Intelligence is a Curse

[salty]

ElDinero. Give me a minute to get back to you. In the meantime. What specific archeological find disproves what events? How about we narrow it down to three big events, you pick them, give me the link, so I can read it over, and then I'll respond to that. To the other comment you made, let me get back to you. I want to play some video games tonight.

Rhythm, would you like me to add something about post #25? I see you added two additional links, so I'll take a look at those later. Hm, I'll have to be more clear about the predestination and freewill argument that I'm talking about. Let me define them as I know them Biblically.

Predestined: People who are (predestined to come to Christ) born and will accept Christ in their lifetime, serving him as the Lord ordained for them to serve.
Freewill: People who are born with the ability to choose to come to Christ from their own desire to know him.

Humans are not given the ability to see if other people around them are predestined (they can guess, but they don't know for sure). Paul declares himself as predestined, which is something anyone who has a powerful "calling" or mission for their life will declare, something that has been clearly defined by God. In the days when Paul was not a believer it was strange, but not unbelieveable to know that Paul would turn and serve Christ. Paul was a zealous man and persecuted the Jews and Gentiles that followed "the Way" in his service to God, when he was given a mighty sign that he was on the wrong side he switched immediately.

To me, this denotes that people who are predestined do not "sit back" and wait for things to happen to them while doing whatever, because they are ever seeking to follow the "right path" even when they are on another path. The Lord will make himself apparent to the predestined and they will answer the call, some will switch sides, like the former Imam that works with me and others will take their commitment to the world like Lee Strobel. To me, these people were predestined to follow God, because they were seekers. I don't think it's necessary to fight about whether people were seekers or comers, as long as we're all together in God, that's all that matters.

The only person on this forum that may be predestined is Search (because he continues to ask questions and by golly his name is "searchingforanswers"). I believe everyone else has freewill and will continue to live as they see fit, including myself!

Ugh! Rhythm! No more challenges! I have to go home! See you tomorrow or later....l

[The Grand Nudger]

I'll be here whenever you get back. I'm always here.

Hmn, 3 events, so much bullshit to choose from, let's take it from the top.
Creation, The Flood, and Exodus.

[Erinome]

This is what I'm trying to tell atheists:
1. Soon God will destroy all imperfection to make way for perfection.
2. God has created a way for finite creatures to repent and be in his presence.
3. Everyone will be given the chance to hear about God and choose.
4. Those who deny, defy, hate or purposely ignore God will get what they deserve based on how they have lived their lives on earth.
5. People have the free-will to live their lives however they see fit, with God or without God.

1. Prove it. How do you know? Why would it be "Soon" when the star that heats our planet has 2 Billion years worth of hydrogen to burn before the radiation evaporates the oceans. So why would it be soon, how do you know, and can you prove it?

2. I don't want to repent to your repulsive, jealous, greedy, racist, woman hating, baby killing, unreasonable God.

3. Hear what about God?

4. Not scared, not sorry.

5. Yes, and it's unfortunate that you use your free will to believe in this nonsense, fabricated by man. You're an apologetic, and a creationist, and therefore I can't take you seriously, as your silly beliefs tell me you're unreasonable and a drone of superstition with no mind of your own.

You never have anything insightful or profound, and it would be an embarrassment to the human race if we all perished, and all that was left to speak for the human species was something you posted. The aliens who found it would think. "Good fucking riddance!".

[ElDinero]

With regard to the number 4 in that list: So are you saying, salty, that if I am a good person who shows kindness and loyalty and is trustworthy and so on, that it doesn't matter if I hate, defy or deny God? If so, seems to make belief in God a bit pointless either way, no? Maybe we could just skip past all the anti-scientific bullshit and get to treating other with kindness etc., what do you think?

---

ElDinero. Give me a minute to get back to you. In the meantime. What specific archeological find disproves what events? How about we narrow it down to three big events, you pick them, give me the link, so I can read it over, and then I'll respond to that.

I'll be here whenever you get back. I'm always here.

Hmn, 3 events, so much bullshit to choose from, let's take it from the top.
Creation, The Flood, and Exodus.

Those three seem perfectly agreeable to me, although archaeology can't exactly explain creation or the flood either way. So rather than get fixed on the semantics, let's just say 'natural science' rather than archaeology. Do I really have to explain why the biblical account is bullshit?

http://www.talkorigins.org

It's all there.

[Minimalist]

It is clear in the Bible that any who call on the name of the Lord will be saved.

It is far from clear. In fact, lots of xtians argue about that very point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvation


I'm not bothering to quote from this article because it goes on forever and really says nothing of consequence. Still....xtians have been willing to kill each other about it.

---

I'll be here whenever you get back. I'm always here.

Hmn, 3 events, so much bullshit to choose from, let's take it from the top.
Creation, The Flood, and Exodus.

http://www.worldagesarchive.com/Referenc...ers%29.htm

Not long ago, archaeologists could agree that the Old Testament, for all its embellishments and contradictions, contained a kernel of truth. Obviously, Moses had not parted the Red Sea or turned his staff into a snake, but it seemed clear that the Israelites had started out as a nomadic band somewhere in the vicinity of ancient Mesopotamia; that they had migrated first to Palestine and then to Egypt; and that, following some sort of conflict with the authorities, they had fled into the desert under the leadership of a mysterious figure who was either a lapsed Jew or, as Freud maintained, a high-born priest of the royal sun god Aton whose cult had been overthrown in a palace coup. Although much was unknown, archaeologists were confident that they had succeeded in nailing down at least these few basic facts.

That is no longer the case. In the last quarter century or so, archaeologists have seen one settled assumption after another concerning who the ancient Israelites were and where they came from proved false. Rather than a band of invaders who fought their way into the Holy Land, the Israelites are now thought to have been an 'indigenous culture that developed west of the Jordan River around 1200 B.C. Abraham, Isaac, and the other patriarchs appear to have been spliced together out of various pieces of local lore

The Davidic Empire, which archaeologists once thought as incontrovertible as the Roman, is now seen as an invention of Jerusalem-based priests in the seventh and eighth centuries B.C. who were eager to burnish their national history. The religion we call Judaism does not reach well back into the second millennium B.C. but appears to be, at most, a product of the mid-first.

This is not to say that individual elements of the story are not older. But Jewish monotheism, the sole and exclusive worship of an ancient Semitic god known as Yahweh, did not fully coalesce until the period between the Assyrian conquest of the northern Jewish kingdom of Israel in 722 B.C. and the Babylonian conquest of the southern kingdom of Judah in 586.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Why are you arguing with a guy who comes across as such a fool? I don't know him,so can only judge by the corkscrew logic in his loopy posts.

SEEMS TO BE

(1) Dogmatic fundamentalist who has not yet developed the ability for abstract thought.

and/or

(2) Suffering from that pandemic ailment amongst fundies ; cognitive dissonance,shown by a stunning ability to ignore evidence.


(3) Troll

(4) Poe


Why on earth do these people come to an atheist forum? To save us ? The hubris beggars belief and gives me the shits.

[The Grand Nudger]

Archaeology does actually discredit genesis (giving god credit for things which we ourselves were left to remedy in his not so well thought out creation, not to mention annihilating it's own "timeline" in the process). It also has quite a bit to say about the flood. Min might ask at what point the Egyptians developed scuba gear, for example.

[ElDinero]

Pad, I think to be fair that salty is the second of your options there. He seems to be sincere (at first glance, anyroad). I'm content with challenging him thoroughly.

[The Grand Nudger]

She does seem to be sincere. I also feel that it's the second option. Which is why I don't mind that the burden of proof has been shifted.

[ElDinero]

Apologies, salty.