Posts: 7140
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2013
Reputation:
72
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 9:01 am
(January 16, 2015 at 3:21 am)fr0d0 Wrote: And most Christians I know weren't nice people to start off with. I'm curious as to what that means. Most of the Christians I have known (and that would be most of the people I've known) range from decent people to some of the best people I have had the privilege to know. A few of them range from unpleasant to utter douchebags, but the latter I can count on the fingers of one hand. Not much different from the people of any other religion I know.
Some of them will tell of how religion changed their lives, but with very few exceptions we are talking about people who had some vices (as bad as drugs, and as mild as tobacco smoking) that they cleaned up after accepting Jesus as their savior. Those few exceptions would be people who were somewhat violent or on a path that was very likely to lead to bad consequences. But for the vast majority of people, who they were before they became Christian is who they were after.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
92
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 10:34 am
Cherry picking scriptures to follow has been a godsend for US christians.
Posts: 441
Threads: 12
Joined: March 1, 2013
Reputation:
10
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 11:05 am
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2015 at 11:07 am by Davka.)
(January 16, 2015 at 12:48 am)Godschild Wrote: The two contributions you made to this tread shows the truth found in the scriptures. Few will find the narrow path that leads to salvation and a changed life, the wide road will carry those who refuse to accept the gift of grace, salvation and live in the world. Doesn't matter the name one attaches to themselves, it is the actions that represent the name that show they are the real deal. Thank you for that conformation, see the Bible still effects you, and God said He would use anyone to bring truth. Consider yourself as being a part of God's work.
GC
Jesus fucking christ, you can't even read your own writing, how do you expect anyone to believe that you've accurately read anything anyone else has to say?
Nothing I've written here shows anything other than the fact that so-called Christians are no different from anyone else. I understand that you are incapable of comprehending that, because it flies in the face of your preset worldview, but I'm typing it anyways for the benefit of others.
Again, even if only 10% of those who claim to be Christians really are True Believers TM, there should be a statistically significant difference between "christians" and everyone else. No such difference exists, ergo the Bible's claims regarding the effects of Salvation are lies.
(January 16, 2015 at 10:34 am)vorlon13 Wrote: Cherry picking scriptures to follow has been a godsend for US christians.
Right up there with No True Scotsman.
Posts: 8781
Threads: 26
Joined: March 15, 2010
Reputation:
29
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 12:16 pm
(January 16, 2015 at 11:05 am)Davka Wrote: (January 16, 2015 at 12:48 am)Godschild Wrote: The two contributions you made to this tread shows the truth found in the scriptures. Few will find the narrow path that leads to salvation and a changed life, the wide road will carry those who refuse to accept the gift of grace, salvation and live in the world. Doesn't matter the name one attaches to themselves, it is the actions that represent the name that show they are the real deal. Thank you for that conformation, see the Bible still effects you, and God said He would use anyone to bring truth. Consider yourself as being a part of God's work.
GC
Jesus fucking christ, you can't even read your own writing, how do you expect anyone to believe that you've accurately read anything anyone else has to say?
Nothing I've written here shows anything other than the fact that so-called Christians are no different from anyone else. I understand that you are incapable of comprehending that, because it flies in the face of your preset worldview, but I'm typing it anyways for the benefit of others.
Again, even if only 10% of those who claim to be Christians really are True BelieversTM, there should be a statistically significant difference between "christians" and everyone else. No such difference exists, ergo the Bible's claims regarding the effects of Salvation are lies.
You got the gist, and I live with and around Christians and I can tell you they are definitely different than the world. Something else I like to see when one wants to correct wording and grammar they have little to counter the argument.
GC
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Posts: 441
Threads: 12
Joined: March 1, 2013
Reputation:
10
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 12:45 pm
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2015 at 12:47 pm by Davka.)
(January 16, 2015 at 12:16 pm)Godschild Wrote: (January 16, 2015 at 11:05 am)Davka Wrote: Jesus fucking christ, you can't even read your own writing, how do you expect anyone to believe that you've accurately read anything anyone else has to say?
Nothing I've written here shows anything other than the fact that so-called Christians are no different from anyone else. I understand that you are incapable of comprehending that, because it flies in the face of your preset worldview, but I'm typing it anyways for the benefit of others.
Again, even if only 10% of those who claim to be Christians really are True BelieversTM, there should be a statistically significant difference between "christians" and everyone else. No such difference exists, ergo the Bible's claims regarding the effects of Salvation are lies.
You got the gist, and I live with and around Christians and I can tell you they are definitely different than the world. Something else I like to see when one wants to correct wording and grammar they have little to counter the argument.
GC Nice try, but I addressed your argument as well as your lack of education. The inability to write properly in your native tongue is germane to the discussion, as it illustrates (at the very least) your poor grasp of the essentials of a grade-school education.
"I live with and around Christians" amounts to nothing more than apocryphal evidence. I have lived with and around Christians, Muslims, Jews, New-Age Hippies, and rural white Southerners. My own experience is that any group with strong spiritual beliefs looks and acts differently from "the world" - at least, when they are in community. Whether or not they act differently when (they think that) none of their coreligionists are looking is the more important question.
The only tool we have available which might help us to determine how Christians (or others) act "when no-one is looking" is the collection of statistics. And the statistics tell us that Christians are just as likely to fornicate, cheat on taxes, commit crimes, and otherwise violate the commandments as any other group. There is not even the tiniest statistically significant difference between the empirically-determined actions of self-identified Christians and the population as a whole.
What is even more damning to the arguments of the No True Scotsman proponents is that this lack of statistical difference does not change even when the group of "Christians" is narrowed down. Limiting the set to "Christians who read the Bible daily," or "Christians who attend church more than once a week," or "Evangelical Christians," or "born-again Christians" makes no difference whatsoever.
This is, of course, only one of many examples of how real-world data is at odds with the claims made in the Bible. The world does not know Christians by their fruits, or their love for one-another, or in fact by any difference whatsoever in their actions.
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 1:44 pm
If Christians were to follow the bible word for word.. instead of cherry picking the good parts we wouldn't have big enough jails to put them in.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 30129
Threads: 304
Joined: April 18, 2014
Reputation:
92
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 1:54 pm
(This post was last modified: January 16, 2015 at 1:54 pm by vorlon13.)
Unless they start with that deadly serpent thing . . .
Posts: 441
Threads: 12
Joined: March 1, 2013
Reputation:
10
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 1:59 pm
(January 16, 2015 at 1:54 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Unless they start with that deadly serpent thing . . .
to be fair, that passage was inserted by later editors. The earliest manuscripts don't have the whole shpiel about doing miracles.
Posts: 107
Threads: 9
Joined: January 11, 2015
Reputation:
10
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 3:48 pm
(January 16, 2015 at 1:59 pm)Davka Wrote: (January 16, 2015 at 1:54 pm)vorlon13 Wrote: Unless they start with that deadly serpent thing . . .
to be fair, that passage was inserted by later editors. The earliest manuscripts don't have the whole shpiel about doing miracles.
True, one of my fav top ten interpolations in the bible:
The top 10 verses that were not originally in the New Testament
It seems that some of the most familiar verses of the New Testament were not originally part of the text, but were added by later scribes. The scribal additions are often found in late medieval manuscripts of the New Testament, but not in the manuscripts of earlier centuries. Some of the best-known English editions of the New Testament, such as the King James Bible, were based not on early manuscripts, but later ones, these verses became part of the Bible tradition in English speaking lands.
1 John 5:7 - there are three that bear witness in heaven, the father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.
John 8:7 – let the one who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.
John 8:11 – neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.
Luke 22:44 – in his anguish Jesus began to pray more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling to the ground.
Luke 22:20 – and in the same way after supper Jesus took the cup and said, "this cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood."
Mark 16:17 – these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons and they will speak with new tongues.
Mark 16:18 – and they will take up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any poison it will not harm them, and they will lay their hands on the sick and they will become well.
John 5:4 – for an angel of the Lord went down at certain times into the pool and disturbed the waters; and whoever was the first to step in when the water was disturbed was healed of whatever disease he had.
Luke 24:12 – but Peter rose up and ran to the tomb, and stooping down to look in, he saw the linen clothes by themselves. And he went away to his own home, marveling at what had happened.
Luke 24:51 – and when Jesus blessed them he departed from them and he was taken up into heaven.
Speaking of Mark; All scholars agree that the last 12 verses of Mark, are highly dubious and are considered interpolations. The earliest ancient documents of mark end right after the women find the empty tomb. This means that in the first biography, on which the others based their reports, there is no post-resurrection appearance or ascension of jesus.
Work Cited:
Ehrman, Bart. Misquoting Jesus: The story behind who changed the bible and why. New York, Harper Collins. 2005. Print.
You, not a mythical god, are the author of your book of life, make it one worth reading..and living.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Statistical Evidence Against Christianity
January 16, 2015 at 4:44 pm
It's amazing to me that forgeries in the bible are now fairly common knowledge but that puts not one seed of doubt into the minds of believers. Even when the forgeries form crucial parts of the mythology, like Mark's "ending" (forged jesus resurrection story).
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16
Also amazing that atheists have spent way more time studying the "word of God" than people who really do think it is the word of God. Some have barely looked at it, let alone studied it objectively.
I mean, can you imagine really having what you honestly thought was the word of God? Can you imagine ever putting that down? And why would you be scared to study it objectively? That's shows incredibly little faith in its truth.
|
