thought were just fine but I was wrong and it blew up in my face then I went to the bible and found out that God says that those things are wrong. I can't call it I am not that wise and all knowing. I don't know what is going to adversely affect me or others and I don't want to do a trial and error thing. Sox Yes I am going to ask the one who knows everything. It doesn't say in the bible where I should live or what to drive or watch on tv. I have to actually listen to God and He has instructed me.

Quote:The claim, which can't be used as evidence of itself...

 Why do you say this?

Quote:Before you claim that your god deemed or didn't deem this or that, you have to be able to demonstrate that he exists. Ancient books, your personal delusions, the personal delusions of other religious people, and nature itself are not demonstrations of any gods.

It is self evident like the sun is self evident and the only reason people don't see the sun is either they are blind or they look away.

Quote:Highly evolved organisms who are accountable to each other (and themselves) and who invented the concepts of right and wrong. Humans have collectively decided that suffering is bad and that deliberately causing needless suffering is wrong, and that's what makes it wrong. Humans define what is right and wrong.

Did humans do that collectively? When? How? Why are we still being evil? Why are nations still collectively causing needless suffering and wrong? If what you say is true humanity didn't really agree we just made empty declarations and went about doing whatever we wanted.

Here is a link to different versions of the Golden rule. I know what the Golden Rule says in the Bible and the reason I asked you where you heard it from first is because you are still holding on to the one in the bible not the ones that most culture say. Most cultures and religions but this statement in the negative from "don't" whereas in Christianity and Judaism say to do this and to love your neighbor as yourself even one Egyptian one says do. These statements are different than just don't do a thing. So my question is since you have rejected the bible which one where you citing. 

Quote:No, he did not. Your holy book says he was dead for 3 days, after which he ascended into heaven to be king of the Universe at God's right hand. That is not an infinite sacrifice. That's hardly an inconvenience.

Read Hebrews it will explain what I meant. When you worked at your christianity did you understand how Jesus was a sacrifice and what He gave up? Did you ever understand what it cost Him or even question why people said that He sacrificed?

Atheist because I can think, and I questioned the faith in which I was brought up.

Not against homosexuality because I can think, and I realized that it harms no one except those who accept the prejudices of a Bronze-Age sheepherder tribe's priests.

Thinkers tend to question the programming they're fed as children. Most people are more comfortable accepting the prejudices they're fed as children, be it racism, religion, whatever. As the song from South Pacific says, "You've got to be taught, from year to year. It's got to be drummed in your dear little ear, you've got to be carefully taught. ... You've got to be taught before it's too late, before you are six or seven or eight, to hate all the people your relatives hate. You've got to be carefully taught."

Why do you think it is that people raised in Saudi Arabia overwhelmingly come to the conclusion that Allah is the only God, and Muhammad is His Prophet? Or that people raised in India are overwhelmingly Hindu? And so on it goes. Why do you think it is that the "Great Religious Truths™" are so regionally/culturally predictable?

I'm not just being asinine; that's a serious and direct question to which I'd appreciate it if you'd give some thought and reflection, and come up with more than a trite answer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnY-Ft7F9eo

(April 9, 2016 at 10:11 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:

Quote:Before you claim that your god deemed or didn't deem this or that, you have to be able to demonstrate that he exists. Ancient books, your personal delusions, the personal delusions of other religious people, and nature itself are not demonstrations of any gods.

It is self evident like the sun is self evident and the only reason people don't see the sun is either they are blind or they look away.

We can observe the sun. We can test the sun.  We can measure the sun.  There is no evidence whatsoever for your god.  None, nada, zip.

(April 9, 2016 at 9:06 pm)Rekeisha Wrote:

(April 8, 2016 at 3:49 pm)drfuzzy Wrote: Rekeisha wrote:
"There are many thing that you don't believe nor could understand that are real. Just because you deny it doesn't make it not exist. "

-- And just by asserting that these things exist doesn't make it so.  I can assert that silver unicorns exist until I'm blue in the face (just like you are doing with your assertions) and until you can do better than make statements, it's all a waste of effort.  

[b]Rekeisha wrote:[/b]
[b]"I am not going to be ashamed of the truth. What is a shame is that you don't have proof the there isn't a soul or God or an afterlife. I have the Bible, I have the presence of God, the fellowship of believers and history, and nature. You may say this isn't proof, but God deemed it enough." [/b]

[b]--Again, you declare it's the truth, but just because you've been told it is by a congregation, or a book, or your feelings doesn't make it so and isn't convincing.[/b]

[b]"How much of your "truth" is a regurgitation of the world and how much of it is actually reality?"[/b]

[b]--How much of your "truth" is a regurgitation of what you've been taught to believe, because you were born to Christian parents instead of Hindu ones, and how much are fairy tales?  At least we can measure and prove what is in the world.  Until I have more concrete proof of your god than your assertions that you're right and we're wrong, I will not believe that god exists.   The Bible is not proof.  Anecdotes and personal stories are not proof.  Nature is not proof. Feelings are not proof.  [/b]

You say that making an assertion doesn't make it so then prove that I have just been told to believe by the congregation or a book or my feelings. 
As for the argument that I am just a Christian because my parents were there are people who were born to Hindu, Muslim, Atheist, Jehovah's Witness and Mormon parent who believe in God. Are you an atheist because your parents were? 
None of the accounts that the writers of the bible wrote down are fairy tales they are backed up by historians and archaeology. The accounts came from a real culture with real people and has not been honestly denounced. You suggested that my feelings make me believe in God. If I had to hold on to my emotions for my belief in God I wouldn't be a christian because it doesn't always feel good. At time my feelings are wrong and lie. I may feel different about a thing for day to day or moment to moment.   My life is not run by my emotions and I don't believe in God because of a "burning in my bosom".

"You say that making an assertion doesn't make it so then prove that I have just been told to believe by the congregation or a book or my feelings. "  Say . . . what?  If that was English - The burden of proof is on you.

"As for the argument that I am just a Christian because my parents were there are people who were born to Hindu, Muslim, Atheist, Jehovah's Witness and Mormon parent who believe in God. Are you an atheist because your parents were?"  My parents were Southern Baptists, who went RIGHT wing Pentecostal from there.  If you had been born in India, you would probably have been preaching Hindu beliefs.

"None of the accounts that the writers of the bible wrote down are fairy tales they are backed up by historians and archaeology." The majority of biblical accounts have been disproven by archaeology.

Here's a Venn diagram, apropos of nothing....

It's amazing to me that their leaders repeat that "archaeology and history back up the Bible" stuff, when almost every scholar out there (except the hardcore fundamentalist ones, of course, who start with the premise "the Bible MUST be true"), religious and nonreligious, acknowledges that a huge number of the major claims made in the Bible simply cannot be true.

Archaeology has demonstrated, for instance, that Jericho didn't even exist as more than a collection of village huts during the time when the Exodus and subsequent invasion of Canaan is alleged to have happened. In order to get it to agree, you'd have to move back the timeline more than 1000 years, which makes the Pharaohs mentioned in the story not-yet-born by... oh, 1000 years, as those attempting to resolve the issues presented by actual archaeology have proposed. (See the dissection of Bryant Wood's proposed Jericho "solution" at: http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answ...ntwood.php )

That's not even to mention that, during the time the Hebrews supposedly fled from Egypt to their "promised land", Egypt literally owned all of that region. Egypt was fighting a war north of there (with the Hittite Empire) to maintain control of the region. That means the story is claiming, essentially, "They fled from the United States and went to Alaska."

These are things we know now because we have access to Egyptian and Hittite writings of the time, which the people who wrote the Bible stories simply didn't have. It's why the Bible describes events in cities that weren't even established until centuries after the stories claim they occurred (but centuries before the stories were actually written, such that they didn't know that Philistine town they mentioned wasn't always there). History and archaeology barely support a single story in the OT.

There's no evidence whatsoever that the Hebrews (or any other specific ethnicity) were in large-scale slavery in Egypt. They're mentioned in Egyptian carvings, but as already existing in Canaan. I'm sorry, lady, but the people who are telling you that the Bible is well-supported are lying to you. I wonder what motivation they could have for those lies?

(April 10, 2016 at 1:32 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: It's amazing to me that their leaders repeat that "archaeology and history back up the Bible" stuff, when almost every scholar out there (except the hardcore fundamentalist ones, of course, who start with the premise "the Bible MUST be true"), religious and nonreligious, acknowledges that a huge number of the major claims made in the Bible simply cannot be true.

Archaeology has demonstrated, for instance, that Jericho didn't even exist as more than a collection of village huts during the time when the Exodus and subsequent invasion of Canaan is alleged to have happened. In order to get it to agree, you'd have to move back the timeline more than 1000 years, which makes the Pharaohs mentioned in the story not-yet-born by... oh, 1000 years, as those attempting to resolve the issues presented by actual archaeology have proposed. (See the dissection of Bryant Wood's proposed Jericho "solution" at: http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answ...ntwood.php )

That's not even to mention that, during the time the Hebrews supposedly fled from Egypt to their "promised land", Egypt literally owned all of that region. Egypt was fighting a war north of there (with the Hittite Empire) to maintain control of the region. That means the story is claiming, essentially, "They fled from the United States and went to Alaska."

These are things we know now because we have access to Egyptian and Hittite writings of the time, which the people who wrote the Bible stories simply didn't have. It's why the Bible describes events in cities that weren't even established until centuries after the stories claim they occurred (but centuries before the stories were actually written, such that they didn't know that Philistine town they mentioned wasn't always there). History and archaeology barely support a single story in the OT.

There's no evidence whatsoever that the Hebrews (or any other specific ethnicity) were in large-scale slavery in Egypt. They're mentioned in Egyptian carvings, but as already existing in Canaan. I'm sorry, lady, but the people who are telling you that the Bible is well-supported are lying to you. I wonder what motivation they could have for those lies?

In my first novel, I put my characters in Los Angeles. I'd hate to think that 2000 years from now people will be standing in the administration building at Cal State thinking, "Oh wow, we're standing right where Chloe met Ted. And there really is a King Hall here. There really is a Greyhound station on Los Angeles Street, so Rhonda's book MUST be true."

That's not what fiction writers mean when they say suspend disbelief.