The majority of Christians in America are biblically illiterate. This is kind of a big deal considering the Bible is the foundation and basis for their belief system and reason for living. Does anyone else find it odd that so many Christians are willfully illiterate to something so pivotal in their lives?
Here are a few statistics:
- 93% of Americans have a Bible.1
- Only half of Americans can even name one of the Gospels.1
- The majority of Americans don’t know that Genesis is the first book of the Bible.1
- 60% of evangelicals think Jesus was born in Jerusalem rather than Bethlehem.1
- 22% of high school students think Moses was one of Jesus’ disciples.1
- Half of High School seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah were a married couple.1
- 1 in 10 Americans believe that Joan of Arc was Noah’s wife.1
- 60% of Americans can’t name 5 of the ten commandments.1
- Given thirteen basic teachings from the Bible, only 1% of adult believers embraced all thirteen as being biblical perspectives.2
- One-third of college attending Christians could not put the following in order: Abraham, the Old Testament prophets, the death of Christ, and Pentecost.3
- One-third could also not identify Matthew as an apostle from a list of New Testament names.3
Many Americans continue to believe that a Jewish man from 2,000 years ago was God’s son … simply because someone told them so when they were a child. This is the equivalent to believing in Santa Claus as an adult. If you choose to worship Jesus every Sunday, at least take the time to read the book about him. Otherwise you’re nothing more than a lemming.
[1] Various sources listed in this Politics Daily article, “Why a Real ‘Year of the Bible’ Would Horrify Its Sponsors“
[2] Barna Research Online, “Discipleship Insights Revealed in New Book by George Barna.”
[3] Gary M. Burge, “The Greatest Story Never Read: Recovering biblical literacy in the church.”
Tags: America, Atheism, Atheist, Bible, Biblically, Blind, Christians, God, Illiterate, Jesus, Lemmings, New Testament, Old Testament, Santa, Scripture
June 23, 2009 at 2:05 am |
The only thing that will come from more people reading the bible is more atheists, which is why I fully support Christians actually reading the damn thing they are killing people over.
June 23, 2009 at 8:43 pm |
I thought it was more Muslims killing people over their holy teachings.
But I’ve never read the Koran; I have, however, read the Bible, and have never killed anyone (for any reason). In fact, Biblical teachings- those of the Christ, I mean- have inspired me to save lives.
But since God gave us each free will, you are entitled to your own opinion.
June 23, 2009 at 8:57 pm |
That just means you aren’t following your bible correctly, you are supposed to stone gay people to death.
Leviticus 20:13
Go get em!
June 24, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Ok first off you can’t take everything the Bible says literally. I know people think Christians see everything in black and white but we don’t.
Second Leviticus 20:13 is in the old testament. Christians believe that when Jesus came and died for our sins it changed everything and a new covenant was made.
Third its the Muslims that are still stoning women and gays to this very day, not really Christians, yet we get all the blame.
June 24, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Russell,
Yes, the History Channel lied to you. Catholics do NOT confess their sins to a preacher (priest) they confess them to God Himself through his priests…Christ was never “re-crusified” through the Mass…unbloody sacrifice….I wish I could go into more depth here, but I have to leave shortly….please, please get your information from the CCC…there are many Catholics (unfortunately) as well as many other Christians who simply do not know their faith. Don’t listen to others, read for yourself…God bless.
June 24, 2009 at 2:43 pm
God bless you too Julie
However I do study the bible very frequent. I’m just not an expert with it comes Catholicism and its theologies.
June 24, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Thank you, Russell! You know what I really would love to witness some day? When ALL Christians can come together and love and share with one another the faith and focus on what “unites” us rather than what “divides” us. Think that would put one great big smile on the face of Jesus, wouldn’t it?
Blessing to you !!
June 24, 2009 at 9:57 pm
Julie, you make an excellent point, Christianity is extremely flawed and false because they all just can’t get along. I mean, that’s why I stopped claiming to be an American, a democrat, white, male, hell you name it, all the categories that I’ve belonged to that claimed a certain sense of ethical and religious depth (don’t kid yourself, rational humanism is no less a religion that science or the big three) i’ve now willfully unmoored myself from entirely due to others’ ill-gotten ways.
the logic in this thread is horrible — and i’m not even a christian.
June 24, 2009 at 10:15 pm
The Bible says nothing of stoning gay people. The section you’re referring to is about adultery (starting in verse 10). The passage says that those who commit adultery should be put to death, and then it lists the ways to commit adultery. The book of Leviticus tells us that mankind is not to lay with mankind as with womankind (Leviticus 18:22), making this a sin (it also means that this is a choice we make and not something in our genetic make up, since it is a command).
So, in this reference, there are two sins being committed, the abomination of homosexuality, and the sin of adultery.
There are many other places in the Bible that also talks about the idea of ‘loving the sinner, but hating the sin’. We as Christians are to make people aware that what they are doing is wrong and lead them down the right path. If they continue in their sin, then God will punish them.
June 28, 2009 at 11:29 am
@steve
BRILLIANT! who needs research! if the bible says it is then it is!
demons vs germ theory
geocentric vs heliocentric
stable earth vs plate tectonics
babble tower vs linguistics
Noah’s arc vs evolution
Noah’s arc vs geology
genesis vs abiogenesis
tell me how well the bible is doing so far would you?
June 23, 2009 at 9:04 pm |
You may not be, but in africa….
children are being burned as witches, children are being forced into service as ‘gods soldiers’, the catholic church is killing millions every year by there actions on condoms and aids etc etc etc.
June 24, 2009 at 2:31 am
Please don’t confuse Catholicism and Christianity, they are very different, also just because one person claiming to be a catholic does something doesn’t mean all other Catholics are complicit.
As for people believing and not reading, I would argue most of those Christians are not actually saved, the Bible does in fact teach that Jesus is God’s son.
June 24, 2009 at 3:49 am
Chancemuse,
Catholicism is on form of Christianity…inform yourself.
June 24, 2009 at 6:23 am
@Citizens, I suppose you could argue that, but my point of view, as a christian, is that the catholic church have deviated from what the bible teaches.
My measure of a Christian is someone who has repented of their sins and is fully trusting Jesus to save them. By that standard I would say pretty much all Catholics are not saved. Catholics tend to get caught up in the works side of things, indulgences and such. They trust in Jesus + works.
June 24, 2009 at 8:51 am
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about regarding Catholicism. Catholics believe that salvation is a gift from God only….works only attempts in showing the love we have for Christ. Something like a husband saying to a wife: I love you darling and I accept you and then goes off and has an affair. Is that real love? No! Love is shown through actions (works).
June 24, 2009 at 1:53 pm
There are a lot of differences between Catholic and the rest who share the Christian faith. Catholics believe that God speaks through the pope, worship Mary, believe in saints and you have to pray through them, believe in no direct line to pray to God, also have extra books in the bible that the rest of Christians do not accept as the word of God and some even think is nothing more than church propaganda. Mormons believe and would say they are christian, but it couldn’t be farther from the truth.
June 24, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Russell,
It is very evident that you “listen” to others, but never took the time to read the CCC. The Pope is the decendent of Peter and yes, he is the interpreter of the Word for Catholics. Catholics DO NOT…..I repeat again…DO NOT “worship Mary”…we HONOR her as the mother of our Savior, Jesus Christ. We do NOT have to pray to the saints or Mary; however, we choose to have them intercede for us….like asking your friends to pray for you as well. Are you forgetting that it was Martin Luther who removed the books from the Bible?
June 24, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Is it also true which was told me from several Catholics you are not fully forgiven until you confess to a Preacher your sins? Thats another difference. Also is it true that you believe that Christ is recrucified during each mass? If this is untrue then the history channel and several books have been lying to me. lol
I apologize for saying you worship Mary. That was a bad choice of words. I was just stating that Catholics put more of an emphasis on Mary that the other denotations. I went to one of the main catholic church in D.C. that in the chapel there was a huge statue of Mary behind the pulpit, with beautiful stain glass windows on the sides of the building with pictures of the saints and there was no Jesus to be found in the chapel. I just found that a little odd.
June 24, 2009 at 2:28 pm
also from my understanding is that the catholic church in the America’s have more of a liberal understanding of what the Vatican in Europe and the Pope to this day still believe. Its very possible to go to a catholic church in the U.S that believe different things than what they main church has a stance on.
Anyway I think it doesn’t really matter, Protestant, Baptist, catholic, or whatever in my eyes we are all christian and we should stop the in fighting. Its hard enough for us as is.
June 25, 2009 at 1:44 am
I agree, the in fighting has to stop, but within Christian denominations, I see Catholics as people who need the truth. Catholics believe in purgatory, a kind of mini hell where we must be purified before going to heaven. It also teaches that you can do things to reduce your time spent there, sounds like works to me.
This is an insult to Jesus who has already done all the work. We are saved by grace alone through him, there is nothing we can do to fix things.
June 24, 2009 at 8:31 pm |
@Wordsprite – why would you think that more Muslims kill over their teachings than Christians? Think about the history of the world, more so this country and some of the most horrific acts were fueled by people trying to force Christianity on the masses. Wars, slavery, lynchings were all done by ‘good christian men’ and remember the reason? “Because its the Christian thing to do’ “Because no one should follow any other religion but Christianity” “Because lynching blacks cleanses the pure white christian race”. I bet my life there have been more killings ‘in the name of Christianity’ than any OTHER religion..
June 24, 2009 at 8:58 pm
I can kill more then you do!
no, i can kill more!
hey, i kill less!
no! i kill less!
who cares? irrational beliefs backed by force = evil. doesn’t matter WHO does it.
June 25, 2009 at 8:00 pm
@cocoachickscritiques- the “wars, slavery, and lynchings” were not done by true Christians, I will tell you that much.
Pure white Christian race? Come to church in Milwaukee sometime, if you want to see how diverse we really are. (I’ve worshipped at white, black, mixed, developmentally disabled, Latino, and Deaf churches, and learned something about Christ’s love at each and every one.)
“I bet my life there have been more killings ‘in the name of Christianity’ than any OTHER religion..” could be an unfortunately true statement, one that makes me very sad. But calling oneself something and being that way are two completely different things. Surely you have learned that concept.
June 26, 2009 at 11:18 am
‘no true scotsman’
enough said.
June 24, 2009 at 8:18 am |
@Sisyphus.
Agree 100%. When I was in Catholic Sunday school, our instructors discouraged us from reading the Bible. Most years passed w/o students even touching one.
June 24, 2009 at 2:03 pm |
I would have left that Sunday school class immediately as well. That instructor’s superior should have been notified as well.
June 25, 2009 at 12:28 pm |
For another side of the story:
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/in-christ-alone/
June 23, 2009 at 2:31 am |
You know that those teaching christians would never lie about what is in the bible. Why would they need to read any more of the bible then their preacher tells them to? LOL Yeah I agree that not as many know what the bible says and I also have not read it. I actually did try but could never stay awake while reading it.
June 23, 2009 at 3:51 am |
The problem comes not from reading one’s Bible, but in reading it and swallowing it only as one’s denomination demands as being “politically correct”, in reading it and thinking you, alone, have arrived with the one true interpretation. The Bible is not an Algebra book to be conquered by the reader, but a tool in the hands of the Holy Ghost to teach the reader as he/she goes through life. Christianity is not a schematic laid out for one to successfully memorize. The Bible is not an infallible book of magic to be worshipped. Either God remains God in this, or all we really possess is another religion. That’s been my experience, anyway; and as I usually tell people: Get your own experience; you don’t need to clone mine.
June 23, 2009 at 6:25 pm |
“Christianity is not a schematic laid out for one to successfully memorize.”
Ergo, systematic theology is complete and utter bullshit.
June 23, 2009 at 4:20 am |
Even when they do read their bibles, it is often part of some “bible study” where someone else tells them how to interpret it and how to disregard the parts that would trouble a sound mind.
June 23, 2009 at 5:25 am |
Yes, often true. But this is also true of most other literature. How many people do you know who simply read Shakespeare without interpretation?
June 23, 2009 at 7:11 am |
Shakespeare never claimed that his books were the inerrant word of a perfect God.
June 23, 2009 at 1:59 pm
win
June 23, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Da Vinci, for example, seemed to make a lot of claims that people support. Why? Because it gives them another source of assurance that they don’t have to believe what the Bible says. But do most people read Da Vinci’s writings and research it, or do they take it for granted that it must be accurate? I would think the latter.
vjack is right, even a lot of “real” Christians don’t actually take the time to interpret the Bible themselves. But believe me, reading the Bible and interpreting with what you think does not usually discredit it.
June 23, 2009 at 2:17 pm |
What? *shakes head* People need to pay more attention to the “Red Letters”.
June 23, 2009 at 2:21 pm |
Actually, most bible study classes are simply reading a book, and then discussing it based on what each finds in the bible. Usually it’s not “taught” by anyone in a real sense. People give their opinions and either agree or disagree with others. Sometimes minds are changed, or enlightened, other times not.
It is not a very good argument to suggest that “sound” minds are kept from knowledge. Recall that in 2000 years, there have been billions of believers, and actually just a few might have been better educated and intellectually superior to you and me.
Perhaps it might be wise then, to say, I don’t find the evidence compelling for me, rather than set yourself up as superior to some rather excellent minds who chose to differ with your beliefs.
June 23, 2009 at 2:54 pm |
Or you can rightly conclude that 2+2 != 5 and if someone more educated than yourself says that it is 5, they are wrong. One only needs to read the first book of the bible to find dozens of contradictions. Anyone that claims that the bible is inerrant is wrong no matter how many billions of people believe so and no matter how educated they are.
Seriously. The first contradiction is on the first page!
GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
June 23, 2009 at 2:58 pm
where is the contradiction?
June 23, 2009 at 3:13 pm
I’d really like to know what the contradiction is as well.
Also, realize that making man in his own image does not mean man, or any animal, is a clone of God. Humans are obviously not perfect, and if God is, then we are definitely exactly like God.
I’ll even admit that no Christian can really explain exactly what it means to be made in God’s image. We don’t understand everything, either.
June 23, 2009 at 3:29 pm
I apologize, I thought the contradiction was obvious. In Gen 1:25-26 god made the beasts of the earth, then he made man. In Gen 2:18-19 god made man, then he made the beasts.
If I were in court and I said “first I traveled to Georgia, then I went to Spain” and five minutes later I said “first I went to Spain, then I traveled to Georgia” I’d be contradicting myself.
This isn’t a problem for a moderate christian that doesn’t take the bible literally. This is only a problem for one that claims that the bible is inerrant and exacting.
June 23, 2009 at 3:31 pm
The contradiction is in the timing.
GEN 1:25 – god makes all the beasts of the earth.
GEN 1:26 – god makes man to have dominion over them.
GEN 2:18 – god notices man is lonely…
GEN 2:19 – … so god makes some beasts.
Did he forget that he had already made the beasts? So much for omnipotence.
June 23, 2009 at 3:48 pm
One of the biggest pitfalls in interpreting the Bible is taking things out of context.
Chapter 1 is a sort of timeline of the creation.
Chapter 2 begins by explaining that this is now “the account of the creation of the heavens and the earth.” (verse 4)
Notice how chapter 2 does not go over the order of all the events. It is not a timeline. I can understand how it seems that verses 18 and 19 seem to be out of order, but again, this chapter is meant to explain that God created animals on one day and man the next. In fact, one possible explanation I’m thinking right now is that God had already created all the creatures, and when he says “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;”, it could very well mean that right there in the garden God created one of each type of animal (all of which already existed in parts of the world where he placed them) so that Adam could name them. I think this is a reasonable explanation. It’s not stating that God “invented” the animals to suit Adam after Adam was created, but rather he just gave Adam one of each animal that he had already created so Adam could name them, since he couldn’t possibly travel the whole world to find all the animals and name them.
June 23, 2009 at 4:15 pm
I’m sorry but I don’t see how this is taken out of context. I simply quoted what is in the bible.
Your “interpretation” or attempt at apologetics in this case is simply wrong (according to the bible). Take 10 minutes and read Genesis 1 and 2 again. In Genesis 1 a very distinct order of events is laid out. Man comes after many other living creatures on the sixth day (man and woman formed at the same time as well). In Genesis 2 man was formed prior to other living creatures from the dust of the ground (before plants, animals, rain, or even the garden of eden itself). To claim otherwise is to be dishonest with yourself.
from Gen 2
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens- 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth [b] and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth [c] and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams [d] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- 7 the LORD God formed the man [e] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
8 Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
June 23, 2009 at 4:18 pm
After re-reading that last post I realize that it may have been offensive. That was not my intention and I apologize if it offends you. This is one of my known character flaws that I’m still working on. I get over excited when debating =)
June 23, 2009 at 4:28 pm
I would first like to take back part of what I said earlier. I was reading the beginning of Chapter 2, and the part that says “This is the account of the creation of the heavens and the earth” is the end of the account of the 7 days. It’s referring to Chapter 1 and the first few verses of Chapter 2 where the account is completed, and the statement is made to conclude that part.
So Chapter 2 is not an account at all, and that is why you can’t use it to contradict with chapter 1 because it isn’t claiming to be in order of events.
Please see this page I found: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c023.html
I understand what you’re saying, but just because chapter 2 says there was nothing on the Earth and God created man, and he created trees and animals, it doesn’t explicitly state that man came before everything else. It’s just kind of a recap of the things he made, not in chronological order. And again, looking at these verses:
Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
These are specifically talking about the garden. All these verses explain is that God had created a man, and he created a garden for the man to live in. If it says he created the man and then he put the trees in the garden, etc., it cannot be taken to be that the garden is the whole world, because it is clearly not. So I really don’t think this is a contradiction, because these verses are clearly talking about the garden, and all of this refers to Adam being in that garden. It is not referring to the order of events of the creation of the world.
That link I provided explains pretty much this same thing, except better than I can.
And by the way, I took no offense. But I do appreciate you saying that.
June 23, 2009 at 4:32 pm
I also think this article provides even more insight in the same track as what I’m trying to say:
http://www.tektonics.org/jedp/creationtwo.html
Translation to English can be a large cause of confusion with the Bible.
June 23, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Anyone who fails to see that there are two distinct and different accounts of the Creation in Genesis really does need their brain tested! In the first, God creates the heavens and the earth, and all living things, in six days, culminating in the creation of humankind – “male and female created He them”. Then God “rested… from all His work which He had made.” (Pretty exhausting, even for a Deity!) In the second (“in the DAY that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens” – not six days, mark you!), He seems to plant the seeds of plant life in the ground before creating Adam. Then, after placing this man in the garden which He created for him, he finds that the man is lonely, so He creates the animals in the hope that Adam will find “an help meet for him.” Adam reviews the animal creation, but “there was not found an help meet for him.” Thus, God created Eve from one of Adam`s ribs, a fitting companion for the him at last, and the Creation was complete. Two beautiful stories, with lessons to teach the readers no doubt, but NOT to be taken literally!!
June 23, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Christiananswers is a truly appalling site, and I used to have a whole library of books like this – testimony to the doubts that “Bible-believers” really have about their precious book, even though they won`t admit it! I`ve read all this garbage over and over again, and I have to say that they score a spectacular “own-goal” in one of their answers, when they declare that of course we can`t know where the Garden of Eden was exactly, etc, as the antediluvian world was completely destroyed by Noah`s Flood, and a new earth came into existence after this event. if this is so, then how come the Bible names the rivers that come out of Eden, and the counries that they flow through – namely Havilah, Ethiopia, and Assyria? So countries with these very names existed prior to the flood as well, then? What a coincidence! And how amazing (a miracle perhaps!) that in this much-changed landscape, where the earth has undergone massive upheavals, and billions of tons of sediment have been deposited to form the rock strata which exist today, it should still be possible to recognize the River Euphrates!! Get a grip, people, these are ancient myths!!!
June 23, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Is the translation to English also supposed to be inerrant?
If not, which version is the officially-sanction inerrant Bible? How do we know this?
June 24, 2009 at 6:18 am
Anybody read the Bible in it’s original Hebrew (Old Testament) or Greek (New Testament)? Yeah, I thought so. The manuscripts with the ancient text were transcribed and re-transcribed and translated from generation to generation. There were many places where there were holes in the parchment, where entire words or sentences would have to be guessed (where you see Italics in the text of the Bible, that is where scholars guessed on what went there). For hundreds of years the sacred ancients writings were passed down, before some of them, that’s right, SOME of them were eventually compiled and re-arranged into what we know as the Bible, derived from a word meaning ‘library of books.’ It is no wonder, then, that there are errors and confusions surrounding the book, but these errors are those of men, and not of God.
It may interest some of you to know that Genesis (beginnings) Chapter 1 v. 1 could also be interpreted to say In the beginning God organized the heaven and the earth. This is just in the first verse alone! It should be not said that the Bible proves that God exists or that Jesus is the Christ. To an unwilling mind no amount of testimonials or proof will be enough anyway. Rather, the Bible helps people gain an understanding of the dealings of God with men in the past, and should be used as a learning tool for the actions we should take now and in the future. Faith is based upon much more than substantiated factoids and interpretations of ancient sacred texts. It is, or it should be, about one’s personal relationship with the Lord, and the conviction that strikes them the very core of their being that lets them KNOW in their heart the God lives and that Jesus is the Christ, the Savior of the world.
June 24, 2009 at 10:17 am
your problem here is that Genesis is the product of four different writings combined into one by the editor. The two chapters you refer to were written by two different people describing the same event.
Of course you are quite right that they don’t agree, but the disagreements are more major than you allude to actually. The point is the bible is not an inerrant document, as I think you later pointed out.
Those that assume it to be will be forever trying to explain away the the unexplicable by bizarre twistings of things.
July 6, 2009 at 2:27 am
Even if chapter 2 is not in any specific order itself, it is very specific in this case; God does not want man to be lonely and therefore creates the beasts and brings them to Adam.
September 4, 2009 at 9:54 pm
To answer your question Brian, personally, I do not, but the pastors and theologians which lead the church in there doctrine most certainly do.
June 23, 2009 at 6:08 am |
They should make the Bible into a really long TV series. That would get a lot more Americans tuned in. The vast majority of Americans don’t read any books, so why should the Bible be an exception?
Given how abysmally bad Americans usually score on similar history and civics tests, I was actually impressed that the Bible scores were relatively high. On many of them, the majority answered correctly. That’s rare.
June 23, 2009 at 2:25 pm |
You said it. Watching Jay walking got to be too embarrassing to deal with. It’s hard to believe so many in this country are totally illiterate as to much of anything other than what show is on TV on any given night.
June 23, 2009 at 7:10 am |
What bothers me is that politicians will tout that the Ten Commandments are the basis of our laws without even knowing what they are.
The fact of the matter is that only about half of them are incorporated into our other laws and the others are incredibly vague to the point of uselessness as a standard of law.
Going further, they aren’t even the first recorded codes of law. Hammurabi’s Code predates the Ten Commandments by about 300 years and was secular in nature. We also have knowledge that other laws predated even those.
June 23, 2009 at 8:17 am |
What bothers me is that politicians will tout that the Ten Commandments are the basis of our laws without even knowing what they are.
Before anyone dismisses this as hyperbole, it actually happened to Congressman Lynn Westmoreland. He appeared on the Colbert Report and was able to list three of the commandments.
Westmoreland on the Colbert Report, June 14, 2006
December 10, 2009 at 8:36 am |
Actually, only two are now law – thou shalt not murder, and thou shalt not steal. Bearing false witness can get you in legal hot water from time to time, but that’s it… 20-30%. Pretty weak.
Actually, that’s not bad after 2000 years, but far from good enough to stake my moral or ethical beliefs on. I’m obviously not in the majority…
June 23, 2009 at 8:02 am |
Half of High School seniors think Sodom and Gomorrah were a married couple.
IT could be true soon if those dang liubrals iz sucesful in advancing the gay agenda.
(Poe)
June 23, 2009 at 8:27 am |
Didn`t they live next door to Gog and Magog?
June 23, 2009 at 9:41 am |
I will never forget years ago, when I was a believer, that one Sunday the Bible study leader asked how many people in the group had read the whole Bible.
Now this was an adult bible study group of about 25 people. All but 4 of them had been Christians their whole lives. And this was a conservative, fundy, “Bible-first-last-and-only”, Baptist church. And most of the people in the group would have been considered leaders and stalwarts of the congregation.
So how many raised their hands?
I recall it was 5 of us. Me, my wife, the leader, one pastor’s wife, and one other dude.
That means that 80% of these adult pillars of the church had NEVER read their holy book.
June 23, 2009 at 10:47 am |
You said “when I was a believer” ; however, you never said why you became an unbeliever. You made this decision because other “so-called Christians” never read the Bible? No, something else had to happen here. Before you pick up God’s Holy Word, you need to pray and ask for guidance in understanding Scripture and it will be revealed….maybe at that time or maybe through the actions of others you meet. I agree that there are many who call themselves “Christian”, but are not true followers of Christ. Some are simply afraid to follow or attempt to understand Scripture for one reason: it will make them accountable for their actions. How sad where this world is heading!
June 23, 2009 at 12:11 pm |
however, you never said why you became an unbeliever. You made this decision because other “so-called Christians” never read the Bible?
Need any help setting up that strawman?
June 23, 2009 at 2:46 pm |
You’re right. Something else had to happen. In fact the event I described happened over 10 years before I de-converted.
Now about the Bible: I have read it. At least a half dozen times deliberately from cover to cover, and I don’t know how many times in other (non-straight-through) ways. All of those readings were during my 25 years as a Christian. I always prayed before and after for understanding.
June 23, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Leo,
I do not understand, and, of course, you owe me no explanation at all. How does one become “de-converted”. If you really knew Him, how can you reject Him?
June 23, 2009 at 4:10 pm
How does one become “de-converted”.
That’s a long story and it’s not identical for everyone. If you want mine, go to http://www.de-conversion.com and look in the archives for old posts about my story. Some titles are: “My steps out of Christianity”; “From Fundy to Orthodox to Apostate”, “Praying my way to losing faith”, and all of my “Reasons why I can no longer believe:” series.
If you really knew Him, how can you reject Him?
Well, the answer to that is obvious. He is not real. A guy named Jeshu bar-Joseph may have been a real, historical person (and I think he was), but BibleGod is not real. He’s a mythological being like Ra, or Vishnu, or Zeus. So really, I rejected him for the same reason you “reject” Osiris.
June 23, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Leo,
I will read your story a little later, maybe tomorrow. I will thank you in advance for sharing it with us. Leo, Jesus is real, whether you acknowledge Him or not. He believes in you…died for you…took all of your sins…yours and mine. I am an imperfect person, but I know in my heart and soul that I have been forgiven and I will live forever with my Creator one day. I can not even imagine the emptiness of those who make the choice not to believe and seek. How empty they must feel, thinking that there is nothing left of them once they die to this world. Never seeing their love ones again must be too awful to imagine.
June 23, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Julie,
What is going to become of all the Muslims? Are they all going to Hell because their God isn’t as good as yours? They have a holy book just like you. And they believe in their religion for the same reason that you believe in yours. All objective indicators suggest that their faith is as strong as most Christians.
If you are ready to conclude that the Muslims are wrong, then you must conclude that having faith and a holy book is not enough. What makes Christianity any different?
June 24, 2009 at 9:16 am
Julie, You can give me the basic gospel message if you want, but it’s a waste of words. I know it very well. I’ve delivered it countless times.
Jesus probably really did exist in history. In that sense he was a real person.
He died. He did not come back, nor is he going to.
I don’t know what happens after you die. I strongly suspect that nothing happens. Like before you were born. No consciousness, no anything. You won’t feel bad, because you won’t feel, think, be, etc.
As for emptiness: that was a concern at first. Once I accepted reality though, I got on with what I do know. This life.
I know from your perspective (a world filled with invisible beings who care for you, and with a dream of being immortal) that a life of only some decades doesn’t look so great. I did not for me either. But once I accepted reality, I made my peace with it.
Now I live for this one life I have. I enjoy the people I know, the things I do, the things I see and experience.
And I DON’T sweat the hereafter. If it turns out there is one, I’ll have to figure it out when I get there. (No. I’m not afraid there will be a hell. But that’s a whole ‘nother matter.)
June 24, 2009 at 9:46 am
Paul/Leo,
First of all, “what happens to the Muslims” is in God’s hands, not mine. It is my job to inform and it is up to the person to accept or reject, it is their choice. I do not know the mind and the heart of anyone, whether it be a Christian, a Muslim or a Jew, etc. I have never claimed that nor will I ever. I know the Good News of the Lord and I have accepted Him. Again, we have that choice. Everyone has a choice in this life, but, Leo, once we close our eyes to this life, there will be no other choice….at that time, you had made your choice and God will respect the choice you had made. Whether you believe in Heaven or Hell is moot at that point. Before rejecting the love and forgiveness of God, I would only pray that you do something for your soul. Please go into a quiet place in your home, close the door, get on your knees and cry out to the Lord, confess your sins (and please do not say you have none) and ask Him to reveal Himself to you. IF you have an open heart and truly believe this, I can guarantee you that He will do just that. Don’t expect instant gratification (though He could do that), but wait on His word….possibly through others. Remember, the most important part is the OPEN HEART. The life of a Christian is not an easy road, but the peace that follows I can not describe to you. You will be ridiculed, mocked and have people hurt you for your beliefs, but it does not compare anything to what Jesus suffered for you and me on the Cross. Yes, He died…Yes, He has risen and more importantly, Yes He will return for you.
June 24, 2009 at 10:33 am
Julie:
Again you seem to think you’re telling me things I don’t know or didn’t think of. Again let me remind you: I said ALL the things you’re saying to many people in my 25 years as a devout Christian. I truly believed.
Now about going into a room and praying: You think I did not do that??!! When I began to find myself seriously doubting the faith (about late 2006) I just about freaked out of my skin. Try to think how you’d feel if that happened to you. It was about the worst thing I could have imagined.
Pray? Sheesh! I prayed. I did it quietly; I did it loudly, I pleaded, I begged, I screamed, I cried, I fasted, I quoted Scripture, I sat completely still hoping/listening/feeling for any response at all. I looked for answers, assurances, anything at all.
There was nothing. The silence was deafening.
You bet I truly believed. You bet I was open. You bet I looked in the Bible and listened for anything anyone had to say.
Would any parent watch a child so anguished and just ignored him? If there was a “loving father” as you wish, such a being would respond (on that I agree with you). But there isn’t one.
Now please knock off the condescension.
I can assure you that there’s no one there, that you are deluded, that if you truly opened up your eyes and mind, you’d see reality and realize that you’re worshipping a Santa Claus.
Life is beautiful just as it is. You don’t need an imaginary friend. There are plenty of real ones.
June 24, 2009 at 11:03 am
Leo,
Condescending to you?…oh my, that was NEVER my intention and if my statement were received by you in that way, then I sincerely apologize. Leo, I know first hand the pain and suffering you obviously went through. Believe me when I tell you that I had many, many days of screaming and yelling and praying….no answer…no answer..no answer…..so was my thinking. I had so many questions…all of the “whys”…mother was an orphan, lost my father at 7 years of age, sicknesses, deaths, you name it and I have been there. I felt the pain and I still do. I was always searching for answers “that I wanted to hear” and well, sometimes it just does not happen that way…it is in God’s time that it will be revealed…you were (and apparently still are) being tested to the fullest…been there and done that. Finially, I keep coming back to the “peace that surpasses all understanding”. I can not explain it and I do not think anyone can unless you have experienced that grace yourself. I don’t know why you are in these trials, but don’t let satan win the battle for you. Hang in there….I am certain people are praying for you….me for one!
June 24, 2009 at 12:32 pm
You may pray (talk to the air) all you wish. And I know you mean well.
Satan (who was taken from the Roman god Lucifer, the Morning Star BTW) is no more real that BibleGod.
You may have experienced the anguish I went through. Sorry if you have. What you cannot know is the clarity of knowledge I now have.
First, to be clear, I categorically state, without fear (or even possibility) of contradiction, that the deity (or deities more properly) described in the Bible or put forth by Christianity do not exist. The reason I do this is because I know it is the truth.
You peace is self-induced via a happy delusion. You’re welcome to it, but it is not something I can ever go back to. In the same way that I can’t go back to the happy childhood belief in Santa. It simply isn’t true and I know it.
this is truly and utterly an incomprehensible position to you. I know because a mere 3 years ago it would have been equally incomprehensible to me.
Anyway, I can hope you see it somehow. The truth is better than delusion. But if you don’t, no big deal. You’re obviously a nice person and the faith isn’t likely to make you a bad one.
June 24, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Leo,
You keep saying the you “know” the truth and that I am “delusional” in the truth. Faith can not be explained….you are aware of that. How can everything we experience in this life be said to be left up to “chance”. DNA proved so many things as well….every coil in each of us is unique. This happened by chance?…NO! The heavens and the universe scream the existance of God. Please, Leo, I am not preaching to you, I am only asking you not to “believe the lie”…yes, I know exactly who Lucifer is….the father of all lies…I will continue to pray for you that your heart will be touched once again. Thank you for allowing me to do that for you! I pray you find that “peace”.
June 24, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Julie:
Probably the simplest way to understand where I’m coming from is to look at the apostle Thomas. In John 20, when told that Jesus was risen and alive, he said, quite simply and sensibly, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.” A little later Jesus shows up and shows his wounds and lets Thomas touch them.
So I’m standing on one side of verse 25. (Don’t bother me with “more blessed are those….” I’m not greedy. Just ‘blessed’ will be quite enough thank you.)
Now if you can produce an actual deity, rather than lame arguments for why he never shows up or does anything, then great. Otherwise you have nothing.
Next argument before you bother with ii: [You might not see it or accept it, or might just dismiss it if god did some miracle or some such.] An all-powerful, all-knowing being, who created me and knows me better than I know myself can come with whatever he needs to in order to get through to me. For sure lame apologetics aren’t it.
June 23, 2009 at 3:17 pm |
“That means that 80% of these adult pillars of the church had NEVER read their holy book.”
You said the question asked was who had read the whole Bible. If only five of you raised your hands, that doesn’t mean the rest had never read the Bible at all. It means they haven’t read the whole thing.
While I do think it’s good to read the whole Bible at least once so you know where you’re coming from, not having read the entire Bible word for word doesn’t make you less of a Christian. How many people support Evolution but couldn’t even tell you that Evolution is based on genetic mutations that turn out to be beneficial? You can believe in something without understanding it completely, but the more you know, the more credit you have in believing it.
June 23, 2009 at 11:19 am |
99% of the people who fly on airplanes get aboard without being able to accurately describe the laws of aerodynamics.
I guess they are just believers.
June 23, 2009 at 12:13 pm |
Poor analogy. Air travel has actual statistics on casualties which anyone can look up without understanding aerodynamics in detail. Where’s the data on whether Biblical theology (e.g. existence of Heaven) is true?
June 23, 2009 at 1:46 pm |
The analogy might fail but not for the reason you mention since a variant case can be introduced (i.e. suppose most people who flew have never seen statistics or even know they exist but still fly because word-of-mouth assures them it is safe) that shows the variable you mentioned (i.e. the ability to refer to airline statistics) does not produce a false analogy. I don’t think you have a firm command on how arguments from analogy are supposed to work.
Besides, you’re not being charitable to the argument. The analogy is simply trying to show that there are others things which people rely upon without having full knowledge of the actual consequences that will come about or without being sure. Statistics, after all, illustrate probabilities or positive correlations in most cases, not guarantees. (Although even that is questionable, see Hume).
June 23, 2009 at 3:05 pm
The difference is people don’t claim to base their lives on the laws of aerodynamics. Many christians claim to base their lives on the bible and the bible alone. And yet they haven’t read it. The analogy would work fine for a crazy person that claims to worship the laws of aerodynamics (assuming that person doesn’t know the laws of aerodynamics).
June 23, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Air Travel companies generally don’t claim that they have the inerrant word of a perfect God.
June 23, 2009 at 6:05 pm
This is such a small point that it might not even be worth discussing. However, seeing as how this is what I do for a living (I am a philosophy professor at a university) I simply have to make the point that you guys are mistaken about arguments from analogy. Again, listing differences between the two cases does not produce a false analogy, otherwise all analogies would be false analogies. If I claimed that dogs are like children in that they demand attention and lots of care, then you could not show that this was a false analogy simply by suggesting that children can learn to speak English whereas dogs cannot. That misses the entire point of the analogy.
Thus, claiming that the difference is that Christians worship the thing they do not know much about whereas airline passengers do not worship aerodynamics is irrelevant as far as the analogy goes. The same goes for the difference Butterfly mentions.
The purpose of the analogy is to demonstrate that people believe in things despite not having full knowledge of that thing. The point Paul M is making is that people often believe things when all they have is word-of-mouth or some other weaker sense justification. As far as that goes, the analogy works. The only way to show that this is a false analogy would be to show that either Christians or ~99% of airline passengers do in fact have full knowledge of the thing they believe in. Then the analogy would miss it’s intended purpose because on that point one of the cases would not be analogous to the other.
You can also try to show that in general, people only believe in things they have complete or indubitable knowledge of. Try doing that and see how far you can get.
June 23, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Butterfly: And that’s why people understand that planes can sometimes crash, they’re imperfect and flown by simple men who sometimes make mistakes or poor decisions.
June 23, 2009 at 2:45 pm |
If you’re looking for analogies, it’s the equivalent of a society where 80% of people insist that learning to drive a car is absolutely the most important thing you can do in your life, but the majority can’t name the pedals or recognise a steering wheel.
June 23, 2009 at 11:52 am |
blind faith….or..ignorance?
June 23, 2009 at 1:11 pm |
There’s a difference? Generally people who act on faith do so because they don’t feel the need to verify things personally.
June 23, 2009 at 12:39 pm |
Who needs to read the actual Bible, when there are so many great ‘teachers’ and books out there to tell us what it says. No need to get into the messy details… details that will be glossed over anyway, and considered words that made sense thousands of years ago, but don’t apply today. I mean… c’mon, nobody thinks that raping women and then forcing her to marry her attacker is a good idea anymore… and Paul, while he had a lot of good things to say, just wasn’t the marrying type, so don’t worry about his silly ideas about marriage.
Oh, and all of that stuff about women needing to submit to their husbands, and keep a home and have kids… well, that was then and this is now. Plus, the men were told to LOVE their wives, and that is really really hard.
The last thing the conservative right wants people to do is actually read and comprehend the bible on their own… people may actually begin to see the truth… and that truth may set them free… and then the churches would stop getting money… and then… well, you know… all those high up guys wouldn’t be able to roll into church in that new Benz, and that would be sad.
June 23, 2009 at 12:50 pm |
Have you ever opened your heart and mind and read the Bible in a quiet space within your own home? Yes, there are multitudes of unethical and immoral people out there claiming to “know the Word”, but why would that stop you from searching yourself? “Religion” is just a word that is generally misused….what you should strive for is a “relationship” with the Word.
June 23, 2009 at 1:19 pm |
Have you ever stopped to think whether a “relationship” with a book that is historically inaccurate, scientifically inaccurate and morally inferior is a good thing?
June 23, 2009 at 1:25 pm
The “relationship” I was speaking of is with God Himself through His Word. Historically inaccurate??….absolutely not! Faith is a “gift” and trying to explain that to someone who does not have faith, is like trying to explain clouds to a blind person…believe me, I say that with all due respect!
June 23, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Those are pretty strong claims to make without any evidence or examples. Notice how those who are Christians in this discussion aren’t claiming that science is inaccurate, ridiculous, or morally wrong, so why should you? It doesn’t really add to the discussion, but it does encourage people to have hard feelings against one another when it’s not necessary at all.
June 23, 2009 at 3:31 pm
I am responding to compeek. You ask for evidence but when you are asked for it all you say is the bible says so. Because you want to believe it doesn’t make it evidence.
June 23, 2009 at 3:51 pm
Baconsbud, you are the one who made the claims, and I’m asking you to support them.
I was pointing out that in general, Christians aren’t the ones making the claims. We are on the defense from claims made against the Bible.
If you say the Bible isn’t true, it’s your responsibility to explain why you think so, and especially if you are going to claim specific things about the Bible, then you need specific examples from the Bible.
So you are right, because I want to believe doesn’t mean I am right. I’m not denying that, nor do I claim it’s so. I’m asking you to explain your side instead of merely claiming we’re wrong.
June 23, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Where are these claim you said I made.
June 23, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Baconsbud, my apologies. I was originally talking to Reginald Selkirk, and when you replied I just assumed I was talking to the original commenter who I was responding to.
June 24, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Historically inaccurate??….absolutely not!
Sticking just to the New Testament, do you really believe that a ruler would require people to travel to the historical birthplace of a long-ago ancestor to carry out a census? For which there is no extra-Biblical support?
Do you really believe the story of Herod killing all the babies under two years old?
Do you realize that the timeline for who ruled Judaea as compared with the events of Jesus’ life doesn’t fit?
June 24, 2009 at 2:54 pm
As an example, here (http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aiia/census-luke2.html) is a discussion about the census mentioned in Luke. There are many others like it elsewhere, since this is an old horse that has been repeatedly beat to death.
Like the many other claims about the Bible being “…historically inaccurate…” or “…scientifically inaccurate…”, this is an example of hostile assumptions, bad logic, and poor follow-through.
Finding extra-Biblical evidence of a census in 6 A.D. does not prove that there was NOT another census by the same leader around 4 A.D. Nor does LACK of evidence disallow other possible explanations.
To disprove the census in Luke, one would need to find reliable, accurate, EXHAUSTIVE historical documentation that clearly indicated that such a census did not and could not have occurred. Of course, such evidence would be highly suspect due to its extremely unusual character: a document that says that something did NOT happen?!? Most likely, such a document would be questioned as a forgery, for good reason.
So, let’s get down to brass tacks. So far, NO ONE has yet proven even ONE single actual falsehood in the Bible. Sure, there are lots of hostile attacks, and there are MANY things in the Bible that we cannot verify, but NOT ONE case of an actual proven falsehood.
On the other hand, there are NUMEROUS cases where the Bible has been demonstrated correct, particularly in some noteworthy instances where the Bible contradicted everyone’s expectations. I am thinking about the much-disputed tetrarch mentioned in Luke that was eventually proven real by a recent archeological dig.
As a contrast, one should take a look at the reputation of the Book of Mormon, which is universally reviled in the world of archeology. And no wonder, when it describes American Indians having steel and glass-bottomed boats long before they were invented.
Instead, the Bible is a respected and well-used archeological reference that is often doubted but never yet proven wrong.
If we were talking about ANY other document, it would be given the benefit of the doubt until actual contrary evidence was found. Instead, it is UNIQUELY attacked without pause upon the slightest provocation.
You should be asking yourself WHY the Bible receives such uniquely hostile treatment.
June 24, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Hey Rob Williams!
You know what? I seriously need to make a template of this argument…
Just because that we can’t “prove” something to be wrong doesn’t mean that it is right. It is not up to us, the atheists/scholars/Luke-doubters/Hell-I-don’t-know, to disprove of this little worldly census of yours; it is your job to prove it.
Similarly, if I claimed that there was an invisible, inaudible and undetectable china teapot revolving around Earth and that regardless of how advanced our technologies become, we would still not be able to detect this teapot, would you buy it? No? Why not? Simple. Because I have yet to offer “reliable, accurate, EXHAUSTIVE documentation” to prove my teapot’s existence.
So no, we don’t have to disprove anything; you have to prove it.
Oh, by the way, about the infallacy of the Bible; I’ll like to see you prove virgin birth.
P.S. Generally, “other documents” do not claim to have the infallible word of God and do not condemn you to hell if you don’t believe in it. While I’ll believe “other documents” for stating that George Washington was born in Virginia, I won’t believe it without extensive evidence if it stated that he was born of a virgin.
June 25, 2009 at 10:59 am
Rob Williams: “So far, NO ONE has yet proven even ONE single actual falsehood in the Bible. Sure, there are lots of hostile attacks, and there are MANY things in the Bible that we cannot verify, but NOT ONE case of an actual proven falsehood.”
There are many examples of the Bible saying two directly contradictory things. Therefore, at least one of them must be wrong. BeAttitudes has a whole file of these things.
For just one scientific absurdity, in Genesis, it says you can breed animals with stripes by putting sticks in their watering trough.
June 25, 2009 at 11:02 am
Rob Williams: “ Instead, it is UNIQUELY attacked without pause upon the slightest provocation.
You should be asking yourself WHY the Bible receives such uniquely hostile treatment.”
You should look up the word UNIQUELY if you’re going to put it in all-caps. And you should not say that the Bible has been uniquely attacked in the very same post in which you attack someone else’s scripture.
June 25, 2009 at 12:15 pm
@Butterfly:
1. Apparently you are not paying attention: nearly every religion on the planet claims to have official god-written-or-inspired documents and claims to be the EXCLUSIVE way to goodness and happiness, etc. I mentioned the Book of Mormon in another of my comments, which does actually deserve your hostility; it is an easily-proven fraud.
2. As I also mentioned in another comment, I am not here to prove anything; I am merely providing a few hints for the rare reader that might be honestly seeking a lead. Obviously, you are not such a reader, which is your prerogative.
The point of my comments about Luke’s census, and of the discussion at the link that I provided, is that there is good reason to believe that Luke’s account is accurate. The same can be said about the rest of the Bible–there are plenty of good reasons to believe that it is an accurate set of documents, and there are NO good reasons to not believe it.
You doubt Luke’s census; that is your prerogative. However, what is significant is that you cannot present a good REASON for your doubt. Citing other people’s doubt is likewise not a good REASON. Your doubt and hostility, or that of others, even a majority of others, is NOT news, and it is also not a REASON.
A good example of a REASON would be the Book of Mormon’s claim that American Indians had glass-bottomed boats and steel long before they were invented. Maybe there could be another explanation (there is always a non-zero but infinitesimal probability), but the best explanation is that the Book of Mormon is a fraud. Since there are MANY other such REASONS, one can safely conclude that it is a fraud.
I have spent over two decades researching doubts such as yours, and I have found them to be just as empty as your doubt over Luke’s census. Indeed, it seems apparent that you STARTED from your doubt and hostility, rather than ending up there after proper research and consideration. You are entitled to doubt, and you are entitled to be hostile, but no amount of shouting them will transform them into an actual REASON.
Best wishes.
June 25, 2009 at 5:21 pm
@Reginald Selkirk: When I say that the Bible “…is UNIQUELY attacked without pause upon the slightest provocation”, I mean it AS QUALIFIED. I am well aware that other books get attacked (that seemed too obvious to actually state), but my point is that the Bible seems to be targeted for more often, far more readily, with far more hostility, with far less justification.
I don’t think that this is a coincidence, and I suggest to everyone that they should consider WHY the Bible gets such unique treatment. This is exactly the kind of reception that I would expect for the ONE REAL BOOK that claims to speak about the ONE REAL GOD.
For example, it is easy to ignore the Book of Mormon, and hardly anyone seems to pay any mind to it. For every person or book that attacks the Book of Mormon, there seems to be thousands that attack the Bible. Meanwhile, those attacks against the Book of Mormon seem to merely laugh at its foibles, while the attacks on the Bible seem murderous in comparison (and in fact even).
So, why does the Bible uniquely touch a nerve, and the Book of Mormon et al do not?
Exercise left to the reader…
December 10, 2009 at 9:22 am
It will never cease to amaze me how quickly and conveniently one can choose to suspend, and then re-instate, rational thinking.
@Rob Williams, re: “I mentioned the Book of Mormon in another of my comments, which does actually deserve your hostility”. But the bible… that’s sound collection of factual information supported by evidence… right… I’m baffled that anyone could be in full support of the Bible as the inerrant word of god, and then with the flick of a switch turn around and criticize the Book of Mormon.
@Julie, re: “Faith is a “gift”, and trying to explain that to someone who does not have faith, is like trying to explain clouds to a blind person.” No, rational thinking is a gift, and considering how few species possess the ABILITY to use it, it’s really quite disheartening how few people within our own species BOTHER to. Faith is something you apply as a tool for survival, in the moment, when there isn’t time to think things through. When you’ve got years to work with, choosing not to ask questions, scrutinize, and search for rational conclusions is a disservice to the species, and a sad waste of a brain.
Trying to explain rational thinking to someone who does not use it is like trying to explain that clouds are just water vapor to someone who thinks god lives on them.
December 17, 2009 at 1:47 am
@Kenton: Discussing the Bible and the Book of Mormon requires no suspension and reinstatement of rational thinking–indeed my comments demonstrate rational thinking, contrary to yours.
Simple fact–archeologists systematically rely on the Bible and systematically revile the Book of Mormon. The vast majority claim no allegiance to either book, but they recognize the accuracy and usefulness of the Bible while likewise acknowledging the utter waste of referencing the Book of Mormon.
As for your comments about faith, you are simply being argumentative and absurd. YOU exercise faith each and every moment of every day. Every time you take a step, you trust that you won’t fall–but occasionally you are wrong. You trust people, you trust things, you trust that there will be a tomorrow. If you don’t KNOW, then you MUST trust. Welcome to faith. Being human = daily faith.
June 23, 2009 at 1:22 pm |
I have done that. I did it for years. I hoped and prayed that i would hear God speak to me. You know what came out of that? Yep, the realization that the bible is flawed, is not anywhere near a perfect book and actually reads more like a bunch of propaganda that could be used to get large masses of people to do what the writers wanted.
I like that you immediately made a judgement about my time with the Bible. How Christian of you… Making snap judgements before even asking a question.
June 23, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Tell me exactly “where I made a judgment about (your) time with the Bible”?….I asked a question only. If you took that as a judgment on my part, then I sincerely apologize for not making my question more clear. In no way did I mean to offend you, I was only looking for an answer. I have to tell you this though, I too have waited and waited and waited for answers from God. I prayed and prayed and even screamed at Him and still no answer to my satisfaction. Well after months and discussing my situation with my friends, by the way who told me that they had been praying for me, I felt such a peace, that I am at loss for words how to even describe it to you. The hurt is still there, but the peace covers it. I believe the answer was “not now, but in My time”, which will be perfect and beyond what you even could possibly imagine. Again, please accept my apology if I offended you in any way.
June 23, 2009 at 3:21 pm |
Julie, the fact remains, there are some horrifying, horrifying things that God commands in the Bible.
I don’t care what your ends are, there are certain means that do not justify it. Wholesale slaughter of women, children, and livestock simply don’t warrant justification of any sort.
The fact is, that part is in the Bible. If the Bible is the Word of God forever, then that never goes away. There is not even any mention of an apology and there is no scrap of evidence within the Bible to suggest that certain laws of the Old Testament ever stopped being relevant.
Jesus himself claimed that the Law of Moses was still very much in effect. Therefore, according to Jesus, someone who rapes a virgin is still entitled to pay the dowry and marry her. After all, that part of the law didn’t pass away and the whole “love thy neighbor” part certainly seems like it speaks against rape, however, we’re talking about punishment.
Therefore, the punishments of the Bible on people who commit these crimes still stand. Sure, Jesus forgave the adulteress, but if you want to apply that, you have to apply it in context.
Are we to let rapists off the hook entirely or force them to marry their victims (if their victims were virgins prior to the assault, of course)? If you can answer this in a morally acceptable way using only the Bible in context, then I might take your book seriously.
June 23, 2009 at 3:33 pm
The fact you are missing here is that the Bible explains what is called the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.
Under the Old, sacrifices were used to pay for sins, priests were the only ones who could come close to talking to God, and other things like that.
Jesus brought the New Covenant when he died on the cross, paying for all sins, past, present, and future. The New Covenant doesn’t excuse us from sin, but it does change the way we interact with God. We no longer have to offer sacrifices of animals, we can pray to God directly, and the punishments that were set for the Israelites don’t directly apply.
So yes, nothing in the Bible says the Ten Commandments don’t apply anymore, but realize that the punishments set for the Israelites are not implied to be in effect for us. Modern governments have laws and punishments, and that’s what the world lives by. Of course, no earthly government can ever rule perfectly according to God, nor to most try.
So I believe you are somewhat mistaken in your idea that everything from the New Testament directly applies to modern contexts.
June 23, 2009 at 7:08 pm
I said Old Testament law still applies. Jesus even says this. Read Matthew 5 and you’ll see that it’s quite clear that Jesus did not intend for the Hebrew law to fall out of effect.
He mentioned that some laws would be even more stringent, such as murdering someone was now equated to thinking bad thoughts and adultery to lust.
Still, you failed to answer my question and, instead, harped on an unrelated point. I don’t care what Jesus says about the Ten Commandments, not for this question anyway.
How about you try again and, this time, answer the question.
June 23, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Janus Grayden, you appear to be missing the entire point of the chapter! From the last verse of chapter 5:
“But you are to be perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect.”
This is not possible! That’s the whole point! We as humans cannot live perfectly by the law of Moses, or any law. We are imperfect. The whole idea here is that we cannot make ourselves good enough to go to heaven to be with God. Only God could do that, and he did so by sending Jesus. The law is irrelevant, not in the sense that we shouldn’t obey it, but in the sense that we can’t obey it.
To be honest, I’m not exactly sure what you’re point was originally. I’m not even sure what I’m arguing with you about. But what I do know, and this is in the Bible, which you surely know, is that God is just. God doesn’t punish out of hatred of us, he punishes because he hates sin. We surely deserve any type of punishment he could give us, but with the New Covenant that Jesus brought, we are forgiven for all our sins. That doesn’t mean we can do whatever we want, but that if we love him, we will want to follow his commands.
June 23, 2009 at 9:57 pm
I’m sure you have some very good points about something or other, but, again, you’re still avoiding the question.
Is there anywhere in the Bible that changes or, at the very least, excuses having rapists marry their victims as a form of recompense?
I mean, if you can even prove that such a thing is equitable in this day and age, I’ll be satisfied. I know my original question is to show if that punishment had in any way been accounted for in the Old or New Testament, which, of course, nobody has ever been able to show me. However, I’ll cut you a deal: just show me how that such a thing could possibly be a morally justifiable decision in ANY time, to force a rape victim to marry their attacker.
Honestly, that’s sick. That’s morally reprehensible to me and any God that would ordain that is certainly no friend of mine.
June 24, 2009 at 3:44 am
compeek
You say god hates sin but isn’t hate a sin? If a being is perfect doesn’t that imply that it could neither hate or love? How can a being that is all good hate? I know the only time I feel guilty is when I want to hate or do hate someone.
June 25, 2009 at 9:53 pm
@Baconsbud
You asked, “You say god hates sin but isn’t hate a sin? If a being is perfect doesn’t that imply that it could neither hate or love? How can a being that is all good hate? I know the only time I feel guilty is when I want to hate or do hate someone.”
Okay, if I had to answer if hating a person from your heart is a “sin”, then I suppose it is. But to call hating sin a sin simply doesn’t make any sense. No, it’s not a sin to hate evil.
Being perfect does not mean you can’t love! Where would you get that from? :\
So a perfect being can hate evilness. I really don’t think we need to argue about this. :p
June 23, 2009 at 8:43 pm |
Have you ever opened your heart and mind and read the Holy Qu’ran in a quiet space within your home? or the Tao te Ching? or the teachings of Buddha? Or practiced meditative Yoga?
Yes, there are multitudes (billions, actually) of non-Christians who “know the word” or have experienced just as much enlightenment as you have, but their enlightenment is not your enlightenment, and they do not believe in your Christ.
And they are as correct as you are, or as incorrect as you are. The point being that either ALL are correct or ALL are incorrect. No “book of faith” contains absolute truth.
Earlier you mention the “emptiness of those who don’t seek.” What is this emptiness? Please describe it to me, as I surely do not have it, nor do I know what it is. Is it your emptiness that you are projecting upon me? My life is pretty fulfilling as it is, without a god. I do not feel I am lacking much (except the guilt of sin).
December 10, 2009 at 9:31 am
If I were a betting man, I’d say the answer is probably something like, “Until you have known the fullness of God, you will never understand your current emptiness”, or some other nebulous, un-testable platitude. I’ve all-but given up expecting rational arguments like this to resonate with someone who’s clearly built an entire house of cards from their religion. Too much built-up to start second-guessing the foundation now…
December 17, 2009 at 12:04 am
@humor_impaired: You said:
And they [non-Christians] are as correct as you are, or as incorrect as you are. The point being that either ALL are correct or ALL are incorrect. No “book of faith” contains absolute truth.
This statement is an cop-out–throwing up your hands and just giving up. That is certainly your prerogative, but it has no power to persuade.
Of course, you are obviously mistaken–either ALL being correct or ALL being incorrect are NOT the only options. Clearly, one or more could be correct while others are incorrect. Most everyone claims that they are individually correct while everyone else (except their buddies) is incorrect.
It is unlikely that everyone is incorrect since it seems that just about every possibility is represented in the world: especially the basics of there-is-a-God versus there-is-no-God.
On the other hand, it is impossible for everyone to be correct because there are obvious mutual exclusions such as the same basic there-is-a-God versus there-is-no-God.
Most likely, based on very simple logic, there is only one right “answer” or a small group of related right “answers”.
A crucial difference among all the options is that many (most?) of them make testable claims, but only one answer/Book/God actually passes the tests. There has been much written about that, but one good reference is a book by a devout skeptic called “Evidence That Demands A Verdict” (and sequel).
For example, how many of those people/groups/religions/books claims that their God destroyed a superpower (ancient Egypt)? The Bible does, and it is verified.
June 23, 2009 at 2:30 pm |
Just as bad as those who dismiss the bible based on rather faulty information as to what it actually means. You raise a number of issues, but it doesn’t seem that you know what biblical scholars even say about these passages. You take them as quite literal and truely said I take it?
December 10, 2009 at 9:41 am |
Sherry, my Bible doesn’t have the Appendix that tells me which parts I’m supposed to believe literally, which parts are figurative or metaphorical, and which ones I’m allowed to dismiss entirely. Can you share yours with me? I want to make sure I interpret it exactly the same way that every single other Christian does…
I’m also happy to hear you have a definitive resource that tells you what the Bible “actually means”. I wasn’t aware that Christians had reached consensus on this, but now that I know they have, I can begin to take the Bible and what are now sure to be consistent teachings seriously again.
December 17, 2009 at 12:19 am
@Kenton Gilchrist: Indeed, the Bible was delivered with the assumption (like most books) that the reader was reasonably competent and honest in handling its passages.
I have read the Bible cover-to-cover more than once, and I have never found a single passage that was even slightly difficult to handle.
I know that I don’t fully understand every aspect of every passage, but why would I expect to do so? Despite my advanced reading abilities and a Bachelor of Science degree from a prestigious university, I still find it useful and necessary to (re)study passages from nearly every book I have ever read.
I have seen the various claims and arguments regarding the difficulties of the Bible’s passages, but I have yet to find one that has any substance. In nearly every case, reading the passage in question reveals that the author of the argument is purposely trying to distort and fight against the obvious and simple meaning delivered by the passage.
There is often room to claim that there are additional subtle meanings beyond the plain reading, and those deserve some debate. But claiming that such additional subtleties justify rejecting the document outright is simply absurd.
Finally, no two people interpret any other book or any other form of communication in exactly the same way, so why would anyone expect any two people (let alone everyone) would exactly agree about such a sizable volume as the Bible. Again, that is simply absurd, and the claim is simply dishonest.
June 23, 2009 at 1:20 pm |
popurls.com // popular today…
story has entered the popular today section on popurls.com…
June 23, 2009 at 1:31 pm |
I completely agree, except that I have read the entire Bible cover-to-cover (twenty-two times when I lost count) but I am not an atheist.
On the other hand, I think that it is critical to recognize that what is being described is what naturally happens when the Bible is adopted by a religion (man-made system of “beliefs”). However, these symptoms are due to the religion, not the Bible. Therefore, these symptoms merely help to identify “religionists”: people that (pretend to) follow a man-made system of “beliefs”. Such people are not believers as described by the Bible, nor are they practicing Christianity as described by the Bible. Hence, they make extremely easy targets for ridicule. However, it is also somewhat unfair to criticize them for not following the Bible, since the Bible is not REALLY the basis for their lifestyle anyway, which is made obvious by the fact that they have never actually read it.
As a believer, I share the sentiment that no one is TRULY entitled to call themselves a “believer” in Biblical Christianity until they have read the Bible cover-to-cover at least once, and then have made the corresponding commitments that the Bible describes for believers. However, the Bible itself does not contain such a requirement, nor is it anyone’s place to add one. The essential commitment and requirements are far simpler and more accessible.
Indeed, the whole point is that REAL Biblical Christianity is NOT a religion–it is not man-made, it is not a system, and it is not about following rules. Instead, it is a relationship between two beings: the believer and the one true God known as the Lord Jesus Christ (for us simple English speakers).
I also certify that the Bible emphatically teaches a true tolerance of others that allows no place for mistreating, let alone killing, those who practice various religions (including atheism). As the Bible says (to paraphrase): one cannot love the God that one has not seen, without loving the fellow (hu)man that one can see. In this case, obviously, we mean love in its highest, most charitable, purest, non-sexual sense.
Therefore, I strongly encourage discussions such as this one, because clarifying the situation for everyone is ultimately a good thing. The pretenders need to be called out, the pretenses need to be unmasked, and the rare exceptions need to be recognized.
Best wishes.
June 23, 2009 at 1:42 pm |
Rob,
Beautifully said! Religion is “man’s concept of God”, what we should be striving for is “God’s concept of man”. I truly believe that God knows each and every one of our hearts and knows us better than we know ourselves. If you truly seek Him, He will be found. He is ALWAYS with us even when we deny Him. What comfort!
June 24, 2009 at 12:08 am |
all that needs to be said is ’show me the evidence’
you claim there is an all powerful, all knowing, all loving, just, creator of the universe. some would go further and claim this creator also interferes in our lives at times based on our prayers.
evidence? this is a huge claim, there are literally a TON of claims that go with this (in standard christianity) hell, heaven, the soul, angels, demons, an afterlife, sins, redemption, special creation etc etc etc.
you could accept or throw out any of these as you like. feel free to define god as narrowly or as widely as you like. but remember you must provide EVIDENCE for your claims.
Without evidence of your claims i have no way of knowing if your simply making things up.
and no the bible is not evidence, those are the claims.
June 24, 2009 at 10:01 am
@arthur Ice: As I said elsewhere in these comments, NO ONE will provide undeniable evidence. If you want to be an atheist, then you must simply choose to believe = faith. If you want to accept evolution, then you must exercise faith. If you want to choose the Lord Jesus Christ, then you must exercise faith. If you want to pick from the multitude of religions, again you need faith.
If truly undeniable evidence existed for any of these, then we would not be having this discussion. Instead, everyone would be trivially divided into two groups: believers in the obvious truth demonstrated by that undeniable evidence, and the nonbelievers who would likely be committed for their obvious insanity in the face of that undeniable evidence.
On the VERY rare occasions where small groups of people has been presented with “undeniable” evidence (such as the resurrection of Lazarus), some accepted it and others rejected it. That is a basic characteristic of human beings: we can reject obvious truth, no matter how blatant.
In fact, EVERYONE is exercising faith each and every day, such as when one sits on a chair trusting that it isn’t broken. Faith is a necessary part of every being’s existence, unless they are omniscient: either you know EVERYTHING, or you are forced to trust someone or something else. So, the question is not really one of undeniable evidence, but one of sufficient evidence and whom you choose to trust.
As I also said elsewhere in these comments, the Lord works with subtle evidence rather than blatant, so that we each fully retain our free will to choose. One of those subtle evidences is the Bible itself, which is unique among literature. If you honestly want to know, I recommend that you take a look at Josh McDowell’s book “Evidence That Demands a Verdict”, which he wrote to DISPROVE the Bible and Christianity.
So, faith is an unavoidable fact for an intelligent but limited being such as humans. The Bible, and the Lord Jesus Christ that it describes, encourages an intelligent faith that integrates trust with investigation and a healthy dose of skepticism. From that came science, which has since been bastardized by the blind faith and denials of atheism.
June 24, 2009 at 10:15 am
Another great book…..”The Case for Christ”….Lee Strobel…..tried desparately to prove that Christ did not exist….well, he changed is mind upon completion of his research.
June 24, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Lee Strobel was a Christian long before he wrote his appalling book, which is not an unbiased investigation of the evidence at all, but a collection of “interviews” with hopelessly biased “theologians” (mainly) who support Strobel`s views, and only a passing mention of any opposing ideas! You have been well and truly deceived here Julie, like many others, I`m afraid!!
June 24, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Lee Strobel was an avowed Atheist for a very long time…..while he was a jouralist….
June 25, 2009 at 9:27 am
AH so if god gave undeniable evidence we would lose our free will and become mindless slaves following his commands?
someone alert Adam. he didn’t get the news.
The bible states VERY clearly that if i simply ask to be presented with jesus he will appear before me. if he doesn’t your book is lying. it’s that simple.
if i am to be punished FOREVER in the worst possible punishment in existence, shouldn’t i be given adequate chance to do what your god considers ‘right’?
oh but what about those that for some reason NEVER got a chance? those born when jesus wasn’t alive, or those who where born in places that the gospel was never taught?
are they doomed to hell?
if you think there was a different rule for those born BEFORE jesus (because they obviously didn’t accept him since they couldn’t have) then hasn’t your god changed his supposedly absolute and unchanging morality?
if not then isn’t he forcing some people threw no action of there own to be rejected to hell? if you think ‘god measures my heart if i have no chance’ then isn’t spreading the gospel only going to INCREASE the chance that people are going to reject it and be sent to hell?
don’t you get it? your bible is obviously a structure used to control the people. it’s not a moral guide. it’s not a collection of higher truths. it’s simply the most effective shackle for the people….the shackle they spread and they place upon themselves.
June 25, 2009 at 9:37 am
Arthur, the bit about eternal punishment always troubled me.
How can a being be merciful while, at the same time, handing out punishments that last forever with no hope of redemption?
If there’s no chance of forgiveness, then how can that be mercy? If even one person has gone to hell who never heard about the gospel, then their punishment is based on something they couldn’t help and there has never, ever been a chance for them to redeem themselves. That, alone, is proof enough that the notion that the God of the Bible is at all merciful is ludicrous.
Of course, there was the whole genocide thing, too, but that’s a discussion for another time.
December 10, 2009 at 10:40 am
Rob, this is probably a futile attempt, but I’ll try anyway…
Just because two faiths exist doesn’t make them equal.
You’re right, people exercise faith all of the time. But there’s a huge difference between (a) having faith that you won’t die from eating an apple, based on years of evidence you’ve gathered from eating apples with no adverse effects, and (b) basing your entire belief system on a book written in a dead language two thousand years before humans knew what stars or germs were, simply because someone told you it was the inerrant word of an infallible, supernatural being.
Two articles of faith. Not even close to equal.
Similarly, just because there are two opposing views on an issue doesn’t make them equal, either. There are crazy people out there who still argue that the earth is flat, but there argument doesn’t automatically become just as valid as any other just because they pose it. In the same vein, Atheism and Theism are not equal opposites. It doesn’t require faith to say, “I don’t know what the answer is, but this one seems unlikely, and until I see some evidence I’ll choose to keep looking”. But it DOES take a lot of faith to say, “Although I have no evidence, this IS the way things are”.
Opposing viewpoints, yes, but one far more certain, staunch, and “faithful” than the other.
You also mentioned something about evolution needing faith. I really hope this ridiculous debate dies soon. I’m sorry for anyone who has refused to move past the 1950’s pop-culture, conventional wisdom that it’s a “theory”, but your continued ignorance about the issue is nobody’s fault but your own.
There is as much evidence for evolution as there is for gravity… and far better explanations, actually. (Can you explain gravity? But I can’t imagine you’d maintain any level of respect among your peers if you told them gravity was just a theory that requires faith to believe in). Just because you choose not to educate yourself on something doesn’t make it less true. A refusal to multiply 36 x 78 doesn’t change the fact that the answer is 2808.
The only reason evolution is debated as vehemently as it is is because religious communities think it poses a threat to fundamentals of their belief systems. Well, I’ve got news for you… just about everything does. The earth is round, it revolves around the sun, germs make people sick instead of demons, etc. Can we please move on?
December 17, 2009 at 12:47 am
@Kenton Gilchrist: “There is as much evidence for evolution as there is for gravity.” = patent absurdity
Name one single device, machine, product, etc. that depends on evolution for its operation. Compare that empty set to all the devices, machines, products, etc. that depend on gravity for their operation. Case closed.
Just as with your attempts at discussing religion, you are screwing up your attempts at discussion science, and for the same reason. You are mixing up fundamentals with derivations, fairy tales with facts, wishful thinking with demonstrated relationships.
Evolution is not about science, it is about origins = history. You cannot test evolution in a laboratory. You cannot test evolution at all. I can test gravity, any time, any where. If gravity were to fail or cease, almost everything I know would break. Not so with evolution.
The fact that we can isolate and compare DNA says nothing about evolution. The fact that we see many different kinds of living things in the world says nothing about how they got here.
On the other hand, the Bible has done far more to benefit mankind than the pseudo-science of evolution.
For just one example, consider the Black Plague. Despite your claim that the Bible was “…written…two thousand years before humans knew what stars or germs were…”, the Bible saved the lives of millions of people by protecting them from the germs that caused the Black Plague. While millions of people around the world died as a result, one group of people was essentially untouched: the Jews. Indeed, that fact became so obvious that people worldwide began accusing the Jews of having caused the Black Plague, and many Jews lost their lives due to the consequent persecution. As a matter of fact, ignorant and bigoted people still persecute the Jews to this day while claiming justification by the Plague and similar excuses.
How did the Bible save those millions of lives? By simply informing the Jews and any other readers about sanitation and hygiene. The Bible did not bother to invoke the word “germ” (since it had not been invented yet), but the Bible nevertheless reveals a profound understanding of germs and health protection that is now parroted worldwide by various health organizations such as the Red Cross.
What has your “evolution” done for me lately???
December 17, 2009 at 3:28 am
@Rob Williams: you are just displaying your total ignorance of what you are saying with your stupid diatribe against “evolution”! Do you not realize that evolutionary theory is actually used all the time in computer science? I haven’t got time now to go into the details, but you can look it up on the net if you know nothing about it. We wouldn’t have the computer programmes that we have today without it – the model works, and that’s it!!
December 17, 2009 at 9:45 am
Rob Williams–
Are you claiming this as proof that the Bible is divinely inspired, or just helpful? Yes the ritualistic cleanliness of Judaism helps prevent disease. But that hardly proves a God is involved.
You also might want to rethink your statement. The science of evolution has never claimed to do more for mankind than religion. That’s an absurd statement. Evolution is a process, religion is a belief system. Apples to oranges.
Using science to prove the validity of religion is laughable. It fails every time. You can’t recreate evolution in a lab, because time is one of the key elements to the process. But we do have a mountain of fossil evidence to establish the undeniable proof of evolution.
I also have to ask how the Bible has been helpful to the many nations slaughtered in the Old Testament, or those tortured and killed in the Inquisitions, or those killed in the Crusades. The Bible is only helpful to some. Especially those who ritualistically obsess over cleanliness to avoid infectious diseases.
December 10, 2009 at 9:53 am |
Julie, I’ve been hearing this argument a lot lately, and I’m hoping you can clarify. So many people today are prepared to cast religion aside, claiming that the real battle is to know god, and the historical practices and errors of religion and the church are irrelevant to really knowing the one true lord and savior.
But the entire belief system is based on the bible, is it not? If not for the bible, the entire western concept of god would not exist, since it is the sole source from which all subsequent knowledge about god has stemmed. Indeed, you could not have the concept you do of god without the Bible. But it was written by man, (mis)translated by man, and in many places entirely re-written by man.
If there really is a god, and it is possible to really know him in the spiritual sense, shouldn’t it be possible to do so without the Bible at all?
December 10, 2009 at 11:55 am
Kenton,
The entire belief system is not only based on the Bible, which by the way, is the inspired Word of God written through His chosen instruments. Our belief “systrem” as you call it, is also based on “tradition”. After all, the Apostles and followers of Jesus Christ have yet not received our Bible for many years afterwards. Jesus Christ established one Apostolic Church with one Sheppard on earth to lead (inspired through and with the Holy Spirit) and man, as stubborn as he is, thought he knew more and decided to pick and choose what was convenient for their life styles…thus, the split of one church into many. How sad is that?
December 10, 2009 at 12:20 pm
The only way you know about Jesus and any of these traditions is through the Bible.
There are no corroborating historical documents for the life and times of Jesus, so it still comes back to the fact that every single aspect of your spirituality is defined by scripture and religion.
December 17, 2009 at 1:06 am
Allow me please to point out what you are really talking about when you refer to the Bible. What you merely call a book is actually a collection of writings (letters) by dozens of authors from all walks of life, written over a period of thousands of years, describing their lives as they interacted with God.
The same God that interacted with them is still present to interact with you and me. Whether or not we bother to write about it, or whether anyone else reads those writings, has little bearing on who He is or whether we choose to interact with Him.
Since you are not actually interested in an honest exploration, but instead are focused on mere arguments, you COMPLETELY miss the point and make yourself look foolish. Nevertheless, that too is your prerogative.
I met the Lord Jesus Christ long before I began reading the Bible. I got to know Him mostly through conversation while I walked back and forth to school alone.
In college, I earnestly investigated all those religions. I learned a very simple truth. If you start from a man-made institution, and you focus merely on some book, then you deserve the pains of the religiousity that you will fall into. Instead, if you focus on getting to know the real God as a living being, you will not be distracted by those other things. Indeed, you eventually become able to recognize the false books and the religions because they distract you from the real living God.
We train people to recognize counterfeit money by completely familiarizing them with the real thing. We don’t bother attempting to expose them to the counterfeits because there will always be a new variant to learn. If you can unerringly recognize the real thing, you are already trained to identify ALL the counterfeits.
December 17, 2009 at 10:12 am
Ignoring the countless biblical flaws and absurdities of your belief system also makes you look foolish. Nevertheless, that too is your prerogative.
Just because you investigated all religions and picked the one you like best, doesn’t make you an expert at discerning counterfeit superstitions. You were searching for a superstition and were successful in finding one. If you “got to know” Jesus before researching other religions, you had already made up your mind. You looked at other religions only to prove to yourself that Christianity is true.
I too have researched the many religions of the world. That is exactly why I no longer believe. Christianity has no more rational or factual foundation than every other religion I’ve rejected my entire life. You speak of a living God because the Bible tells you there is one. You only “know” the living god through the words of the Bible. A book written by men that thought the earth was flat, women were less clean and subordinate to men, slavery was acceptable and it was just to kill disobedient children. Such wise and divinely inspired words.
June 23, 2009 at 1:40 pm |
I’ve read the bible several times straight through and took notes. This isn’t including the times I spent reading it with fellow “believers” (I no longer fall into this category). Since I actually read the thing, I found that all the things Christians are against, their God is FOR.
Things such as murder, rape, pillaging, ABORTION, and many many other things are MORE than allowable (check out the book of Hosea), as long as the INVISIBLE GOD THAT NO ONE ELSE CAN SEE OR HEAR says it’s okay (rather convenient if you ask me). Amazing how God agrees SO much with his followers (whether it’s Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc…).
June 23, 2009 at 3:02 pm |
I’d really appreciate if you could back this up with specific examples.
I don’t understand how you could read the Bible and then claim God supports those things.
For one simple example, one of the Commandments is to not murder. So how can you say God supports murder?
June 23, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
Exodus 12:29 And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. That sounds like murder of children.
June 23, 2009 at 8:36 pm
This is not murder! I agree it is a terrible thing, and yes, sometimes I don’t understand why God does things that he does. But I do know that he knows a lot more about what he’s doing than we do.
This was a punishment. This plague came when Pharaoh refused to let God’s chosen people, the Israelites, out of slavery. A punishment is not murder. If somebody gets the death penalty, is that murder? Of course not. God is the ultimate authority. If he punishes a people, they are not murdered.
I can completely understand how terrible this is. I mean, he killed the firstborn of every Egyptian family. Like I said, I don’t understand it, either. The Old Testament times were very strange like that. God helped the Israelites slaughter their enemies in battle. But how could God choose sides if all people are equally sinful? Again, I don’t know. But the Israelites followed God, and the other nations refused.
If your point is that God did some terrible things, well then I almost have to agree. I can’t deny that they seem terrible. But God is still a loving God. He cannot, however, love sin. That’s really all I have to say about this. :\
June 24, 2009 at 12:22 am
i love compeek’s reply.
if god does it…it’s not murder!
sorry, still murder.
‘it’s not murder it’s punishment! if someone is on death row it’s not murder it’s punishment’ sorry still murder.
and you wonder why atheists think christians (at least THIS type of christian) are wakadoo? this would be why.
murder is the killing of another human being that is not in self defense or in the defense of another.
let me ask you, it’s god right? he is all powerful RIGHT? why didn’t he just free them? or if he needed to kill someone to show what a big man he is why not kill the pharaoh? you know, the one responsible?
why kill the first borns? let alone ALL the first born? would it be fair for god to kill your child for what bush or obama or ANY leader has done? why?
do you start with the assumption ‘god is always right, and i don’t get it i must be wrong and god is right, EVEN if it contradicts everything else i know about reality’
if so, you redefine right and wrong out of usefulness.
June 24, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Compeek,
How about the simplier explanation that your God was a filthy liar who was nothing close to being of perfect benevolence?
No,
Even better: he’s not even there.
To anyone who’s gonna tell me that this is a bit harsh, which is more “harsh”: killing THOUSANDS of innocent CHILDREN, human beings capable of suffering with hopes and dreams that one day might bring tremendous good to society with parents who surely love and dote on them, simply because of one dickhead(AKA Genocide) more “immoral” and “harsh” than my blatantly truthful sentence?
Yes.
And you Christians preach on the “sinfulness” of abortion…
Damned hypocrites.
June 25, 2009 at 9:17 pm
@Arthur Ice:
“if god does it…it’s not murder!
sorry, still murder.”
“murder is the killing of another human being that is not in self defense or in the defense of another.”
I don’t mean to be argumentative, but you are wrong. From the dictionary definition (Merriam Webster) of ‘murder’: “the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder)
There are two reasons shown by this definition that the event we are discussing is not murder. A) God made the ‘law’ by which this event would have to be judged. Obviously, if God cannot sin, he wouldn’t break his own rules, and so it can’t be murder. B) He did not have “malice aforethought’. If you remember why God wanted Pharaoh to let his people go, you know that the Israelites had been kept in torturous, unjust slavery for years. God’s intention wasn’t to show his hate for the Egyptians. He was freeing his people from the enemy. Yeah, he could have forced Pharaoh to let them go with no problem, but realize that God doesn’t usually choose to control humans because ‘free will’ in following him wouldn’t work.
@Butterfly: Realize that Pharaoh had a first born as well, so it was a direct punishment to him. No, I don’t understand how God could kill so many children. Yes, it seems and is a terrible thing to have to happen. I’m sorry I don’t have a better explanation because I honestly don’t understand God either. But God is not a murderer.
June 26, 2009 at 11:24 am
compeek i was giving a basic laymans definition, but sure lets go with this.
Isn’t your god’ ALL POWERFUL? wouldn’t it be possible for him to free his people? wouldn’t it be possible to convince the pharoah to let his people go?
*after all he FORCED him to harden his heart*
supposedly he killed millions of babies (according to this story which has ZERO evidence to support it, sorry it didn’t happen) for the crime of being….first born.
nothing else.
he _murdered_ children. it doesn’t matter if a lawmakes kills a child or the childs father or another adult. it does not matter. makign the law does not obsolve you of following it. thats not what a ‘just’ and ‘moral’ god would do.
your basically saying ‘god made the rules, god is in charge, god can do what he wants’.
if thats your argument then if the devil had created everything and made the rules…wouldn’t you worship him and follow HIS rules? isn’t this what your saying?
“might makes right?” god has the power so it’s his ass i kiss.
sorry. morality is not made by some magical sky daddy. it’s made by us based on what we want to happen and how we interact with each other. it’s purely subjective. but just because it’s subjective doesn’t mean it’s useless. far from it.
EVEN if your god DID exist, and even if your god DID create a moral law. it is still not an ‘objective’ law. it’s still subjective. subject to god’s choices and wishes. thats no more objective then anything else, unless you want to define objective as ‘what the one with power wants’ in which case see my earlier point.
June 26, 2009 at 11:10 pm
@3rdiopen, arthur Ice, Baconsbud, compeek:
Like many, you seem to have a problem with the treatment of murder in the Bible, which I anticipate is probably due to four basic mistakes that I have often observed in similar discussions. Perhaps I can help clarify their sources.
1. One mistake is that many people seem to think that killing and murder are the same thing, but they are not the same and the difference matters.
Killing is the simple obvious act of terminating another life. Since we are speaking of the Bible and of the Lord Jesus Christ, I will limit my context accordingly to the act of one human killing another human, or of the Lord killing a human.
Murder is killing without a valid right to do so, which leads us to issues of intention (motive) and permission (accountability).
We are properly incensed when a person kills another out of spite or envy or as part of another crime such as rape or theft, because the motive is obviously selfish and the person obviously has no right to kill in those circumstances. The Bible documents that this attitude originates with the Lord Jesus Christ. It is this category of circumstances that is addressed by the commandment (of the special Ten given to Moses) that says that we should not murder.
On the other hand, when a murderer is executed for their crime, many of us clearly see that this killing has a different motive (preserving the peace and derivatives) and that there is a special form of right, accountability, and permission that applies (if the execution is handled properly within certain constraints). While many people oppose capital punishment, nevertheless the Bible clearly commands it and specifies the special circumstances regarding how it is to be applied. In this case the intention is the public good rather than selfishness, and permission has been granted along with corresponding accountability.
Another manifestation is the case of self-defense; most of us acknowledge the right of one person to kill another if the motive is the direct preservation of their own life, or the life of a third party. The Bible supports self-defense and describes its constraints.
So, this mistake is about fussing over killing that is not murder. However, this mistake is rare–most people seem to be able to navigate past this one.
2. But, there is a question being begged here: who granted permission for one human to kill another, but without it being murder? Better yet, WHO EVEN HAS THE RIGHT to grant such permission? This issue leads many into a very common misunderstanding.
The Creator of all human beings has the obvious right to grant such permission. As Creator, only He has sufficient standing in relationship to all human beings such that He has a right to say when one may kill another. As a matter of fact, BY DEFINITION, the Creator’s criteria around granting or withholding that permission constitutes the definition of murder. So, murder is simply killing without the Creator’s permission. This is the essence of the commandment that we should not murder, so obeying it requires gaining an understanding of the relevant parameters for permission.
As a consequence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Creator to murder, BY DEFINITION. If the Creator decides to kill, then He obviously has granted Himself permission to do so.
Unfortunately, many people simply won’t reconcile themselves with this fact, so they completely misjudge the Creator’s actions. The Creator is above His creation in every way, and He has the undeniable right to do what He pleases with it, including utterly destroying any or all of it.
We readily acknowledge the right of a child to smash the sand castle that he just built, without question or qualm, yet it is grossly hypocritical and illogical to not acknowledge that same right between our Creator and ourselves.
If you do not want to acknowledge the existence of a Creator, then so be it. But once you acknowledge His existence, even just hypothetically in order to discuss something like His role in murder, then you should constrain yourself to such obvious needs of consistency.
3. The third common mistake that I encounter in such discussions about the Bible is that many, if not most, people advocate that there is never a justification for killing, let alone murder, neither by humans nor by God.
I certainly agree with the sentiment that murder and even killing are strongly undesirable, and that they should be avoided. However, the strongest advocate for that would be the Lord Jesus Christ. Thankfully, He promises that a time is coming when all murder and killing WILL stop; unfortunately, it is not yet.
It is important to remember that murder and killing were not part of the Lord’s original creation either. Therefore, when the Lord eventually stops all murder and killing, He will be restoring that aspect of the original creation.
However, the Fall of Adam & Eve was soon followed by the first murder, of Able by Cain. In dealing with murderers throughout history, the Lord and we humans have been forced to deal with one very troublesome fact of our fallen human nature: often the only way to stop a murderer is to execute them. Reason usually doesn’t work and incarceration often fails for various reasons (such as parole).
So, the bottom line: murderers thrive on the reluctance of society to deal with them in the only effective manner available, and they will typically continue until they are executed. As a result, it is common for many more people to die unnecessarily because we fail to take decisive action early enough. Certainly it is awful to execute someone, but it is horrific in the extreme to allow a known murderer to repeat their offense instead.
The Lord Jesus Christ has the relevant perspective and courage to do what needs to be done, for the greater good. He commands His followers to do the same, with appropriate constraints to see that it is done reasonably well.
4. Finally, the most common mistake that I observe in such discussions is that people fail to even try to look at the situation through the eyes of the Creator.
One crucial aspect is that the Creator has a very different view of death in contrast with the typical human, or even in contrast with His typical follower. He knows that we all eventually die, while we pretend that we are immortal (especially during our youth). Each of our lives and deaths is precious to Him, but His focus is on the long term while we struggle to look beyond the short term. Most of us see death as something to be avoided at all costs because it seems final, but He sees death as merely a transition that pales in comparison to other issues.
Ironically, most of us are capable of recognizing the nobility of an early death in sacrifice for a higher cause, such as demonstrated by our favorite heroes in the movies. The Lord Jesus Christ has already played that role, for real, about two thousand years ago. However, that role could only be played once. But, before and after that, throughout human history, He has had to play the difficult role of choosing SOMEONE ELSE that must die in order to serve those higher purposes.
Some of those difficult decisions have been captured in the Bible, but many people seem extremely uncharitable in their refusal to recognize the Lord’s nobility in carrying out those challenging roles. Those people also seem to regularly fail to proper assign blame to the appropriate human participants in those encounters.
I suggest rereading the stories of those difficult encounters while making some charitable attempt to place yourself in the Lord’s shoes. Try to envision all the challenging aspects of those situations and how they might be balanced, without simply coping out with such naive notions as “well, first of all, no one dies”. Try to address ALL the injustices, based on HIS criteria, if you dare.
In summary, let me please point out that the Bible is an ADULT book. It is not for the faint of heart. It is not for the hopelessly naive. It is also not an academic exercise.
It is consistent, if you actually bother to look. It works. It is fair, but to everyone rather than to just a few.
However, if you are just looking to justify yourself by picking it apart, you will certainly find a way. But that says nothing about the Bible, it only reveals something about yourself.
Best wishes.
June 27, 2009 at 2:51 am
Rob I am a little rushed for time this morning, so might not say this as I would like. I don’t see that there is really any difference between killing and murder. I see killing someone in self defense of self or others as justified murder. Who can give us the ok to murder? I believe that it is within the power of ourselves to set our own morals. Are you saying that before Jesus it wasn’t ok to defend females who were being raped?
The death penalty is simply a revenge killing and nothing more. If you check the stats for murder rates in the USA you will find that states with the death penalty have the highest murder rates. What I get from this is that the death penalty doesn’t prevent murder but encourages it.
I kind of disagree with your view that the bible is fully ok with self defense. Some christians believe that the bible tells them to not kill even in self defense. The verse about turning the other cheek could and is used to justify this belief. I don’t know how many would actually turn the other cheek if their life was on the line.
I think one of your problems is that you seem to think all of our knowledge of right and wrong only came about because of the bible. Have you studied the histories of many of the other belief systems and their teachings?
You are making the assumption that someone that creates something has special rights over it. I don’t believe we were created so I don’t see that any being has special rights over me. No being has the right to kill anyone just because you want them to have it.
Your view is why I say christians have no morals. You can easily change them as you see fit, using the bible to justify it to yourself and others. Instead of justifying evil acts you should be condemning them and working to better mankind not hold it back.
June 27, 2009 at 10:26 am
@Rob Williams
“Murder is killing without a valid right to do so, which leads us to issues of intention (motive) and permission (accountability).”
no one has the right. there is a difference between ‘right’, and ‘necessity’ this distinction is important. here let me demonstrate why, your arguing that because god created the universe and us he has the right to destroy us and anything else he pleases.
so by this argument, if the DEVIL had created us and the universe he would have the right to destroy us also. if you say YES your agreeing that ‘might makes right’ as long as i CAN do it i have the RIGHT to do it.
good luck with that moral position.
if your saying NO then your moral position changes not because of an action or a consequence but instead because of the actor who caused the action…this is the most arbitrary of moral codes that could exist!
“The Bible documents that this attitude originates with the Lord Jesus Christ. It is this category of circumstances that is addressed by the commandment (of the special Ten given to Moses) that says that we should not murder.”
so you think that moses and the others walked to the mountain and lived for YEARS before this and nobody knew that murder was wrong till moses brought down the tablets? hey, i can suspend disbelief for only so long, if you think i’m going to believe that a stable population survived while thinking murdering everyone was ok….well yeah i see an issue with that.
“On the other hand, when a murderer is executed for their crime, many of us clearly see that this killing has a different motive (preserving the peace and derivatives) and that there is a special form of right, accountability, and permission that applies (if the execution is handled properly within certain constraints). While many people oppose capital punishment, nevertheless the Bible clearly commands it and specifies the special circumstances regarding how it is to be applied. In this case the intention is the public good rather than selfishness, and permission has been granted along with corresponding accountability.”
I’m against capital punishment entirely. but yes, lets consider your ’special circumstances’ shall we?
how about that of a woman who fails to scream loud enough when she is raped? this IS a circumstance that is specifically mentioned in the bible. do you not think THIS is a valid case? WELL?
“Another manifestation is the case of self-defense; most of us acknowledge the right of one person to kill another if the motive is the direct preservation of their own life, or the life of a third party. The Bible supports self-defense and describes its constraints.”
just a TINY little fuss. no killing in self defense _IS_ murder. it is labeled as such, it is treated as such. It’s is JUSTIFIED, but that changes nothing about the persons guilt. according to the law you can break ANY law and be guilty but if the conditions warrant it then you may be found JUSTIFIED in your action while still being guilty. the distinction is important.
but as for ’self defense’ what about the woman that grabs a mans balls to defend her husband when another man attacks him? well according to the bible her hand should be cut off (man is the bible weird or WHAT?). she was simply helping defend her husband but hey,, don’t let those uppity women get in on it!
the ’self defense’ in the bible usually consists of crap like this. don’t even get me started on the WORTH of life (in some cases relative worth other cases literally coin value). lets put it this way, a child in the womb? isn’t even counted till they are FOUR, unless of course they die by someone else’s hand.
“But, there is a question being begged here: who granted permission for one human to kill another, but without it being murder? Better yet, WHO EVEN HAS THE RIGHT to grant such permission? This issue leads many into a very common misunderstanding.”
simple NO ONE. NO ONE has the right to grant permission for one human to kill another. NONE. you kill someone YOU ARE GUILTY. you may be JUSTIFIED in the eyes of your PIERS but you are still guilty of the action. thats how it works. no one gets to just say ‘well it’s ok, we said so, and so it’s like you didn’t do it!’ no, your wrong. and if you STILL think this is valid _read above about the devil and god_ this argument fails on _many_ levels. you fail to realize your simply parroting the argument of ‘might makes right’ a policy you personally act as if is evil but think when your god does it is right.
“The Creator of all human beings has the obvious right to grant such permission. As Creator, only He has sufficient standing in relationship to all human beings such that He has a right to say when one may kill another. As a matter of fact, BY DEFINITION, the Creator’s criteria around granting or withholding that permission constitutes the definition of murder. So, murder is simply killing without the Creator’s permission. This is the essence of the commandment that we should not murder, so obeying it requires gaining an understanding of the relevant parameters for permission.
As a consequence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Creator to murder, BY DEFINITION. If the Creator decides to kill, then He obviously has granted Himself permission to do so.”
so in other words “when my god does it, it’s not murder”
yeah sorry, your basically saying ‘because it’s god, and because he has the power he is right’ i don’t even need to mock and refute your argument, YOU DO IT YOURSELF! rofl. if someone was more powerful then god then obviously HE would be in charge! if the devil had created us then obviously HE would be in charge and HIS actions moral!
you destroy the worth of the definition ‘moral’ no matter how you work with this. you need to SERIOUSLY rethink what you mean by ‘absolute morality’ and ‘objective morality’.
“Unfortunately, many people simply won’t reconcile themselves with this fact, so they completely misjudge the Creator’s actions. The Creator is above His creation in every way, and He has the undeniable right to do what He pleases with it, including utterly destroying any or all of it.”
1) show evidence your god exists, till then this is basicially a joke of an argument. why?
“Unfortunately, many people simply won’t reconcile themselves with this fact, so they completely misjudge the flying teapot’s actions. The flying teapot is above its creation in every way, and it has the undeniable right to do what it pleases with it, including utterly destroying any or all of it.”
my ‘argument’ is as ‘valid’ as yours, as long as you simply assume the magic teapot exists and created the universe. or your argument, as long as you assume the magic teapot exists and created the universe. when you understand why you reject my ‘argument’ you will get why i reject yours.
that being said even if god HAD created the universe, i point this out AGAIN, he is not moral in destroying it. he may be CAPABLE sure, but not _moral_. otherwise the devil could do it, yata yata on and on (you obviously didn’t think this out to far did you?).
“However, the Fall of Adam & Eve was soon followed by the first murder, of Able by Cain. In dealing with murderers throughout history, the Lord and we humans have been forced to deal with one very troublesome fact of our fallen human nature: often the only way to stop a murderer is to execute them. Reason usually doesn’t work and incarceration often fails for various reasons (such as parole).”
ok, now show me evidence of the garden of eden, adam and eve, and that they existed. do you not get how this works? your ASSUMING that i accept your claims in order to show your claims as valid. but hey lets for a moment go down the rabbit hole here shall we?
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
-Epicurus, 341 BC, Samos – 270 BC, Athens
destroying theism for a a few thousand years =-P
the standard response being of course “we have no right to judge God” and “God’s reasons are beyond our comprehension.” and of course…why call that god just? why worship a god we have no understanding of?
and as for ‘locking up a murder doesn’t work because of various reasons (parole)’ um, you don’t parole them, and the recidivism rate for murder is less then 0.3% good try, still fail, try FACTS, they help with figuring out how to deal with reality.
“Finally, the most common mistake that I observe in such discussions is that people fail to even try to look at the situation through the eyes of the Creator.”
actually, i tried to do this in chapter one of your ‘good book’
“hey…i think i will put this GIANT BOWL OF CANDY in front of this child with no concept of right and wrong, then tell them they can’t have any…..if they don’t eat any EVER then they can stay right there happy next to the bowl of candy….if they DO eat any then i will torture them forever! hey sounds perfect!”
yeah, THAT was the first step in realizing the bible is evil and your god is evil. the fact that god kills MILLIONS in the bible (by number! not even counting the ones we have no number for) while the devil kills 10…and he SHARES those kills with god…yeah, it’s not a surprise that it’s full of BS when it comes to morality. the fact none of it lines up with reality just means it also happens to not be likely to be true.
June 27, 2009 at 1:20 pm
@arthur Ice: I never even used the word “morality”, nor mentioned many of the other things that you fuss about. Obviously, you are not even responding to me, but someone or something else instead. In contrasting your comments against Baconsbud, it is apparent that you are trying to substitute yelling and Ad Hominem attacks for reason. By the way, no one cares about your magic teapot; it just makes you seem childish; likewise when you put so much energy into attacking a deity that you claim does not exist.
As for your claim about “might makes right”, that is actually what the Bible is arguing AGAINST, as am I. It is also what you are effectively arguing FOR. So does Baconsbud, but at least he attempted reason and did not make himself look foolish.
When someone argues that we should each develop our own moral code, the inevitable result is “might makes right”. Why should your moral code take precedence over mine? Because you can “beat me up”? If you have the might to be able to kill me, then your action becomes de facto justified? There have been many who have taken that stance, to the point of plunging the whole world into war.
The Lord’s right to destroy His creations, and to define murder, are not based in “might makes right”. Instead, they are based in a derivative of very well-recognized property rights.
If I buy a house, I can raze it to the ground at my whim–I can do what I want with my property, and no one has the right to question it. At least, not unless there is a valid challenge to my actual property rights, such as if I “bought” the property from someone who did not actually own it themselves (oops).
If I built the house, then the potential challenges to my property rights are much reduced. In the trivial case, no one fusses over a child smashing his sand castle.
It is critical to see how this differs from “might makes right”. Another child does not have the right to smash the sand castle, even if they have the “might”, and most of us would defend the builder against the smasher. If the builder’s parent smashes the sand castle, most of us recognize the parent’s rights over the child but we might be bothered by the “excessive use of force”–it does not seem right because the parent’s right to smash the sand castle is much more tenuous and leans towards “might makes right”.
On the other hand, when you claim that we should each create our own moral code, you advocate that anyone can smash the sand castle if they claim the right and then demonstrate the might. On what basis could you dispute them? You have none, other than might.
Thankfully, the world generally does not follow your example, and we recognize concepts like property rights that get us away from “might makes right”. Those concepts come from the Lord Jesus Christ.
The most solid form of such rights are the rights derived from the act of creation, because they encompass property rights and much more. But those rights are not based on might–another powerful being does not have those rights if they did not participate in the creation that grants them.
To bring it closer to home, consider if you bought a chess set with a board and all those chess figurines. You could destroy the set, or any piece, without question. If you had created the chess set personally, hard-carving each figurine, your right to destroy them would be even less questionable. However, it would be questionable if even your own spouse were to destroy a piece (or even move one ;^).
If you could create those figurines, then imbue them with the breath of life, your rights become enhanced with that of dictating their behavior towards each other upto and including killing–you get to define “murder” for them. Someone else with the “might” to destroy your creations would not have the right to do so, and you would have a claim for recompense against them if they did.
We humans certainly have the might necessary to kill each other, as do the Devil and the demons and the angels and the Lord Himself. As a matter of fact, killing humans is rather easy from a “might” perspective: many animals and even plants can do it.
Your claim that we each should set our own moral code is what allows murderers to justify their killing. Who are you that you claim to override their moral code? If they want to kill someone to satisfy their lust (rape), or to make a few bucks (theft), or to get ahead of a competitor (envy), who are you to claim otherwise? So far, your only claim is your might over theirs.
Instead, my claim is rock solid–only the Creator has the right to kill or to specify when others may do so without consequence from Him. He is also the only being with the right to delegate that right, under the conditions that He sees fit. The logic is clean, the moral code is simple to understand, and might has nothing to do with it.
Since there is only one being in the universe capable of creating living beings, He is the only being in such a position.
Your fuss over it changes nothing, other than whether He wants to hold you accountable for it. Yelling about it certainly does not substitute for reason, neither does a magic teapot.
And if you deny that He exists, then you are left merely with “might makes right”. Good luck with that.
June 27, 2009 at 5:27 pm
“I never even used the word “morality”, nor mentioned many of the other things that you fuss about. Obviously, you are not even responding to me, but someone or something else instead. In contrasting your comments against Baconsbud, it is apparent that you are trying to substitute yelling and Ad Hominem attacks for reason. By the way, no one cares about your magic teapot; it just makes you seem childish; likewise when you put so much energy into attacking a deity that you claim does not exist.”
yes, the teapot IS childish. the fact that it’s a DIRECT analogy to your ‘argument’ should let you see why i think your argument is childish also. you want it to be so, have no evidence to show it is so, but still expect me to take it seriously? really?
as for “likewise when you put so much energy into attacking a deity that you claim does not exist”
because of people with your EXACT BELIEF SYSTEM there are 125 THOUSAND children on the street tonight because they think these children are witches. because of people who belief your same breed of insanity, i have seen people burned to death, because of people with YOUR same delusion i have seen videos of children being tortured both physically and mentally in order to remove demons from them. some of that here in the US (the demon ‘cleansing’) and some of that in africa.
sorry if i’m a TAD hostile to your belief system, i’m trying to wake some people up before they light MY pier or drag any more children through a very real fiery hell instead of your make believe one.
the fact that you think there is no question of morality involved in the MURDER OF PEOPLE says volumes about your belief system doesn’t it?
pol pot was wrong because he murdered millions. see easy. god was wrong (if he actually existed) because he murdered or ordered the murder of millions of people. see easy.
isn’t it strange how for the religion that supposedly has the moral high ground it’s been dragged kicking and screaming into EVERY moral change in history? slavery, civil rights, womens suffrage, gay rights, and now gay marriage. wonder why that is?
“As for your claim about “might makes right”, that is actually what the Bible is arguing AGAINST, as am I. It is also what you are effectively arguing FOR. So does Baconsbud, but at least he attempted reason and did not make himself look foolish.
When someone argues that we should each develop our own moral code, the inevitable result is “might makes right”. Why should your moral code take precedence over mine? Because you can “beat me up”? If you have the might to be able to kill me, then your action becomes de facto justified? There have been many who have taken that stance, to the point of plunging the whole world into war.”
oh how ignorant you are. no thats not me doing an ad hominem. thats a fact. you showed it.
a social species must develop a moral code. if they don’t they do not reproduce and continue on. it’s that simple. morality has two parts. what IS and what we OUGHT to do. there is something called the IS-OUGHT gap. everyone has the ‘is’, everyone has the facts of the matter. now you must show what you OUGHT to do.
you are claiming you OUGHT to do things because god says so….unfortunately thats the is-ought gap. you have no reason you can explain for why you should do what god wants you to do. him wanting you to do something is simply another ‘is’, just another fact (if he actually existed and you actually had evidence of what he wanted).
_I_ have no problem. my gap is filled. here watch:
I am alive, others are alive (is), i ought to not kill them (ought)…..IF i wish to survive and have them survive!
see that last part? IF, all my morals are based on conditionals that i wish to occur. just that simple. IF we want a stable population then we shouldn’t kill each other, IF i don’t want to die i should make an effort to instill preservation of life in others, IF i wish to keep my properties i should avoid stealing others stuff because they may do the same, IF i wish to remain in a society i must work for the general good for the society.
see how that works? as a society i can develop a moral code to work within society, how do i rate my moral code versus others? i look at my actions, the consequences and the values it promotes and denigrates. it’s just that simple. they develop through interaction.
i can show thats where YOU get your morals as well. the bible is pro slavery, you are anti slavery. you got your morals from your pier group, not the bible. it’s just that simple. you think women are people with rights and self worth of there own, the bible says women are property. the bible talks about specific codes of conduct, you ignore those codes of conduct.
“On the other hand, when you claim that we should each create our own moral code, you advocate that anyone can smash the sand castle if they claim the right and then demonstrate the might. On what basis could you dispute them? You have none, other than might.”
nope. your wrong. see above. destroying the sand castle is not good OR bad if it effects no one else. morality only acts within a society. never outside of one. anything you do with or to yourself that has no effect on others is not good or bad. it simply is.
why can i say killing another is bad? well try and figure it out yourself!
IF i wish to survive, or have my culture survive, THEN it’s not right for people to kill other people. just that simple. cultures develop morals as a group. you tug one way i tug another we develop a code thats useful for all.
YOU have the same requirement. the difference is that YOUR system reduces to one. IF i wish to go to heaven, THEN i must follow god’s rules.
thats it, thats your only ‘if then’ bridge you have. how is this morality again?
is it subjective? hell yes it is! and? so?
subjective is not the same as worthless.
isn’t your sense of taste subjective?
do you like the taste of dog shit?
how about the taste of cake?
if your sense of taste is subjective and it’s worthless will you then be perfectly fine with eating dog shit instead of cake?
of course not!
it’s a child like mind (not ad hominem. it really IS the child like mind) that requires a simple black and white yes and no one or the only answer to reality. sorry buddy, you live in shades of grey. just because we can point to the black and whites doesn’t mean it’s ALL black and white.
“The Lord’s right to destroy His creations, and to define murder, are not based in “might makes right”. Instead, they are based in a derivative of very well-recognized property rights.
If I buy a house, I can raze it to the ground at my whim–I can do what I want with my property, and no one has the right to question it. At least, not unless there is a valid challenge to my actual property rights, such as if I “bought” the property from someone who did not actually own it themselves (oops).”
so your property?
Reductio ad absurdum.
your god is moral because your simply property and he can do what he wants with you.
in other words your a slave and your god is a slave owner. you have no inherent worth as your own person, but simply as the property of another.
…..
….
…
and i’m supposedly the one without a coherent world view and care for life?
ok.
“Thankfully, the world generally does not follow your example, and we recognize concepts like property rights that get us away from “might makes right”. Those concepts come from the Lord Jesus Christ.”
no, i’m sorry he didn’t create property rights. in fact he told you to give away EVERYTHING. heck, i’ve read the bible. multiple times. i have highlighted multiple copies based on the different things i’ve wanted to keep track of. in no place does jesus EVER come up with an original moral teaching….in fact, his only original ‘teaching’ have been amoral ones that don’t work in the real world. like slaves should do what there masters want, after all this is a short life.
I know you think all sunshine comes from your holy book but i’m sorry there are _plenty_ of texts that come before these and they talk about the golden rule and many other moral codes, heck most of them even create actual THOUGHT behind them instead of ‘witty’ one liners of straight white and black.
“If you could create those figurines, then imbue them with the breath of life, your rights become enhanced with that of dictating their behavior towards each other upto and including killing–you get to define “murder” for them. Someone else with the “might” to destroy your creations would not have the right to do so, and you would have a claim for recompense against them if they did.”
so if the devil created you then you would worship him and follow his rules, and you would do what he wanted.
thats what your saying.
if the devil wants you to kill everyone around you then your required to do it if he where the one to create the world. or heck if your god commands you to kill everyone then you would do it. after all, thats what he wants you to do.
Morality….what does that word MEAN anymore to you?!?
“Who are you that you claim to override their moral code? If they want to kill someone to satisfy their lust (rape), or to make a few bucks (theft), or to get ahead of a competitor (envy), who are you to claim otherwise? So far, your only claim is your might over theirs.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyd6om8IC4M&feature=channel_page
THIS should basically educate you. if you don’t get this then your not paying attention. your argument is DIRECTLY contradicted by evidence. atheistic countries are better in EVERY way you wish to consider then religious countries. crime rates, abortion rates, education, life expectancies etc etc etc.
“Instead, my claim is rock solid–only the Creator has the right to kill or to specify when others may do so without consequence from Him. He is also the only being with the right to delegate that right, under the conditions that He sees fit. The logic is clean, the moral code is simple to understand, and might has nothing to do with it.”
and your wrong. only if you define ‘morality’ into uselessness does it make sense. after all if you follow your logic then YOU are property, YOU would worship the devil if he created you, and YOU would murder, rape, and kill everyone you know simply because god tells you to.
_i would not_
your claiming without your god you would not be moral, in fact morality comes FROM your god. that your god can kill because he wants to and it’s right.
yet i would not commit mass murder, while you have all ready shown you would.
“Since there is only one being in the universe capable of creating living beings, He is the only being in such a position.
Your fuss over it changes nothing, other than whether He wants to hold you accountable for it. Yelling about it certainly does not substitute for reason, neither does a magic teapot.
And if you deny that He exists, then you are left merely with “might makes right”. Good luck with that.”
ah but my magic teapot is just as likely as your god. but even if i assume that your god does exists and IS the only one who can create life (a shaky argument there buddy, look into artificial life, we are almost there) but for the sake of argument lets assume this is ALL true.
this does not change the argument at all. IF your god was the devil instead you would do what he wanted, it is PURELY subjective. it’s not the actions, but who has the big stick. nothing more.
June 28, 2009 at 12:59 am
@arthur Ice: Whatever your issues, they are obviously not with me–you are not even tracking with my conversation. What is this about 125,000 children, and witches, and the magic teapot (that is not an analogy to anything, let alone what I am talking about), and the “is-ought gap”? You are bouncing around on topics like you’re in some kind of contest ($1,000 per topic covered in two minutes?!?).
Whatever–I made my points for those who actually are seeking answers, or at least for leads to potential answers. If you don’t like God, that is your prerogative and it is not my problem. You seem so confused that I wonder whether you will ever work anything out. I hope for your sake that somehow you do.
Regardless, it is obvious that you are neither trying to understand nor trying to provide understanding. In other words, you are not even trying to communicate.
Best wishes.
June 28, 2009 at 11:53 am
@Rob Williams
“Whatever your issues, they are obviously not with me–you are not even tracking with my conversation. What is this about 125,000 children, and witches, and the magic teapot (that is not an analogy to anything, let alone what I am talking about), and the “is-ought gap”? You are bouncing around on topics like you’re in some kind of contest ($1,000 per topic covered in two minutes?!?).”
of the two of us, YOU seem to be missing the point.
I’m directly quoting you then responding to your comment with something that either directly refutes your point or explains my position.
example.
““likewise when you put so much energy into attacking a deity that you claim does not exist”
I explained that, unlike your implication that it must be true because i’m arguing against it, the REASON i argue against false beliefs is two fold.
i said it before and i will say it again.
false beliefs lead to people being KILLED, people SUFFERING. the children on the street? thats what christians are doing TODAY. your people. yes there not your ‘breed’ of christian, but so what? they read your holy book, they think it’s right, they simply accept different parts while you decided to be a little more moral then your holy book (though you would kill if your god told you to). nothing more.
it’s the belief in the supernatural and the undemonstrative that causes this suffering. i don’t care if it is political, or religious, or scientific. a false belief should be removed before it causes suffering.
the second reason is because while i believe i am correct (otherwise i wouldn’t hold the belief) i COULD be wrong, i’ve been wrong before, so i know that at least some of my beliefs are wrong. the difference between belief and knowledge. you demonstrate god exists and what he wants and i will change my beliefs. that simple. just because i think it’s a crap shoot in ‘hell’ before you will be able to demonstrate anything of the sort doesn’t mean i shouldn’t talk with you and show you where your being a nut job (or offer you the chance for you to show me where _I_ am being a nut job). so far you have condoned (and even demanded it as moral!) mass murder, lack of understanding of my point of view (tell me again what i believe?), as well as a misunderstanding of fundamental science.
your record is that of most moderate to fundamentalist christians. your not exactly convincing me you know something i don’t.
“Whatever–I made my points for those who actually are seeking answers, or at least for leads to potential answers. If you don’t like God, that is your prerogative and it is not my problem. You seem so confused that I wonder whether you will ever work anything out. I hope for your sake that somehow you do.”
you stated your point of view clearly enough sure, but have never justified it in ways i would accept. your argument basiclaly comes down to:
‘god exists’
um..ok, how do you know?
‘he just does!’
um..ok.
“he did these things in the bible”
but, um an all loving god wouldn’t do these things, there evil!
“no they are not! they are good when god does them!”
but um…doesn’t that mean god can do anything and it’s ‘good’ and doesn’t that mean good and evil is basically meaningless?
“what? no! of course not! god is good!”
see where i get a bit ‘confused’? i follow your ‘argument’ it basically consists of unfounded assumption on top of unfounded assertion on top of justification. nothing more.
Yeah i get you don’t like that i break it down that way but that truly is what this is. want to show me god is good? first show me that it’s likely he exists. until then your god has no more evidence then the magic teapot and just like the magic teapot i reject it because it has no evidence. nothing more. the teapot argument is ridiculous not because it’s wrong, but because i have to actually state it! the fact you don’t grasp this RIGHT from the start says something about your thinking about god. namely that you are to intertwined emotionally with the subject to even inspect it.
“Regardless, it is obvious that you are neither trying to understand nor trying to provide understanding. In other words, you are not even trying to communicate.”
you are absolutely right. the moment you said mass murder of children is not only justified but morally REQUIRED and that you are property I pretty much assumed that your mind is unable to comprehend morality, and that you are lost to insanity…though a breed of it that masquerades very easily as sanity.
after all, what else do you call a person who would willing go and mass murder children and think it’s RIGHT, but insane?
no, i’m not trying to communicate with you, i’m communicating to that undecided person who is reading this and weighting the pro’s and con’s of religion.
i can tell you the pro’s and con’s of atheism pretty quick.
pro’s:
you will not believe in something that has no evidence.
con’s:
you will probably have to reevaluate the rest of your life, once you throw off one of the big lies, it’s hard to live under any other.
June 24, 2009 at 3:26 am |
compeek
You claim it was a punishment. If I forced you to do something and then I punished you for doing it, would that be moral?
Exodus 4:21 And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.
Now what I get from this is that even if the Pharaoh wanted to let the people go he couldn’t because god wouldn’t let him. That is murder and nothing you say to yourself can change that. There are other verses that say how god continued this action.
June 23, 2009 at 2:06 pm |
Can anyone recommend a book written centuries ago by sheep herders who were certain that Earth was a flat object in the center of the universe? Preferably one that describes a deity who has the ability to create a universe but not to speak in an audible voice. Also it would be nice if that book demanded groveling– lots of groveling. Checking Amazon now…
June 23, 2009 at 2:09 pm |
Dan…Dan…Dan,
Why are you putting God on the same level as man?
btw, did God ever say that the “Earth was a flat object in the center of the universe”?
June 23, 2009 at 2:11 pm |
When did I say that God said that? RTFP!
June 23, 2009 at 2:33 pm |
The bible was not a book written by sheep herders. It was written by various people over about 3000 years in all. Some were quite educated, in fact most of them were since writing was not the province of the poor and illiterate. They were speaking to their own time of course. It is hard to find a concept in the bible that describes the earth as flat. You suffer again from having a fairly faulty idea of what the Bible actually says.
June 23, 2009 at 3:15 pm |
here you go:
Matthew 4:8 : Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
To show all the kingdoms of the world from a high point, the earth would have to be flat.
One more just for fun:
Daniel 4:10-11
10 “‘While I was lying in my bed, this is what I dreamed. I saw a large tree in the middle of the earth. 11 The tree grew very tall and strong, reaching high into the heavens for all the world to see.
The same logic applies
June 23, 2009 at 3:25 pm
Matthew 4:8 : Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
“To show all the kingdoms of the world from a high point, the earth would have to be flat.”
Realize that both Jesus and the devil are spiritual beings (Jesus also taking the form of a man when he came to Earth). As you will see in many parts of the Bible, it uses figurative language quite often. Saying the devil took him to an “exceeding high mountain” could very well imply that he wanted him to see everything. There’s nothing in that verse the says they went to the top of Mt. Everest and physically look out as far as they could. If that were the case, fog, clouds, perspective, etc. would all impair the view beyond maybe a few tens of miles. Saying that this verse implies the world is flat doesn’t really make much sense, if you think about it.
Daniel 4:10-11
10 “‘While I was lying in my bed, this is what I dreamed. I saw a large tree in the middle of the earth. 11 The tree grew very tall and strong, reaching high into the heavens for all the world to see.
“The same logic applies”
Again, my same logic applies. Note for one that this happened in a dream. How many dreams have you had that were perfect physical examples of the world? Realize this also. The whole world had not been discovered by man during the writing of the Bible, at least by those who are in the Bible. When they say “for all the world to see”, they are saying the the world, meaning the people and nations of the world, not the Earth itself. So again, there isn’t really anything here to say the Earth is flat.
June 23, 2009 at 3:36 pm
I agree with your second comment. I was certainly wrong to use a dream as an example.
However I must disagree with your first point (only if you take the bible literally, I do not). The vast majority of Christians (as far as I know) do not consider the temptation of Jesus in the dessert to be a metaphorical story. His fasting for 40 days and 40 nights followed by temptation from the devil is an essential story of the christian faith.
June 23, 2009 at 3:56 pm
kenzo, I appreciate your being reasonable. It makes discussion much more fair.
Anyway, I agree somewhat with what you’re saying. There are parts of the Bible that are meant to be literal and parts that aren’t.
When Jesus says it’s easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to become a believer and go to Heaven, he obviously doesn’t mean it’s impossible for a rich man to go to Heaven because there is no possible way for a camel to fit through the eye of the needle.
In instances like this, it’s clear it’s not meant to be literal. The problem I have when people say the Bible isn’t meant to be taken literally is when they say that the Old Testament is just “nice stories” that are examples, but didn’t necessarily happen. The Old Testament is meant to be a historical account, and it is meant to be taken literally. People need to understand when the Bible intends to be literal and when it isn’t.
That said, the Bible is not full of trick questions and puzzles. And I have to say, I think a lot of the confusion in the Bible comes from the translations. Remember that the Bible wasn’t written in English. So when we have a translation that was made over a hundred years ago and try to understand, it can often be like reading Shakespeare.
June 24, 2009 at 12:24 am
“That said, the Bible is not full of trick questions and puzzles.”
except the part where jesus says he tricks people and speaks in riddles so that more people will go to hell….except that part.
June 23, 2009 at 2:12 pm |
I would put God below man… because men exist.
June 23, 2009 at 2:13 pm |
Dan,
You exist, now what?
June 23, 2009 at 2:58 pm |
Well said, Julie.
June 23, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Is this an inside joke or something?
June 23, 2009 at 8:42 pm
It’s like this t-shirt I have.
At the top it says:
“God is dead.” -Nietzsche, 1883
Below it says:
“Nietzsche is dead.” -God, 1900
Julie is merely making the point that humans are unbelievably insignificant when compared to God. We exist. Um, great. We don’t do anything amazing. But God is and does.
It’s not a joke.
June 24, 2009 at 12:27 am
except you miss the point. we have evidence of men.
where is the evidence of god?
the believer claims ‘there is a god, all you must do is believe and you will see!’
the atheist states ‘belief requires evidence, others believe in many gods, all just as hard as you,all contradictory, all with as much spirit and conviction as you, are they to correct?’
provide the evidence and i will believe. i would not WORSHIP the god of the bible (a simple reading of the text _should_ convince anyone of it’s immorality) but i certainly WOULD believe in him,
June 25, 2009 at 9:34 pm
“where is the evidence of god?”
You are right. We have no undeniable proof that will satisfy everyone’s questions regarding the existence of God.
I do not want to (and will not) sustain a discussion about God vs. science in this thread, but I ask you the same question, where is the evidence of that which you use to disprove God? We’re both at a loss for solid, physical evidence. Don’t forget that.
Faith by definition believing what you cannot see. When somebody says “there is a god, all you must do is believe and you will see!”, they don’t mean if you force yourself to believe you’ll have all the knowledge and proof given to you. What they mean is that if you put aside your doubts and choose to love God back, not just believe he exists, then you will start to develop a relationship, and it will make a little sense, and that sense will increase if you choose to nurture the relationship.
I do, however, feel that we have quite a bit of evidence of a supernatural being. Look outside. Yeah, okay, Evolution did it. Where are the millions of fossils showing the transitions? What about the people who have been mysteriously healed of supposedly incurable illnesses? Sure, we don’t hear about these a lot, but they exist. It sounds like a stupid example, but my dog once had a large tumor that was most likely require that we put her down. As a kid, I remember praying that God would help her. We went to the doctor a couple weeks later, and it was completely gone. Okay, it’s just a dog, right? But still, tumors don’t just disappear. You can question the truth of my example, I suppose, but there are other examples out there like this that aren’t made up.
If you truly believe that we are what we are, then I ask you one final question. Where did everything come from? I don’t mean how did we get the planets. I mean, where did matter come from? It’s an accepted principle in science that matter cannot be created or destroyed, and yet it had to have come from somewhere. “Oh, anti-matter of course.” Where did anti-matter come from?
I can sit here and try to argue why it makes sense that there’s a God and all of this, but obviously that will rarely convince anyone. But, please, explain to me how we can possibly have anything if there wasn’t a supernatural being to create it. I would love to hear a clear explanation for that.
June 26, 2009 at 11:47 am
“You are right. We have no undeniable proof that will satisfy everyone’s questions regarding the existence of God.”
i don’t need undeniable evidence, i need ANY evidence. ANY. provide even a SCRAP that isn’t subjective bias.
“…but I ask you the same question, where is the evidence of that which you use to disprove God? We’re both at a loss for solid, physical evidence. Don’t forget that”
I HAVE NONE….but then i don’t NEED any. YOU are the one making the claim (namely of an all powerful all knowing creater god that created this universe with us in mind.) ALL claims without evidence (and especially if they go AGAINST observable evidence) can be rejected because they (wait for it…) _have no evidence_.
i don’t have to prove there ISN’T a bigfoot. you have to provide evidence it’s likely there IS a bigfoot. thats all. the burden of proof is on you buddy, not me. I’m not making fanciful magic claims, you are.
“Faith by definition believing what you cannot see. When somebody says “there is a god, all you must do is believe and you will see!”, they don’t mean if you force yourself to believe you’ll have all the knowledge and proof given to you. What they mean is that if you put aside your doubts and choose to love God back, not just believe he exists, then you will start to develop a relationship, and it will make a little sense, and that sense will increase if you choose to nurture the relationship.”
and how is that different from self delusion? there is no way to know if you are correct, to know if your any more right then any OTHER religion or there beliefs. your making every effort to deceive yourself.
“I do, however, feel that we have quite a bit of evidence of a supernatural being. Look outside. Yeah, okay, Evolution did it. Where are the millions of fossils showing the transitions?”
in the museams and the labs and in the textbooks you failed to open and read. talkorigins.org go there, figure it out. I know someone (most likely a preacher) told you there are no fossils. i know this because even the most cassual of inquiries could find you thousands of them per major group and thousands of examples of each. we now have so many that scientists are arguing to call something a ‘mammal like reptile’ or a ‘reptile like mammal’ yeah seriously. it’s a smooth gradient and they still argue over semantics like this.
“What about the people who have been mysteriously healed of supposedly incurable illnesses?”
yes, what about them? why not go look into ’selection bias’, ‘placebo effect’, ’spontaneous remision’, and a whole host of other things which explains this perfectly. why is it that god doesn’t heal amputies? whywontgodhealamputees.com
“If you truly believe that we are what we are, then I ask you one final question. Where did everything come from? I don’t mean how did we get the planets. I mean, where did matter come from? It’s an accepted principle in science that matter cannot be created or destroyed, and yet it had to have come from somewhere. “Oh, anti-matter of course.” Where did anti-matter come from?”
the big bang. if your question is ‘where did matter and energy come from before the big bang’ then the answer is
“WE DON’T KNOW” yeah, suprise! science doesn’t know everything! thats the _strength_ of science. when you ask a question we never EVER state we know it all, we think this is to the best of our knowledge what is the truth. you can allways show we are wrong, and we will go back and fix things. religion on the other hand…..well no.
oh and as for “It’s an accepted principle in science that matter cannot be created or destroyed, and yet it had to have come from somewhere.”
look into ‘cassimir effect’, ‘heisenberg uncertainty principle’, ‘hawking radiation’, ‘virtual particle pairs’. all of these are energy out of no where, all of these are uncaused effects, all of these are energy and matter being destroyed and created (though conserved over a long enough time scale).
yeah your understanding of science is at LEAST 70 years our of date.
June 23, 2009 at 11:27 pm |
But who made you exist? Who made your parents exist? your grandfather, your grandfather’s grandfather? Or you are also one of those who believe that we came from a monkey? I don’t think so because I am more handsome than a monkey. =)
June 24, 2009 at 12:32 am |
your ignorance of something does not make something false.
do you accept that paternity tests work? then you accept the evidence of evolution. go look it up.
evolution explains perfectly and makes predictions (which have been tested AND confirmed) on ERV’s, SINES, LINES, ambiguous proteins, mitochondrial eve, y chromosome adam, phylogenetic / embryological development tree overlap, atavisms, vestigial features, ring species, fossil evidence, etc etc etc etc.
there are at LEAST 50 evolutionary predictions and confirmations that i can recite of the top of my head (how many times do you think i have heard the ‘no predictions and confirmation!’ claim?)
your lack of education in the matter (well except for of course what some person told you it was, instead of what it is) does not make you correct, it makes you ignorant.
June 24, 2009 at 10:50 am
@arthur Ice: You are misunderstanding and misrepresenting evidence, belief (faith), and human nature.
For one, you say “evolution explains perfectly and makes predictions (which have been tested AND confirmed)…”, which is a patent absurdity that reveals a fundamental lack of comprehension of the scientific process. IF evolution were a quality scientific concept, then it would merely serve as a MODEL for reality that could be used as a basis for designing TESTS in which we could OBSERVE the deviations of its approximate predictions from the actual measurements. This is known as the scientific method, which has become quite unpopular among atheists recently.
Since you mention a variety of such “predictions”, but you do not claim credit for any of them, I must assume that you are citing someone else’s work. Most likely, you do not personally know any of the people involved in that work nor did you personally witness any of it, just like the rest of us. Indeed, I suspect that you are representative of the typical person in that you are merely regurgitating the content of some popular publication that reported on that work, but probably several steps removed from the original. In most cases, that original work and its publication is also relying on citations of other people’s work from which they are also well-removed.
Therefore, you and all the other people involved in that “science” are actually practicing FAITH–you all are trusting someone else’s report of someone else’s work, with the exception of the VERY small group of people who actually DID something that looks like the scientific method. Even that small group is still practicing faith when they are relying on the work of others rather than their own. Finally, even those few who are actually practicing the scientific method are occasionally hamstrung by the fact that faith is an inherent part of their exercise as they are forced to trust their tools, their techniques, their colleagues, and their own fallibility.
On the other hand, when someone does practice the scientific method WELL, we can get amazing and useful results. For example, Newton’s Laws provide a model of basic physical processes that are used (and reverified) everyday around the world–hence we use the term “law”.
However, like all models, Newton’s Laws fail when you attempt to apply them beyond the boundaries of the model. Einstein discovered and documented this in various aspects known as his Theory of Relativity, some of which perhaps has been verified to the point of being promoted to “law”.
As a result, it would be foolish for anyone to design a machine while ignoring Newton’s Laws, or Einstein’s Theory of Relativity when it applies (e.g., satellites).
Therefore, part of how we know that evolution is NOT “all that” is the simple fact that it can be and is routinely ignored. In other words, a creationist and an evolutionist can work on the same biological problem and achieve the same results. Their differences have no bearing on the science at hand, but are merely a difference in their faith about origins. However, I anticipate that the creationist will be more effective because they will be less ignorant of the role of faith in their daily work–the evolutionist is more likely to blindly trust in their own arrogance and thereby make critical mistakes. History has even revealed many spectacular examples of evolutionists actively falsifying their work.
So, if you did not do the science yourself, you are exercising faith in someone else. If you did the science yourself, then you are trusting in a known-fallible being working in an imperfect lab.
Does your favorite atheist/evolutionist SWEAR that they NEVER lie, cheat, or steal? Do they have billions of witnesses who claim to have verified that?
June 24, 2009 at 5:43 pm
no rob. the scientific method is also known as ‘methodological naturalism’.
yes evolution is a model, and that model makes predictions. examining those predictions we can know if our model is accurate.
actually no, i work with evolution _every_ day. i personally design software using evolutionary algorithms (). it was my first introduction to evolution. as for the biological variety…well yes, i am expressing ‘faith’ that the ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC body is not in some giant conspiracy. wow, thats an amazing bit of faith there. seeing as how if you could show evolution to be false you would win a Nobel prize (and I’m certain the undying love of the Templeton foundation). mediocre scientists make there living by collecting data, good scientists make there living by extending the work of others, FAMOUS scientists make there living by showing how other scientists are stupid by pissing all over there hard won work. show evolution to be wrong, and you will become famous over night. explain observed speciation through other means thats different then evolution then your name will forever become one of the founders of science line newton, Einstein, or yes, Darwin.
Creationism isn’t an explanation because we have OBSERVED what it says doesn’t happen. it’s like claiming that objects only fall up. it’s not viable.
“Therefore, part of how we know that evolution is NOT “all that” is the simple fact that it can be and is routinely ignored. In other words, a creationist and an evolutionist can work on the same biological problem and achieve the same results. Their differences have no bearing on the science at hand, but are merely a difference in their faith about origins. However, I anticipate that the creationist will be more effective because they will be less ignorant of the role of faith in their daily work–the evolutionist is more likely to blindly trust in their own arrogance and thereby make critical mistakes. History has even revealed many spectacular examples of evolutionists actively falsifying their work.”
explain to me what predictions creationism puts forth? the answer to EVERY question resolves to ‘cus god wanted it to be so!’ thats the short and long of it.
evolution on the other hand EASILY provides ways to show it is FALSE.
for example. DNA. DNA is _not_ the most effective (in almost any way you can think of) in storing genetic information, sure it’s in the top 100,000th place on many of the other alternative ways of storing genetic information but there are _plenty_ of other long chain polymers which work just as well. if god is such an amazing perfect designer, why didn’t he make each species with a different genetic system? why make EVERY species use the same system? if he made them all different then viruses would _never_ transmit outside of a species….but evolution predicts we all would _have_ to share the same genetic code (with only the most minor of variations, and these ONLY within hierarchies), so far all of this lines up perfectly with evolution. why did DNA win if it is not the best solution to storing genetic information? because evolution doesn’t find the BEST solution, it finds a ‘good enough’ solution. evolution often gets stuck in local minima.
what is the creationist argument? ‘cus god wanted it this way!’
what about atavisms? evolution predicts we should occasionally see genetic traits in animals which there ancestors also exhibited. these genetic traits are usually turned off in the normal species….why would a bird develop teeth? why would a human grow hair over there entire bodies? why would a snake grow legs? why would a human grow extra nipples (and some times full extra mammary glands!). evolution explains this perfectly. creationist response? “cus god wanted it this way’
how about SINES and LINES? short and long repetitive parasitic genetic codes. why would other ancient animals exhibit these codes in the EXACT same positions as later animals in ways that make it look EXACTLY as if these where precursor species to the modern forms? evolution explains this. creationists simply don’t….’god wanted it this way!’ lets forget for the moment that this is EXACTLY the technology used to determine paternity (and other genetic relatedness examples). don’t think these tests work? gather up some known samples and let them test it in a double blind. either they can work out the exact same paternity line like everyone else does, or it doesn’t work.
what about ring species? evolution predicts ring species perfectly, shows where they can form and under what conditions. they explain why species a, and species b can mate, and species b can mate with species c, and species c can mate with species d, but species a and species d can not mate. evolution explains this….creationism again throws up it’s hands and says ‘cus god wanted it this way’.
“So, if you did not do the science yourself, you are exercising faith in someone else. If you did the science yourself, then you are trusting in a known-fallible being working in an imperfect lab.
Does your favorite atheist/evolutionist SWEAR that they NEVER lie, cheat, or steal? Do they have billions of witnesses who claim to have verified that?”
of course not! you should _never_ trust the findings of another scientist. thats plain stupid. you TEST IT YOURSELF. thats how science works.
other scientists make mistakes. YOU can make mistakes, people can lie and cheat. BUT if both you and I both see a puppy and both claim there is a puppy and other people verify there is a puppy, then it’s pretty stupid to claim there is NOT a puppy when you have nothing but your oh so strongly held belief against it.
notice that your claim here is easy to turn around. what self correcting is there in religion? what self correcting system is there in the ’science’ of creationism? you assume that god created everything as it is then shove everything to make it ‘fit’ into this.
your ignorant. thats not an ad hominem, thats a fact you have demonstrated.
June 24, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Owned right there!
June 26, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Fascinating post arthur Ice! I love your comment about “famous scientists” – priceless!! Re your comments about DNA: the Creationists will keep arguing, as if they`ve got some sort of “trump card”, that the similarities between different groups of animals etc are a clear pointer to there having been one Intelligence at work “designing” them all, but it always occurred to me, even as a Christian, that this would really only demonstrate how bereft of imagination He was!
June 26, 2009 at 12:54 pm
true barriejohn, it is a common claim of the creationist crowd ’same design same desginer!’ but it’s basiclaly idiocy.
it’s not just the similarities, but also the DIFFERENCES which matter.
put these in some logical configuration would you?
aaaa, aaab,aaba,abba,baab
sure you can choose any order you like, and you can even make an argument for any order you like (though in reducing value). but if you know these are genetic codes and you know how mutations work and you know how reprduction works then only one conclusion works.
heck lets even use some biblibal language so our creationists friends can figure it out.
aaaa begat aaab and aaba
aaba begat abba
aaab begat baab
see? a tree! if anyone doesn’t think it works….pick a gene, pick a collection of genes. go online to the free database of genetic codes for different species. it works every time, all these trees ALLWAYS overlap.
do you realize on average we gene map another species every 5 weeks now? by the end of the year we will be up to a new species every 4 weeks (or faster)!
_every_ species ever mapped has fallen perfectly ont he predicted location on the tree.
…it’s almost like evolution actually happened/happens/is happening…..
June 23, 2009 at 2:25 pm |
I love these type of discussions.
Any who. It’s all about Love. Don’t forget that…. at least…
*kind of sad how many people do…
No, I’m not a hippy. Though I would be one if it was legal.
June 23, 2009 at 2:44 pm |
I find it very interesting to see that people are practicing in the comments what was being vilified in the main article: blind faith in the opinions, beliefs, and myths of others.
The fact that they are directing such blind faith AGAINST the Bible in the comments rather than directing such blind faith FOR the Bible in the main article does not make either example of blind faith desirable.
For example, claiming that the Bible teaches a flat Earth is just as much a blind faith absurdity as those mentioned in the main article. As a matter of fact, it is the Bible (e.g., Isaiah 40:21-22) that described the Earth as round long before it was scientifically tested, let alone commonly believed.
In fact, if one would actually bother to investigate for oneself, one can readily find that every claim about the Bible being unscientific, unhistorical, inconsistent, etc. is simply not true. By not true, I do NOT mean based on some blind faith claim; I mean rationally, demonstrably not true based on a decent inquiry that would stand reasonable scrutiny.
Likewise, I find it interesting that people are demonstrating here the same inability to recognize when the Bible, just like any other book, often discusses a topic in order to argue against it rather than for it. When the Bible presents stories about murder, rape, incest, etc. it is typically doing so for the same reason that Shakespeare and others did so: to illustrate that the consequences are undesirable in a fashion that communicates much better than simply “don’t do this”.
Finally, just for the record (and as a hint for the uninitiated), part of the point of the Bible is that God (the Lord Jesus Christ) is different from man in crucial ways. Among those differences is the fact that God, as Creator, has the undeniable right to do what He pleases with what He created. When we see an artist destroy a work-in-progress (say a clay sculpture) in order to reuse the material while starting over, we do not give it a second thought. Simple logic makes it obvious that we have no right to question the Creator when He chooses what to do with His own creations, whether that be a section of land, a planet, the universe, or any particular individual or group of inhabitants of the same.
HOWEVER, the difference that the Bible presents is that it describes a Creator and His universe that has character: neither the Creator nor His Creation is random or arbitrary. In other words, it is possible to understand the Creator and His Creation because they are predictable. It is that fundamental philosophy that allows us to leave mere blind faith behind as we engage in the new Biblically-founded pursuit of SCIENCE.
That leap into the realm of science did not come from the Greeks, the Romans, the Persians, etc., although each and many others contributed aspects to its implementation. That leap did not come from any religion (not even atheism).
So, now that we have science, now that we know that we can investigate, understand, reason, and predict, WITHIN LIMITS, let’s please do so. But, how about we apply that leap consistently–both FOR and AGAINST the Bible–and see what is what?
Best wishes.
June 23, 2009 at 2:50 pm |
Lawdy! So many messed up errors and premises, it’s hard to even know where to start. Rob-me-boy, you’re a long way gone.
June 23, 2009 at 2:58 pm |
See, this is why discussing anything related to the Bible gets frustrating. Rob explains his points very thoroughly and makes logical sense. What he says is true. None of the claims about false things in the Bible have in fact been proven false. In fact, there are quite a few things (see the crossing of the red sea) that have real evidence found in modern times to support them. This “proof”, of course, hardly gets any publicity because the media has a problem itself with supporting anything outside of our precious science, but the information is out there.
Anyway, as I was saying, LeoPardus, if you’re going to claim that somebody like Rob is a long way gone, you’re going to need to bring your own explanations to the table.
June 23, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Rather than copy/paste tons of stuff here, you and Rob can pop over to http://www.de-conversion.com There you can look in the archives for posts of mine that should set forth a lot of my “explanations”.
I should probably hasten to point out that Rob sounds like he is very much where I was years ago; i.e., “pretty far gone”. It was a process for me, maybe he’ll get to it, maybe not.
June 23, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Well as a Christian I want to make the point that I believe that the Bible need not be factual to contain the truth. That truth is only possible through logical deduction and scientific experimentation is the rationalist view. If God wanted to be discovered by science or deduced by logic, it would have been done to everyone’s satisfaction thousands of years ago.
But God chose to reveal himself to us through his word. This truth is available to any who believe, but will never be logically deduced or scientifically proven. This is what Paul is saying in I Corinthians 1:18 – 31.
The problem with fundamentalist Christians (and I mean no offense if this includes you) is that by asserting the Bible is literally true they are implicitly accepting the rationalist point of view – that truth only comes via reason and factual evidence. This discounts the centrality of faith and faith is precisely how God expects us to know him.
June 25, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Paul M, I do agree with you. As Christians, we don’t have to prove the Bible to ourselves to believe. We shouldn’t have to be able to logically explain, with evidence, every part of the Bible. The only time I would disagree (and you might be with me on this, anyway), is that if the Bible claims it is factual at a certain part, such as with a historical account, then we are indeed to believe it is factual, just as we might believe any historical text that seems to be accredited. I’m not a fundamentalist Christian, but I do believe the Bible is 100% true, including the parts that are intended to be fact, rather than theory or similar.
June 23, 2009 at 3:39 pm |
Rob I have read that verse several times and I don’t get that the earth is round from that. I get that the god you worship was sitting atop a dome encircling the earth. That filament or whatever it was called. You know the one I mean since you have read the bible so much. I know there are verses that refer to pillars holding the earth. If you apply the science we have today to what the bible says, I can understand how people deny that the bible says the earth was flat. There were plenty in the middle ages that thought the earth was flat based on the same information you have.
June 24, 2009 at 12:39 am |
round does not equal spherical. the world is described as flat and like a flat disk.
the fact that you miss this and think it means spherical (while a literal reading describes it as flat) is just another reason why you should go back and read it again.
here do me a favor. read the bible TWICE. once literally. i mean word for word. _what is being said here_ don’t interpret, don’t try and figure out hidden meaning, just read it word for word. the MOMENT you feel uncomfortable with the text write down the passage and why you didn’t like the literal interpretation of it.
next go back and read it again as you have been taught/instructed/preached to. write again the interpretations of those sections in which you where uncomfortable.
now compare the two. did you ONLY interpret where
1) science has shown this to be wrong and the majority of those you know accept this claim?
2) where it was morally ambiguous or provides moral claims which are not in line with the current moral codes of your fellow christians?
let me ask you a question…don’t you think the places you interpreted and the places you read literal where just a TAD arbitrary? how do you _know_ those are where you should interpret and the rest is literal? doesn’t it seem strange that you, and only the other christians you congregate with, seem to know where to read literally and where to read interpretatively? isn’t it strange that the text seems to line up perfectly with your OWN moral code as passed on by your family and friends, while OTHER christians attribute OTHER things into the same book and it also seems to line up perfectly with there OWN moral code?
doesn’t this suggest something to you?
June 24, 2009 at 12:40 pm |
@arthur Ice (and imitators): Don’t bother with this double-read-the-Bible exercise. Treating anything (e.g., Shakespeare, a scientific journal article, the newspaper, etc.) with that kind of blatant hostility is doomed to only demonstrate your hostility. Such behavior does NOT fit with the concept of honest inquiry.
If you approach anything with the intent of forcing it to comply with your own perspective, you will merely twist it into such compliance and ruin the experience for yourself.
On the other hand, if you approach the experience with an honest attitude of discovery, letting it say what it says without your efforts to torture it, you might actually learn something.
The Bible itself speaks of this well-known phenomenon.
One clue that you might actually be listening properly is when YOU are the one who changes.
June 24, 2009 at 5:49 pm
ah perfect! don’t read your bible critically, don’t think about how YOU consider it. simply change your mind and let it guide you!
ugg!
honest inquiry REQUIRES you to think about something critically.
read EVERYTHING on ALL subjects like this. FORCE yourself to consider ‘do i just want this to be true, could i be fooling myself?’ if it’s true then it will show itself to be true. if the bible is actual and factual the ‘god’s own honest truth’ then shouldn’t the honest critical search for truth find it?
why instead do theists always ask you to simply stop thinking and instead just accept there claims?
_I_ certainly don’t want you to do this. _ I_ certainly don’t do this in my own life.
I honestly believe that my beliefs are true. why do i believe this? because if i didn’t believe they where true then i wouldn’t hold them would i?
that being said….I _know_ some of my beliefs are _not_ true. how do i know this? because past experience has shown that other things i have believed where false. KNOWING THIS i have to assume that some or many of my current beliefs could be false. any other position is arrogance and self delusion. knowing this i _must_ constantly search for the truth and test my own beliefs.
can you really say anything different about your OWN beliefs?
June 25, 2009 at 12:31 pm
@arthur Ice & Butterfly: I certainly recommend critical thinking, but neither of you are demonstrating it. Your hostility and presumed doubt are far from level-headed critical thinking and healthy skepticism. It shows beautifully well in your comments–no substance, just vitriol.
Some people can tell the difference, so I leave it to them to read your comments and mine and act accordingly.
June 25, 2009 at 5:11 pm
god’s supposed book: do as i say or i will burn you in hell.
me: an all loving all powerful god probably wouldn’t do or say this, not and be all loving that is.
theist: vitriol against god!
sure reasonable. You claim it’s unreasonable not to believe in god, even when there is no undeniable evidence (or heck just ANY evidence, you haven’t shown ANY!).
is it also unreasonable to accept there is no magic teapot? i can claim it exists, i say it is floating out past jupiter. sure i have no evidence of it, or even a convincing articulate full accounting of it…or really any accounting that matches with what we know of reality, and sure it’s possible but not probable….but hey! it MUST be unreasonable to deny that right?
so do you accept the magic teapot?
just because i disagree with your opinion does not mean i’m spewing vitriol. you have the right to your opinion, and i respect that right. i do NOT respect your religion, and nor should i. after all, according to YOUR religion you should either burn me alive or stone me to death.
June 23, 2009 at 2:53 pm |
You make a good point that most “Christians” don’t read the Bible. But as a Christian, I have to say that while it isn’t my place to judge who is really a Christian or not, I’d say that most of these people who claim to be Christians but could really care less what Christianity is truly about, are not really Christians.
Christianity is not supposed to be another religion. It isn’t supposed to be a religion at all. It’s supposed to be a relationship, a friendship, with the supreme being we know as God who created everything. We can’t expect to understand even a small fraction of how God works, but the Bible lays out how we should adjust our lifestyles to live in accordance to what God desires from us as Christians.
I’m not going to sit here and try to convince everybody the Bible is true and factual, or that you should drop everything and believe it all. Yes, I believe it’s completely truth, but while you might say it can’t be proven, you also can’t prove it isn’t true.
It’s like a lot of things in science. Generally accepted doesn’t mean it’s true, so generally rejected doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
I notice a lot of the comments are mocking stories from the Bible and things Christians do and believe. I just want to say that if you haven’t read the Bible to know what it says, you don’t really have a right to mock it.
I think the biggest problem with Christianity nowadays is that too many Christians make it into a religion. They make it into something extreme that makes it look like some stupid thing that these stupid people believe. But how many people do you know who are Christians? Are they really any different than those who aren’t? If Christians have led you to think that we believe we’re special or something, please, please realize that that isn’t the point at all. Yes, we believe we have a friendship with the creator and that we will saved in the spiritual world when we die. But we definitely don’t believe that we are holy, and we know that we do wrong just like everybody else. The only difference is that we chosen to admit our faults and accept that we can’t possibly be perfect on our own, so we turn to God as our mentor and friend.
I’m a Christian. I read the Bible; I go to church. But speaking personally about Christianity, I just want to point out that it’s really not that exotic after all. Just because we can’t comprehend it doesn’t make it false. I can’t comprehend how vast the universe might be, so should I believe the universe isn’t real, since I can’t see much of it anyway?
No hard feelings or anything intended. I just want to explain how being a Christian isn’t so weird or deserving of so much hassle from others.
June 23, 2009 at 3:16 pm |
Compeek,
As I said before…religion = man’s concept of God….
You are right in saying that you can not convince anyone of anything. That is not your job. You proclaim what the Word says and then it is up to the Holy Spirit to reveal Himself. I love what St. Francis of Assisi said: “Preach the Gospel at all times, and when necessary, use words”. That is the way to know a true Christian.
June 23, 2009 at 3:10 pm |
I have studied the bible pretty thoroughly and it only made me believe stronger in God. I will agree it is widely misinterpreted and it takes a very clear and open mind to grasp a lot of what’s there because it has been tarnished through centuries of mistranslation. I do think reading it will separate people who truly believe and those who believe due to traditions of their family, but if you notice in the old testament Jesus actually does this separating on his own through his teaching. Unfortunately, most of the crazy fanatics and people who give Christianity a bad name are the ones that just don’t know their own religion and it’s too bad.
But what i really don’t understand is why atheists even wast time worrying about christians and even spend more than 1 second trying to prove it’s wrong. If you don’t believe it why worry about if it’s true or not, go on your way and live life and leave the bible and christianity to those who believe in God.
June 24, 2009 at 12:09 am |
Shane,
First, just to address your first sentence:
So, you read THE compilation of stories that Christians believe is the word of God, and it made you believe more in God? What else have you read?
I think a major reason atheists spend time trying to prove the tenants of Christianity are wrong is because atheists all too often take the bait from proselytizing Christians. A post in this very topic written ostensibly by a Christian says that the burden of proof is on the nonbeliever, asking the nonbeliever to prove God doesn’t exist. The saddest part is that, it is very rare in the real world for the burden of proof to be on the person claiming the negative. I haven’t met anyone who can prove that there is no “God.” In my experience, when Christians are asked to prove God’s existence, they are offended at the least, and in most cases, they turn the burden of proof to the atheist.
Another, and probably more valid reason atheists try to disprove, or at least make cases against the existence of “God,” is that religious fanatics all over the world are killing each other. Even if they were just “quietly” observing their religion on their own time, laws around the world are still written, interpreted, and carried out based on what a person or group of people believe. If those beliefs happen to be something atheists regard as myth, superstition, ignorance, and fantasy, it would stand to reason that an atheist would draw a pretty sizable debate.
Just to clarify…
Atheists don’t “worry about if it’s true or not.” Instead, they are sure it’s not true. I am pretty sure that most atheists would like nothing better than to leave all religion “to those who believe in God.” The problem is, Christianity in particular has big problems with atheists. But, that’s kind of the point right?
I’m sure my closing remarks below will upset some of those trying to have a friendly discussion of whether or not “God” exists. So be it.
It is a ridiculous discussion. There is no such thing as “God.” It is superstition, hype, fantasy, mythology, habit, and sadly, most who adhere to the belief have been trained to believe. The belief in “God” is a crutch by which to support a crippled mind, incapable of functioning on its own. I realize that this article is not necessarily about the existence of “God,” but come on now, wtf are we talking about here? Someone else here commented on how lonely the life of an atheist must be… I should think the life of a believer would be more lonely. All of the atheist’s friends actually exist.
Please accept my apologies if any were offended. I really don’t think anyone should be.
June 23, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
When I discussed with my friend about her religious belief, she told me “To me, the Bible is more than just a book”, yet I don’t think she even read a few pages of it. Because if she did she would know Jesus is Santa Claus for adult. How can someone live with a lie like that. So sad because I love her
June 23, 2009 at 3:32 pm |
becu,
Are you making a judgment on “what your friend said” or a judgment on “how she lives her life”? Do you see a difference between what she said and how you see her live her life?
June 23, 2009 at 3:14 pm |
@LeoPardus: Please feel free to address my “…messed up errors and premises…”, I have no worries.
I practice what I preach: I have actually investigated most of the popular claims for and against the Bible, science, and many mainstream and not-so-mainstream religions over the several decades of my adult life. I am NOT a mirror of the culture of the parents, locale, ethnicity, or nation that I happen to have been born to, yet I have integrated those into my lifestyle and identity where feasible. I desire to constantly strive to choose who I am in every area and at every level, and I welcome any challenge to pursue that further.
My beliefs and practices are very different from what is popularly referred to as “Christianity”, I choose not to practice any of the various religions, but I tolerate the presence and practice of those who choose differently. I love the practice of science but I am not blind to, nor taken in by, the omnipresent atheistic religious overtones of the popular scientists.
As a result, I notice that this discussion is very rare because it makes an unusual attempt to be reasonable and objective, instead of merely provocative and hateful. I lament that such a treatment is so rare, and I have been considering creating a forum for more such discussions. This is my first exposure to this particular forum, so I will investigate it further–perhaps I don’t need to create another one.
Best wishes.
June 24, 2009 at 9:07 am |
Rob,
I can engage with you here or over on the de-conversion.com site. First I’d have to have some idea what you believe. Since you say it’s not “Christianity”, what is it?
I guess the things I’d want to know are:
-Do you believe in a personal, active deity who can be related to/with and who responds to prayers?
-Do you believe in any revelation from said deity? If so, what is it? (Bible, other books, only personal, all of these and more….)
June 24, 2009 at 12:54 pm |
@LeoPardus: Yes on both counts. My other comments probably answer your questions adequately.
I trust that the Lord Jesus Christ uniquely exists as God, and that He interacts with His Creation within self-imposed limits. One of those limits is that He is almost never blatant or forceful (for now).
In other words, as we want other people to tolerate us and give us the “space” to live our lives, we are imitating His example of tolerance for our opportunity to likewise live, explore, discover, and learn. Of course, our actions throughout that experience still have consequences that cannot be avoided.
Since I trust that the Lord interacts with His Creation, that has become my experience. However, I recognize that most people do not share that trust, and so they do not experience that interaction.
June 24, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Interesting. Your belief is certainly more vague or loose than what I had. I’ve encountered the like before though.
Something that does not click is why one would bother believing in such a vague deity and vague revelations. I mean, Biblical stuff like fire from Heaven, audible voices, miraculous healings, walking on water, and so forth I could get behind. But a ‘never shows up, do nothing’ deity is just worthless.
And when you claim the existence of a deity who does nothing I can’t help but think, “Aren’t adults supposed to get past the imaginary friend stage?”
Like I say, if there was an actual deity who did things like what is described in the Bible, I could get behind that being. But since all I’ve ever seen/heard are excuses and apologetics, I can’t believe.
June 24, 2009 at 1:33 pm |
@LeoPardus: I have started reading your story at de-conversion.com, and I understand some of your pain based on my own experiences. I am inspired to write mine up, which I am now planning to do soon.
For now, suffice it to say that I encountered many similar nasty qualities of religious Christianity, but I choose to leave the religious part behind while keeping to the “family” part of a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.
I view Him as my adopted Father who is my God and my Creator. Other believers have been similarly adopted and are my siblings. I have responsibilities to my Father, my siblings, to my fellow man, and to the universe, but the whole situation is actually rather simple and straightforward.
Likewise, I find the Bible to be simple as well–a set of stories from people with their own experiences of the same Person, written with the same characteristics as most other stories except for the occasional issue of a different source language and culture. Of course, the abstractness of discussing a (typically) nontangible being makes things a bit more interesting and complicated.
Nevertheless, it is simple for me to understand but it is maddening to execute, since my impure nature wants to go in all the wrong directions. Since everyone else has the same well-known problem (but not necessarily a comparable comprehension), there are lots of sources for inspiration and examples.
I do not fear death or Hell; I am aware of them, but I trust in my Father’s patience with me. I likewise differ greatly from religious Christians in my views, opinions, and ethics.
For example, I vote FOR same-sex marriage and AGAINST various forms of discrimination based on arbitrary issues such as homosexuality, color, national origin, or religious views.
Our government is secular just like our society, and our public laws should reflect that fact. Our government’s interest in marriage, for example, is based on resolving issues of contracts, property, and guardianship from a secular perspective, and that is distinct but complementary to nonsecular interests in marriage. I do not personally advocate a same-sex marriage, but I respect the rights of others to choose that for themselves and to expect our secular society to respect it within reasonable and well-defined limits, just as our society does for my marriage.
When the Lord Jesus Christ eventually establishes a proper theocracy here on Earth, THEN the laws will match His nature but all need for fuss over it will be gone.
Meanwhile, I try to notice when I am screwing things up, then I confess and attempt to clean up the mess. But my focus is on what corruption is happening to my nature that is manifesting as a violation of His nature (laws). I am not concerned about punishment; I am concerned about reconciliation and restoration.
Real Biblical Christianity is not about being or even becoming perfect, it is primarily about becoming a humble (self-) janitor.
Best wishes.
June 24, 2009 at 2:38 pm
I just finished reading LeoPardus story. Truthfully and honestly my heart just broke for him. I understand that pain (as Rob does also) in Leo’ s heart. Thank God he has a loving and supportive wife to stand by him through this all. I will continue to pray for their family!
June 24, 2009 at 2:33 pm |
Other questions that came to me:
-Is the deity you propose “good” and “loving”?
-If ‘yes’ to the above, what do you mean by those two terms?
June 25, 2009 at 1:42 pm |
@LeoPardus: I understand your thoughts about a “do-nothing deity”, and your concerns are certainly not unique–MANY people have that impression of the Lord Jesus Christ (and various gods).
So, let me please start by simply saying that I share your concern on many levels. For one, I wish that the Lord would intervene far more often and far more decisively in my life to mitigate or even prevent the many injustices that I have experienced. Beyond my own selfish desire, I wish that the Lord would likewise intervene in other people’s lives around the world and throughout history to stop the many atrocities that occur, especially the ones that make my life seem a paradise in comparison.
But, here is the thing that most people miss about the Lord Jesus Christ: He WANTS that intervention FAR more than any, or even than ALL, of us can imagine. Please try to imagine how you would feel if you were omniscient–if you could actually observe and even experience those atrocities as they occur, and RELIVE them continuously, both as the victims and as the perpetrators. Imagine if you could experience the torture as if you actually were the victims. Imagine if you could experience the hate and violence as if you actually were the perpetrators. Try to imagine how that would feel if all that torture and helplessness and hate and violence, and every other aspect of the experiences, was as foreign to your nature as water in a desert. The injustice of it all CRIES OUT OVERWHELMINGLY for action: MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!
Then imagine if you could empathize and sympathize fully in that manner, AND you also had the undeniable absolute POWER TO MAKE IT STOP. Finally, imagine how UTTERLY FRUSTRATING it would be to HAVE TO RESTRAIN YOURSELF.
So, why would the Lord Jesus Christ have to restrain Himself? Well, let’s start with the consequences of Him NOT restraining Himself.
The Bible records the story of just such an occasion. The Lord observed that mankind, almost without exception, had become so depraved that such atrocities were commonplace. Theft, rape, murder, and all kinds of other crimes were rampant. The injustice of it all was overwhelming, and cried out for action. So, the Lord acted.
The result was that an estimated two billion (2,000,000,000) people died in the Flood, and only eight (8) people survived. Along with those people, a VAST number of other lives were snuffed out, and the ENTIRE surface of the planet was transformed. Life itself for humans after that was fundamentally transformed. The impact of wiping the slate clean was so enormous that the Lord swore an oath that He would never destroy the Earth by water again, and He instituted the rainbow as a reminder to us of His promise. Try to imagine how such an intervention would feel.
The atrocities certainly stopped, for a while. Now the Earth’s population is back in the billions again, and the atrocities are commonplace as well (though I have no idea how they compare to before the Flood). Shall we ask the Lord Jesus Christ to intervene again?
I don’t know about you, but I am not ready to be snuffed out. I suspect that a lot of people would be rather unhappy about it as well. Certainly another such global catastrophe would provide the undeniable proof that many people claim to be seeking, but I doubt that they would consider that fact to be a net-win in their final moments.
Of course, most of the world’s population would argue that they each should be excluded from such a global catastrophe, and many of them will have what they consider to be good reasons for their exclusion. How do you decide who gets snuffed? Which atrocities warrant snuffing, and which ones don’t? Imagine having to be the-person-who-decides.
Let’s say that IT IS YOU who is deciding: would you be fair or arbitrary? What criteria would you use? Would you care what anyone else thought of your criteria? Whom do you answer to?
I could go on, but perhaps this is sufficient to get the idea that the Lord Jesus Christ has already been through this exercise and we are living with His answer, the BEST answer possible.
His answer is simple: you and I and everyone else gets to live for a while and try to work things out on our own, then He will bring it all to an end once-and-for-all (but this time by fire). If we each ask His opinion, or even ask for His help, He will gladly provide it. BUT, He will not YET go so far as to intervene to the point of interfering with other people’s lives in the process.
*** In other words, He will help each of us as long as and to the degree that it does not require Him to FORCE Himself into someone else’s life without their consent. ***
Why?!? Because the Lord Jesus Christ cares about the opinions of each of us regarding His conduct: did He act beyond ALL reproach? What are the criteria?!? He uses the highest possible criteria available: His unimpeachable character and nature. Any injustice that would upset His most-sensitive nature is worthy of censure. What is the manner of that censure? Eternal separation from Him and everyone else who rejects such injustice.
If you don’t think that such an answer is the best possible, then I dare you to propose an alternative. You will find yourself in an never-ending debate, and for good reason–there will be numerous flaws in your approach for everyone to nitpick.
Besides, everyone has already validated the Lord’s answer. Every time someone cries out for intervention in the face of an atrocity, there is also a cry to just “leave me alone”.
“Why do those damn Christians/Muslims/cultists/atheists/etc. have to keep poking their noses into my business?” In fact, they don’t have to keep poking their noses, but they often do. It is the Lord Jesus Christ, and ONLY HIM, that TRULY respects each of our right to freely live our lives as we see fit. As a consequence, He MUST restrain Himself from intervening too often or too blatantly.
But, He has had just about enough, and He WILL eventually respond to those cries of injustice. Be careful what you wish for…
June 26, 2009 at 11:38 am
Rob:
You have to be kidding. You think that the Noah story actually happened? You think there were 2 billion people around way back then? (A new number to me BTW. Not even the YECS folks I’ve heard ever claimed anything like that?) You think the flood was global? After saying “I find the Bible to be simple as well–a set of stories from people with their own experiences of the same Person,” you now want to be an OT literalist?????
Then there’s the gigantic problem with your whole idea. “We don’t want God to intervene ’cause he’d kill us.” ?????
Sorry man, but I’m back where we started. There are so many problems I don’t know where to start.
Since you did ask about a better alternative though, here’s one. There is no God. The reason the world seems so whacky is because it is. The reason no deity ever does anything is because there are none. The reason we all seem to be making it all up as we go is because we are doing so and there are no grand, eternal laws set up by anyone (apart from physical laws of course). The reason theists come up with so many conflicting, mutually exclusive, and untenable beliefs and ideas is because they are just engaging in wishful thinking.
The interesting thing is that simply removing any and all deities from consideration makes existence quite obvious and basically comprehensible. Putting any deity (other than a totally detached one) into the picture makes everything utterly senseless and leaves apologists positing really silly efforts to explain their fantasies.
June 26, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Just so I’m clear, you’re claiming:
1. Ridiculous Old Testament stories actually happened.
2. God’s fatherly approach is to be completely uninvolved so he doesn’t have to kill us all.
Very convincing.
June 23, 2009 at 4:57 pm |
For those who have not been able to receive the Word of Life, a greater manifestation of the death already in them stands out more. In short, they were not Christians to begin with. The door is still open though
John 6
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
http://www.allthegospel.org
June 23, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
I really like the comments about me being “very far gone”; it reminds me of a scene from the movie “Contact” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118884/) based on the book by Carl Sagan. I highly recommend the movie as a great illustration of this whole debate. (***potential movie spoiler alert***)
At a key point in the movie, the main character Dr. Ellie Arroway (an atheist) is being interviewed by a special international panel for the role of representing Earth on an anticipated trip to travel to another world and perhaps meet another civilization. Another main character Palmer Joss (a respected scientist and Christian?) asks Ellie whether she believes in God. Ellie questions the question and its relevance, so Palmer points out that almost the entire Earth’s population believes in a deity, so the question seems relevant if Ellie might be representing them. Ellie then indicates that she does not, which in context seems to indicate that she is “very far gone” relative to the rest of the population since she is one of the few nonbelievers.
At the end of the movie, the question becomes relevant again because Ellie becomes THE unique “believer” (not in God) and again “very far gone”, but in the opposite direction.
In the first case, Ellie is a nonbeliever but she has never actually examined the beliefs that she rejects. In the last case, Ellie is a believer because she has faced what she considers to be undeniable proof, but everyone else remains an unbeliever because she is unable to effectively share that proof.
This dilemma is a constant theme around these topics, and I don’t think that it is coincidental.
Like Ellie, most people simply choose to be unbelievers (“the Bible isn’t true”) or believers (“Jesus was born on Christmas”) based on regurgitating whatever set of myths happened to have implanted more solidly during their childhood. But, in fact, the myths are just myths regardless of adherence.
On the other hand, when Ellie is faced with undeniable proof, everyone else treats it like a myth because that proof is unavailable to them (they weren’t along for the “ride”). Only one person (Palmer) publicly supports Ellie’s belief, based on his trust in her which is founded in their relationship. Meanwhile, another person publicly and vehemently vows to lead a government inquiry to disprove Ellie’s belief and to expose the hoax and the hoaxer. Yet that same person secretly believes Ellie and takes significant action to support her, because this skeptic has one tiny piece of circumstantial evidence that his integrity will not let him ignore.
But the undeniable proof is where Ellie’s experience greatly deviates from reality: remember that this is a fictional story in which Carl Sagan goes to a lot of trouble to (brilliantly) engineer this scenario. In reality, none of us has undeniable proof, but Carl Sagan illustrates that having it will STILL not resolve the debate.
Ironically, Carl Sagan probably did not realize that his story was not original–the Bible contains a similar story (the rich man Lazarus), but in that case it is nonfictional.
So, in short, there is no undeniable proof, it is not forthcoming, and it still would not resolve the debate anyway.
I believe that this is by design, since truly undeniable proof would manifest an extreme lack of tolerance on the part of God. How would you be able to stick to your religion if the Lord Jesus Christ just “popped” up in front of you and a CNN news crew, did some fancy miracle stuff, let you take lots of video and an hour-long interview, then walked off into the sunset?!? If He exists, it would seem that He certainly COULD do such a thing, but WOULD He? I think not, because such an act would be rudely intolerant, and the Lord is instead the essence of gentlemanly kindness.
On the other hand, there is a day coming when He will indeed provide such a newsworthy moment. Meanwhile, the available “proofs” are subtle rather than undeniable, for the humble rather than the hostile. From such a perspective, I am happy to be “very far gone”, just like the atheist Ellie.
;^)
June 24, 2009 at 8:51 pm |
it is only sensible to reject a claim which has zero evidence. if i where to claim to have seen a leprechaun you to would reject the claim.
but gods not like a leprechaun! the evidence is everywhere!
yeah, only if you don’t think critically and simply accept the claim without inspecting it.
your right, if i was given actual evidence then i would also believe. and? to simply accept a claim because i might like it to be true, or plenty of other people believe it is silly.
as david gerrold once said (and this works on two levels):
“a majority vote doesn’t determine truth, look up lemmings”
June 24, 2009 at 8:52 pm |
also isn’t it funny how you say it wouldn’t be fair for jesus to simply pop up and show off if we asked it (even though this is exactly what the bible claims can be done).
‘fair’ is providing no evidence then punishing me for the lack of believe….forever.
thats if i assume the bible is true.
if there is no god, well that lack of evidence thing seems to make sense doesn’t it? no need to justify it or hop through hoops. it just means exactly as it means. strange isn’t it?
June 24, 2009 at 10:12 pm |
And Ellie sleeps with the preacher being played by Matthew McConahey…
June 23, 2009 at 5:38 pm |
finally… it all makes sense now.
this is why chain-letter emails will not stop:
superstition.
fear of the unknown.
fear of the invisible boogey man.
fear of the spaghetti monster.
fear of the leather-bound book that everyone has, yet do not read.
June 23, 2009 at 6:24 pm |
Jim said:
“Christianity is not a schematic laid out for one to successfully memorize.”
Ergo, systematic theology is complete and utter bullshit.
June 23, 2009 at 6:57 pm |
The problem I have with this article is that you seem to be putting on trial the accuracy of a book (that at the very least is a historical book) by showcasing the lack of popular knowledge of said book. Granted, to a degree you are very correct, but again, I know of people that could do all of these things easily. Reading the Bible in-depth doesn’t create atheists, the fact that many people claim to and live in an opposite manner is what an unbelieving person finds unbelievable.
June 23, 2009 at 7:27 pm |
“Reading the Bible in-depth doesn’t create atheists”
Well that’s exactly what happened in my case. In the 10th grade I decided that since I had been calling myself a christian my whole life i should probably read the bible. I spent the next few weeks reading the narrative version and the KJV straight through. When i finished I was no longer a Christian and on my way to atheism. I could no longer be a christian since I was appalled by so many parts of the bible.
June 26, 2009 at 12:36 pm |
No, my point is most Christians are biblically illiterate. Reading the Bible does create atheists. Obviously in every case, but I personally know of many cases of former Christians that walked away from belief because of this poorly written book.
June 23, 2009 at 7:32 pm |
As I said once notice how this website is too much of a pussy to say the same about Islam or Scientology. PUUSSSY!!!!!
June 23, 2009 at 8:17 pm |
You’re stupid.
June 23, 2009 at 8:28 pm |
First off – my apologies on behalf of all of us Christians who have offended all of you with idiotic statements and actions over the years.
Second – this whole argument is a bit self-defeating. I would assume that most atheists haven’t read the Bible either, except perhaps a few of the proof-texts from Deuteronomy and Leviticus that they like to make fun of Christians with. But they’re making a decision about the Bible based on the same level of information as many Christians…because they were told to by someone who wrote a book about why the Bible is ridiculous. Isn’t this the same set of actions that we’re accused of?
June 23, 2009 at 11:27 pm |
No. Atheism is NOT a belief system. It makes no claims. Therefore, it need not be proved. Christians are the ones making the extraordinary claims (along with Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc.). Therefore, the burden of proof properly belongs on the religious proponents.
I am still waiting for somebody to explain to me why the Christians are right and the Muslims are wrong. From where I sit, they both seem to be about equally persuasive.
June 24, 2009 at 12:07 am |
@Paul S: Absurd, of course atheism makes claims–it claims that there is no god, then makes numerous claims to explain the origin and nature of the universe in the absence of a Creator. Hence, it provides the motivation and origin of the various evolution myths. From there it continues to manifest itself into claims about nearly everything else–atheism is even used nowadays to describe how software “evolves”.
More particularly, atheism is a religion, in that it is a man-made system of beliefs that attempts to explain the who, what, when, where, why, and how of our existence. Atheism attempts to answer all those questions across the breadth and depth of human experience, the same questions that everyone is asking.
Just like any other claims, some can be tested while most cannot. As a result, atheism requires just as much blind faith as any other religion, sometimes more.
Bottom line: Atheists (a small minority) claim that god does not exist, contrary to a large majority of the Earth’s population, who claim that some kind of god does indeed exist.
Of course, many of those believers (e.g., false Christians) actually live as if God does not exist, so I think atheism may actually be the majority religion on Earth.
However, since one cannot prove the absence of something, the atheist are left begging the question. Meanwhile, the god(s) claimed by all those believers seems quite hesitant to just “pop in” on command, so the believers are left begging the question as well. So we have a stalemate, for now.
Of course, when the Lord Jesus Christ does actually show up, in full view of the world, on His own schedule, what will everyone do then? I anticipate that it will be a little late to just “switch”.
June 24, 2009 at 5:00 am
To say that atheism makes claims is just playing semantics. Atheists have no holy book. Atheists do not assert that certain actions are required for eternal life (or even that eternal life is possible). Atheists do not posit a creator or a supernatural invisible god. All atheists are doing is saying that they do not believe YOUR claims.
Atheists may have other explanations for certain things, such as the creation of the universe, but those explanations are not derived from atheism. Those explanations are derived from science. Why not just say that “scientism” is a religion, since your definition of religion is so loose?
Science is the attempt to understand the natural world through hypothesis and experimentation. It has nothing to do with atheism, which is the lack of belief in a supernatural god.
Believe it or not, evolution is not a myth taught by atheists, but rather it is the conclusion of scientists derived through observation and experiment. The key difference between science and religion is that science does not presuppose the “answer.”
June 24, 2009 at 8:20 am
Richard Dawkins said it best: We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
June 26, 2009 at 12:17 pm
“Absurd, of course atheism makes claims–it claims that there is no god, then makes numerous claims to explain the origin and nature of the universe in the absence of a Creator. Hence, it provides the motivation and origin of the various evolution myths.”
I was right with you on the first part (atheism means ‘i do not believe a god exists nothing more’)
but then you ran into a quagmire of insanity. here let me hep you.
your wrong.
most buddhists, most shamanists, some forms of satanism, and a host of other religions are also atheistic. they don’t believe in gods either.
they have claims about how the universe/life/etc etc are created/came to be/ meaning. they are all different.
yet they are all atheists.
“From there it continues to manifest itself into claims about nearly everything else–atheism is even used nowadays to describe how software “evolves”.”
as a software enginere. i have evolved software. no quotes. no sarcasm. no misstranslation. thats exactly what i do/have done/ will continue to do.
ever rode on an airplane? you can thank your life to evolved control systems. most cars are designed with evolutionary algorithms to reduce air resistance. heck even many medicines are designed with evolutionary algorithms now.
“Just like any other claims, some can be tested while most cannot. As a result, atheism requires just as much blind faith as any other religion, sometimes more”
tell me how much faith is required to decide to leave your house from your door, or the window on the second floor.
your claim an all knowing, all powerful, all seeing, all loving creator god wooshed our world, the universe, and life into existance with magic (he literaly used an incantation!)
the world as i know it does not work this way. i have ZERO evidence this universe works this way. this requires faith.
i require NO faith to believe there is no bigfoot. there simpyl is no evidence to support the claim. the same condition exists with god. i require no faith to reject this claim, just as it requires no faith for you to reject all the other god claims (zues, thor, mythra etc etc). the evidence does not support the claim. no faith needed.
“Bottom line: Atheists (a small minority) claim that god does not exist, contrary to a large majority of the Earth’s population, who claim that some kind of god does indeed exist.”
no, ALL atheists claim god does not exist. it’s actually the definition of what an atheist is. nothing more.
the number of people who beleive a claim does not determine if the clainm is true.
david gerrold once said “majority vote doesn’t determine truth, look up lemmings”
it doesn’t matter if the majority of people believe in god, or that the world is flat. the truth of the matter is not determined by a majority vote.
“Of course, many of those believers (e.g., false Christians) actually live as if God does not exist, so I think atheism may actually be the majority religion on Earth.”
again, atheism is not a religion.
it’s an answer ‘no’ to the question ‘do you believe in a god’. nothing more.
what people tack onto that is entirely another story.
just like theism is not a religion. theism is the answer ‘yes’ to the question, ‘do you believe in god’.
atheism (literaly, not theism) is the opposite of theism.
YOU are a theist. so is a muslim, a hindu, and many of those who practice native american beliefs…..would you THEN say since you are ALL thesists you all have the same religion?
see how silly that is? your miss using the word in an attempt to set up a false dichotomy. it’s bad form in logic, and it’s pathetic appologetics because it can so easilly be shown to be a lie. lieing for jesus, didn’t your holy book have something to say about that? hmmm…
“So we have a stalemate, for now.”
no we don’t. you make the claim. you provide the evidence.
your trying to create a false dichotomy here again.
belief in the christian god is just as reasonable as non belief! both of us are in the same spot!
no, we are not. i am making no claims about the universe. NONE.
you are.
you are required to justify the claims with evidence.
if you don’t get why then maybe this will help:
“However, since one cannot prove the absence of something, the bigfoot denialists are left begging the question. Meanwhile, the bigfoot(s) claimed by all those believers seems quite hesitant to just “pop in” on command, so the bigfoot believers are left begging the question as well. So we have a stalemate, for now.”
see? same thing. you reject this but when it comes to your god you let it go. why? because you want it to be right, you have been told it’s right, and its as much a part of who you are as your foot is. and giving up your god is the mental equivalent of chopping off your foot.
the fact he doesn’t exists doesn’t matter here. you will not willingly part with it so you will make every effort to ignore the glaring mental dissonance.
“Of course, when the Lord Jesus Christ does actually show up, in full view of the world, on His own schedule, what will everyone do then? I anticipate that it will be a little late to just “switch”.”
if god shows up (not just as jesus but GOD) then i will admit he exists…i will also make every effort to spit on him for the evil he has done. your god’s existance or not is question one. question two is your gods morality. he isn’t.
i don’t hate your god (any more then i hate darth mal from star wars. he is FICTION to me, get it?) but if you showed me evidence he existed, then yes i WOULD hate him (just like i would hate darth mal if you showed HE existed and did what he did in the movies) but until then it’s all a bit silly from my point of view.
‘my imaginary friend exists! you don’t believe me? well you will when he comes and kicks your ass!’
well um…oooook. sure.
June 23, 2009 at 8:56 pm |
@BobB: In case you missed it, I was talking about all religions including (false) Christianity in all its forms, Islam, Scientology and all the other cults, atheism in all its forms, etc. I am not trying to be antagonistic, but I do want to be clear. We seem to be focused on false Christianity here due to the blog owner’s history, but all the other religious lies deserve proper recognition as well.
It takes courage to humbly and honestly trudge one’s way through all this stuff, and particularly to establish and pursue a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ in the face of all the world’s doubt and hostility. The Bible itself emphatically warns that most people will not undertake such a journey, and that many who start down that path will turn back–just as we see examples of here in these comments and from the blog owner.
The Bible is an adult book, in every sense. If it does not offend you in some way, then you probably are just not paying attention. Sometimes you need to notice that the example given is a bad example, and that the Bible is agreeing with your moral outrage. Sometimes you just are getting it because the Bible was not written in your language or for your culture, and your assumptions are misleading you. Sometimes you need to question where your sense of morality comes from, and realize that it is “off”. Sometimes, you need to just get that there are a handful of things that you just won’t ever get, nor will any other human being, because some God-level stuff is “complicated”.
But, people give up on everything under the Sun, whether justified or not. Perhaps there is something for us to learn even from those who turn back, as well as from those who never even look.
There is a saying that you can tell more about someone by looking at their enemies than by looking at their friends. I have learned a lot about the real God by noticing the characteristics of those people who choose to hate Him, such as in some of the comments here.
One of His key characteristics is that He is the only Being I have encountered that has utterly NO need to defend Himself–you can’t hurt Him, no matter how hard you try; He doesn’t even ball up His fists when someone starts a fight.
So, in honor of that, I try not to defend Him either. I am only trying to drop a few hints so that an honest seeker might make some progress on their own.
Best wishes.
November 17, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
“One of His key characteristics is that He is the only Being I have encountered that has utterly NO need to defend Himself–you can’t hurt Him, no matter how hard you try; He doesn’t even ball up His fists when someone starts a fight.”
My imaginary friend in childhood was like this also. didn’t make him real either.
June 23, 2009 at 9:58 pm |
I couldn’t agree more…Christians need to pick up their Bibles and read it!
Pastor Dean
June 23, 2009 at 9:58 pm |
what are the thirteen basic teachings of this bible? does the bible mention the seven deadly sins? or the seven virtues? please advise,,i really do not know the answer ..thz
June 23, 2009 at 10:00 pm |
All sin is deadly…Romans 6.23 says, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ.”
And for that think they haven’t sinned…Romans 3.23, “For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.”
June 23, 2009 at 11:22 pm |
the seven virtues from wikipedia
1.Chastity Castitas Purity Extravagance Luxuria Abstaining from sexual conduct according to one’s state in life. Courage and boldness. Embracing of moral wholesomeness and achieving purity of thought through education and betterment.
2Temperance Temperantia Self-Control Gluttony Gula Constant mindfulness of others and one’s surroundings; practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation.
3.Charity Caritas Will, Generosity Greed Avaritia Generosity. Willingness to give. A nobility of thought or actions.
$.Diligence Industria Persistence, Effort Acedia Acedia
A zealous and careful nature in one’s actions and work. Decisive work ethic. Budgeting one’s time; monitoring one’s own activities to guard against laziness.
5. Patience Patientia Peace Wrath Ira Forbearance and endurance through moderation. Resolving conflicts peacefully, as opposed to resorting to violence. The ability to forgive; to show mercy to sinners.
6.Kindness Humanitas Satisfaction Envy Invidia Charity, compassion, friendship, and empathy without prejudice and for its own sake.
7. Humility Humilitas Bravery, Modesty Pride Superbia Modest behavior, selflessness, and the giving of respect. Giving credit where credit is due; not unfairly glorifying one’s own self.
June 23, 2009 at 11:23 pm |
the seven virtues from wikipedia
1.Chastity Castitas Purity Extravagance Luxuria Abstaining from sexual conduct according to one’s state in life. Courage and boldness. Embracing of moral wholesomeness and achieving purity of thought through education and betterment.
2Temperance Temperantia Self-Control Gluttony Gula Constant mindfulness of others and one’s surroundings; practicing self-control, abstention, and moderation.
3.Charity Caritas Will, Generosity Greed Avaritia Generosity. Willingness to give. A nobility of thought or actions.
4..Diligence Industria Persistence, Effort Acedia Acedia
A zealous and careful nature in one’s actions and work. Decisive work ethic. Budgeting one’s time; monitoring one’s own activities to guard against laziness.
5. Patience Patientia Peace Wrath Ira Forbearance and endurance through moderation. Resolving conflicts peacefully, as opposed to resorting to violence. The ability to forgive; to show mercy to sinners.
6.Kindness Humanitas Satisfaction Envy Invidia Charity, compassion, friendship, and empathy without prejudice and for its own sake.
7. Humility Humilitas Bravery, Modesty Pride Superbia Modest behavior, selflessness, and the giving of respect. Giving credit where credit is due; not unfairly glorifying one’s own self.
June 23, 2009 at 11:29 pm
seven deadly sins with corresponding virtues…live a life like this,and the world will be a much better place,,,
Lust Chastity
Gluttony Temperance
Greed Charity
Sloth Diligence
Wrath Patience
Envy Kindness
Pride Humility
June 24, 2009 at 1:43 pm |
@hbs34: Those things are not part of the Bible, they are part of religious Christian dogma. If you seek formulas and special lists of rules, then you are seeking religion (a man-made system of beliefs) instead of God. Such a search is your prerogative, but I think that it will eventually disappoint you.
June 23, 2009 at 10:10 pm |
i’ma christian and don’t care if someone else is an atheist,tranny or a blunt projectile. why should anyone care if i’ma christian?? get a life.it’s amazing to me that non christians will literally critique one’s christian belief to the point of insult then when the christian tells the nonbeliever to get screwed,the nonbeliever says “oh aren’t you supposed to be a christian? ” as though christians are ordered via god to accept all insults and accept intimidation and insults.nonbelievers who feel that way don’t know the bible. the reason why?? they’re non believers!!
if you’re a not a christian,fine..good for you..but don’t start in on me just because i AM one. go bother a witch (wicca) or a transylvanian monk or something.
June 23, 2009 at 11:29 pm |
That would be fine if Christians didn’t cause so much trouble in the world.
June 24, 2009 at 3:54 am |
Who started in on you? What were you expecting from an atheist blog?
June 24, 2009 at 4:43 am |
What’s wrong with Wiccans’ or Transylvanian monks’…?
June 23, 2009 at 10:13 pm |
In his famous book Mere Christianity, Lewis makes this statement, “A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg – or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us.”
June 23, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
The sooner we turf the sky-daddy and his magic book, the better. Consider why god is irrelevant…
http://deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/why-god-is-irrelevant/
“would assume that most atheists haven’t read the Bible either, except perhaps a few of the proof-texts from Deuteronomy and Leviticus that they like to make fun of Christians with. But they’re making a decision about the Bible based on the same level of information as many Christians…because they were told to by someone who wrote a book about why the Bible is ridiculous. Isn’t this the same set of actions that we’re accused of?”
The problem is that some atheists are trying to use the desultory book in question to show the inconsistencies and monstrous nature of the bible. I doubt they lend much credence to the actual text, but rather use it as a starting point to show how incredibly wrong it is to worship the sky-fairy and his assorted minions.
June 23, 2009 at 10:14 pm |
Allah, buddha, and any so called god out there did they die for you? No they did not JESUS CHRIST DID JESUS DIED FOR US ALL HE IS GOD. TAKE A LOOK AROUND AT THE WORLD EVERYTHING WHAT HE SAID IS COMMING TRUE.
June 23, 2009 at 11:33 pm |
Proof through capitalization!
Allah did not die because Allah is God the father. Actually, Allah is exactly the same God as the Christian God–doctrinally speaking. The Koran does not support your view. What makes the Bible more accurate than the Koran?
June 24, 2009 at 12:30 am |
@Paul S: “Proof through capitalization!” = brilliant (ROTFLMAO)
Regarding your question about Islam versus Biblical Christianity, you probably already know that they share a origin and history up to the point of Father Abraham and his two sons, one of which became the ancestor of the Arabs and the other became Israel the ancestor of the Jews.
So, your question can be answered perhaps in two ways.
1. Father Abraham, prompted by the Lord Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha Mashiach = Yahweh = Jehovah = God), said that his promise, rights, and privileges would pass through his son Israel, not his other son. So, Islam’s own (grand)father said so.
2. You might investigate the claims that Islam (past the point of Abraham) was invented by a third party as a means to subvert those people who adopted/inherited it.
If one becomes a bit more than casually acquainted with the Bible and the Koran, as well as with typical Christians and Muslims, one will find lots of differences among the books and lots of inconsistencies when comparing the books to their “practitioners”.
By the way, for the record, I have a great respect for Abraham and his descendants–both the Jewish and Arabic nations. Abraham blessed his descendants greatly, and the Lord Jesus Christ certified those blessings while warning others not to mess with His people. Therefore, I attempt to honor His people whenever appropriate. I am a Caucasian married to a Jew, and my youngest daughter carries an Arabic name. So, I am not trying to be provocative or mean, just accurate.
June 23, 2009 at 10:15 pm |
One must learn not to be a hypocrite. If I remember correctly you were once a Christian. So that being said, instead of bashing others who believe what you once did, why don’t you have a blog to help point out the false teachings of the church going all the way back to Constantine.
By doing what you are you doing along with all the others here, is not considered right in the eyes of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is wrong!
Remember everyone, it is easier to hate than to love, but we must try.
Shalom
June 23, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
Any one can claim to be a christian. My bible tells me true christians, belivers, or witness all those who read the word daily and have a relationship with God Almighty. To be a christian is to live and be guided be the word of God “Bible” not last of the flesh, my bible tells me not all who call me Lord Lord will enter my kingdom, but only those who do my will. Its just like a child who has no relationship with he/her parents might miss out on their will.
June 23, 2009 at 10:18 pm |
PS:
RE: Liar, Lunatic or Lord…
http://www.worldmag.com/articles/13579
June 23, 2009 at 10:20 pm |
I am a Christian and it is sad that something so pivotal to someone’s life is only given lip service on Sundays.
The quote by theBEattitude “If you choose to worship Jesus every Sunday, at least take the time to read the book about him. Otherwise you’re nothing more than a lemming.” Is 100% truth. There are many people who do not walk the talk, but love to talk the talk; because the talk is what this world cares about.
Just like Blogs. You can blog day and night and never live a life that is consistent with your blogs. One may say, it is easier to talk and hide than it is to declare and face the music…because that would take integrity.
If you ever want to learn more about the Christian Faith, from those who read the Bible, you can read our blog Vessels of Mercy by following this link: http://bit.ly/5Kqn.
Grace and Peace,
Judson
June 24, 2009 at 8:14 am |
Imagine what a different country this would be if the parts of the Bible that the Christians chose to focus on were:
“Judge not, that ye be not judged”.
or
“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.”
or
“But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also”
or
“One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
The sad truth is that the Bible is a huge mass of statements without much consistency, and people pick and choose their quotes to justify whatever it is they want to do. One reason the Bible is so popular is that the Old Testament God is such a vengeful bastard that his actions justify any imaginable atrocity.
Rape, Killing Children, Genocide, Deception, and the list is never ending.
June 24, 2009 at 6:26 pm |
I read and studied the Bible for 30 years of my life. I highly doubt you’re going to enlighten me.
June 23, 2009 at 10:21 pm |
I too finally said to hell with the Christian religion. You wouldn’t believe the weight that was finally lifted off my shoulders. Growing up my mom force me and my brother to go to church. I couldn’t wait to be out of that house.
Then when I’m finally out, I met a man, who I dated, that tried to scare me into believing by telling me all the time about the rapture. When I came to my senses, we broke up, and that’s when I made my decision to leave all this nonsense behind.
Unfortunately, I’m still being harassed by Christians, either at work, or they bother me at home. Luckily, I have an intercom system at my apartment and can weed out these troublesome people.
June 23, 2009 at 10:23 pm |
1. Your point is off… it has nothing to do with not reading the bible…. although the statisitics are sad… even though statistics have never truly been much help in most cases. (Yet the human mind and emotions are so reactionary to statistics, because they seem to be presented with accuracy and authority).
2. i believe in Jesus, and I do read the scriptures, my reading the bible does not have anything to do with why I believe in Jesus. I believe in Jesus for a simple, yet complex reason. He is the mediator for the justice we are all fighting, whining, complaining, killing, dying, arguing, and debating for, because we’re still trying to get justice, for all the injustices of man. Jesus is the only answer that makes sense to the mystery of God, and the need for Jesus to be a sacrifice against the curse of death that we all face.
3. Believing in Jesus without understanding or knowing the scriptures is a sad reality in the immature, weak, very human church, but if you read the scriptures yourself, you’ll see that the word’s of Jesus were meant for simple people, and we are still a very simple creature, with very real weaknesses, and appetites for self seeking pleasure.
June 24, 2009 at 7:57 am |
“Jesus is the only answer that makes sense to the mystery of God…”
I guess you think that all the Hindus and Buddhists and Muslims think that their religions do not make any sense.
Wow.
June 23, 2009 at 10:23 pm |
I would agree that yes, those folks (specifically Americans) who identify as Christian would do themselves well to read the Bible, I would qualify that with saying that they would benefit from reading Christian history, diverse theologies, and other sacred scriptures. But ‘knowing things’ has never been at the populist core of Christianity, and probably most other religions. It is a communal identity. There are often many nominal identifications that folk have that individuals don’t know much about. I’m Irish Catholic. All I can tell you is that I sin like crazy and have red hair.
There have been many times and places in Christianity where many never read the Bible. Or, they were actively dissuaded from reading it. Yet their faith was strong, they passed on their cultural values, they sang and drank with others during their yearly rituals, and all was well. And things will most likely remain the same.
But I did note in comments above that there were concerns of how people might be then taken advantage of by religious leaders who prey on their lesser instincts like fear, greed, ego, etc. While this is a valid concern, I would add that many religious leaders motivate people best instincts and intentions to courses that end up being harmful. Love, family, trust, devotion, these are the terms in which arguments are made that have historically been ruinous.
So how would a contemporary Christian engage more deeply in their faith and avoid the traps that faith with good intentions can lead to? While reading the Bible, Christian history, various Christian thinkers representing many perspectives, and other sacred texts is important, us Christians must go further.
This means working for justice, practicing peace, worshipping and fellowshipping with the outcast, and treasuring those who are called the least.
Practically, I’m talking about getting outside denominational comfort zones, working in interfaith circles, and serving humbly in one’s community.
Thinking that Moses and Jesus are contemporaries is of little concern to me if the world is unlivable because of environmental collapse. May love be our guide.
June 23, 2009 at 10:36 pm |
Matthew 7:21 (New International Version)
21″Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
June 23, 2009 at 10:39 pm |
Revelation 21:6-8 (New International Version)
6He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son. 8But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”
June 23, 2009 at 11:36 pm |
Unless the bible is just a made up story…
June 24, 2009 at 12:23 am |
Prem. I. Human shall die
Prem. II. Paul is a human
Cons. Paul shall die
but:
-Paul himself cannot prove that he can die
-Anyone can prove himself/herself can die ?
June 24, 2009 at 6:32 pm |
Posting a silly Bible verse that says I will burn for eternity is cowardly. If you have a point, you are welcome to comment. But save the hateful Bible verses for someone who doesn’t view it as complete fiction and fairy tales.
June 24, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
we call the Lord Righteous, and shall punish those who are not, because we choose, what he does not want, unrighteous one…
you say bible is full of hate/silly/full of contradiction because you choose what the bible does not want
Psalm 18:26 (New International Version)
26 to the pure you show yourself pure,
but to the crooked you show yourself shrewd.
June 26, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Does this statement sound ridiculous?:
We call Thor righteous, and shall punish those who are not with his giant hammer, because we choose, what he does not want, unrighteous one…
Yes, it sounds equally as ridiculous as what you wrote.
June 23, 2009 at 10:46 pm |
both religious and non-religious folk get some things confused (don’t we all?).
Text: the bible is a collection of books, has many authors even within the same ‘book’, was transmitted at first orally and then copied by hand over several centuries and finally translated into many languages other than Hewbrew/Aramaic/Greek. It thus represents an account of the Jewish people made by many writers over many centuries living in many different cultures and representing many different viewpoints and insights. Why would it be consistent? No one individual is, so why this book?
Faith: the bible contains some truly inspiring passages in which sense it can be called the ‘word of god’ (as well as some passages that are offensive and some that are irrelevant to all but first century AD Jews). As such it has enabled many to live better lives and follow a moral code that benefits their fellow humans (and enables some to be illiberal and persecute their fellow humans). God (whatever god is) can speak through the bible just as surely as through the sunset or any other aspect of the world.
The ‘word-of-god’ aspect of the bible is surely in the truth it contains (logos=word/self-knowledge/wisdom) rather than any ‘word’, sentence, opinion that has been written by biblical authors. Many passages in the bible are simply not understandable (Revelations anyone?). In fact ‘christian’ history shows how fallacious the literal approach has been, with groups who have extracted one meaning from one passage trying zealously to kill other groups who have extracted another meaning from another passage. And someone who said ‘love your enemies’ has been studiously ignored. Too confronting I guess.
Personally I believe that one’s moral code should be formulated from within, not imposed from without. I cannot forget that some of the greatest wrongs of European history: the death of seven million negroes in the 18th century slave trade; the 15 million native americans destroyed by the Spanish in South America ; the horrors of the various Inquisitions; have all been justified, bible in hand, as according to the word of god. A little caution seems in order.
Textual criticism of the bible can be truly educational and should be encouraged not repressed. But it doesn’t (or shouldn’t) disprove the validity of anyone’s faith. That is validated by how each person lives and acts.
Then again what would I know?
June 23, 2009 at 11:04 pm |
[...] Indeed it is, Professor Myers—and that is exactly the point you would have discovered if you had bothered to read Allen’s column. In fact, such a reaction was the very point of Allen’s central theme: that so many Atheists are smug, overtly bigoted ideologues endowed with more than a subtle twitch of messianic victimhood. I mean, without a vocabulary inclusive of the words, “God,” “religion,” or “superstition,” could the Atheist-dialectic read, write, or interpret whatsoever? Is there anything original to “new” Atheism without disparaging religion, its holy dialectical “other”? [...]
June 23, 2009 at 11:05 pm |
You can log on to esoriano.wordpress.com to answer all your questions regarding faith and the bible. Surprisingly every questions you will raise will be answered according to the bible. Just give it a try.. He is the only sensible preacher in our time.
June 24, 2009 at 7:52 am |
Every question?
What about the question:
What is a question that you can’t answer?
or
Where I left my keys?
The cube root of 76454554597354115?
I am pretty sure the number of questions he can’t answer (in any useful way) approaches infinity.
June 23, 2009 at 11:11 pm |
I do not expect all people to be delighted in their visit to my world… my weblog; but everybody is welcome — even the most bitter of my detractors. I pray that my God may enlighten you to understand the world where I live in (Philippians 3:20)
“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ…”.
Let me give you an insight of the kind of world I consider my home. I have the same foresight as those who were once maltreated by the authorities of this world (Hebrew 11:13).
“These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.”
But, I enjoy journeying in this world seeking for my ‘countrymen’ in the world to come (2 Peter 3:13).
“Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”
I hope that through the internet you may visit my world; and I pray to God that you may not only ‘google’ into it, but also ‘stumble’ upon it.
After 43 years of ‘travel’, using my feet, my jeepney, my cars, and my one and only….
June 23, 2009 at 11:29 pm |
compeck, yesterday you said that you couldn’t explain what it means that man is made in the same image of God. Good on you for been honest. If you would like a fairly easy explanation, then email me Geoffhambling @clear.net .nz and I will that covers it mostly.
June 24, 2009 at 12:27 am |
[...] Why do so many believe in Jesus? Because they don’t actually know what the Bible says. Biblical li…thebeattitude.com [...]
June 24, 2009 at 12:41 am |
You say so, because you don’t believe in Jesus or you don’t read it
June 24, 2009 at 1:45 am |
you try to read a Bible?
try to read a bible you will see your want to see
June 26, 2009 at 12:42 pm |
Everyone sees what they want to see in the Bible. That’s it’s beauty. Everyone interprets it to justify their own behavior.
June 26, 2009 at 7:01 pm |
This is the main problem with the bible. I think this statement alone is the best reason to not believe in it. We all can justify whatever we want using it, which is no different then when a christian says an atheist has no bases for their morals. I don’t see that they do either since all their so called objective morals can be changed using the bible.
June 24, 2009 at 2:33 am |
the point is… all of us here just follow this prophecy
Philippians 1:15-18 (New International Version)
15It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. 16The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. 17The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains.[a] 18But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.
June 24, 2009 at 2:58 am |
I think this might be because people are encouraged to separate religion and science. That leads to nobody critically assessing their beliefs. And there’s a sense of “DUH! Faith is not supposed to make sense” which really I find odd. Shouldn’t the most important thing in yout life make sense? True religion should be strong enough to withstand anything thrown at it.
June 24, 2009 at 7:46 am |
Some would say that faith is the opposite of critical thinking.
June 24, 2009 at 10:42 pm |
Yes. But but nothing worth using your brain on should fall like a house of cards when ones starts thinking critically. If God exists then belief in Him and therefore faith in Him should only increase the more critically you think. That’s my personal experience anyway.
I don’t believe in “leaps of faith”. I believe God gives you a ladder and you climb aboard. =)
June 25, 2009 at 11:04 am |
Most rational people would say that faith is the opposite of critical thinking.
June 25, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Disagree. Faith comes from belief which comes from logical thought. Yes, a lot of people don’t think of faith that way, but I believe they’ll answer to God for saying what He said doesn’t make sense. And mind you, I’m not limiting what He said to the Bible or the Quran or anything. Faith should be accessible to everone, whether it is Tarzan raised among apes or a man living on a desert island. Holy texts are very important, but they should be in tune with humanity’s instinct of what constitues right. Because that instinct we have is every much as God given as His words.
June 26, 2009 at 11:51 am
Faith doesn`t come from logical thought according to 1 Cor 2 v 14: “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.” According to the Bible, unless God reveals Himself to you, you cannot find Him by normal thought processes. At least get the facts right about what is actually taught!
June 26, 2009 at 7:29 pm
According to the same chapter the spiritual man makes judgements about all things. Meaning thought is important to faith. If you believe in God you will, in your heart, never accept that truly wise people will reject God.
What use is a faith that doesn’t come to naturally?
Also are Bible believers the only people who believe in God? =)
June 24, 2009 at 4:03 am |
Good points… but aren’t we generalizing a bit. Yeah Christianity has established itself as a very democratic religion. But where are you actually drawing the line of definition. There’s a difference between those that call themselves Christians simply because it was imposed on them at birth, we also have the liberal and radical believers and we have “true” believers. Lets not leave out the “defectors” and all the other branches.
The Bible CAN be a little dodgy, especially if you try to compare the different translations. I won’t even go into how the book was compiled to begin with. It’s OK to not believe in something, but aren’t you in a way trying to take away something that has given so many people hope for such a long time. Religion, in all its weird metaphors and definitions has a place. So does Christianity, even if only the clueless are followers.
You are right though…it would help if people would start reading the book and formulate their own opinions about it. Instead of just being blind followers.
June 24, 2009 at 4:29 am |
This article only tells us that Americans are stupid and illiterate ………….
June 24, 2009 at 4:45 am |
Interesting stuff
June 24, 2009 at 4:46 am |
The title of the post implies that if people knew what the Bible says, they would not be Christians. I think the article ends up saying, in essance, that Christians should read the Bbile. Amen to that. Many Christians wave the Bible like a flag, or wear it like a badge on their arm, but have no idea what’s written inside. I’m an ordained minister; I totally agree with everything in the post (read very of the comments).
June 24, 2009 at 4:47 am |
The title of the post implies that if people knew what the Bible says, they would not be Christians. I think the article ends up saying, in essance, that Christians should read the Bbile. Amen to that. Many Christians wave the Bible like a flag, or wear it like a badge on their arm, but have no idea what’s written inside. I’m an ordained minister; I totally agree with everything in the post (read very few of the comments).
June 24, 2009 at 5:13 am |
Whoa, buddy! There are not even 93% of the US population that claim to be Christian! That statistic doesn’t strike you as absurd? Only about 76%* of Americans profess to be Christian (2007 poll), or did you forget about Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism and Islamic religions? Or how about the 15%** that claim no religious affiliation at all? 93% is a huge jump! You can’t have thought that all atheists and other denominations fit into a measly 7%. Even in the Bible belt you only see upwards of 86%*** of the population claiming to be Christian.
That said, I agree that there are staggering numbers of people that don’t study, and I do mean study the Bible regularly. I believe that most of the guilty party rely on their pastor or preacher to relay the messages of the Good Book to them. Humans, nowadays, tend not to store information in their brains that is readily at hand. It is much easier, for example, to pull out an Atlas than it is to memorize all of the roads and highways out there refer to (Malcolm Gladwell-The Tipping Point). Simple math problems can be solved with a calculator with no effort. Histories of the Nations can be found on a google web search. It is easier, then, to trust some one else who is credible to tell you what is important, and when you have questions to look them up yourself at that time then it is to have a solid basis of the entire Bible stored in your noggin somewhere. I also think that is horrible, because humans (yes, even pastors) make mistakes constantly. If it was so easy to correctly and effectively interpret the Bible, why then are there hundreds of denominations out there? Why are there drastic differences in their teachings and beliefs?
I know that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, not because some one told me, or because a collection of ancient gospel writings say so, but because I have studied it out in my mind and my heart, and prayed for a confirmation to come to my by the power of the Holy Spirit. Even if people start reading the Bible on a daily basis, there is no guarantee that they will be any more knowledgeable about the Savior of the World or about what they should do in life. Every one has a right to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, regardless if they are studious readers of the Word of God. There is no easy way to gauge or judge a persons religious prowess or the worth of a soul, not should we attempt to do so. There is only one judge of all men. We should gain firm testimonies in our own hearts, yes. When we truly believe something is true, something we strongly believe will lead to salvation, happiness and peace, we should then also encourage others to do take part in that. It isn’t about who reads or doesn’t read, or who knows this Book in the Old Testament or that, it is about loving all of our brothers and sisters and trying to mutually work together towards cleansing ourselves from the stains of the world.
*^ a b c “CIA Fact Book”. CIA World Fact Book. 2002. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html. Retrieved on 2007-12-30.
**^ “Studies on Agnostics and Atheists in Selected Countries”. Adherents.com. http://www.adherents.com/Na/Na_46.html. Retrieved on 2007-06-14.
*** ^ http://www.gallup.com/poll/109108/Belief-God-Far-Lower-Western-US.aspx
June 24, 2009 at 7:03 pm |
I’m not a Christian and I have a Bible. Bibles are everywhere and in every hotel room. The statistic isn’t that hard to believe.
June 24, 2009 at 7:43 am |
The article implies that the level of ignorance about the Bible is notable in some way, but as any number of polls (and the news and several tv shows) indicate, the level of cluelessness of the American public about nearly all subjects (except sports and American Idol) is staggering.
Most people think the sun revolves around the earth and:
Can’t name 3 countries in Europe.
Tell who were the players in WW2 and who were our allies.
Name the vice president.
Tell you when 9/11 happened.
Find their home state on a map.
Those were all questions that I have seen answered wrong by a majority of respondents in a variety of polls, so ignorance of the Bible is just consistency, not an odd anomaly.
I think if the citizens of this country were truly well educated, most of the stuff the politicians and pundits and priests get away with would be nipped at the bud.
June 24, 2009 at 7:54 am |
“I think if the citizens of this country were truly well educated, most of the stuff the politicians and pundits and priests get away with would be nipped at the bud.”
Ditto!
June 24, 2009 at 8:50 am |
For those dumping on Islam, have you actually read the Quran or even tried to understand it, or are you simply spouting what people have told you. It’s amazing how people who are not even versed in their own religion are experts in other people’s religions.
As for reading..the word Quran literally means — that which should be read — it comes from the same root as the Arabic word “iqra” which means to read or recite and in fact was literally first word of the first verse of the Quran revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)
June 24, 2009 at 9:25 am |
Yes! Why do so many People believe in Jesus? I always wondered about that fact. And why is it that whenever a dark entity ( whether sent, or walk-in, or however ), enter into a persons home, life, etc, the name Jesus Christ for some odd reason is the only word that causes this thing to flee.
And why is it that ex-members of dark cults, satanic rituals, psychic schools, etc, have disclosed in their books that the only power against evil is prayer and the name Jesus Christ.
Wow, isn’t this facinating! Speak of a non-spiritual experienced mentor guiding his flock with his internal light.
June 24, 2009 at 9:27 am |
Honestly, religion serves as a security blanket; a means of measuring our actions through a filter. Anyone who puts all their faith into this idea is just running away from the only reality that they ever knew in order to justify their actions whether they be good or bad. The fact that their is ignorance when it comes to the Bible just shows how truly sad religion is in America and how we generally just try to find a security blanket to hide under without even thinking twice about it. We are told from a very young age to believe in something that we can’t even comprehend and we believe it and let that mysterious thing rule our judgment. People need to get a grip on themselves and start accepting things as they are.
June 24, 2009 at 10:02 am |
“For those dumping on Islam, have you actually read the Quran or even tried to understand it, or are you simply spouting what people have told you. It’s amazing how people who are not even versed in their own religion are experts in other people’s religions.
As for reading..the word Quran literally means — that which should be read — it comes from the same root as the Arabic word “iqra” which means to read or recite and in fact was literally first word of the first verse of the Quran revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)”
9:29 comes to mind
so goes 9:5
So does the Hadith of Sahih Bukhari book 84 in which Muhammad states so eloquently
“If he changes his Islamic religion, then kill him” — a real inspiration for the systematic slaughter of apostates in Islamic nation.
June 25, 2009 at 11:29 am |
Islam: What the West needs to know
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-871902797772997781
June 24, 2009 at 10:08 am |
I agree that it is very obvious that most people who claim to be Christian have not read the New Testament and do not realize why there is a “new” testament because they still read and quote verses from a book that does not apply to their faith, the Old Testament. The OT is a book of the Hebrew faith, not the Christian faith. The worst part is that they pick and choose what they believe and practice when it pertains to the OT.
June 24, 2009 at 12:27 pm |
@seth: Great start, bad finish!
The “new testament” is announced in Jeremiah 31:31+, which references the “old testament” in Exodus then describes the new one:
…I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
So, God writes the old testament law into the hearts of the new believers, such that
…they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them…
So a new believer practicing Biblical Christianity (instead of one of the false pseudo-Christian religions) has a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ such that He actually helps the believer implement and fulfill the Biblical Judaism described in the old testament. Therefore, Biblical Christianity and Biblical Judaism are one and the same, but they are NOT a religion. As it says in Jeremiah 31:28:
And it shall come to pass, [that] like as I have watched over them, to pluck up, and to break down, and to throw down, and to destroy, and to afflict; so will I watch over them, to build, and to plant, saith the LORD.
So, the whole Bible has always been wholly relevant to any real believer.
Perhaps this “model” will help some to grasp this better…
The point of the old covenant was to create a context in which we could discover that we CANNOT reach perfection by our own means, EVEN with perfect laws. Israel’s history, along with that of the rest of us, demonstrated a haphazard reckless mess of attempts (as testified to by many comments here). We desperately need help.
The point of the new covenant is that we can have help from the one being (the Lord Jesus Christ) who can actually make it possible to fulfill those expectations. Unfortunately, almost none of us can appreciate that opportunity even in the face of that history, let alone if those experiences had been “skipped”.
However, it is absolutely critical to recognize that the change in covenant has NO impact on the nature of salvation: faith. The same trust in the Lord that saves me and allows me to be forgiven and cleansed of my failures is the same trust that likewise saved the Apostle Paul and Father Abraham (see Hebrews 11).
These passages, and many others, can help us to clear up a critical misunderstanding. The purpose of the Biblical laws is to teach us, to give us feedback about our actual performance in life, similar to how a yardstick reveals the progress of our child’s physical growth. In other words, the Biblical law is more properly viewed like a thermometer that measures our love (in the purest sense) towards the one true God and towards our fellow man.
When I violate one of the Biblical laws, such as by stealing, the point is NOT that God is going to “punish” me for breaking one of His “rules”. The point is that my stealing has hurt people (including myself) because that act inherently violates the nature of workable personal interactions that is captured under the concept of (pure) love. My theft upsets the balance and thereby creates an injustice, but the Biblical law is merely reporting and describing it so that we can more readily recognize and learn from it.
Stealing did not become bad when the Lord Jesus Christ wrote it into the Ten Commandments that He gave to Moses–stealing was ALWAYS inherently bad because it violates the nature of love, which is defined by the character of God (remember: God IS love). Since we are created in the “image” of God, our nature mirrors His nature in this respect: we respect the nature of love inherent in us because we mirror the nature of love defined in Him. Stealing from one another is an unavoidable violation of that nature, but we fallible humans often attempt to suppress our responses to it in various ways and degrees.
The Biblical law describes various aspects of this inherent nature so that we can recognize what is happening when we violate it. But the point is not punishment–the “punishment” is automatic, except in two particular respects.
One aspect of Biblical “punishment” is to reinforce the feedback loop for violations by making the consequences more obvious and more public. In the extreme case, we execute (not murder) the violator so that we can close the feedback loop for society, NOT to punish the perpetrator. Executing the violator only serves to close that feedback loop for them as well, since there is no opportunity for them to demonstrate their “learning” once they are dead.
The other aspect of Biblical “punishment” is the impact to our relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Violating the nature of God by our acts unavoidably separates us from His presence.
Adam & Eve began life with a solid relationship with the Lord, but their Fall resulted in them being separated from Him. This was NOT an arbitrary decision–it was a vital necessity.
Rough analogy/metaphor: A being of the purity and power inherent to the Lord Jesus Christ will destroy any impure being that comes into His direct presence, and He will automatically withdraw (recoil?) from the presence of any impure being. Before the Fall, the Lord could walk with and interact with Adam & Eve safely. After the Fall, separation become essential to the couple’s survival. The Lord gave them some “space” so that they would have a decent opportunity to clean up their mess and restore the previous familial relationship. It seems apparent that Adam & Eve did indeed clean up their mess and became saved in the same way that we can: faith.
So, just like being a member of a human family, Adam & Eve were acknowledged as the Lord’s children until their Fall resulted in them being disowned/disinherited and thereby separated from Him. Each of their descendants (including you & I) begins life similarly separated from the Lord, because we inherit the same impurity that separated Adam & Eve. But we can become adopted (“saved”, “born again”) by the Lord upon our honest request, and His response is to cleanse and restore us into His family.
Each violation of the Biblical laws reveals an encroaching corruption to our nature, but the law only “measures” and describes the corruption rather than imposes it. Since the presence in us of that corruption “forces” the Lord to “stand off”, these violations impact our relationship with Him. However, each honest effort to clean up that mess with Him restores us anew.
It is apparent that, if we actively and repeatedly reject our restored nature, we can ultimately separate ourselves from the Lord permanently (effectively forcing ourselves to be disowned).
It is also apparent that, if we never choose to be adopted, then we remain outside the family.
So, Heaven is simply where the Lord’s family resides in the afterlife, and its characteristics are simply defined by the presence of the Lord.
Likewise, Hell is simply where those outside the Lord’s family reside in the afterlife, and its characteristics are simply defined by the absence of the Lord. Note then, that nobody goes to Hell who did not choose to do so by their rejection of Him and Heaven. Also note that the Lord does not “send” people to Hell, since Hell is the simple result of Him honoring people’s rejection of His presence.
So, we all start out in need of adoption by the Lord, but He does not force it on anyone. If we honestly ask, He readily adopts us. If our actions demonstrate an overwhelming trend of disrespect for our adopted Father and others, we can be disowned again.
When we leave this life, the status of our adoption becomes permanent. His family spends the afterlife in His presence, as they each chose, with all the benefits inherent to it. Those who rejected the Lord are granted their desire by spending the afterlife without Him and without all the goodness that comes from His presence, referred to as Hell.
As imperfect as my description may be, I hope that it helps you to understand how the Bible integrates well, and how the faith that it describes differs from a religion (man-made system of beliefs). Real Biblical Christianity = Biblical Judaism is based on the original relationship between mankind and our true Creator. It is a family, an extremely tolerant one, but not a rule set.
June 24, 2009 at 12:56 pm |
Thanks for the reply, but I must disagree. Jesus gave one commandment not ten. I have torn the OT from my bible and it will stay that way. I put no faith in anything before Matthew as most of it is a contradiction to what Jesus taught.
June 24, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Jesus gave us 2 commandments: Love the Lord God with your whole heart, mind, soul and strength….the second: Love your neighbor as yourself…keeping these two commandments are the fulfillment of the 10 commandments. The New Testament fulfills the Old Testament!
June 24, 2009 at 10:48 pm
But isn’t the OT part of the Bible too? Like if you were born in that time (before Jesus Christ) then wouldn’t the OT have been the ultimate truth for you? If you are a Christian now because you were born in the time after the Crucifixion then you would have been a follower of Moses at the time he was leading the Children of Israel to the promised land. Imagining you had been around then…would you have discarded the OT that glibly? I think there’s a reason its still part of the Bible even though the NT is supposed to fulfill it…
June 24, 2009 at 10:16 am |
@thesheikdown — and perhaps you should read the other 99.999% and understand it all in context. It’s clear that people like you who simply regurgitate selected passages don’t actually understand what it is that you are saying or writing.
The Quran and Hadith are not a list of commandments that are enacted blindly. Yet that’s exactly what you are doing in your comment above.
June 24, 2009 at 10:41 am |
Thanks for the post. This is a problem. Our country and world would be so much better if only “Christians” would pick up their book and study it more.
What a better world we’d have if more people would study their Bibles, memorize things like the sermon on the mount, Proverbs, and the like peoples lives would be transformed form bench sitters to star players overnight.
The Bible is one of the greatest pieces of literature of all times. Greater then the Illiad, Crime and Punishment, War and Peace, or any other great book one can read.
June 24, 2009 at 6:39 pm |
There are many good and moral teachings in the Bible. But the ugly, bloody and hateful parts of the Bible make far from the greatest book of all time.
June 24, 2009 at 11:00 am |
Words of wisdom. Even though I would not honestly call myself a Christian, I was raised Catholic and agree whole-heartedly with your point.
June 24, 2009 at 11:15 am |
Yes, indeed those are words of wisdom; however, just reading and studying the Bible just leads to knowledge. Putting it into practise would be the greater good!
June 24, 2009 at 11:36 am |
Wow! Passion barometer off the charts!!!! You sure know how to stir the waters!
I’m just logging in to say, “Damn You BEattitude!” Ever since I read this post the Doobie Brothers have set up camp in my psyche and their song “Jesus is Just Alright With Me” has been running in a nonstop loop. Now I love that song and am quite alright with its presence….however my housemates are beginning to get crazed looks in their eyes…
June 24, 2009 at 11:58 am |
Many Americans continue to believe that the earth is the third planet from the sun … simply because someone told them so when they were a child.
June 24, 2009 at 3:23 pm |
Very true.
However, people who question whether or not our planet is the third from the sun can corroborate the popular view with many different sources. The existence of God is only substantiated by the Bible, and wherever you choose to exercise faith. It is circular logic to continue believing a point a single source tells you not to question. Not to mention the fact that people’s views on where our planet is in relation to others has yet to determine public policy. If it ever does, and the policies based on that view of it being the third rock causes people to oppress, torture, make war, or otherwise hurt some other people, I’m sure you will see some arguments against it.
Thanks for playing.
June 25, 2009 at 8:31 am |
Many millions of people have an experience that they identify as “God.” I think your premise is flawed that the Bible is the basis for belief in God. The Bible was an impulse shared among diverse writers across a millennium who endeavored to communicate an experience that preceded their attempts to write about it.
June 25, 2009 at 1:35 pm
I’m sure that many people feel they have experienced God regardless of the Bible’s virtues. My point is that at the very least, for Christians, the Bible is the singular record of Jesus’ works. It is the singular and the only authority on the subject. Research from diverse historians reflects that Jesus likely existed, but as far as the holy nature of his existence, proof is not forthcoming. My point was that for Christians, the Bible is the ONLY document that in any way discusses the holy work of Jesus. Even were it not, any other texts concerning his life would be secondary. The Bible is not amendable.
Overall, my point was that the belief in such a document is not a logical basis for public policy, but it continues to be a basis, whereas believing that our planet is third from the sun has no effect whatsoever on things like equal rights for all people, conduct in war, abortion rights, death penalty, euthanasia, etc.
June 24, 2009 at 12:03 pm |
The problem is that 1) reading the Bible includes reading, which is too much trouble for the average American, when they’re so used to information being handed to them via TV, word-of-mouth, and Internet blurbs, and 2) the Bible is something that requires interpretation and thought which, again, is too much trouble for the average American.
June 24, 2009 at 12:08 pm |
Many believe in Jesus, but the Jesus they believe in is a god they have created in their minds (a form of idol worship – these people are in violation of the 2nd commandemnt because they have created a god with their minds to suit themselves). If there is a god, it has always been easier for man and woman to change god and make Him accepatable to us rather than to humble ourselves and allow God to change us and make us acceptable to Him. Thus, most of these people claim to be Christians, but they are really false converts. That is why they don’t know the Word of God. If you don’t know the true message of the Bible you can easily be duped into hearing and believing whatever a preacher will tell you is the message of the Bible. Today, many preachers have exchanged the true message of the Bible for a life enhancement message. BeAttitude, do you have a Christian background?
June 24, 2009 at 12:17 pm |
Oatisobserver,
Jesus is God and I certainly did not “create him in my mind”. Yes, I believe in the Trinity and obviously you are sounding as a J.Witness. The true Word of God….the true message? “And the Word was made Flesh and dwelt among us”….that is Jesus Christ.
June 24, 2009 at 12:32 pm |
Thanks Julie for your reply. May the passion of our hearts be to know Him more fully with each passing day and to help others to come to know Him. ~Mike
June 24, 2009 at 12:33 pm |
Can you explain the Trinity as you see it? This concept has long escaped my understanding. Thanks.
June 24, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Salvation..
1. People have fallen into sin
2. God is savior (Isaiah 60:16, etc)
3. but We are not able to see God, for he is Holy and we are not
then how he fulfill “the salvation” ?
4. by sending his Holy Spirit as man in Jesus
5. After “mission” completed, after resurrection, he go back to his thrown, heaven.
as Jesus says:
Revelation 21:7 (New International Version)
He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son.
June 24, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Wow. This in no way answered my question. I’m wondered briefly if you were trying to respond to someone else, but read some of your other posts and realized you are not very good at communicating in English. No biggie.
Can someone please answer my question?
June 24, 2009 at 12:11 pm |
iamstillbroken,
Yes, I agree with your statement….how lazy “many” people these days are becoming. Choices need to be made.
May I ask a question? Is the name you chose “iamstillbroken” have anything to do with your struggles with God or religion?
June 24, 2009 at 12:22 pm |
christians are jews that wouldn’t cut their foreskin off….
i really just want to address the last paragraph. the bible was penned by someone that believed (we suspect) the oral traditions that he (again, we suspect) heard and decided to pass them on to posterity. none of it was written at the time that it was supposedly happening. while we have historical records for some of the figures of the book (paul, some of the royalties mentioned, etc), there are very, very few that corroborate much of what is in the bible. further, even when the thing was written there was a great difference in opinion about what should be included and what should not. the gnostic tradition was condemned even before it was written for their views on jesus and his teachings.
June 24, 2009 at 12:31 pm |
Babybrover,
Your statement is insulting…..Christian is the name given to those who have made the decision to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ.
The Bible is very well documented and gives verifying historical accounts…lineage….and the New Testament is the fullfillment of the Old Testament.
June 24, 2009 at 12:37 pm |
sorry guys, most of what I have read is factually incorrect. The bible is the only book in the world with a tremendous body of prophecy. So many that it is statistically impossible for them to be fullfilled. Your beliefs (atheism) are simply the conjecture of mans mind. The truth is when people actually read the bible life changing things begin to happen to them and their society. The current tribulations in america and other nations is our march away from the bible and God. Recently I was told by a Christiam missionary in Irag that in the northern part of the country there is still a large contingency of Babylonian devil worshipers. As they passed out pocket bibles and people began to read them hundreds of them changed their beliefs. The proof is in the puddin baby. I haven’t read any atheist sites that promote happiness and bliss because of their beliefs. On the other hand I have read vile language and an unlerlying anger. Maybe the problem is they have never really met Jesus in a personal experience. If you do, you will abandon such foolishness and start to really live! I write this because I too questioned the existence of God and found my way to be utter folly. Then I was unhappy and depressed but now I have a reason for living. What’s wrong with that?
Greg
http://www.focusonfreedom.net
June 24, 2009 at 2:53 pm |
“What`s wrong with that” is that you are completely deluded, that`s what! Sadly, there isn`t a single fulfilled prophecy in the Bible where the prophecy can actually be proved to have been made before the event to which it refers. Doh!!
June 24, 2009 at 3:35 pm |
@barriejohn:
Agreed.
“So many [prophecies] that it is statistically impossible for them to be fullfilled.”
What does that even mean? As I take it, you’re saying that the bible is full of so much truth, it’s impossible for it to be true? I’m sure that’s not what you meant. Try again please.
Your anecdote of devil worshipers reading the bible and changing is conjecture itself. Atheism for most atheists is not just a random arrangement of anti-superstitions. It is a way and method of questioning the things around them.
Speaking of happiness and bliss: what about the people throughout history that have died at the sword of Christianity?
June 24, 2009 at 4:15 pm |
Oh my, you have not read the Old and New Testaments, have you. The New fulfills the Old….the birth, the location, the crucifiction, the denial….thousands have been fulfilled…
June 24, 2009 at 4:07 pm |
Devil worshiping Iraqis!?!
Can you hold off on the bibles until we can get some anthropologists in there?
June 24, 2009 at 12:44 pm |
” If you choose to worship Jesus every Sunday, at least take the time to read the book about him. Otherwise you’re nothing more than a lemming.”
excellent point. But true Christian worship Jesus every day and not only on sundays!
June 24, 2009 at 6:43 pm |
That was exactly my point. Most Christians in America worship their God about as much as I do.
June 24, 2009 at 10:24 pm |
i got your point! and agreed. Christianity is not only confesed by words, but also and most imprtantly confessed by the way of life.
So yes you are right, infact your post make a great sunday sermon.
thanks
June 24, 2009 at 1:05 pm |
That is VERY true. Every word in that posst is so true! I wish I could add this site to my blogroll, but I don’t want to offend any of my friends.
June 24, 2009 at 1:07 pm |
A true christian is someone who has the Spirit of Christ within. How then can someone relgate him to sundays only? Impossible. That’s what so exciting about Jesus, he goes with you every day. Atheism on the other hand gives no hope of help except from within. How boring and empty. Sorry but it’s true. Someone said that walking with Jesus is “joy unspeakable and full of glory” I couldn’t agree more.
Greg
http://www.focusonfreedom.net
June 24, 2009 at 2:08 pm |
gregwirths – I am not an atheist because I think it is fun. I could not become a Christian even if I thought it would be an unspeakable joy. The fact is that I have no choice in the matter. My mind came to the conclusion that it has and I would by lying to myself if I tried to change that.
I have considered the evidence of the truth of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and found them wanting. The central problem for me is that the world has produced myriad mutually exclusive religions. many of them with holy books and millions of followers. I can find no logical basis to select one over the other as being the truth. Faith alone cannot be the answer, because all of the major religions have faithful adherents. We know the majority of them must be wrong.
In the bible I have read about great miracles, which surely must have made faith an easier proposition of the ancients, but I have never personally witnessed a miracle (or even heard of one in the news).
My conclusion is that religion is the product of wishful thinking and our desire to give meaning to the unexplainable. Which religion we advocate seems to be based primarily on the chance of the culture we are born into. I have a hard time accepting that I just happened to be born into the “true” religion which will give me eternal life.
It is too bad that atheism gives me no hope, but I did not come to atheism for hope. I got here by default.
June 24, 2009 at 2:28 pm |
Paul S:
I am standing up applauding. Well and concisely said!
June 25, 2009 at 4:26 pm
@Paul S & LeoPardus: I wholeheartedly agree–well said, Paul! I came to a different conclusion in my search, but I applaud your statement of the issue.
It is critical for each of us to realize the nature of the playing field: the various religions claim exclusivity, Biblical Judaism/Christianity claims a relationship instead of a religion, and atheism in its various forms disavows them all. It is impossible to not pick one, and it makes no logical sense to try picking more than one. None of them can be proven or even disproven conclusively.
Faith and choice are inherent elements of the human condition. Welcome to the game!
June 24, 2009 at 3:37 pm |
werd.
June 24, 2009 at 10:25 pm |
“The central problem for me is that the world has produced myriad mutually exclusive religions.”
When you say “exclusive” do you mean you don’t think there is such a thing as a single truth? Or that the idea of the adherents of only one religion going to Heaven and the rest going to Hell is repugnant? (I’m sorry, I like your posts, just trying to figure out this sentence.)
June 25, 2009 at 8:57 am
Don’t know if he’ll answer, but “mutually exclusive” in simple, logical terms means that if any one of those religions is correct, the others must be false.
With so many religions making such exclusive truth claims, you absolutely must pick the right one or you’re screwed. And of course you have to worry that they are all wrong and something you never saw was the “right” one.
June 25, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Thanks.
But in that case, whether you formally accept a religion or not, you live your life according to a set of rules you’ve mapped out for yourself. These can be selfish and worldly or they can be self-sacrificing and noble. So why not pick a religion that fits with your ideals? And not all religions say the other religious people are damned to hell or “screwed”…=)
June 26, 2009 at 3:08 pm
purplesocks:
I could pick a religion that doesn’t say others are screwed. Taoism comes to mind. I actually kind of like that religion.
But in picking such a religion one falls afoul of all the others that are exclusive. So if you go Taoist, then Christianity and Islam say you’re going to hell.
The main reason though why I don’t “pick a religion” is because they are all full of wishful thinking, unprovable claims, varied types of errors, and so forth.
I also don’t “pick a religion” because it would add nothing. More likely it would try to take something, like my time or money.
June 26, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Well. So long as you’ve thought really hard about it and researched all possible choices.
June 24, 2009 at 3:33 pm |
How sad to have no hope. Yet the hope I have is not based upon blind faith. I have seen miracles such as a broken arm healed, instananeous deliverance from LSD, glacoma healed and even a brain tumor healed completely which was confirmed by the doctor and put in the local paper. I’m sure all of this will be discounted by the (wise) and shrugged off by saying “I never saw it”. I did and have this as proof that God exists. Other proofs of the divine inspiration of scripture such as its’ body of prophecies, mathematical perfection as proved by Dr. Ivan Panin an atheist who studied the bible mathmatically and by the way later became a christian because of his discoveries, and its medical and historical superiority of its time. Add to this the personal experience of Jesus Christ and I can only say, “I have hope.” How can there be no God when the universe screams of his existence and the intricacies of creation could only have come about by a superior mind (GOD)? I’m sorry but as a child my default mode came about while looking at the stars and thinking why am I here at this time? Have you never thought this? We are more than just a mass of cells similar to the animals. You can have hope and joy and peace and assurance of your purpose because it does exist. Why stand and applaud no hope? Sounds pretty empty. I’ll take God any day.
Greg
http://www.focusonfreedom.net
June 24, 2009 at 6:45 pm |
Okay, let’s say there is a god. Why is your version of god the right one? Seventy percent of the world’s population disagrees with you.
June 24, 2009 at 8:17 pm |
You missed my main point. I love the idea of having hope. But I can’t trick myself into believing what my rational thought process won’t believe–great benefits notwithstanding.
I’m glad that miraculous things have happened to you. That hasn’t been my experience.
I will investigate Dr. Pavin’s story.
I think about why I am here and why the stars are here and the intricacies of life. Please don’t assume that I am shallow simply because I have come to different conclusions about those things. (My beliefs are in line with conventional scientific thinking.)
Also, I would like to add that I am a happy person because I enjoy life here on earth (love, music, friends, baseball). So it’s really not that bad.
June 24, 2009 at 10:32 pm |
“Yet the hope I have is not based upon blind faith. I have seen miracles ”
I’m glad you have hope and I’m a fan of religion myself. But miracles do not open eyes…they forward a point of view you are supposed to come to by using the tools God gave you to discover Him. I personally think miracles are a faith enhancer or a faith accessory rather than something that is a proof for the validity of that religion.
And yes, the universe does scream of God’s existence. =)
June 24, 2009 at 4:03 pm |
Wow. I hope there’s no law saying that you have to read all the comments generated by your post.
Before I saw the comments I thought the post was pretty innocuous. Haven’t we all see a myriad of articles in which the shocking ingorance of our fellow citizens is exposed through some quiz or another.
But a few people started with “we are the REAL christian” types of statements and it looks like it just snowballed. As an atheist and an outside observer, I’ve always wondered when the day will come when the different types of Christians would have it out at one another. It sometimes seems like the truth no one wants to say in public. One Christian doesn’t think the other Christian is Christian.
June 24, 2009 at 4:11 pm |
Jackybird,
Unfortunately, you are correct that Christians sometimes do appear to argue among themselves…but, it does bring out dialog.
June 24, 2009 at 11:33 pm |
Christians do sometimes appear to argue amongst themselves?
Like in Ireland? Dialog?
June 24, 2009 at 4:38 pm |
Just curious, do you write intentionally misleading post titles just to garner attention? Your overall post addresses nothing about Jesus nor does it suggest any support for belief in Him predicated on not reading the Bible.
That said, the core of your post continues on the disingenuous path. The majority of your statistics have to do with Americans, not Christians. Why not entitle your piece “Americans are Biblically Illiterate?” Because you won’t make the wordpress home page without the titillation?
Joan of Arc the wife of Noah…that’s cute. Too bad neither you nor the original author you hooked it from provided any documentation.
June 24, 2009 at 6:49 pm |
No, not misleading. My point is biblical literacy is the quickest way to atheism/agnosticism.
The Bible is ridiculously flawed, repeatedly conflicting, horribly bloody, and filled with evil laws. Most people would see the book as fiction and folklore if they actually read it.
June 24, 2009 at 8:27 pm |
“Biblical literacy is the quickest way to atheism/agnosticism.”
Not necessarily so. Do you have any evidence or statistics to support that claim? Or is this just an opinion? If it’s an opinion, you should make it clear that you are interpreting these particular statistics so as to leap to your conclusion.
Many very intellectual, rational, biblical scholars have concluded just the opposite. There are many well-researched books out there that come to the opposite conclusion that you have. Many atheists have, upon really studying the Scriptures, become Christians.
This is not to say that many of your points aren’t valid. I agree with you that believers would do well to gain a better grounding in why they believe what they believe. My guess is that this could also be said for 90 percent of the Americans who say they believe in Darwinian evolution even though they’ve never read The Origin of Species, never read books about science or scientific journals, and only because they remember bits and pieces of a junior high textbook and the cool fossil pictures in a National Geographic magazine.
My main point is that the logic of your post is flawed. The statistical evidence presented simply supports the statement that many Americans are not well-versed in the Bible. The evidence presented here does not support the claim you make in your title, that people believe in Jesus because they lack knowledge about the Bible.
The truth or falsity of a claim does not depend on how many people understand why they believe it. That rule applies to Christians and to atheists.
June 24, 2009 at 9:03 pm
The proof is in my own life and in the testimony of many other former Christians I have talked to. My logic is not flawed. An all-powerful God could certainly inspire a less terrible book.
June 24, 2009 at 10:27 pm |
I disagree.
thanks
June 24, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
[...] Why do so many believe in Jesus? Because they don’t actually know what the Bible says. The majority of Christians in America are biblically illiterate. This is kind of a big deal considering the Bible is [...] [...]
June 24, 2009 at 7:36 pm |
I’m so glad that my English teacher is a Bible nut. Were forced to read the bible from a literary stance. Still atheist but now I get a lot of imagery found in media, literature, and art….
June 24, 2009 at 7:57 pm |
Bieng a huge believer in God and Jesus, I can actually agree with what is said. I believe that one must actually know what you believe before you believe it.
June 24, 2009 at 8:07 pm |
I love how some people pick and choose what they decide to follow and ignore other aspects that don’t fit into their lifestyle.
For example, if you are having pre-marital sex, you might as well break one more rule and also use a condom. You can’t condemn one rule while breaking another and not consider yourself a hypocrite.
I think people also have to realize the difference between the religion itself and the history of Chrisianity. Many aspects of current Christian beliefs are historical and not necessarily religious at all (ie. not in the Bible). Much of what is practiced is habit and not the word of God.
June 24, 2009 at 8:10 pm |
2000 years of continuous testament or perhaps more like 5000 years or more. Sounds like a trend.
Testifying from sops that say God doesn’t exist because they say so. Says something. The number of atheists with studies to prove the negative must number in the dozens. LOL. And the number of Atheists that have talked convincingly to me would fit on the head of a pin.
Do you believe in quantum physics? Can you explain it? Aphysicist!
Not understanding that Gays are to be loved is absolute rubbish.
June 24, 2009 at 8:22 pm |
So you must be a Muslim and a Jew as well.
June 24, 2009 at 8:10 pm |
Romans 2:1-16 (King James Version)
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Romans 3:23 (King James Version)
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Question
Would you give me a Bibical answer as to what one must do to be saved. I’v see and heard many say just pray the sinners prayer. That seems like no answer to me from what I see in the scripture. look forward to your answer
The Phillipian jailer asked the same question:
Acts 16:30-31
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
So…what must you do? Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
You may say…I have always believed in Jesus. Some belief is not saving faith…. notice the following verse.
James 2:19
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
Obviously the belief of the devils is not enough….so what kind of belief, or faith do we need?
Let us first see what is the opposite of saving faith.
Habakkuk 2:4
4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
The opposite of saving faith is pride…or trusting in yourself. Think of it this way. How do you hope to get to heaven? You may say because I try hard…I have been baptized….I take communion. Although you believe historically about Jesus…you are trusting in your own efforts.
Galatians 2:21
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
Ephesians 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
So then, saving faith comes when you transfer your trust from your efforts onto Jesus Christ alone. This transfer is usually expressed in prayer.
Romans 10:9-10,13
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
There is not a magic “sinner’s prayer” in the Bible. It is the belief, or transfer of trust from yourself and your efforts to Jesus alone that saves. Notice what Hebrews says is the foundation truth:
Hebrews 6:1
… not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
Salvation is a turning from (repentance) trusting in dead works… and turning toward Jesus. You can tell Him that in the prayer of your own words. I hope that this clears things up. Please feel free to follow up with any other qestions that you may have.
In Christ
Pastor Don Carpenter
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Baptists-954/Must-Saved.htm
June 24, 2009 at 8:12 pm |
2000 years of continuous testament or perhaps more like 5000 years or more. Sounds like a trend.
Testifying from sops that say God doesn’t exist because they say so. Says something. The number of atheists with studies to prove the negative must number in the dozens. LOL. And the number of Atheists that have talked convincingly to me would fit on the head of a pin.
Do you believe in quantum physics? Can you explain it? Aphysicist!
Gays are to be loved is Christ’s teaching. Loving Atheists the same. Hating Christians – millions killed for their beliefs. Seems the Atheists have the problems.
June 24, 2009 at 8:13 pm |
… We eat food without any question..
but one “stupid” says before i eat it, i need to know the contents of protein, bla bla bla…. for i’m a doctor for 30 year, that carbohydrate can kill me
June 24, 2009 at 8:17 pm |
I don’t think you need to know what the Bible or Gita or Koran says or believe in Jesus. We are humans, and if we start loving humanity, we have all the knowledge around us.
June 24, 2009 at 8:27 pm |
Agreed.
Atleast someone understands ;]
June 24, 2009 at 8:18 pm |
First of all, your blog title( Why do so many believe in Jesus? Because they don’t actually know what the Bible says.) doesn’t make any sense! How can one believe in someone if they haven’t read or listen to what the bible said about Jesus. Just because one read or heard of what jesus did and accepted him as their Lord and savior doesn’t mean that they would fully know what the bible says. It takes time for one to study the bible and fully know what it says and i hope one would take that step once they believe in Jesus Christ. That is the power of Jesus Christ, it touches everybody, even if they aren’t fully knowledable about the bible .
June 24, 2009 at 8:52 pm |
You’ve only reiterated my point. People listen to sermons at church, but do not read their own Bible. Churches conveniently never talk about the ugly parts of the Bible.
If you only listen to the words of others to build your faith in Jesus, that is the equivalent of a lemming. It requires personal responsibility to question and study teachings so important to a person’s life.
June 24, 2009 at 8:23 pm |
The level of stupidity from the above remarks says it all. “YHVH” is the God the father and Jesus is the “begotten son”. The devil is in the details and that is where the problem resides.
http://www.CaptainDemocracy.wordpress.com
June 24, 2009 at 8:26 pm |
If only people realized how childish it is…
June 24, 2009 at 8:26 pm |
[...] http://thebeattitude.com/2009/06/22/why-do-so-many-believe-in-jesus-because-they-dont-actually-know-... Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Santa Claus or Santa ‘Christ’!Satan Claus!This post brought to you by Santa ClausBudget summer vacation from Chicago – road trip to Santa Claus, Indiana [...]
June 24, 2009 at 8:26 pm |
You are assuming that all who call themselves Christians are so. This is a false statement because Christian actually means Christ follower. For many being a Christian is simply cultural, because it is cultural it is not something that has been made their own.
June 24, 2009 at 8:58 pm |
I never claimed all Christians are this way. But the majority are.
June 24, 2009 at 8:36 pm |
The fact that there’s arguments about what religion is right or better just further backs up why I opt out of following anything!
June 24, 2009 at 8:44 pm |
Those statistics have no basis and lack any form of proof!
June 24, 2009 at 11:44 pm |
Proof? It has been written. This blog says the statistics are true. I heard from another guy that the person who writes this blog is divinely inspired. If you don’t believe it, you are probably going to hell. Unless, you know, you later decide that you do believe it. But you have to promise. Then it’s all good.
June 24, 2009 at 8:47 pm |
Number of people over here have said all muslims do is, kill people, so for the sake of record, i would like to request everyone who has made this claim, if you can compile some data, on how many people have been killed by people belong to each religion in last 200 years, and publish it over here, i will be really grateful,
thanks,
June 24, 2009 at 9:15 pm |
hey,
these statistics you have presented are pretty appalling. thanks for the insight — will hyperlink this post on my own blog.
God save America
June 24, 2009 at 9:23 pm |
This post is one big, dumb, lie. I know alot about my God, the one and only. It’s simple and understandable but takes some interpreting in some places. The people who write this kind of stuff will sadly go to hell. God gave you one book, do yourself a favor and read it, and actually try to understand it rater than find more things you don’t understand. Yes, i know its hard to understand, but wherever you got this from, lied to you. Once you learn the truth, its a whole different world. God’s already in control, just pick a side. Choose wisely…
And thanks all my fellow Christians for speaking out against this stuff. God bless..
June 24, 2009 at 9:24 pm |
[...] save the United States of America 2009 June 25 by Alastair Su When I saw this post on the WordPress homepage, thinking it another anti-Christian rant. I was surprised then, when it [...]
June 24, 2009 at 9:27 pm |
Your logic for arriving at the conclusion that Americans believe in Jesus because they are biblically illiterate, is based on literal information from the Bible and not spiritual understanding. Spirituality comes from hope, faith and a deep desire to serve God, and not memorization of Books in the Bible (as an example). I agree that many Christians do not take the time to study the Bible, and certainly that should improve, but you analysis is an spiritually deprived as you say Americans are biblically illiterate. The Pharisees, of whom Jesus openly chastised, practiced doctrine without spiritual understanding–which got them nothing. Please don’t do the same!
Visit me at: http://theunfoldingofarose.wordpress.com/the-lords-prayer/
or read my book: The Unfolding of a Rose
http://www.strategicbookpublishing.com/TheUnfoldingOfARose.html
December 10, 2009 at 11:39 am |
“based on literal information from the Bible and not spiritual understanding. Spirituality comes from hope, faith and a deep desire to serve God, and not memorization of Books in the Bible”
I can’t say this enough, apparently. You can’t separate the literal word of the bible from a more serene, spiritual understanding of god when your entire notion of who god is comes from the bible. If the bible is your only source of information on who god is, pretending to have a higher understanding of him while dismissing scripture is absurd.
December 17, 2009 at 1:13 am |
@Kenton Gilchrist: WRONG, WRONG, WRONG
You don’t get to know God merely and only from the Bible. As I said above, the Bible is a collection of letters written by dozens of authors over thousands of years, describing their lives as they interacted with God. They already knew God when they wrote, just as we can. MAYBE someone’s writings “introduced” them to God, but writings alone do not make a relationship with God any more than they do with any other person. Relationship comes from interaction over time.
If you cared to understand rather than just argue, you might eventually quit missing the point.
June 24, 2009 at 9:32 pm |
You say the majority of Christians in America are biblically illiterate, but all but three of your “facts” deal with Americans, not Christians. Maybe make a more compelling argument next time. Also, most Americans don’t know the star-spangled banner, what the starts and stripes on the flag mean, and many American Facts. It’s too bad we are all such ignorant Americans as well.
June 24, 2009 at 9:56 pm |
75-85% of Americans consider themselves Christians. So yes the “facts” are compelling.
June 24, 2009 at 9:57 pm |
I meant, only one deals with Evangelicals and the other two deal with college students at a christian college. (who knows if they are even christian) while the rest of the fast deal with possibly non-christians…
June 24, 2009 at 9:35 pm |
I would like to know where these statistics are coming from (i.e. who did a gallup poll, wrote a professional journal or actualy went door to door asking people what their beliefs are). Further more, how many people were interviewed?
Needless to say, while some of the statistics might be very thought provoking, I really beg to differ. If one never read the bible but attendend church at least 4 times a month (every sunday of the month) I think the average person would know that Genesis is the first book of the bible and that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are part of the New Testament (Gospels).
The bottom line is this, regardless of statistics, regardless of what one might THINK, Jesus is as real as the heartbeat that beats from within you. He is alive today and in order to spend eternity with Him, you must be born again.
How are you born again? By being born of the water (water baptism in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ) and of the Sprit (receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in other tongues). This and only THIS consist of the NEW BIRTH experience and frankly, its not up for debate. Its a fact and a promise. Read Acts 2:38!
December 10, 2009 at 11:35 am |
Part of me truly wishes I could turn off half of my brain and feel the blissful serenity that must accompany this kind of mindless jargon.
Half the time I can’t decide if I pity or envy people like you. To have servants do your cooking and cleaning for you is one thing, but to never have to think for yourself either? Heaven. Literally.
June 24, 2009 at 9:39 pm |
Isn’t it fascinating to read the elaborate comments of so many people who claim to reject Christianity and/or have no interest in Christ or the God of the Bible? Pretty energetic bunch for being so disinterested or antagonistic. Perhaps they know there’s more to it than superstition? Jesus Christ remains the most interesting, compelling and influential figure in all of human history. If one were to focus on an intense study of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the person of Christ becomes all the more interesting. Also, the DVD “The Gospel of John,” produced by a Canadian film company, is one of the best cinematic revelations as the script is word-for-word the Book of John.
June 24, 2009 at 9:45 pm |
What’s sad is that I, a self-proclaimed Agnostic – apparently know way more that the average Christian. I took a class in college called ‘Bible as Literature’ because I always thopught it was important to think about the Bible as a TEXT, because as the end of the day, that’s what it is. I also think that if you’re against religion but you don’t know what you’re talking about it only makes you a different kind of ignorant.
June 24, 2009 at 9:55 pm |
What is amazing to me are the grand, sweeping generalizations in this discussion which bear no resemblance to a reality crafted by research. To assert that most Christians are ignorant of the very Bible they study is absurd on the face of it. Even nominal Christians read the book weekly. To claim most pastors avoid the difficult passages is likewise without merit. I’ve attended church for 25 years, attending regularly, across denominational lines and I’ve worked in Christian radio. Some sermons are better than others of course, but most all I’ve heard are bibilically based, and certain, the vast majority of the pastors I’ve listened to do not try to avoid difficult issues or theological challenges. But really, Christian bashing is all beside the point. The essential issue is whether or not you believe what Christ had to say about himself. You must first read what he had to say about himself, and then, consider the impact of his words and deeds on the lives for people down through the centuries. Following that, I’d suggest you ask him directly and see if you get an answer. After all, if he rose from the dead, he is still alive, and more than willing to communicate with you.
June 24, 2009 at 10:00 pm |
Well said. =)
June 24, 2009 at 10:05 pm |
Nominal Christians read their Bible weekly? You must be joking. How many “nominal” Christians have you spent time with recently?
You have touched on two major issues. Believing the “accurate” words Christ said about himself that were not documented until 40-70 years after his death by unknown authors. And following it up by praying to him directly for answers that never come.
If you don’t mind me asking, how exactly has Jesus communicated with you?
June 25, 2009 at 8:19 am |
CORRECTION: PARAGRAPH SIX—
” . . . seized on the opportunity. . . “
June 25, 2009 at 9:00 am |
theBEattitude:
I hope this answers your questions satisfactorily:
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/in-christ-alone/
June 24, 2009 at 11:57 pm |
“No resemblance to a reality crafted by research…”
Seriously? This is your beef?
To any/all: Why are the pro-bible people so easy to pwn?
June 24, 2009 at 10:05 pm |
The real Question is do you know God and Does He Know you?
It does not matter wheather we remember the whole Bible God has done that for us the race is not to remember everything you read but when it is brought to your rememberance what do you do with it? do you do you chose to do good with it or bad? Do you chose to beliive or not? And yes I do believe it is Black or White no gray area. everything that is not the truth is a lie. Truth last foreever and sll else will fall away.
June 24, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
How exactly do you know God? He is invisible and refuses to speak to you directly. The only way you know him is through descriptions in a collection of 2000+ year old texts written by primitive men that thought the earth was flat.
Archaic texts are not required to choose to do good or bad.
June 25, 2009 at 4:40 am |
The Question is not how do I know God the question is do you want to know God? If so He will reveal Himself to those who want to know Him and seek as though they do and He will do it in a manner in which you will not quetion weather it is Him or not You will know it is. The Bible is there for you to read, what you do with the knowlege that you are givin through it, well that is up to you. It is your choice. What is your Choice I Chiose to Belive what was said.
June 24, 2009 at 10:41 pm |
Hello, my name is Josiah, and I am not a lemming.
I have been reading the Bible since I was 8. I have a B.A. in biblical studies, and am working on an M.A. in Christian theology.
I believe what I believe because I have researched it, and found it to be true. If you are also interested in truth, please read on:
Here is my summary of your logic, BEattitude, as I see it:
1. Most of North America claims to be Christian
2. Most of these people do not actually know anything about the Bible, or core Christian doctrine
So far I agree completely. “Christian” has become a fashion-term, and also a convenient political term. Everyone wants to be called a Christian nowadays, especially politicians. Certain people have really learned how to use the religion card to validate whatever they are doing, even though they have no idea what Jesus actually taught.
I agree with you so far, but where are you getting your next points…?
3. The Bible clearly states that Jesus does not exist.
4. If people actually read the Bible, they would realize it is all a hoax.
I noticed that your first two points had some serious research behind them – but unfortunately these last two seem to just pop out of thin air. Where are you getting your information? I regret to inform you that you have been very badly misinformed.
Since Biblical literacy is so important to you, allow me to inform you of a few things. The New Testament is completely packed with Jesus. His biography is repeated no less than four times (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) by people who make it abundantly clear that they believe they are writing about a real person (see Luke 1:1). John goes to great lengths to state that this Jesus was the one “from the beginning” (aka God) yet He was also in the flesh, so that He could be “handled, seen and touched” (John 1:1). The person who wrote most of the rest of the New Testament (Paul) writes that the entire message of His teaching is concerned with nothing but “Christ, and Him crucified,” (1 Corinthians 2:2). He writes elsewhere that the very core of his message is about hoping in the risen Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:19). Finally, the last book in the Bible says in the introduction that it is “the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Revelations 1:1), and when read through the lens of the New Testament, all of the Old Testament also resonates with Jesus. I could go on and on – but you get the point.
I have no idea where you get the idea that the Bible proves that Jesus did not exist. Why do you think that Christians put so much effort into placing Bibles into people’s hands (aka the Gideons, Wycliffe Bible Society, etc., etc.)? You would think that if the Bible told us Jesus did not exist, Christians would hide it away (like certain other religions and cults do) so that nobody would find out the secret. In reality, true Christians love to share their Scriptures with anyone and everyone, since the Bible leads us to Jesus, and Jesus leads us to God, and God is the source of all good.
Yes, there are those who call themselves Christian but do not follow Christ – but how does that prove that Jesus did not exist, exactly?
If you don’t like our religion, that’s fine. You are entitled to your own opinion. Only don’t try to tell us that the Bible is saying something other than it is.
Your conclusions do not line up with the facts on this one, and I would encourage anyone who agrees with you to DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH instead of blindly following.
There are atheist lemmings just like there are lemmings of every other religion and ideology.
Think for yourselves, people!
June 25, 2009 at 12:13 am |
Josiah,
Sorry, you are a lemming. You said so when you divulged that you started reading your bible at 8 years old. You never had a chance to think for yourself.
“I have been reading the Bible since I was 8. I have a B.A. in biblical studies, and am working on an M.A. in Christian theology. I believe what I believe because I have researched it, and found it to be true. ”
For you to not be a lemming, at least the following would have to be true:
1. You did not believe in Jesus until you were old enough to research it. 8 year old kids don’t research shit.
2. Your research would be something other than reading various biblical interpretations/accounts. It would have to be at least slightly scientific. I mean, you’re in college, so you understand the scientific method right?
3. Your research is ongoing.
I sincerely doubt you meet any of this criteria to escape lemming-hood. If you do though, please enlighten me.
“Your conclusions do not line up with the facts on this one, and I would encourage anyone who agrees with you to DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH instead of blindly following.”
Said like a true Christian. Prove your god exists, shouldn’t be too hard, considering all the research you’ve done.
June 25, 2009 at 6:07 am |
Interesting criteria. So anyone who still believes what they did when they were 8 has had no free thought in their life…? Have you considered the possibility that I may have had a period of questioning, searched through a lot of things in later teens/early adulthood, and ended up coming back to the truths which I grew up with?
I suppose you would like me to believe the opposite of my parents. Would this prove that I am a “free thinker”? Maybe. Maybe it would just prove that I hate my parents and want to believe the opposite of them, no matter what the truth is. I suppose that wouldn’t make me a lemming, but you still couldn’t call that free thought. More like a lemming running backwards.
Can you enlighten me here: where does Science come into the equation? I am not talking about the boiling point of water, or the position of the stars, or relativity, or even evolution. I am talking about a God who is BEYOND nature. As in, you can’t SEE Him with your eyes, or your telescope or whatever. In fact, you probably wouldn’t even know He existed unless He came to earth in the person of Jesus to tell us about Himself. That is why studying the Bible (which is books written about this event, by people who were actually there) is far more “scientific” than talking to a scientist. The coming of Christ in history is not repeatable: the best way to study that data is to read Scriptures.
What makes you think that my research is not ongoing? When did I tell you this information? You are making assumptions here.
I have never hidden from any facts. If there is any proof that Christianity is wrong, I will drop my faith in an instant. As to the details of my faith, I am constantly questioning and revising exactly what I believe as I study more and more.
This may come as a shock to you: free thought is actually very much a part of my faith, and of the faith of all those I know – especially in Christian education.
June 25, 2009 at 6:53 am
What an amazing coincidence that after literally years of searching you should decide to adopt the faith that you were brought up in! I`m gobsmacked!!
June 25, 2009 at 8:09 am
(to berriejohn)
Do you have an actual argument behind that statement? Are you trying to say that every thinking child will come to reject their parents’ beliefs? How can humanity progress (or even hold its ground) if people continually reject the truths which the previous generation learned?
I searched, I found, I agree with some of the basics that my parents believe.
This does not make me stupid. If anything, it takes more guts to go back and admit that maybe your parents were right on some things than to just dismiss them as “stupid.”
June 25, 2009 at 8:10 am
(to berriejohn)
Do you have an actual argument behind that statement? Are you trying to say that every thinking child will come to reject their parents’ beliefs? How can humanity progress (or even hold its ground) if people continually reject the truths which the previous generation learned?
I searched, I found, I agree with some of the basics that my parents believe.
This does not make me stupid. If anything, it takes more guts to go back and admit that maybe your parents were right on some things than to just dismiss them.
June 25, 2009 at 8:40 am
So if you`d grown up in Iran you wouldn`t be a happy Muslim now? Pull the other one!
June 25, 2009 at 11:40 am
Yes, maybe I would be Muslim if I were from Iran. Maybe I would be Atheist if I were from England. What of it? The point is not what faith I grew up with, but whether that faith is true.
Yes, I know there are people who never question, only blindly agree with their parents, or teachers, or whatever. But I am not one of them, and you do not know enough about me to prove that I belong in that box.
This entire discussion is a waste of time. You seem to be saying that in order to be a “free thinker,” once cannot believe the same things as one’s parents. Tell me – what happens if one’s parents happen to be correct?
June 25, 2009 at 12:28 pm
I didn`t say that you had to disagree with your parents` beliefs. I said what an amazing coincidence it was for you and millions of other Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, etc, that you found that your parents` beliefs just happened to be the truth! I think I made my point!!
June 25, 2009 at 2:52 pm
I think you mistook my point.
A child cannot validly observe data, calculate, and form an opinion as a child. This is why we have laws against children signing contracts, among other things…
“I believe what I believe because I have researched it, and found it to be true.” –Sorry, I took this to mean that based on your research, you concluded that you have valid reason to believe. I’m sure you think you do, considering your many and varied studies. My main problem with that line of thought is that your many and varied studies consist of only Christian doctrine. How many of your professors in Theology were atheists? For that matter, how many weren’t Christian? I’m just saying, it would be a lot more convincing of an argument if your research were even slightly objective, bonus points for diversity. You don’t have a BA in anthropology, and you’re not working on an MA in history. You can honestly, as an educated adult, tell me that your research holds water? As in, other people should take your word for it? You dropped your “education” in your post as credibility for the statements you were going to make didn’t you? Maybe you were just letting us know a bit about yourself before you got started?
If I go see a doctor of medicine, I’m still skeptical of whatever their suggested treatment is, but for the most part, I take their word for it. I accept the likelihood that if they have a degree in medicine, they have learned about medicine and treatment based on the cumulative, measurable, and tested, knowledge of the world, not just from the study of one archaic document.
And, sadly for you, it’s not about proving Christianity is wrong. I could care less. It’s about proving it is right. That’s the major point many Christians fail to realize in all their misdirected ramblings and arguments. Faith is the opposite of rationalization. Continued belief without definite, concrete evidence is irrational, especially when precisely the opposite data always shows itself.
So, yeah, you are still a lemming. Just as other respondents have posted, lucky for you your parents happened to be right all along. Unlucky for the other two-thirds of the world. Most believe in some supernatural force in their lives, but you and your crew happens to be right. Yours and the other religions of the world have studies similar to Theology, but they all are missing that one key ingredient: PROOF. If Pasteur discovered germs and then instead of proving his idea right, he insisted that everyone try to prove him wrong, you’d probably have never been born. Proof is unfortunately what every religious debate will boil down to. The thing is, it has to hold up under scrutiny. Images of the Virgin Mary’s face in tortillas rarely get studied by pros.
Your study of theology is literally the study of a subject which has yet to be proven exists. You have to presuppose that your subject exists. Historians don’t. Doctors don’t. Paleontologists don’t. You do believe in T-Rex don’t you?
I know that theology students think they are applying science to religious questions, but it is all pointless if you have to make such a leap of faith to even have a subject.
So, no it doesn’t matter that you agree with your parents or not. I mean, it certainly doesn’t help your case, but I’m not taking points off. In terms of objectivity though, I doubt you have traveled the world and given as much thought and reverence to those foreign religions and gods as you have to the one you currently hold true. I like to think that my own children will question everything I teach them. If I have taught them TRUTH, it will be validated by any educated person they speak to.
It’s funny that below you have written that this entire discussion is a waste of time. Do you mean literally? –Like you should be washing dishes instead? We are talking about the MOST important thing in the world aren’t we?
June 25, 2009 at 6:47 pm
(To berrijohn)
Excuse my sarcasm, but it seems like you are trying to give me a verbal back-hand, instead of standing toe to toe with me and giving it to me straight.
Yes, I believe what my parents believe. Yes, I happen to live in a country where many people believe (basically) what my parents believe. In other nations (and also across the street) people believe differently than I do.
This is the information. We are agreed on the facts.
Now, back-handed sarcasm aside, what are you trying to say from these facts? That just because I agree with my parents, I must be wrong? What if my parents are right? What if Christianity is true and it just happens that most of Western civilization has been right for the last couple millennia?
With all of the perspectives out there, you would think that at least ONE of them is right. Hopefully, whoever out there is right is also giving their kids the information to find out the truth for themselves as well.
I feel that I was fortunate to be a part of such a family, but it’s not as though I made up my mind in childhood and had no free thoughts since – but this point has already been made.
June 25, 2009 at 8:11 pm
(to 1second)
No, I am not saying this topic is a waste of time – inter-faith dialogue is always profitable.
What IS a waste of time is trying to dismiss or ignore someone without a credible reason. Do you disagree with me? Give me your side of it. Do you think I am an idiot because I believe the same thing that my parents believe? Give me a break. This is not an argument, it is the verbal equivalent to a sucker-punch.
Like I said above – give it to me straight or don’t give it to me at all!
If something I said gave you the impression that I did all of my studying at the age of 8, then please allow me to correct myself: I began reading the Bible at age 8, and read it cover to cover about five times by the time I was 15, and continued reading voraciously afterwards. I also memorized the Gospel of John as well as other large pieces of the Bible.
Yes, yes – I can hear you taking a big yawn here, but let me remind you of the content of the original post: BEattitude was setting out the preposterous thesis that the Bible would destroy people’s faith if only they read it. Well, I am living proof that that this idea is bunk!
Yes, I understand how my “testimony” would be more convincing to you if I had a string of liberal-arts degrees after my name. However, time is limited and education is expensive. This post is not about “do I win the all-precious ‘I am a free-thinker’ award,” however, but whether I am Biblically literate.
I take your point about going to the doctor. Yes, I would more or less trust a doctor on matters of health. I would not necessarily trust him on math, or history, or geography or religion because…well, that’s not what he studied.
That’s where my education comes in. I have 5+ years of post-secondary education under my belt. The topic? You got it – the Bible. No, a degree in anthropology or history would not teach me more about the Bible (although these topics are covered in my program). You learn about the Bible by studying it, just like you learn about the stars by looking at them.
If you think that I am trying to “prove” that Christianity is correct, you have mistaken me for somebody else. If you think that you can disprove God, I would be very interested in your evidence. It doesn’t take any more faith to believe in a God than to believe that no God exists – either way, it’s not like we can poke a hole into the spiritual world, to take a look and see if God is there.
If believing in something without proof is illogical, then Einstein was just as much an idiot as myself, because he clung tightly to his theory of relativity even when there was absolutely no proof to it. Scientists today hold to this theory, even though it is not completely proven.
Faith is a part of reason – you couldn’t function in this world without it. Yes, there are fanatics who believe something AGAINST THE FACTS – but I am not talking about that. The moment someone disproves Christianity, I assure you, I will be the first one to leave.
Getting back to the actual topic, however: my sole point in this post was to correct BEattitude’s outrageous thesis that biblical-illiteracy is a help to the church, and reading the Bible would destroy faith.
If you or anyone else have any proof which would seem to protect BEattitude’s theories against my counter-evidence please – enlighten me.
June 26, 2009 at 3:01 am
Josiah I think you are misunderstanding what he is saying. He is saying that most people, even those that leave their religious beliefs when young, come back to the religion of their parents. Since you were raised as a christian it is way more likely for you to be christian. It has nothing to do with whether it is right or wrong. I know most people don’t want to see their parents as being wrong and why would they raise you as christian if it was wrong.
June 26, 2009 at 5:42 am
*deep sigh*
Yes, Baconsbud, I understand. My parents are Christians, and so it is MORE LIKELY that I will become a Christian.
My point here is that it is not mandatory that I needed to become a Christian – my brother is not a Christian, and he received the same Christian upbringing. Also, it also does not mean that I do not think on my own. I actually believe differently than my parents on a whole lot of religious and non-religious points.
My forehead is beginning to ache from hitting my head against the same brick wall. Do you understand what I am trying to say here?
Just because someone believes the same as their parents, that does NOT mean they are a lemming. Maybe it is an indicator, but it is not solid proof.
Can we at least agree on this one?
June 26, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Josiah if i understand the use of the word I would say you are more lemming then not lemming. Since I didn’t know what the word meant until I looked it up a few days ago I really can’t say for sure. I am in the USA and am guessing this is a British term. It would help if I knew fully how it is being used. I doubt you are some kind of mouse like rodent, so went with the one about people following others.
June 28, 2009 at 5:43 am
Lemmings are rodents who (so it is said) will travel in groups. Since they do not think for themselves, they will blindly follow the leader (who probably thinks he is following the guy next to him). It is said that whole groups of lemmings will actually run off a cliff into the ocean, with no member of the group hanging back to think, “Hey, maybe this is a bad idea.”
To be a lemming is to follow blindly, without thinking for one’s self.
I would argue that there is a second kind of metaphorical lemming, though – a lemming running backwards. This is a person who (for whatever reason) feels that it is SO important to “be one’s own person” that they unconsciously or consciously decide that whatever the authority-figure (parents, teachers, pastors, etc.) decide, they will do the opposite. You get this a lot when people enter the rebellious teenager stage.
This is also living without free thought, because rather than thinking for self, one is still dependent on the minds of others. “Does mom want my hair short? Okay, it will be long. Does dad like classical? Okay, I will listen to Iron Maiden. Does mom want me to dress nice? Okay, I will dress like a punk….” Etc.
For some, this stage may be a step towards free-thought, but lets’ just be honest – it is not free thought. To define one’s self negatively against another is to demonstrate that one cannot think or exist on one’s own.
As an outsider-looking-in, it’s probably fair to say that I COULD be a lemming, since I still believe the same thing I believed when I was 8 – which is also the faith of my parents – and since I have not gone on a world quest to search out other faiths before coming back home.
Also, however, I have at times had the suspicion that some of the non-Christians posting on this site are just lemmings-running-backwards. That is, they have not thought rationally about things, but are reacting to a bad or lukewarm faith which they grew up in. Have THEY really travelled the world, and studied every sort of belief before coming to their belief in atheism? Or do they really just want to believe the opposite of their parents? Or maybe they went off to college, heard a Dawkins-like teacher, and switched their alleigance from unquestioning obedience of Christianity to unquestioning following of Atheism.
PLEASE LISTEN TO ME: I am not saying that I can concretely say this about anyone here. I don’t know anyone here. Reading even a few hundred words of a person’s mind to not provide such a window into their soul.
…so don’t you think that if *I* have the grace to hold back from such groundless and insulting conclusions about others, y’all should hold back from passing that judgment this way?
How much do we really know each other? How helpful is it to sling these sorts of accusations around? It’s probably better to focus on the facts, on the topics, and on the issues than to attack people you do not know or understand.
July 6, 2009 at 3:09 am
There are so many holes in your arguments Josiah that I don`t even know where to begin! For a start the Einstein analogy is entirely wrong, as he had mathematical proof of his theories, which were based on observed phenomena, and experiments then proved them to be correct. Sadly, he then made the same mistake as you, and devoted the rest of his life to trying to reconcile his own theories to more up-to-date ideas, in order to produce a “theory of everything”: an excercise which was doomed from the beginning!
However, just to answer one specific question of yours: I am living proof that BEattitude`s thesis is correct. I was brought up as a member of the Plymouth Brethren from an early age: believed all that I was taught: was baptized; and became a prominent teacher and preacher. However, the more I studied the Bible, the more evident were the contradictions and anomalies it contained, and in the end the struggle became too much, and I had to renounce it all. I now wonder how on earth, as an intelligent and rational person, I could ever have taken such nonsense seriously in the first place!
June 25, 2009 at 12:31 am |
The Bible is a highly conflicting and flawed document. The New Testament Gospels were written 40-70 years after Jesus’ death by annonomous authors. Far from credible testimony. Paul never even met Jesus. His encounter on the road to Damascus sounds like the ramblings of a crazy man. Whether Jesus existed or not is not my point. It is completely irrational to believe this Jewish man was God incarnate sent to earth only to be slaughtered as a blood human sacrifice to himself.
If people actually read their Bible, many would see it as I do. I am evidence of that along with many, many former Christians I have talked to.
You’ve studied the Bible and still believe. That is your choice. In my opinion that only means you are more willing to ignore obvious flaws in Christian theology and scripture than I am.
June 25, 2009 at 6:31 am |
Actually, Luke (Luke 1:1-4) and John (John 21:23-24) mention their identities in their accounts, and forty years is not that long. Would you think that a biography of the Beatles during their glory days would be innacurate, since it was written today rather than in the 60’s? Forty years is still a short enough time that living memory would correct the errors, or force a made-up document to be thrown out.
Would you believe me if I wrote a book about some healer who lived in Washington in the 50’s, healed people, spoke widely, and died publicly? Even fifty years – or seventy, or a hundred – is a close enough amount of time that it would be possible to seek out people who knew whether such a person existed. Consider that the Bible makes some very bold statements about Christ. Would people have believed this and received books about Him only 40 years after He died, if He did not live or did not do at least some of the things that He did?
Paul likely met Jesus in his life, although you are right to say that his “Damascus-road” experience was more important to him than any previous sightings. You may feel that this experience is not valid – but that is your judgment call. A person who is crazy probably wouldn’t be able to write letters which have continued to amaze brilliant minds for two millennia.
Yes, the idea of Jesus coming as our sacrifice is a tough one to understand. Understand, however, that you are holding up your own standard of “irrationality” as the final criteria for truth. This sound scientific, but you are really just being close-minded to anything which is difficult for you to understand, or would cause you to rethink some of your own assumptions.
As to Jesus’ sacrifice: To be honest, we actually don’t know WHAT Jesus did when He came. All that we know is that from the beginning of time, there has been something wrong with the human race (is anyone going to deny this?). When Jesus came, He fixed the problem, and made a way for each of us to individually and corporately achieve perfection.
The simple fact is, BEattitude, that most people who take a lot of time reading the Bible as it is eventually become Christians. This why Christians leave bibles in hotels, in prisons, and just about everywhere else they are allowed to. And there are thousands of testimonies of people reading those Bibles and coming to faith.
Why don’t you try it? Take the Gospel challenge: how long can you remain a non-Christian while reading 3 chapters a day in the New Testament?
=)
June 25, 2009 at 9:11 am
No, without proof I would not take your word for it. I don’t even know you. How can I possibly know if you are a truthful person?
I took the Gospel challenge for 30 years of my life. That is exactly why I no longer believe it.
June 25, 2009 at 10:06 am |
Okay, so track with me…you would not take my word if I wrote some book about events which occured 50 years ago, since THIS IS STILL RECENT ENOUGH TO VERIFY THESE EVENTS ELSEWHERE.
40-70 years is a VERY close time-gap between the actual events and the penning of the Gospels. It is not very likely that people could come up with something completely off-the-wall, then publish it as truth if they were so close to the actual event.
Are you understanding me…?
June 25, 2009 at 6:15 pm
It was 2,000 years ago. They passed information like a game of “telephone”. After 40 years it would be your word against someone else. There is no other way to dispute or verify the information.
If a criminal trial occurred 70 years after the crime, do you think the testimony would be accurate or trustworthy?
June 26, 2009 at 2:54 am
Josiah if you wrote about an event that happened 50 years ago I would be able to verify what you have written by using sources other then you. If it was some personnel event that all the witnesses were dead and it was never written about before you putting it on paper I would have doubts and only go so far as saying he believes it happened but it is possible it didn’t. In 50 years a story can go from a minor event in someones life to a major event. If you wait 50 years to tell a story how many changes can it go though before you tell it?
June 28, 2009 at 5:54 am
Yes, in some cases, witness 70 years after the fact would indeed be credible: especially when people have written authoritative documents, when people testifying have witnessed the events, and when other people alive can also be called upon to witness to the events.
Yes, the details of a story could change in 70 years – but could the CORE of the story change?
Mark simply could get away with making up the story about a person who: 1) lived in a certain place, 2) worked miracles, 3) taught extensively, 4) had a large following, 5) pissed off the religious establishment, 6) died an official, roman execution.
These points would have been easily falsified seventy years or even several hundred years later.
BEattitude: I have heard the “broken-telephone” illustration for the Bible many times. The only thing I can say is look at mgm’s post. There is serious research which disproves this (rather simplistic) theory – but you would be better off seeking out the information for yourself if you are that interested.
June 25, 2009 at 2:28 pm |
There are many serious, well-researched books on the authenticity and historicity of the New Testament. One I might recommend, in the off-chance you are willing to read it, is by Greg Boyd called “Cynic Sage or Son of God.”
Many of the criticisms you have raised on your blog about the Bible have been seriously considered by Christian thinkers and researchers, and they have been addressed in books published by leading universities (not just Christian universities) and also . It’s not like atheists are the only ones who see difficulties and complexities in the Bible. Christians have grappled with these same problems for centuries, and written about them extensively. There are tons of well-reasoned books out there that deal with these complexities in an honest way. Often the difference is that many athiests (I don’t know about you, so don’t take that personally), upon finding an difficult text or verse, immediately conclude that the entire Bible is bunk. A predisposition against the Bible often leads them to avoid further and deeper exploration.
I would add that most thinking, reading Christians know that there are still unanswered questions and things we don’t know fully in relation to the history of the Bible. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a sufficient and reasonable basis for faith.
June 25, 2009 at 2:20 am |
I got colon cancer stage 3 and now in progress of doing chemotheraphy…i really need money .so please click the link;
http://www.kliks.my/kamal/
June 25, 2009 at 7:10 am |
Interesting post! Reminds me of a book I read recently (related subject matter) called Religious Literacy by Steven Prothero. Great read!
Personally, I dig the bible, but I don’t take it literally.
June 25, 2009 at 8:26 am |
Historians apply a number of tests to determine authenticity.
Eye witness accounts are highly valued, just as they are in a court of law.
Intense scrutiny of the New Testament documents has been engaged for almost 2000 years, and to date, no one has debunked the testimonies.
You fail to realize that the New Testament writers were a collection of people from various walks of life, and they had an audience of thousands: people who embraced the Gospel, and a great number who were hostile to the Gospel, even to the point of persecuting early believers and killing them.
(Note that all the disciples save two were martyred for their testimony.)
The Romans had no use for Christians, obviously, and the Temple Jews hunted them down. If there was an opportunity to discredit the disciples and early believers these most powerful groups would have seized the opportunity in a heart beat.
Additionally, the length of time between the original writings and the earliest copies in our possession is another test historians apply. A couple generations is a very short time period between original writings and copies. Comparing this same time lapse to other ancient documents and you find the New Testament writings (copies) are much closer to the originals, increasing the propability of authenticity. Curious how nobody disputes the Iliad but so many denigrate the New Testament.
Keep in mind an tremendously compelling fact about the Bible: it is the all time best seller, and more people in more places for greater periods of time have tried to destory it with fire or false claims and misrepresentations.
Interesting as well, it was written by about 44 authors over the course of abotu 1500 years and it is actually 66 books that are internally consistent and complementary. Now how did that happen?
As to vast conspiracies foisting the Deity of Christ on an unsuspecting world, for such a conspiracy to hold, hundreds of people would have had to preserve a lie even in the face of agonizing death, not only in the first century but throughout the centuries to follow. Are you aware of the fact that more people have been martyred for Christ than any other cause? Certainly you’d agree it is at least astounding so many people would die for something they knew to be a falsehood.
Finally, the more science inquires, the more the Bible holds up. Time after time archeological discoveries confirm the text. EX: secular scholars used to dismiss the Bible for mentioning Hittites, until Hittite culture was confirmed through discovery of artifacts.
And on it goes. Long before science confirmed these things the Bible described them:
>the hydroponic cycle
>the fact ‘life’ is carried in the blood (nutrients/oxygen)
>the earth is a sphere
>the connection between hygene and disease prevention
>the importance of nutrition
>the expanding universe
And then you have prophecy. More than 300 prophesies about Christ in the Old Testament were specifically and completely fulfilled in the life of Jesus of Nazareth. For any student of statistics and probability out there, the odds of this happening by chance are impossible.
There are also numerous other prophesies, and all have come true to the letter. Dr. Peter Stoner did very interesting studies on the subject, confirmed by his colleagues as being academically sound.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=49720
Look at these figures as well:
“Over a quarter of all the verses in the Bible contain a prediction about the future. Altogether, 737 separate forecasts are made, from some only mentioned once, to others mentioned hundreds of times.
Of these, 594 (over 80%) have already come true. Since those that have not, are all concerned with the end of the world, which obviously has not happened yet, the Bible has actually achieved 100% accuracy.”
Source:
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/156582
Those of us who are called by His name do not believe out of ignorance or blind faith. We believe because someone told us the good news of God’s love and we responded by looking into it. We sought Him, and he answered us.
How have I communicated with him? How does one describe the still small voice of God speaking to your heart, renewing your mind, healing your body, restoring your soul? I have asked him for help many times and he has always helped me. I have prayed for healing and been healed. I have prayed for the salvation of others and have seen them saved. I have prayed for forgiveness, and been lovingly forgiven, the greatest gift.
For some no evidence will ever be enough, nor miracle persuasive, no healing or assurance satisfactory, for “broad is the way that leads to destruction and many go thereby, but narrow is the way that leads to salvation, and few find it,” says the Master.
June 25, 2009 at 8:28 am |
Another invaluable resource—EXTENSIVE RESEARCH CITED HERE:
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/156582
Dr.Peter Stoner, Professor Emeritus at Pasadena College, describes, in his book “Science Speaks” ( Stoner Peter W. and Newman, Robert C Moody Press, 1976 ) how he took just 8 of the Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in Jesus Christ, and using the law of compound probabilities, calculated the probability of one man fulfilling them. Dr.Stoner wrote:-
“we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time, and filled all eight prophecies is 1 in 10 raised to the power 17.” Written out longhand, this is 100, 000,000,000,000,000, and in order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Dr.Stoner illustrates it by supposing that:-
“We take 10 to the power 17 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas (267,000 square miles!!). They will cover all of the state two feet deep. Now, mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him he can travel wherever he likes, but he must pick up one silver dollar, and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance the prophets would have of writing these eight prophecies, and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote them down in their own wisdom.”
H.Harold Artzler, of the American Scientific Affiliation, wrote:-
“The manuscript of ‘Science Speaks’ has been carefully reviewed by a committee of the American Scientific Affiliation members, and by the Executive Council of the same group, and has been found, in general, to be dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented. The mathematical analysis included, is based upon principles of probability which are thoroughly sound, and Professor Stoner has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way.”
Fulfilling 48 prophecies by chance is just one chance in 10 to the power 157 (I won’t attempt to write out all the noughts!!), but Jesus didn’t fulfil just eight or 48 prophecies, He fulfilled over 300!!!. How can one maintain intellectual integrity if this kind of evidence is ignored??
SOURCE:
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/156582
June 25, 2009 at 12:23 pm |
Of course all these Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in the life of “Jesus”(if he ever existed)! The people making up the stories made sure of that!! I`ve never read anything more stupid in my entire life!!!
June 25, 2009 at 12:35 pm |
So, you believe a rag tag group of fishermen lined up 300 OT prophesies and recruited a guy to fulfill each one specifically over the course of three years and this guy willingly submitted to torture and the agony of crucifixtion in order to perpetrate a hoax? What was the motive? What was the payoff? And furthermore, this group of fishermen conned thousands of people, including the Romans and the Temple priests? For the hoax to hold up they had to recruit Mary and Paul and hundreds of others to support and promote the lie. And then, once Jesus was murdered, according to their plan, these fishermen traveled throughout the known world at that time preaching Christ is God, and they all met violent deaths because of their preaching, and they did all this willingly, to present and preserve a lie, not getting one penny for their efforts? Seems to me you’d best think again about what is stupid.
June 25, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Of course not – you didn`t take any notice of what I said! I don`t believe that, even if Jesus existed, any of these events to which you refer really happened. (He certainly wasn`t “Jesus of Nazareth”, as the town didn`t even exist in NT times.) Jesus and the Twelve Disciples have about as much historical validity as Robin Hood and His Merry Men, ie some of the events may have happened, but to whom exactly, and under what circumstances, we cannot possibly know now. Certainly, the statements of “Jesus” were not unique (as Christians have claimed for centuries): the Dead Sea Scrolls illustrate that point. When you`re writing a work of fiction it is easy to ensure that a great many “prophecies” from the past are fulfilled in the life of your “hero” – that proves nothing!!
June 25, 2009 at 10:10 pm |
So if research proves that the Bible is correct, what is the point of faith?
God revealed himself through scripture so that we might believe.
He did not leave a trail of factual breadcrumbs for us to follow.
If proof is required for the Christian to believe, then faith means nothing.
June 25, 2009 at 8:41 am |
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2008/11/20/theophobia-and-persecution/
June 25, 2009 at 8:56 am |
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/06/25/in-christ-alone/
June 25, 2009 at 10:00 am |
BTW
For those truly interested in what Christianity is really about, check out a great book by the late Dr. Walter Martin: ‘Essential Christianity.’
June 25, 2009 at 6:07 pm |
Hey Allan. Dr. Martin was my professor. God bless him. What a man, what a witness.
June 25, 2009 at 6:49 pm |
Great man. I had the pleasure of speaking with him by phone a couple of time. Blessings to you!
June 25, 2009 at 11:13 am |
Sorry to over do it but two other books are especially good:
A Shattered Visage: the real face of atheism
Ravi Zacharias
The God Who Is There
Francis Schaeffer
June 25, 2009 at 5:16 pm |
I would then recommend:
The bible unearthed by Israel Filkestein
June 25, 2009 at 2:35 pm |
Allan’s middle initial must be ‘T’. Then by anagramatic analysis we get.
Ack insanE Troll
June 25, 2009 at 2:57 pm |
Next stop for LeoPardus and barriejohn: the rubber room, plastic cups and white jackets with long, long sleeves.
June 25, 2009 at 3:08 pm |
Nice. Shamelessly plug away at your blog and your biased reference material and then insult people for calling you on it.
You’re really representing Christianity well.
June 25, 2009 at 3:47 pm |
That’s an insult? You have pretty thin skin seems to me. My blog is non-profit so I don’t see how one can plug it. When it comes to the fight to save people from hell, the gloves come off, and that’s an act of love. By the way, for real insults and vicious attacks read the comments from unbelievers on this site. Finally, if people would stay on topic and avoid personal attacks, which LeoPardus and barriejohn and Janus Grayden revel in, then we could have fact-driven, mature conversations, but then, people would have to think, a rare activity in this day and age.
If you want soft words and a cushy road to hell, by all means, embrace BEattitude and the rest of the real hatemongers on this site.
If you want the truth, joy, abundant life and eternal life, read the New Testament, but be forewarned, Jesus has some harsh words in there about sin, and the devil, and hell.
June 29, 2009 at 10:09 am
I never said I was offended.
If you had called me a “poopy head,” that would still be an insult. That doesn’t mean I would be offended at that, either.
Also, being non-profit doesn’t mean you can’t plug it. All that means is that you’re repeatedly dropping the name of your site to direct traffic to it. This is widely considered bad form as it looks desperate. From a business standpoint, people don’t respond well to desperation.
I don’t make personal attacks. I have no qualms with people believing in Christianity. To be quite frank, I really don’t care what you believe. However, if someone is going to question my, and others, non-belief in God, I’m going to respond with the stark lack of any evidence whatsoever for a God.
I’m not pushing hate of any kind. I don’t think you’re going to be punished for what you do or don’t believe. I don’t think you have to believe the way I do. I believe that people should be treated, not just the way you would like to be treated, but to treat them the way they, personally, want to be treated (after all, sometimes people don’t want to be treated the way you do; personal preference and all that).
In short, I have no animosity towards people who believe in whatever they want to. However, when someone’s going to tell me that I have to believe what they do and that I will suffer forever if I don’t, then I view it as an insult.
I’m not telling you what to believe, I’m telling you why I don’t believe in God anymore. If that somehow irritates you, then that’s not my intention and you should honestly consider why any opposing viewpoint to yours is seen as hateful. That’s not normal.
June 25, 2009 at 3:44 pm |
[...] 25, 2009 by Ricky Rondo The atheistic blog “The BEattitude” recently posted on the number of self proclaimed Christians that have little or no biblical knowledge. He is [...]
June 25, 2009 at 6:05 pm |
You got a lot of comments! Thoughtful post.
Jesus is truly the only way and His way is easy and again it is the hardest thing you will ever encounter!
June 25, 2009 at 8:26 pm |
If, then, Jesus is stripped of all the borrowed legends and miracles of which he is the subject; and if we also take away from him all the teachings which collected from Jewish and Pagan sources have been attributed to him — what will be left of him? That the ideas put in his mouth have been culled and compiled from other sources is as demonstrable as the Pagan origin of the legends related of him.
June 26, 2009 at 2:04 am |
Well said George! The truth at last!!
June 25, 2009 at 9:20 pm |
I’ve read the Bible, from cover to cover, many times, and I still believe. But, I don’t believe in religion….I believe in God. Most Christian are religious. It is all in the mind…Christ came to die for my sins, and he came to rescue my spirit from death; I was convinced in my spirit by the Holy Spirit. This is not mental, this is the spirit where faith is, not belief. Belief is not faith; it is of the mind…faith is of the spirit and the power is in the spirit. If the spirit is not quickend by the Holy Spirit through faith in Jesus, then the spirit is dead and in darkness. If you don’t have faith, then your spirit is dead.
June 25, 2009 at 9:48 pm |
@Baconsbud
“You say god hates sin but isn’t hate a sin? If a being is perfect doesn’t that imply that it could neither hate or love? How can a being that is all good hate? I know the only time I feel guilty is when I want to hate or do hate someone.”
Okay, if I had to answer if hating a person from your heart is a “sin”, then I suppose it is. But to call hating sin a sin simply doesn’t make any sense. No, it’s not a sin to hate evil.
Being perfect does not mean you can’t love! Where would you get that from?
So a perfect being can hate evilness. I really don’t think we need to argue about this. :\
June 26, 2009 at 5:31 pm |
I think you need to quit calling god a perfect being if you think hate is ok for him. Hate is one of the worst of emotions and no perfect being would have emotions. Think about it.
June 26, 2009 at 6:28 pm
an⋅thro⋅po⋅mor⋅phic /ˌænθrəpəˈmɔrfɪk/
–adjective 1. ascribing human form or attributes to a being or thing not human, esp. to a deity.
God is so vast, so powerful, so different, we often try to pull him down to our level or try to make him more like us, when in reality, while we may be created in him image, we are radically less than and other than the Godhead.
God hates evil. That’s all he hates. There is nothing imperfect about that.
Otherwise, it is absurd for mere humans to attempt evaluation or judgment of Deity. It’s comparable to having an ant sit in judgment of Einstein. How prideful and presumptuous some of us remain: egomaniacs bathed in insufficiency and sin.
June 29, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Aren’t we supposed to love our enemies? Besides, how can God hate something that He, Himself created? It’s not even like He could have made a mistake and accidentally created something He just didn’t like. It’s not analogous to a painter who hates one of their paintings because it’s bad.
According to Christian theology, nothing existed until God willed it so. Evil didn’t just exist. If God’s flawless, then He intentionally created something to hate.
Not only does God hate, but He goes out of His way to do so, apparently.
June 25, 2009 at 9:51 pm |
ingshe, I completely, completely agree with you. I don’t believe in a religion. I believe in the being who created everything.
Being a Christian isn’t about rules or rituals; it’s about the relationship. That’s it. People try to say, “well, then if it’s not about the rules, then you can do whatever you want, right?” Of course not. Would I break the window of my best friend’s car? No, I wouldn’t, because I like them and want them to be my friend. Doing wrong hurts God, so if you have a relationship with God, you won’t WANT to do “wrong” things. Unfortunately we all fall short because we are not capable of sticking to the truth and what is right all the time.
December 10, 2009 at 11:18 am |
Can you explain to me how you can be Christian while not believing in religion?
“I don’t believe in a religion. I believe in the being who created everything.”
What do you believe about the being who created everything? Does your “knowledge” and of him come from the bible? Well, I hate to break it to you, but you’re religious.
It is possible to be a Theist without being religious. One can believe in A god, and believe he created the universe, and MAYBE even believe he controls or judges your actions without adhering to a religion.
But if your notion of god bears any resemblance to scripture, you are religious my friend.
December 17, 2009 at 1:26 am
Many of us who have some experience in this realm make a distinction between religion (what everyone else is doing) and what we are doing.
Some, unfortunately, make the argument dogmatically just to separate themselves from some other religion, but without any real justification or explanation. For example, a Mormon might claim not to be involved in “religion” as distinct from a Catholic.
On the other hand, some of us identify religion as the despicable result of the relevant man-made institutions that attempt to oppress people by binding them to mindless traditions, beliefs, and practices.
We then define our correspondingly different conduct in the form of a living, dynamic relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ, the one true living God. Just as with any other healthy relationship, this one is interactive, direct, and ever-changing.
One common characteristic of those people who are trapped in religion is that they have no interest in understanding others. Instead, they merely spend their time telling everyone they are wrong without having the slightest clue what they are arguing against. That is what I observe you doing here, Kenton.
June 25, 2009 at 9:53 pm |
Sorry, my first reply to ingshe was actually supposed to be a reply to another comment. Ignore it, please.
June 25, 2009 at 11:34 pm |
[...] One-third could also not identify Matthew as an apostle from a list of New Testament names.3 via thebeattitude.com [...]
June 26, 2009 at 6:12 am |
I am not a Christian, or into organized religion.
For the record, though, I had occassion to spend some time with some athiests recently. And I was shocked. I found them to be more “religious” (bound to their beliefs and dogma) than my Christian friends.
It was a shocking experience. I’m not anti-athiesm – and no one group is representative of all individuals who share common beliefs. However, it seems that people everywhere are “religious”. IE: people everywhere have a tendency to latch onto a set of beliefs – even of their own making – that they become POSTIVE of, as being THE TRUTH, “the way” and what will “save them” from all the negativity in the world, and/or their bad feelings.
It got me to thinking – some people cling unfailingly to workaholism. Or materialism. Or atheism. Or looking a certain way, dressing a certain way. I’m not talking about casual “preferences”, but of deeply held beliefs of what they MUST do in order to be free from their bad feelings.
I’m not saying Christianity or Judaism – or Buddhism (or any other “ism”) is the way. I just think that when some of us choose to say “I’m not religious” that we should really stop and ponder our own deeply held beliefs that drive our behavior.
Maybe we are all rather religious (strictly bound to a set of ideas) – even though it often has nothing to do with Jesus, God. We still might be bound to a set of ideas of what is going to “save” us and the world.
And some of those non-god and non-jesus beliefs (of what we think will save of from the negative feelings) are about as silly as made-up mythical creatures. (Fancy cars, fame, botox, keeping up with the Joneses, devout athiesm, workaholism, technology obsession.)
I don’t know – I just started thinking about that, after witnessing so much of a “This will save you” approach from even the non-organized-religion groups. It seems like everyone has a prescription for what will save us, and people everywhere are looking to be “saved” (just not always in the literal Christian sense – but just, from uncomfortable feelings – fear, anxiety, depression, uncertainty). And we all just come up with different WAYS to address that very human urge.
December 10, 2009 at 11:04 am |
Can you provide specifics on what makes an Atheist religious or dogmatic?
To the best of my knowledge, Atheism, at its core, is simply saying, “I don’t know what the answer is, but the answers I’ve seen so far seem unlikely, and you’ve given me no credible reason to believe them, so I’m going to keep looking.”
I have no doubt there are Atheists who argue unwaveringly against the bible. But it’s not the same thing to REFUTE one of an infinite number of answers as it is to INSIST on it. It’s like looking for a needle in a haystack. It’s completely different (and requires completely different levels of faith and rationality) to say “I will definitely find it” than it is to say, “You probably won’t.
(And imagine claiming you HAVE found it without being able to show it to anyone!)
Don’t forget that dogma requires two things – (1) a strong belief in something, and (2) a lack of evidence for what you believe.
DOGMATIC = unwavering belief the bible holds all of life’s answers + no evidence to support that belief
NOT DOGMATIC = strong belief that the bible’s answers are incomplete at best and that life’s answers are better found elsewhere + a good deal of evidence to support that belief
December 17, 2009 at 1:38 am |
Saying “I don’t know” is far from the same as saying “There is no god”, which is often accompanied by “You are wrong to claim that there is a God” followed by “You are an idiot”.
I have yet to have ever met, or to have even heard of, a person who actually limits themselves to an honest “I don’t know”. You, Kenton, are DEFINITELY NOT someone making a claim of an honest “I don’t know”.
An honest person acknowledges that they are a finite, limited being with little real information or ability to discover much about the universe around them. An honest person recognizes that they are forced to trust someone or something outside their control, every moment of every day. An honest person discovers that they can be “confident”, but almost never “certain”, and that nothing can be “proven”. Even attempts at presenting “evidence” demand an exercise of faith, since so many aspects of such “evidence” are still unknown and unknowable.
Since you make many claims counter to these, Kenton, I would call you dogmatic rather than honest. But that’s fine, you’re not the first, by far.
June 26, 2009 at 12:58 pm |
The One-Page BIBLE 6.25.09
Ok, so here is the straight story. I’m God. The One True God. I have always existed. I’m king of the universe, I created everything, and in the beginning earth was just a wad of dirt. I formed it, formed you, created all the animals and plants and everything, and created a beautiful paradise for your ancient grandparents, Adam and Eve. For a short time I enjoyed such a wonderful, loving relationship with those two. I also created all the angels. I control everything from sub-atomic particles to an expanding, infinite universe, but I cannot control love. I’ve been working for many years communicating through chosen servants to tell you how much I love you. I always tell the truth. I always keep my word. Always. I am your eternal lover, and I am a jilted lover.
Creation is sustained by love, which makes sense, because I am Love. (I know this next bit will be a mind bender for you, but when I say I AM, I’m saying I am actually three persons in one being: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I know it doesn’t compute. You’ll just have to trust me on this, and everything else too by the way. That’s what faith is all about.)
Some of the angels I created got prideful and decided they were going to take over. Their leader had lead worship in my presence, but I was forced to throw them out, for the sake of love. Some of you say I should have destroyed evil by destroying Lucifer and the rebel angels, but you see, if you go around destroying everyone who opposes you, you destroy love in the process. Unless people love voluntarily there’s no love at all. Lucifer was an angel, but when he led his rebellion, he became Satan. He lost all touch with love. He was the most beautiful angel, but, he became most ugly. Hell is his ultimate destination, a place he created for himself and for all who insist on following him. While I AM Love, I also hate evil. Evil is death. Love is life. I am sovereign. I call the shots.
Adam and Eve were happy in paradise. We enjoyed company in the cool of the evening. I only had one rule for them: don’t eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. That rule was there to protect them. (I only make rules to protect people. People have the option to disobey, to their own harm.) My commandments protect you from evil, from the influence of Satan. He loves to lead rebellions, and since I threw him out, all he wants to do is promote evil, and steal, kill and destroy. The rule not to eat from the tree was there to protect Adam and Eve, but they fell for the temptation of Satan, disobeyed, and threw the entire world into a death spiral. Giving the devil place has that effect.
It was heartbreaking, for all of us. My heart is still broken. After that, the whole world drifted away from me. I gave you the Ten Commandments so you could measure how far you had fallen and grasp the distance between us, understanding the nature of sin and evil. But I never left you, I never cut you off, and I always had a plan to save you from the enemy of your soul.
Did I know Satan would rebel, and that Adam and Eve would disobey? Of course. Remember, I know everything all the time everywhere. So why did I bother with Adam and Eve and the whole creation? I am eternally, infinitely creative and overflowing with love. I love and create and renew and love some more. It’s my nature. Abundant life nourished by love is the center of my being. For me it was all worth it, even though I knew love would cost me dearly too. Lovers everywhere suffer rejection and ridicule.
Anyway, after Adam and Eve disobeyed and the world fell into sin and death, which is what happens to everything apart from me, that’s just the way it is. If you cut off a living thing from the source of nourishment, it dies. The human race went from bad to worse: killing, stealing, destroying, just like Satan. It would have been easier to just destroy the whole mess, but once again, love restrained me. However, there was a problem. I’m perfect. My justice is perfect. The whole human race had become murderous. Justice demanded the death penalty, but I just couldn’t bring myself to do it, although the people in Noah’s day had gone so far down, there was no hope of retrieving them, so I did give the earth a good scrubbing, allowing a remnant to survive to carry on. (There is great blessing at the end of the entire process. It will add up . Don’t be afraid. Trust me.)
My perfect justice demanded the death penalty, but the love of the Holy Spirit called to save people from sin and death, and it seemed hopeless to all the faithful angels, until they understood our long range plan as it unfolded. The Son is the key.
The Son stepped forward saying: “I’ll go down and become one of them, fulfilling the law of love. I’ll go and take their rightful penalty in my own body, fulfilling the law of justice. Then, for all who believe in me and accept my work on their behalf, a new Garden of Eden is available.” And that is what happened. Satan was vanquished, evil destroyed, humanity saved, the laws of love and justice fulfilled. Today you have the same choice Adam and Eve had: serve Me or serve Satan. Trust me, there is no in between.
So now, we are working to get as many people back from Satan’s cruel hands as possible, but we cannot force anyone, because that would violate the law of love. We love you and want you to come home. It’s really as simple as that. If you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, repent of your sin, and walk with him, you will have the abundant life I’ve always wanted for you on earth, and the bliss of eternal life with us in heaven. Don’t waste any more time. Come on home dear one. Our perfect love casts out fear. And since Jesus took care of perfect justice, you are free, no longer under judgment, free to walk with me again in the cool of the evening!
June 26, 2009 at 1:37 pm |
What is wrong with hearing that Jesus is God’s Son and that he died on the cross for our sins? After all, that is the way that many Christians came to Christ. Romans 10:17 says that faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of God. If you are not saved, then you don’t have a desire to get to know God. Why would someone who isn’t saved go, “Oh, I think I’ll read the Bible to find out if Jesus was God’s Son?” That doesn’t make any sense. The Bible says that before we are saved, we don’t have a desire to know God. God is what draws us to Him.
It appears that you are just as clueless about the Christian faith as you accuse others of being. I suggest you read the book of Romans and the four Gospels.
June 26, 2009 at 2:06 pm |
hey, whats wrong with me punishing you for something you had nothing to do with and heck you where not even born when it supposedly happened.
oh, but don’t worry. i won’t torture you over it. no, i’ll torture this other guy over here for your actions. all YOU have to do is say you accept that it was a good idea to punish this guy and that it was valid to do so.
never mind that the rule that YOU didn’t break but your ancestor supposedly did was something that even they had no control over….namely they ate the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil! how do you not do wrong without the knowledge of what wrong IS?
isn’t god all powerful? why does he have to perform a blood sacrifice to change his own mind in order to not torture someone over something they didn’t do in the first place?! why can’t he simply say ‘you know what? from now on as long as your a good person and try hard i’ll let you into heaven, maybe point out where you screwed up when you get up here’. when did ‘you know what? i think i will burn everyone for there ancestors actions because my imperfect creation doesn’t match up to my standards, hmm that seems unjust…i know! i’ll torture myself as a man to myself in order to forgive others for what they didn’t actually do! yeah! and all the humans have to do is accept that i did this when they have no evidence of it! brilliant!’ sure, sounds moral.
ugg! the entire bible is a practice in brainwashing. what can i make you accept that is so patently insane that if you where exposed to it when you actually developed a mind you would never accept it?
how do we know this is exactly what these claims are? expose a child too late and they don’t accept it. expose a child to OTHER collections of insanity and they accept those and reject these.
if something is true, and i honestly inspect it and search for it, and research it, and test the claims…it shows its self to be true.
June 26, 2009 at 2:40 pm |
2 Cor. 4:4
1 Cor. 8:2
Luke 24:45
Mark 13
June 27, 2009 at 5:59 pm
2 Cor. 4:4
“The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”
so god has blinded me making it so i can’t see him…..so how is it fair if he then sends me to hell? isn’t it kind of rigged then?
1 Cor. 8:2
“The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know.”
so why do you think you know the truth and i don’t?
I believe my beliefs are true because if i didn’t i would hold them as beliefs. I also KNOW that i am wrong about something, past evidence has shown me that, and to assume otherwise is arrogance.
all i ask is evidence that indicates i am wrong instead of bluster and hot air. bluster and hot air simply hides comfortable lies from those who don’t want to look to deeply at them.
Luke 24:45
“Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.”
then why has he hidden these truths from me? isn’t this basically like condemning me to hell for no reason what so ever? he has the power to save me but doesn’t use it?
if a man acts to kill someone we call it murder. if a man fails to act when they could easily save there life we see it the same. isn’t god all powerful? doesn’t he know EXACTLY the evidence he can use to show me the truth? doesn’t he know EXACTLY what will convince me? after all, he showed others. he directly saved them. isn’t he fair and just?
didn’t he say he would do EXACTLY this? didn’t he say over and over again that if you pray for something you will get it? he doesn’t say ‘maybe’ he doesn’t say ‘if i feel like it’ he doesn’t say ‘only on every odd Tuesday and if it goes along with the natural order and i can hide it and make it appear to be natural’ he said ask and you shall receive.
Matthew 21:21-22
Matthew 7:7-8
Matthew 17:20
Matthew 18:19-20
Mark 11:24-25
Luke 11:9-13
John 14:13-14
John 15:7
John 15:16
John 16:23-24
in these passages it’s pretty clear, if god is real, and jesus is god…then why do christians die at the same rate as probability would suggest? have the same birth rate, the same disease rates, same luck at the lottery, etc etc etc
why is it that you pray and don’t receive? these sections are VERY clear. you ask you get.
why don’t YOU drink poison? flush out demons? handle snakes?
(this section was added latter but hey it’s not like this isn’t exactly how your supposed to test to see if someone is a christian or not…oh wait it is).
Mark 13
oh i love this one.
jesus is dead, and his second coming did NOT occur in the generation of the people there. jesus either lied, jesus was not god, jesus was not real, someone else put these words into Jesus’s mouth, or someone at the head office changed there mind.
how can anyone think this drivel is correct? it’s swiss cheese with logical inconstancies and factually incorrect. if you simply ‘cafeteria’ and pick and choose the parts you like then sure it ‘works’ but then on what basis are you doing it?
June 28, 2009 at 3:03 am
You can`t just keep quoting the Bible to support your belief in the ….erm Bible!! And Mark 13 contains the promise that “this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done”, which, despite all the efforts of literalists to make it say something which it manifestly was NOT meant say, was not true!
June 28, 2009 at 12:06 pm
@barriejohn
it’s usually a bad idea to simply quote bible versus at atheists, most of us actually read the bible, the bibles history, the additions and deletions, the context and vernacular of the day.
reasoned arguments usually get at least a nice give and take interaction. you might actually change a few minds that way. simply asserting ‘i am right!’ through ancient text copy pasta usually doesn’t work that well. especially since anyone can do the same thing with there own different old book.
June 26, 2009 at 7:03 pm |
Many, if not most, Christians claim that the bible is the “Word of God”. To look at this claim objectively, first we must define terms.
INSPIRED. What this generally means to the Christian is that God spoke inside the minds of the biblical authors, and this was the method by which God transferred the contents of the bible to those who wrote it. There is some disagreement as to whether the authors wrote based upon their own level of intelligence, life experiences, culture and biases, or whether every word they wrote down was literally given to them without alteration. According to Jerry Falwell, leader of the Moral Majority, both of these mutually exclusive ideas are the truth– the authors wrote down the verses exactly as a person would take dictation, word for word, and yet (somehow) they were able to write from their own perspective and personalities. This is obviously a tactic of trying to cover all the bases– claiming biblical literalism in general, yet leaving the door open to use the excuse of an author’s perspective when it suits.
We are told that the bible is the inspired Word of God. Just what does that really mean? If we think about the concept of inspiration, it is not as black and white as it first appears. The words of the bible were certainly written (and rewritten) by human hands. But what reason do we have for supposing that it did not come solely from the mind of man? Is it a book that no person or group of people could have written? Why not?
I say that believers claim the bible is the inspired word of God for the simple fact that nobody in their right mind would believe it otherwise. They need it to be an inspiration. Miracles, in an “uninspired” book, would be quickly disbelieved. The stamp of inspiration is given on the words so that they might be enforced. “Uninspired” laws might be more easily ignored than laws that come from God Himself. These obvious truths are two reasons why inspiration is claimed for the bible, but not reasons to believe that the bible was actually inspired.
Believers claim the bible is true because it is the Word of God. They claim it is the Word of God because God says so. How do we know this? Because priests and ministers tell us so, and the reason they give for this is that the bible is a “revelation” (revealed to man by God). And how do they know this? The claim that the bible is a revelation comes from the very book that is claimed to be inspired. And so on, round and round in a circle. (It’s called circular logic). It sounds like this:
The bible is true because it is the Word of God, and we know it is the Word of God because the Bible says so. And if the Bible says so, than it must be true, because we know the Bible is true because it’s the Word of God, and God doesn’t lie. We know that because the Bible says so. And that must be true, because it’s written in the Bible.
To prove that a book is inspired you must prove the existence of God. You must also prove that this God thinks, and interacts with humans. It is impossible for us to conceive of an infinite being. God is a guess. If the existence of God is ever proved, how can anyone prove that he inspired the writers of the Bible? In the western world, the two ideas– God and the bible– seem to be inseparable. But not to everyone. There are some people (such as the Deists) who believe in God, but reject the bible.
How can one man establish the inspiration of another? How can an inspired man prove that he is inspired? How can he know himself that he is inspired? There is no way to prove inspiration, any more than someone can prove he had a particular dream. The only evidence is the word of someone who couldn’t possibly know anything on the subject. No one who claims to have been inspired could know for certain if he had not just had a dream, or a temporary insanity. How is it possible for a human being to know that he is inspired by an infinite being? How can we be certain that what they experienced wasn’t all in their heads? That’s what we say about the authors of “other” holy books, the ones that we don’t accept– the Koran, say, or the Hindu Vedas. Throughout history, some 40 “holy books” from different religions from all over the world have claimed to be “divinely inspired.” What makes any one of those books legitimately inspired, and the rest impostors? What is the criteria that establishes this? Is there any?
Taking a deeper look at inspiration, some questions naturally arise. Did God use men as instruments, causing them to write His thoughts? Did He take possession of their minds and destroy their wills? If that’s the way it was, then why are there so many errors and contradictory accounts in the bible? How could the same story be written very differently? Why does there need to be more than one version of the same story, if the story comes from the mind of God? It is possible that these writers were only partially controlled, so that their mistakes, their ignorance and their prejudices were mingled with the wisdom of God? Or does it cast doubt on the whole idea of inspiration?
How are we to separate the mistakes of man from the thoughts of God? Can we do this without being inspired ourselves? If the original writers were inspired, then the translators should have been, and so should be the men who tell us what the Bible means today. If God went through the process of inspiring some people to write His Word, and then He let that Word be imperfectly translated by uninspired men, then we are left with an uninspired, flawed book. What is the explanation, then, of the fact that there are dozens of modern translations that are readily available, some versions differing radically from others?
But of one thing at least we may be certain: an inspired book should certainly excel all the books produced by uninspired men. It should, above all, be true, filled with wisdom and beauty — perfect. If it is not perfect, what is the point of calling it inspired? What if you can’t distinguish it from “ordinary”, uninspired books?
It is claimed that the bible is the only book on earth that is the inspired Word of god. It’s plainly obvious that it is not… that it is only the work of uninspired, flawed humans. I could write a better book than the bible.
REVELATION
A revelation is some piece of information that is revealed to someone, and that person could not have known it before– otherwise there was no need to reveal it. If you do something yourself, or if you see something done, then this information does not need to be supernaturally revealed to you. In this sense, most of the bible does not come under the scope of the word revelation.
Anything written in which man has been the actor or the witness (which turns out to be almost all of the bible) cannot be called a “revelation”– a man needs no revelation to tell him something that he saw or did himself. Think about it. All those accounts of bloody battles, the building of temples, hoarding of riches, lists of kings, census-taking, rapes and murders, plagues and famines, wanderings through the desert, conversations and parables– these are all things that people could have done themselves or seen someone else do. It is not proper to call the bible in its entirety a revelation. It is list of the laws of the Jews, and an account of their history (grossly exaggerated to increase their reputation), mixed in with mythology to control people and divine justification for their wars of extermination.
When Solomon built his temples to store all his gold and house his 700 concubines– and whether he did so is nothing to us– he needed no revelation to write it down. When David slaughtered innocent men, women and children during his thieving raids, he needed no revelation to record it. To call the bible “The Word of God”, simply doesn’t work for this reason alone. It is the word of Man. Nearly all of the content of the bible did not need to be supernaturally revealed, because it was done by people, seen by people, and could have been recorded by those who had done them, or who had seen them done.
Thomas Paine said it best, 200 years ago. He contended that it is a contradiction in terms to call anything a revelation that comes to us secondhand, either verbally or in writing. He asserted that revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication, and that after that it is only an account of something which another person says was a revelation to him. We have only his word for it, as the revelation was never made to us. This argument never has been, and probably never will be, answered.
The bible is not a revelation. It is, at best, secondhand hearsay. I am under no obligation to believe fantastical and miraculous accounts that come to me by way of hearsay. The bible was not a revelation to me, and it wasn’t a revelation to you. If god wants to give me a revelation, he can do so anytime.
June 26, 2009 at 7:42 pm |
Notice the lengths to which some people will go to avoid God. Implicit in belief is accountability. The driving force behind unbelief is the seething desire to indulge self, to run the show, to ‘captain one’s own ship,’ the essence of selfishness, the essential stuff of sin. In our fallen state we ridicule the Creator who loves us, become flesh monsters, and abuse one another. Far better to embrace our loving Creator, become selfless, and bless one another. God is glad to help us in all these good endeavors, but we have to come to him with reverence and ask. Pride, arrogance and selfishness create a barrier only Christ can penetrate, and even then, we are so hard to reach.
June 26, 2009 at 7:58 pm |
Notice the lengths people will go to justify their own delusions. I don’t see non-believers abusing anyone but I do see believers that abuse others all the time. I’m not saying all non-believers are good people and not saying all believers are bad people. Look at the leaders of most nations and you find they are believers and will be abusive even when it isn’t needed.
June 26, 2009 at 9:12 pm |
Autophenomenological solipsism won’t get you laid
June 27, 2009 at 1:06 pm |
AND . . . sex God’s way—-heterosexual monogamy—not only satisfies both husband and wife, it is progressively exhilarating. Once again, God’s way is the best way. Why settle for second class!?
June 27, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Ew, I don’t think hetero sex is “God’s way”. I mean, not that homo sex is. I’m just saying – that’s something men like to say (because they’re so into it and want to THINK it’s “progressively exhilarating” and “God’s way” and all that). I think God’s way is deeper than our culture’s obsession with sex (and food too – we’re obese as ga-ga over food and “satisfaction”), and all the “gratification” seeking. I think the sex empahasis from hertero men is just as gross as from the homo dudes. Yuck!
June 27, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Oh and you know… sometimes I have more respect for the homo dudes for taking this “urge” of theirs to other men, versus foisting it onto women in their lives. Women just AREN’T as interested as men. We never will be. And the consequences of sex are so much more serious for women than for men, even in marriage with our husbands, it’s serious biz. And THAT must also be “God’s way” (if that’s how he made us – right?) It might be “progressively exhilarating” and fun and games for men. But sex is way more serious and risky for women than for men. Again – that is also very revealing about “God’s way”. And men need to remember that.
June 28, 2009 at 8:34 am
If gods way is the best way why do you even come online? God never said it was ok to use computers. LOL
June 28, 2009 at 8:45 am
“God’s way” also includes concubines, polygamy, Levirate marriage (Gen. 38:6-10), incest, forced marriage to prisoners of war, women forced to marry her rapist, or a monogamous concentual heterosexual marriage.
God’s way is definitely not my way. If God’s way is first class, you can call me a second class citizen.
June 29, 2009 at 9:09 pm
I’d argue that all that stuff you’re describing (above) is the literal Bible’s “way”. And not REALLY “God’s way”. (Just because the Bible says it, does make it “God’s way”, like… in REALITY.)
June 29, 2009 at 9:19 pm
I beg your pardon? Doesn’t the Bible say that “All scripture is God breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.”
If man gets to decide what’s right and what’s wrong, then the Bible starts to fall apart at the seams. If the Bible is wrong in some places, then who’s to say where else it could be wrong? We have no way of knowing that the Bible is true, other than the fact that it says it is. Without this support, there’s no way to verify any of it.
That’s not even mentioning the fact that the Bible is the only reference material people have about God. How do you know about God apart from the Bible? Every single aspect of God is derived from the Bible. If you start to separate the Bible from God, then what are you left with?
An imaginary figure and a book written by bigoted people.
June 27, 2009 at 1:07 pm |
PS: Manuscript evidence . . .
June 29, 2009 at 5:27 pm |
I can show superman is real using some of the same logic!
superman comes from another planet, we have seen other planets. that fact checks out.
superman’s planet is around another star. we have seen other planets around other stars. hey! that fact checks out also!
superman works as a newspaper reporter as his secret identity. hey! there are such things as newspaper reporters!
superman stops crime. hey! crime exists! that fact checks out!
see why i have issue with your argument?
the claims of the bible are insane, and i mean that literally, INSANE.
to believe them because a place mentioned in the book is the same as a place that actually exists (never mind the many of places that DIDN’T but where mentioned…). thats silly.
the ‘evidence’ is not commiserate with the claims. just that simple.
July 2, 2009 at 10:31 am |
True insanity is arriving at conclusions before doing the hard work of inquiry, then defending those errant conclusions over and over in the face of contrary evidence.
“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”
Herbert Spencer
July 2, 2009 at 7:25 pm
except i HAVE done the investigations. i was raised a christian. I’ve done a LOT of bible study. i can recite passage and verse of many parts of the bible (admittedly not as cool on the Internet as it is in person hehe).
that IS what the ‘evidence’ people present consist of though.
if your REAL lucky you might get references to documents which where forged or references to obvious hoaxes perpetrated by the 4th century (and 5th, and 6th, and 7th and 8th etc though the 4th century church was the big one for doing it) church.
this isn’t ‘evidence’ the ‘evidence’ is no where near commiserate with the claims.
hence the superman argument above. it’s the exact same type of ‘argument’ as lee strobel and his ilk make for jesus.
i’m willing to believe the story of jesus was based on some real events. but the claims of god and that jesus was god, and that he performed those miracles, and heaven, and a soul, etc etc etc, these are a LOT of amazing things to believe, many of which contradict the known evidence. provide SOMETHING that makes me even consider these things to be likely. no on presents anything that even comes close to believing in this stuff.
July 3, 2009 at 1:55 am
I really enjoy reading your comments arthur Ice, as you bring some fresh and very thought-provoking ideas to what can be a very stale “debate”. (In fact I`m getting a bit sick of saying the same things over and over to the same people, so I am in fact on the verge of giving up. I mean, are there any open-minded people out there reading all this?) Like you I used to believe all this fundamentalist codswallop (I was fanatical), so it really pisses me off when these arrogant jerks assume that I have no idea what the Holy Babble REALLY says, and that if they could just take a moment to explain it to me – why – the scales would fall from my eyes and I would be instantly converted!!
Do you ever visit http://proudatheists.wordpress.com/ If you scroll down the page you will come across some brilliant cartoons, including one VERY funny one about a Creationist science lesson (it lasts all of three seconds!), and another re “proving ” the Bible:
Experiment: Read the Bible.
Conclusion: True.
Proof: The Holy Bible.
I laughed so much I nearly wet myself!!!
July 3, 2009 at 2:14 am
I used to be a prominent preacher with the Plymouth Brethren here in Great Btirain, Allan! Your quotation describes what I was like to a tee – mind closed to absolutely everything except “Bible Truth”. How sad!!
June 27, 2009 at 1:24 pm |
Do yourself a favor: get this movie!
http://www.blockbuster.com/movies/the-gospel-of-john-trailer.html
June 30, 2009 at 6:00 pm |
[...] Blogger (here) asks a good question – why do so many believe in Christ, especially when so few actually [...]
July 2, 2009 at 11:07 am |
Written 700 years before the birth of Christ: (wow)
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/good-friday/
July 2, 2009 at 11:23 am |
Jesus claimed to be God to Jewish Pharisees which was a crime punishable by death at the time. And they killed him for it. That is a pretty easy prophesy to self fulfill.
That same verse used to be my favorite prophesy from the Old Testament. But Jesus also knew this verse very, very well and took it upon himself to fulfill it.
This is all assuming Jesus actually existed.
July 2, 2009 at 11:32 am |
On thing is for sure: if it’s all true, he will be coming back, and this time, not as a suffering servant, but rather, as a conquering king. By then it will be too late to change your mind.
July 2, 2009 at 11:41 am
I must urge you, Allan, to use the same logic you are pleading with others. You must turn to Islam, or you will burn in hellfire for eternity. When Allah returns to us with his might you will be slain and thrown in the pit!
July 2, 2009 at 1:13 pm
So many gods and so little time to worship them all. I guess I’ll worship none of them.
July 2, 2009 at 2:09 pm
:S
July 2, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Allan people have been claiming this for almost 2000 years and it hasn’t happened. People keep having to change what prophecies within Revelation have been fulfilled. I know many times there have been people claiming the end is here but then we keep on going.
July 2, 2009 at 7:18 pm
you should do what newton did (a brilliant scientist but still a religious nutter). he claimed that jesus wouldn’t return until some time AFTER 2100…..
so if he never returns (well hey it was AFTER that date, could be any time now…)
or if he returns before that date (but your dead) hey not a big deal!
or if he returns after that date hey you win!
the only way you can lose, is if he comes back in your time.
of course if you believe any of that, you are all ready a loser.
July 3, 2009 at 2:06 am
Sisyphus – I believe that The Flying Spaghetti Monster supersedes all other gods, so belief in Allaaaaaaaaaaaaaah is now redundant – he`s yesterday`s news, along with his pals Moohammed and Jesus H. Christ!! (BTW I never did find out what the H stood for, or did it stand for nothing at all, as in Harry H Truman, I wonder? After all, there was a minor pop star over here in the UK called simply “H”, a short while ago!). Until such time as someone invents another credible deity (I know – contradiction in terms there!) we must assume that FSM is God`s final revelation to man, and listen only to him!!!
July 3, 2009 at 2:07 am
PS Your site is great!!
July 22, 2009 at 10:02 am |
Luke 12: 1-34
Luke 13: 1-8
Luke 13: 22-30
Luke 14: 15-24
July 22, 2009 at 10:03 am |
PS: What did Jesus say about the Scriptures?
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/07/20/inerrancy-infallibility/
November 8, 2009 at 9:34 pm |
I’m always amazed at the “Jesus” movies that have a brown-haired, European-nosed man playing a Jew. From what I can tell, he looked more like bin Laden than most of those commenting here.
He was a bad-ass. He pissed people off. They killed him. That’s what they do when you piss people off.
He wouldn’t last 3 years in the U.S. today; I’m convinced of that.
November 9, 2009 at 7:48 am |
Well, take note that we’re talking about a religion who claims that they can identify God’s gender, despite never having actually SEEN the being before. >_>
(Or, they did see it, but they have absolutely no idea what they saw, and made their own conclusions based on what little they knew and human nature, thus going against God.
Ergo: the gospel you’re hearing from worshippers is based on a mistaken belief rather than the Real Thing – more fodder for the “pay it no heed” line of reasoning. <_<)
November 16, 2009 at 3:05 am |
People who rely on force to impose the truth do not know what the bible says! People who judge do not know what the bible says! Jesus did make clear the fact that he reiterated the old testament, and didn’t abolish it. So the rules are the same, however the manner in which we deal with witnessing these sins has changed. Jesus knew none were worthy,so he ordered us to love, instead of punishing, because “whoever is blameless, let him cast the first stone.” We all sin, we all fall short, but are justified through righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus Christ. As far as science goes, I do not doubt human potential, but God intentionally confused our knowledge the moment we chose to confide in our own understanding. So automatically, science is flawed. For we live by faith, not fact. A christian is a follower of Christ, no denominations! Christ’s example is taught through the Bible. Unity, no! Jesus said he didn’t come to bring peace, but a sword! God Bless the true saints, and may the Holy Spirit guide you all as we emerge into the beginning of the end.
November 16, 2009 at 4:22 am |
“We live by faith, not fact.” Another priceless gobbet of mental grot from yet another Christian fruitcake! This is going to save millions of dollars wasted on the needless training of doctors and surgeons: all they have to do is “believe” that their patients are going to get well, and hey presto, the job’s done!!
November 16, 2009 at 10:22 am |
Don’t forget that God intentionally confuses scientists and doctors so they won’t be able to help the sick and find cures for disease. God will cure everyone without their scientific wisdom and help. We just need to pray harder.
November 16, 2009 at 10:35 am |
Jose–
Do you wear clothes of two types of fabric? (Leviticus 19:19)
Do you cut your hair or shave? (Leviticus 19:27)
Would you kill your child if they dishonored you? (Leviticus 20:9)
Do you believe in the death penalty for adultery? (Leviticus 20:10)
Do you believe homosexuals should be killed? (Leviticus 20:13)
Do you believe people of other religions should be killed? (Deuteronomy 13:5, Deuteronomy 13:6-10, Deuteronomy 13:12-15, Deuteronomy 17:2-7)
If Old Testament Law is still valid, all of these laws listed here are valid. I’ll pass on worshipping a god that orders his believers to kill everyone.
January 31, 2010 at 7:48 am |
OK, these babes are fair however these ones are wild. See for yourself Tammera Bried http://bit.ly/cVwzV