(June 27, 2016 at 11:49 am)Rekeisha Wrote: [quote pid='1286089' dateline='1464703414']
Redbeard The Pink
First off, I am familiar with the line of apologetics you're using to attempt to force-fit the differing accounts of the Resurrection. Nothing about the chronology of Jewish storytelling or any of the other stuff you mentioned would account for the kind of contradictions I described, especially not if the person in charge of the project is the all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the Universe. If that were the case, we should see no contradictions at all, even with humans involved. I remain unconvinced by your reasoning.
I must apologize I have a tendency to not fully address you comments. As well as assuming too much, as to what all of you believe. I know this is very frustrating to you and I apologize. I am going to strive to slow down while reading your responses and address you arguments.
As for why an all-knowing, all-powerful creator of the Universe couldn't iron out the contradiction is because there are none to iron out. Each gospel account is written to a different group of people. John was writing his account to display Jesus deity. He picks out certain stories in order to help the audience understand this. Mark may have written his account to encourage the roman church or to present Peter's witness of the ministry of Jesus. With different purposes there will be a different focus on certain aspects of the life of Jesus.
Another reason to consider is the nature of who God is. If he wanted robots he would have made robots. God calls His people His children. So like a father he allows his children to participate in his work and loves to lavish His love on us. In Genesis "God planted a garden in Eden"then He "took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it... God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them." This isn't a God who wants to force Adam to call the animals a certain thing. He wants to collaborate with Adam in his creation and is inviting Adam in. He isn't going to override or possess us like some demon. He directs us and allows us to put our own personal touch on the work He has given us because that adds to the beauty of His creation. The bible is the product of God inspiring people and then men producing a work that honors him. He isn't a tyrant who is insecure about His power. He is powerful enough to allow us to work with him. He isn't ashamed about our sloppiness as people but even through our brokenness and imperfection he can make Himself known.
His word is good enough to communicate explicitly who He is. John the Baptist saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!". Jesus is not the one who needs the message. He is not in need of forgiveness and although He owns everything He stepped down from the highest position in order to meet our needs. He willing and happily offers you the gift of salvation. He paid the price so that you can be set free. If you find it lacking it is not because He has not supplied you with everything you need.
How is the number of women or the number of angels at the tomb a contradiction and not a difference? Why do you not accept the cultural way people wrote biographies and the parameters the writers of the Gospels had to communicate this message to their audience?
Quote:
And no, the gospels are not backed by so much as a modicum of sound evidence. They are little more than folklore. They describe geography that does not align with other historical and archaeological evidence, and they assert various events and people for which there are no supporting, extra-biblical accounts. They also say that magic exists and people can do it, and we have no evidence of that whatsoever.
The crucifixion of Christ does have credible evidence and most biblical historians (non-believing and believing) agree that it did happen. So may I ask where you are getting your evidence for the statement that there "isn't a modicum of sound evidence" to back up the gospels? May I also ask what geographical statements do not align with historical and/or archaeological evidences?
Quote:
Pretty much everything you're describing can be explained by physical means. Whether you're willing to accept it or not, the evidence indicates that ALL emotions (yes, even grief) are neurological/biochemical processes in our brains and bodies. There is no evidence that they come from a spiritual plane of existence, and you would need to show me evidence before I could justify believing such a thing. Our need to be accepted, our belief that there are right ways and wrong ways to treat each other...all of that chalks up to being a social species because we evolved that way. Our brains do pretty much every bit of that.
So grief is a chemical ? Is that what is going on in New Orleans? Just chemicals? If it is just chemicals then what that man did was not wrong it "just is" (like matter and laws of physics, right?). If we are just chemical reactions then you don't have a foundation for what is wrong. What happened was wrong, that is why our nation reacted. It isn't because our society has predetermined us to react this way but because we have innate worth. More chemical reactions don't make it meaningful. We all reacted because we know that people have worth. It is right to grieve those people's death because they were made in the image of God both male and female. They have worth and when you label grief just a chemical reaction you lesson the loss to something below meaningful feelings, to simple "characteristic results of basic stimuli in the human species, that was driven by an automatic set of chemical reactions".
The idea that people give things meaning, means that we are all "make believe" that things matter. It isn't really true just a mass delusion. You continue to critic me on the fact that God is not real. So, why if you believe that this is a Godless world do you persist in the false belief that life has meaning?
Quote:
First off, porn producers are generally required by law to keep extensive records about the age and contracts (read: consensual agreements) of their actors. Porn actors also have to get regularly tested for STIs by doctors, and in California I think they still have to wear condoms in every scene. While I'm sure improprieties do happen (like with any profession), the simple fact is that there are extensive legal provisions geared toward keeping porn actors as safe and unexploited as possible, and I would bet that most producers follow those regulations for fear of legal repercussions, if nothing else.
The demand for consensual porn indicates a demand for consensual porn. You have no basis for the assertion that porn signals to slavers that their actions are wanted or acceptable. A separate demand exists for child porn and rape porn, and that demand is what tells slavers that there's money in what they're doing. People who watch normal porn are generally not watching illegal porn, and people who watch illegal porn generally aren't that into regular porn.
Just because someone starts watching consensual porn doesn't mean that it is good or that they will stay with that kind of porn. Have you looked into the correlation of sex slavery with porn? Have you looked into the effects of porn on the human brain and body? What is the effect on the lives of those who are actors in porn. Does it cause them to thrive? Does it cause our culture to thrive? Or does it steal those people's dignity or cause the degradation of sex and what it's use is for. Not for entertainment but as an intimate act between a husband and his wife. When a husband and wife have sex it is a safe place that can draw them closer and produce more people for the family. What does porn give the culture that creates a good?
Quote:
It's not, though. It's a little more accurate to describe it as a building block. It doesn't "tell" the process how to go, it is the basis for the process itself. DNA does what it does because of the way it is shaped. Literally. It is a long chain of chemicals, and depending on what order those chemicals are in, the reactions they start will work out in different ways. It's not quite like feeding a disk into a computer and getting a document back out.
Regardless of what term you want to use, though, there's nothing about DNA that indicates it had to be assembled by a designer of any kind. It consists of naturally-occurring chemicals and can form and replicate under naturally-occurring conditions, so it is perfectly reasonable to believe that its origins are probably natural and probably not supernatural
It would seem scientist don't seem to have a problem with saying that DNA is information.
So how did DNA come about if it was unguided? Proteins are needed to replicate DNA and DNA is needed to produce proteins.
Quote:
Well, the Universe, for example. If God doesn't require a creator, why should the Universe? If God is eternal, why couldn't the Universe be eternal? The thing in question doesn't matter; what matters is that you're setting up a rule like "Everything requires a cause" or "Everything is finite" and then trying to say that your god is the only thing that gets to break those rules.
That...is...special...pleading!
The universe has a beginning that is why it isn't eternal. (in the beginning the God created the heavens and the earth) This isn't just found in the bible but scientist have found this to be true. What I am saying is that everything that has a beginning requires a cause. Everything that is created is finite. God doesn't have a beginning nor is He finite. If you don't have a beginner then you have infinite regression. If you do have a beginner then by necessity he must not be bound by time or space, he must have the power, knowledge, and ability to bring things into being. Therefore anything that was brought into being by the creator is owned by the creator and subject by the creator.
I would like to know how you think things came into being?
Quote:
Has he now? Interesting. That settles that, I guess. I certainly wouldn't want to contradict some person's husband.
What's his field of expertise, exactly?
Art and International Shipping
"But all one needs to do these days is listen to the radio, and hear an "authority" on X subject, and hear them talk about other dimensions, atoms or even smaller particles flying through anything, atoms tied to each other and having the same reaction to one being stimulated even though the other is on the other side of the planet, and more..." says my husband
Quote:
First off, no, it doesn't, and second, you still have yet to demonstrate the existence of this being that you have no problem defining and making claims about. If you can't demonstrate your god, I am not interested. He's no more real than the version I used to worship.
Do you think that justice is real? Do you desire to see justice done when you or others are wronged. It is an innate human desire. Not made brought about by society. This demonstrates his existence. As I stated before, in the past you spoke about people give their own meaning to life. The question is why do we seek to have meaning in life. Also again if this is a Godless universe then all your meanings are made up. You mock my belief in God and you call him my imaginary friend when you behave in the same manner and by imagining your life has meaning.
Quote:
Man, you and these straw men you build. Do you make them little clothes? Is there a pink hat on mine?
If the Bible is a myth, then the god it depicts is a mythical genocidal maniac (like Lord Sauron, only infinitely worse), and if it is true then he is an actual genocidal maniac (like Hitler, only infinitely worse). That is my position. I'm not even sure what you said there.
So he created us and is bigger than us, therefore he gets to squish us of he wants? That is not a moral god, that is "might makes right." That, my good lady, is a common thug. You worship a common thug. Congrats.
As for the slavery stuff, you're really just chasing your tail. I've already pointed out the passages in the Bible that endorse and regulate slavery. Ok, so one of the letters to Timothy says god punished some enslavers, and therefore that contradicts those other passages. What does that tell you?
That the Bible contradicts itself. You still didn't win
If this is a Godless society then what is right in society is based on those who have loudest voice and the most sway, political or physical. Jesus said that " you know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their superiors exercise authority over them." (matt 20:25) Yet you see Jesus come as a servant and using his power not to crush people but to free them from their sin. If God created the world then it is His he had a purpose and a reason for everything that exist. He designed everything to work a certain way. By his nature God is everything that is good then to follow his ways would be good. God being bigger is not for your demise you should rejoice because he is also merciful. With great power God stepped into History and suffered and lived this human life. He didn't just feel bad for our situation but had compassion and joined us so that through his blood we would be freed. He has the power and is pleased to do good for you. God is gracious and merciful, slow to anger. You woke up today and have another day to experience God. You have another day on be on planet earth. In this post today you blasphemed Him and mocked him Yet, He hasn't cut you down because he is merciful. He is happy to be merciful to you and display his love to people who hate him. Pretend he doesn't exist but the truth is one day you will be face to face with a good God. Who was merciful and gave you every opportunity to know Him. He wants to give you rest not oppression and dignity not mere chemistry. He wants you to understand his care and love for you which will be for your good.
If there is no God then your views on slavery are just chemical reactions and imaginations. Or you believe what you believe because everyone in society believes this way.
Quote:Who do you think I am fighting? What do you think I am fighting for?
[/quote]
You're fighting for your own delusional thinking, which makes you think that you are better and smarter than anyone who disagrees with you, no matter how clear and succinct their reasons for disagreeing with you may be. You think that by your repetitive and dull word salad mantra about how good gawd is you'll somehow convert these stupid atheists, who will fall on their knees and proclaim that they have seen the light.
Your gawd is so pathetic. We're left with an absurd and evil book of contradictions, and a bunch of preachers who use it as a circular argument for the existence of gawd. And in the meantime, gawd is so impotent and incompetent that he can't even prove his own existence. He can't even speak for himself, not even in this age where a 5-year-old can make a YouTube video and send it around the world.
No, he doesn't exist. And if he does, he's not worthy of worship.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein
