|
10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer
|
God - any god - was a non-factor in my life long before I even heard the word evolution. Still is.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
 (July 18, 2017 at 1:14 pm)Cyberman Wrote: God - any god - was a non-factor in my life long before I even heard the word evolution. Still is. And evolution, and science, are a far more elegant means of explaining and understanding all there is. God's like the dollar-store way of looking at the universe. And pretty fucking amusing GC (who will henceforth be known as Gullible Cretin) wants to consider me not to be a decent person when he's lying his fucking ass off with every sentence he types.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
--- There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views.  RE: 10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer
July 19, 2017 at 2:29 am
(This post was last modified: July 19, 2017 at 2:42 am by Godscreated.)
(July 18, 2017 at 9:59 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:Godscreated Wrote: You are so wrong in several ways. First he didn't say what I've bold above. He made the positive statement that God doesn't exist and never said anything about me proving God does exist. I can say Krishna doesn't exist because I know God does exist, (even if I can't prove it to your satisfaction) God says there are no other gods but Me. Since I know Him and I know Him not to lie I know there's no other gods. I've never tried to pressure anyone into believing, that would defeat what I believe and what Christ taught, I've known Christians who did and that just doesn't cut it. Your indoctrination statement is a slap in the face to all those great Sunday school teachers that present the Bible to children in a simple way to teach them what it says. I know many who never pressure children and do you know why, because they believe as I do, forcing a decision is not a decision for Christ thus no salvation and it could eventually end up causing them to reject the Bible and the God who gave it. I was never pressured by anyone to believe and I grew up in a old time Southern Baptist church. When it's true it is true. Mister A Wrote:No one says 'God isn't real' in a conceptual vacuum. It's always a response to the claim that God really exists, even if no one said those actual words before the other person said 'God isn't real'. The burden of proof doesn't shift that easily. If the Defense speaks first, they don't have to suddenly prove their client is innocent, the prosecution still has the burden to show that the person is guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt for very serious crimes. When a person makes the positive statement that God does not exist it is up to them to prove their statement. By your very own statements you put Christians in the Defense category and the atheist is the prosecution category. Mister A Wrote:Your story about really knowing God exists is just a story. The same way a Hindu could say the Christian God doesn't exist (or more likely, that Christians are way off base about the nature of the godhead) because they already know that Brahma is real. They know Brahma doesn't lie. The problem with your argument is that a believer in any other deity or any other version of a creator can make the same argument. It's weightless and worthless. You need to prove they do not believe Brahma doesn't lie. Do their writings say this? The Bible given to us by God says He doesn't lie. The Hindus have so many gods they probably can't even name them all nor tell us what they are for. Do the gods in other religions give their believers words directly from them saying they do not lie. Mister A Wrote: We're all well aware that you believe in God. Repeating yourself doesn't add any new information and telling us that you really believe it because of spiritual experiences leaves you with the problem that spiritual experiences aren't proof of anything but your internal brain state, because anyone can have them about any god or spirit or afterlife or nature or animal if they enter or cultivate a conducive mental state. No atheist here is aware that I believe in God, they keep telling me I can't because He doesn't exist, yet no one has ever proven He doesn't. You see for me belief is trusting in something real, not something imagined. My personal experiences with God are just that, a relationship through experiencing God, they are to be valid for me within that relationship. My statements about experiencing God to know He is real is something the Bible teaches and I was relating that to the readers of my post. Mister A Wrote:Online, your personal experience of God is just a story, especially since even if it's true, God doesn't give you anything to say here that's at all convincing to a skeptic. Just a story like other believers in other religions also have. They can't all be right, but they CAN all be wrong. I agree they all can't be right and they are all wrong, their is only one living God and He is the one who created the universe. he gave us His Word in more than one way,too. It's not for me to convince the skeptic, it is for me to witness to what I believe, God will do the convincing to those who are willing, for those who are not willing they have chosen their finial destination. Mister A Wrote:Your 'slap in the face' remark is a fallacious appeal to emotion. Whether it offends you or would offend any Sunday School teachers you want to share with is irrelevant to whether it's true. Young children are not capable of critically evaluating the information given to them by adults. So it's not okay for a parent to teach their children what they want them to hear. Then evolution needs to be out of school classes until these children can become critical thinkers, the PBS stations need to stop the indoctrination of small children through their programs aimed at those pre-schoolers. They are not teaching they're brainwashing. MisterA Wrote:No matter how good the intentions of your emotionally fragile Sunday School teachers, what they are doing is indoctrination. It's indoctrination whether Muslims do it, Hindus do it, Catholics do it, Evangelicals do it, or Yazidis do it. You don't have to pressure children for it to be indoctrination. You just have to make sure they hear your religion first. If such indoctrination were neglected and the only thing taught children were established facts, I have no doubt that theistic religion would decline rapidly, because indoctrinating the next generation is how religions perpetuate themselves. Thank you for supporting my above statement, because evolution is far from evidence based. We can teach children where the universe came from, people like yourself can't even explain where the stuff came from before the big bang. Want a fairy tale to sale to children, tell them that the entire universe came from a golf ball sized piece of material, oh yeah I forgot you have already indoctrinated many children into believing this to be the truth and you have not even addressed where the material came from. Mister A Wrote:And to make sure you're not confused by the word 'indoctrination' again: This door swings to both sides of the argument, you need to understand it's not a one way street. GC (July 18, 2017 at 12:48 pm)Harry Nevis Wrote:(July 18, 2017 at 1:51 am)Godscreated Wrote: I know that atheist believe in evolution and thus reject God through this belief, however there's so much about animals that is impossible for evolution to be involved. For one, some animals according to evolutionary science haven't changed in many millions of years. What happened to the process in them? I see no evidence for evolution and would have a hard time trusting the science because the definition of evolution changes when it's convenient to rebut science that is contrary to what is believed by evolutionary science, so I can't believe in it. Really, then big bang is the start of everything according to the sciences, then you need to show where the material came from to get it started. If you can't do that then it's possible all the rest fails and fails it does. I have no idea how God created the universe but I know it happened. You can call me an idiot till your blue in the face and it will not make evolution true. No one has ever given a valid reason why evolution stops in some animals and not others, the imagined process should not be capable of such things when everything else around these animals have supposedly evolved through time to adapt to the new situations. 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.
 (July 19, 2017 at 2:29 am)Godscreated Wrote: I don't need to show you shit. Just because you've been spoon-fed your religious bullshit doesn't mean that's the only way to learn something. You know too little about evolution to even comment on it.
"The last superstition of the human mind is the superstition that religion in itself is a good thing." - Samuel Porter Putnam
 RE: 10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer
July 19, 2017 at 11:25 am
(This post was last modified: July 19, 2017 at 12:27 pm by Mister Agenda.)
Godscreated Wrote:Mister Agenda Wrote:Gotta love people who start their replies with 'You're wrong'. It's a pretty reliable sign that the person speaking is an arrogant wanker who is completely full of themselves, true or not. Godscreated Wrote:When a person makes the positive statement that God does not exist it is up to them to prove their statement. By your very own statements you put Christians in the Defense category and the atheist is the prosecution category. It's very frustrating to present an argument to someone who can't comprehend it. You got it exactly backwards. The theists are the ones trying to establish that a claim about the existence of something is true, they're the prosecution (trying to establish that something happened and who did it); the defense is pointing out that they've failed to adequately establish their case, they're the atheists. No one would even know they're an atheist if they hadn't heard that someone was claiming some sort of deity exists. The burden of proof doesn't shift so fluidly, it's not just a matter of who said it first, it's what they're really claiming. The person who said it could have corrected me, and said no, no, Mister Agenda, I meant there's absolutely no chance God is real and wasn't just speaking shorthand for 'the existence of God has not been established sufficiently to justify rational belief in it, in my humble opinion'. I was able to pick up on what was actually meant, and you were not, yet you think I'm less discerning on the matter than you are. What was it I said about people who are full of themselves? Godscreated Wrote:You need to prove they do not believe Brahma doesn't lie. Do their writings say this? The Bible given to us by God says He doesn't lie. The Hindus have so many gods they probably can't even name them all nor tell us what they are for. Do the gods in other religions give their believers words directly from them saying they do not lie. Did you ever meet a red herring you didn't like? Are you just trying to get me to run Google errands for you to waste my time? I just threw out an example, I wasn't proclaiming a truth about Hinduism. So naturally you fixate on that, because nothing is more important to you than getting in a 'gotcha', including Jesus, apparently. So I'll happily switch my example to one more certain, Rama, the Hindu god of truth and virtue. The seventh avatar of Vishnu, which means truth and virtue are also attributes of Vishnu, and by extension, his other avatars. Supposedly Rama had all the desirable virtues that anyone would aspire to and fulfills all of his moral obligations. You seem to be clinging to semantics to establish the existence of God. That's not a very good sign of having a strong case, but it's an excellent sign of someone who knows they have a weak one. Godscreated Wrote:No atheist here is aware that I believe in God, they keep telling me I can't because He doesn't exist, yet no one has ever proven He doesn't. You see for me belief is trusting in something real, not something imagined. My personal experiences with God are just that, a relationship through experiencing God, they are to be valid for me within that relationship. My statements about experiencing God to know He is real is something the Bible teaches and I was relating that to the readers of my post. I dare you to say something more inane. You would have to be a complete moron to believe that atheists here don't believe that you believe in God. Belief: holding something to be true. It's better not to comment at all if you can't think of a better comeback than that. Are you compelled to disagree with absolutely everything I say, even when it's pointless? Godscreated Wrote:So it's not okay for a parent to teach their children what they want them to hear. Then evolution needs to be out of school classes until these children can become critical thinkers, the PBS stations need to stop the indoctrination of small children through their programs aimed at those pre-schoolers. They are not teaching they're brainwashing. It's their right to do so, largely because the alternatives to not allowing them to teach their own children what they want is much worse. That doesn't mean it's great the parents can teach their children whatever they want. Do you think it's okay for Hindu parents to teach their children to believe in Hinduism, given that you likely think those children are damned to hell if they don't shake off that teaching, but it's an unfortunate reality that you just have to live with? I would prefer that children be given the most current information available to the modern world on all subjects and to be taught to scrutinize claims critically as young as is appropriate to their stage of development, while not teaching them that any kind of folklore refers to something actually real, but there's no ethical way to accomplish that except through the eventual triumph of sweet reason, of which I'm not optimistic. Godscreated Wrote:Thank you for supporting my above statement, because evolution is far from evidence based. We can teach children where the universe came from, people like yourself can't even explain where the stuff came from before the big bang. Want a fairy tale to sale to children, tell them that the entire universe came from a golf ball sized piece of material, oh yeah I forgot you have already indoctrinated many children into believing this to be the truth and you have not even addressed where the material came from. Where do YOU think the idea of evolution came from, if not evidence? Was is Satan whispering in Darwin's ear and the vast majority of biological scientists ever who have claimed to have found supporting evidence since have been in on the Satanic conspiracy? What is supposed to be taught in science class if you reject science? No wonder so many home-schooled kids become atheists right after getting out of the bubble of ignorance their parents tried to keep them in . To borrow your argument style for a moment, now that you've claimed that children are being taught that the universe came from a golf-ball sized piece of material, you have to prove it. That might be difficult, since there's no evidence at all known to science that the universe came from a golf-ball sized ball of material (though I suppose it may have been the size of a golf-ball for a fraction of a nano-second at some point in its existence, I'm not sure what 'golf-ball sized' even means in the context of the whole of time and space). What should we teach in science class besides the current state of scientific knowledge and theory? The origin of the universe is uncertain, but the evidence that it was once a lot smaller is very strong. Do you have any evidence for the origin story you favor stronger than an ancient book written by an Iron Age people of which no original copies survive? Godscreated Wrote:Mister A Wrote:And to make sure you're not confused by the word 'indoctrination' again: I can certainly understand why someone with your perspective would regard a properly basic science education as indoctrination. If it wasn't such a handicap in life to be ignorant of scientific knowledge at the age of 18 and such a detriment to a modern society, I could agree to delaying such education until then if they were also exposed to no religious indoctrination before then as well. The short term effect would be very unfair to the children and probably cause an economic slump, but would likely cause the near-disappearance of religious dogma in one generation, as I'm confident that science will do much better at withstanding critical scrutiny by eighteen-year-olds than religion...science is BASED on withstanding critical scrutiny, it's what's left after everything else has failed to withstand it. I would certainly agree to a mutual non-indoctrination pact if there were a way to implement it ethically. In fact, it's too bad that a limited social experiment can't be run ethically (or practically, given the difficulty of ensuring the children receive some sort of education but no indoctrination whatsoever) on it, the results would be quite illuminating.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
RE: 10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer
July 19, 2017 at 10:28 pm
(This post was last modified: July 19, 2017 at 10:33 pm by Astonished.)
At this point the only difference between Gullible Cretin and Little Rik is that GC somehow manages to write in complete sentences. But the lack of logic and being void of substance, that's exactly the same.
It's also quite amazing that so many religious folk are up their own ass with their pro-life rhetoric and yet give exactly zero fucks about the kids' rights to vaccinations, adequate food and housing and education, and the right of psychological autonomy when it comes to not being fed a bullshit indoctrination narrative. If parents want to insist that science is on an even footing with faith as far as having to be instilled via indoctrination, then they shouldn't be allowed to reap any of the benefits of it. No technology, no medicine that isn't in their holy books, nothing that has to be produced using technology (clothing, tools, etc.), and see how long it takes them to backpedal and try to weasel out of their predicament without actually conceding they were fucking 100% wrong.
Religions were invented to impress and dupe illiterate, superstitious stone-age peasants. So in this modern, enlightened age of information, what's your excuse? Or are you saying with all your advantages, you were still tricked as easily as those early humans?
--- There is no better way to convey the least amount of information in the greatest amount of words than to try explaining your religious views. (July 19, 2017 at 8:15 am)Harry Nevis Wrote:(July 19, 2017 at 2:29 am)Godscreated Wrote: What it comes down to you have no answer to where the material came from to start the big bang. The ball is in your court to supply the answer because it's your claim. Just ask Mister Agenda. Religion has nothing to do with the big bang and as far as being spoon fed that would be you by science that can't even explain the very beginning of the big bang. 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.
 (July 20, 2017 at 1:01 am)Godscreated Wrote:(July 19, 2017 at 8:15 am)Harry Nevis Wrote: I don't need to show you shit. Just because you've been spoon-fed your religious bullshit doesn't mean that's the only way to learn something. You know too little about evolution to even comment on it. I'm pretty sure we've explained this to you before: even if we don't know where the material came from, it does not mean that the answer is your god. Being careful is for people who can't handle surprises.
(July 20, 2017 at 1:23 am)Inkfeather132 Wrote:(July 20, 2017 at 1:01 am)Godscreated Wrote: What it comes down to you have no answer to where the material came from to start the big bang. The ball is in your court to supply the answer because it's your claim. Just ask Mister Agenda. Religion has nothing to do with the big bang and as far as being spoon fed that would be you by science that can't even explain the very beginning of the big bang. Until you can demonstrate where the material came from then big band is just a fairy tale. At least I have an answer, right. 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.
RE: 10 Questions Biblical Literalists Cannot Honestly Answer
July 20, 2017 at 1:40 am
(This post was last modified: July 20, 2017 at 1:41 am by Inkfeather132.)
(July 20, 2017 at 1:39 am)Godscreated Wrote:(July 20, 2017 at 1:23 am)Inkfeather132 Wrote: I'm pretty sure we've explained this to you before: even if we don't know where the material came from, it does not mean that the answer is your god. You have an answer, yes. But not necessarily the right one. If on a test I put 2+2=7, I have an answer but it is completely incorrect. After all, the Big Bang counts as an answer too. Being careful is for people who can't handle surprises.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
