Thoughts On Belief
Regarding the whole belief thing:
What are beliefs?
BELIEF: ~
- The mental act, condition, or habit of placing trust or confidence in another: My belief in you is as strong as ever.
- Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something: His explanation of what happened defies belief.
- Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.
People can hold religious, cultural, economic, political and social beliefs. In fact, people can hold beliefs on virtually any topic.
In free societies and cultures people have the right to hold whatever beliefs they want, but they do not have the right for beliefs to go unquestioned.
People who don't want their beliefs questioned, examined or scrutinized in any way, shouldn't make them public. If they do not want to hear a dissenting voice, they should keep their beliefs, no matter what they are, private. As soon as anyone places their beliefs in the public domain, anyone has the right to question them.
Now, having said this, it doesn't mean I have, or anyone else has, the right to threaten anyone's life or personal safety. And having said this, I also think there is an ethical obligation to try and keep the questioning polite, and to not fall into the logical fallacy of the ad hominem attack.
Some people allow their beliefs to define them, and as such, they consider it a personal attack if you question whatever belief it is that they are espousing. In other words, they cannot distance themselves from the belief, which is being questioned, and the person who holds the belief.
So, as to whether a person is insulted by the questioning of their belief, over that, I don't have complete control. At least part of the responsibility for the perception of insult, lies also with the person whose beliefs are being questioned. Does this mean that I should refrain from asking questions because my questions might be considered an insult by someone? I don't think so.
Many decisions are made in our lives through the use of reason and critical thinking. Reason involves questioning, examining and critically analysing information. So, when someone is concerned because you are questioning their beliefs and says to you, "You should not question my beliefs." Just remember that what they might be asking you to do is, not to use reason, but to accept their beliefs on faith.
"The way to see by Faith is to shut the Eye of Reason." - Benjamin Franklin
posted by beepbeepitsme | 11:59 pm
27 Comments:
Hey, beepbeep! I think we can actually agree on some stuff for once!!!
First of all, not wanting your beliefs to be questioned is unbiblical and un-Christian. 1 Peter 3:15>> "...always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you..."
Secondly, I think you're correct in saying that questions should be asked politely. They should also be answered politely, if you want to use that particular word. 1 Peter 3:15>> "...yet with gentleness and reverence."
When someone asks a question to a Christian that is cynical, hateful, or theoretically and rhetorically un-answerable, it's not really asking out of a desire to know the truth. It's asking out of a desire to insult and demean the other person. The Bible talks about not throwing your pearls before swine.(Matthew 7:6) The greatest pearls the Christian has are Jesus and His act of atonement.
However, the being polite (or gentle) goes in defense of the Christian Faith, and that's why Christians are to do their best to "speak the truth in love."(Ephesians 4:15) We are not speaking to polarize and divide, but to convert and unite. Sometimes I get so passionate--and perhaps insulted--that I feel, especially over the internet, that "I've lost that loving feeling." I want to be strong and firm, yet, as I said, I want to convince, not detract.
My beliefs do define me. I'm not afraid to say it. I'm proud to say it. You're beliefs don't define you: I know that. You won't even state your beliefs half the time. But my beliefs are who I am, I AM a Christian, my life is dedicated to that, and--by the grace and will of God--I pray that I may never deviate from my purpose on this earth. I am not afraid to be defined by my beliefs. Why? Because I know them to be true. I KNOW them to be true. Not many have the luxury of saying that, but true--and/or mature--Christians do. (I want to add that this isn't a "blind leap of faith" as you say, but is a process of growing in a relationship with God and growing in faith--but not blind faith, and growing in knowledge, etc.)
That's why Christians often feel personally attacked or insulted. Because our lives are invested--not in our beliefs, but rather in what I call our knowledge (for we know, we don't think; we have faith, "the ASSURANCE of things hoped for"--Hebrews 11:1). We know the truth, the truth has set us free (John 8:32), and now those still in chains are trying to bind us back up again. When somebody tells us(or at least me) that God doesn't exist and there is no life after death, it's more insulting than if I were to tell you that Australia doesn't have a government and Australia doesn't even exist.
And that's where I think the whole "beliefs" problem comes in. When someone questions the Christian, it's often more like an interrogation, or an accusing attorney grilling a witness. It's less questioning and more declaring. Rather than asking "Is what you say true and how?" it usually comes out as "What you say is not true, no way, no how."
But want I want to leave you with, is that the Christian has more than a belief--which I think of as "something that is thought to be most probably the case." Although that term is used in both the Bible and the pulpit, I think the beliefs in Christianity are stronger than any other religion, for they are beliefs IN THE KNOW, faith--ASSURANCE, not just: "Well, I've come to this probable conclusion."
RE: drwhoamI
Let me review your posting with the level of scrutiny it deserves.
You said this : "blah blah blah blah (insert emotionally gratifiying phrase here)"
And then this: - " blah blah blah (insert threat of punishment here"
And then: - "blah blah blah - because god said so"
And finishing with: - "blah blah blah and because I believe it therefore it must be true."
Now, go away and contruct an argument for whichever god it is you espouse.
The childish protestations and rationalisations of believers are sad, really. They so desperately want to believe their silliness.
If an adult were proclaiming the existence of Santa they would probably realise how silly they sound. But elevate the fantasy of Santa to that of 'God' and rationality goes out the window.
Ah well, more importantly, when, Beep, are you going to grace my blog?
Great post Dr Whoami!
Beep, was your response an actual argument? It seemed rather strangely worded.
Methinks that our resident religion intolerators are quite upset to see Immanuel Kant:
-"The existence of the Bible, as a Book for the people, is the greatest benefit which the human
race has ever experienced. Every attempt to belittle it is a crime against humanity."
and Sir Isaac Newton:
-"There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history."
and Charles Dickens:
-"The New Testament is the very best Book that ever or ever will be known in the world."
...among the Bible lovers. A scientist, an author and a philosopher. How dare these famously close-minded individuals display such an open attitude.
Burn them at the stake. And the Bible too! (and the medieval crowds of the 21st Century roared!)
Good show!
RE playful pete:
I address arguments,not innane jottings from terminally bewildered teenagers.
RE playful pete:
And now for something completely different: -
RE Kant: The Philospher's Song
"Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table
David Hume could out consume
Schopenhauer and Hegel
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel
There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed
John Stuart Mill, of his own free will
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill
Plato they say, could stick it away
Half a crate of whiskey every day
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle
Hobbes was fond of his dram
And René Descartes was a drunken fart
"I drink, therefore I am"
Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed
A lovely little thinker
But a bugger when he's pissed"
RE playful pete
RE: Newton
1.Newton stuck a knife behind his eyeball to induce optical effects, nearly blinding himself.
2.He was a Catholic-hating Puritan who secretly subscribed to the Arian heresy, which denied the divinity of Christ.
3.Newton only two romantic attachments, both with younger males, and suffered a paranoiac breakdown after the second came to rupture.
So, Newton stabbed himself in the eye with a knife, sympathised with the Arian heresy which denied the divinty of christ and was a homosexual.
Frankly, no wonder he thought that god existed, he probably was shattered after his homosexual affairs finished.
RE playful pete:
RE Dickens
Dickens was interested Unitarian Christianity which professes that jesus has moral authority, but is not a deity.
Unitarians are better defined as free thinkers and dissenters who evolved their beliefs in the direction of rationalism and humanism.
Oh, and he also left his wife who had 10 children with him. He then proceded, so the story goes, to have an affair with his wife's sister.
Beep, I've only visited a couple of times, but you've hit the proverbial nail on the head with this post as witnessed by several of your commenters and their rather undesirable tactics of attacking you personally because you haven't parroted their belief system/doctrine/dogmatism.
What they forget is that Jesus told his followers to go out and cast their nets. He never once told his followers to shame, coerce, force people to his cause.
Insofar as Drwhoami, I believe that millions of Hindus and billions of Muslims could similarly quote their biblical doctrine, not to mention the Shintus and Buddhists, and GitchiManitou followers. And that doesn't even address the sects within each religion - Sunnis, Shias, Sufi, B'hai, Zen, Mormons, Seventh Day adventists, Catholics, Anglicans, Evangelicals, Lutherans, Calvins, Shakers, Amish, Quakers, Confusionists, etc etc.
Don't stop doing what you do. There needs to be a great shakeathon, whereby all of these zealots need to be shaken until the actually read and practice what their prophets said, not what humans wrote from their own interpretation.
Geez, I'm so tired of religious zealots of all stripes. They are a scourge on the landscape and the human race - which is what Jesus felt - Saccrisees and Seducees and all.
I think there's really no need to try debunking the the "philosopher" argument. At the end of the day, all these people could have been the most correct and clever but also drunkens or crazy as cows, but still just people, with their beliefs, fears, ideas, problems of all sorts. Just humans like us.
Problem is, Beep, you are applying rational debate to irrational beliefs. Fundies are not/never persuaded by logic or reason or evidence and resent those who threaten their fantasies!
P.S. Thanks for visiting and let me say how much I enjoy your cleverness and humour!
RE : daniel: jones: and justme:
Thanks for the words of encouragement. It is nice to know some people actually read my blog. :)
Whenever your writing provokes rants, it is a good thing. It means you hit a nerve or two. Good post.
I actually wrote this for another post, but never got around to publishing it. However, since Daniel likes to state these types of one-liners all the time, obviously, I think it appropriately fits here.
Daniel said on another post:
""It does not profit any man or woman to argue with a believer for their minds are locked and bolted."
Anonymous."
Daniel: I don’t know if I—as a Christian—am supposed to take that as a compliment or an insult. I’ll take it as a compliment, but I’ll address it as an insult:
The same could be said about atheists. How do you reason with a fool? (“The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’”—Psalm 14:1; 53:1) How do you reason with a fool, since “fools despise wisdom and instruction”? (Proverbs 1:7) How do you reason with a fool, since “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes”? (Proverbs 12:15) How do you tell the blind to see? (Luke 4:18) How do the blind avoid the cliff when they’re led by blind guides? (Matthew 15:14) How do you make seeds grow when they fall beside the road? (Matthew 13) Only God can do such a work. (Matthew 16:17)
It has been wisely said that it takes more faith to believe that there is NO God than to believe that there is. It would take a vast amount more of information to know God doesn’t exist than to know He does. The one who knows there is a God can feel God, see God, know God, and has the knowledge that God must exist. The one who would know that there is no God would have to know that nobody feels God, nobody sees God, nobody knows God, and that no God exists in/on any square millimeter of this entire universe. The person who would claim that he knows there is no God would literally himself have to be omniscient.
But the fact is, those who believe there is no God do not possess this knowledge, but are so saturated with sin, the world, and themselves, that they’ve decided to shatter the first two Commandments (putting their own “graven image,” their own god and reason, above the One True God), with no plans to make amends. The best thing they can come up with is “The Theory of Evolution,” which has been proven false, impossible, and fraudulent time and time again—even by evolutionists—only to rear its ugly head once more. Even Darwin, the virtual creator and father of the Theory, admitted its implausibility. And many of his theories, as many of most evolutionists' theories, have been proven today to be simply inaccurate. Evolution has been replaced as far as intelligence and integrity goes by the Intelligent Design movement, but atheists refuse to concede.
That's what I wrote in reply to that statement. But, since your best argument will probably be "this isn't about evolution, this is about beliefs" or something along those irrational lines, I must say that you make your own case even worse. The person whose own theories are proven improbable, impossible, implausible, fraudulent, inconceivable, and false, and yet refuses to even give the time of day to Christianity, is the one who is really unreasonable and whose mind is really "locked and bolted."
Nice one Beep! Can't add to Justme's comment and Daniel is spot on! That's why I put you in the "cleverness" section in my blogroll..:)
Pete left a few out though. Bacon, Kepler.........
I knew there was a reason I liked this blog :)
RE: kingdom advancer:
RE: "I think the beliefs in Christianity are stronger than any other religion, for they are beliefs IN THE KNOW, faith--ASSURANCE, not just: "Well, I've come to this probable conclusion."
If you lived in Ancient Egypt you would be worshipping Ra, or Horus or Osiris (depending on the dynasty), I on the other hand, would be an atheist.
Except, I would be a "quieter atheist", as one thing all religions have had in common, is the desire to kill those who do not convert to their faith.
RE kingdom advancer: "It does not profit any man or woman to argue with a believer for their minds are locked and bolted."
"It little profits that an idle king,
By this still hearth, among these barren crags,
Match'd with an agèd wife, I mete and dole
Unequal laws unto a savage race,
That hoard, and sleep, and feed, and know not me."
Seeing we are into posting passages from books, I thought I would post something as well.
But, anyway, it is of no use to post scripture to people who consider, the bible, like any other book, to be written by men.
I consider "The Bible" to have been as divinely inspired as "The Little Engine That Could" and just as relevant.
So cease and desist from posting biblical passages. Most of us have read the bible and consider it the writings of ancient camel herders who thought that belly button lint was a savoury after dinner snack.
But, just in case you are not aware of this passage, I will post it to you. I don't consider it to be the word of any god, but you do.
Matthew 5:22 "but whoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
Only the fool says in his heart: There is no god -- The wise says it to the world.
"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: BUT WHOEVER shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." - Mat 5:22
Just to qualify the point.
Hey Beep, got a question for you:
How do you manage to keep all your dissenters around for so long? Mine never seem to last more than a couple comments on average. Then again, we can be a pretty rough crowd...
Now for KA:
The best thing they can come up with is “The Theory of Evolution,” which has been proven false, impossible, and fraudulent time and time again—even by evolutionists—only to rear its ugly head once more.
Okay dude, here's the challenge: show me... and don't use the same PRATTs that I've heard every stinking time someone makes this same tall claim that you have. If your info came from Hovind, ICR, AiG, the DI, Vance Ferrell, etc... don't bother.
RE iamb: I have no idea why some stay so long. I think they hope for the ultimate conversion. A staunch atheist converted might get them a closer seat to god come "the rupture". Who knows..
RE evolution:
Believers who want to speak about evolution inevitably learn their science from some whacked out apologetic site. So they start with incredible misconceptions considering what evolution is from the very beginning.
And most want to play the argument of "if not evolution therefore god." I refuse to play. They can either prove the existence of their god or they can't.
There are so many logical fallacies associated with that type of thinking that I get worn out trying to make them understand that you can't prove the existence of a god by disproving the existence of tupperware, or anything else.
"I have no idea why some stay so long. I think they hope for the ultimate conversion. A staunch atheist converted might get them a closer seat to god come "the rupture"."--Beepbeep
Speaking for myself, I've stayed so far for your salvation, for God, and to fulfill what God would have me to do. (But, I may eventually move on. Just wanted to let you know in case you stop seeing "Kingdom Advancer" comments on your site.)
"Believers who want to speak about evolution inevitably learn their science from some whacked out apologetic site."--Beepbeep
I'm sure you think that anybody who believes differently than you is "whacked out"--no matter how much smarter and more scientific they are than you.
Secondly, I'm sure you read balanced perspectives on Christianity ,the Bible, and Evolution. Oh, wait, let me correct myself: I'm sure you DON'T read balanced--and accurate--perspectives on Christianity and the Bible and Evolution, and even if you did, I'm sure you'd read them with such disdain that you'd refuse to believe a word they said.
You want to have your cake and eat it too. (I use that because I've already used "the door swings both ways" twice.)
"They can either prove the existence of their god or they can't."--Beepbeep
You can either prove Evolution or you can't. And...you can't. Take the plank out of your own eye, as the Bible would say.
"There are so many logical fallacies associated with that type of thinking that I get worn out trying to make them understand that you can't prove the existence of a god by disproving the existence of tupperware, or anything else. "--Beepbeep
I've already pointed out that disproving Evolution is only a step toward proving God. And, in fact, I've said that MULTIPLE TIMES. However, since you won't concede ANYTHING, but rather say, "It's not about this. It's not about that. It's not about Evolution. That's a 'logical fallacy.' Talk about what I want to talk about in the way I want to talk about it with bad arguments so that I can win...ad nauseam."
"Okay dude, here's the challenge: show me... and don't use the same PRATTs that I've heard every stinking time someone makes this same tall claim that you have. If your info came from Hovind, ICR, AiG, the DI, Vance Ferrell, etc... don't bother. " --iamb
Do you want quotes from evolutionists? Do you want quotes from former evolutionists? Do you want evidence of past FRAUDS trying to prove Evolution? Do you want evidence of evolutionists jumping the gun on evidence--simply and plainly being wrong time and time again? Do you want the odds of Evolution? Do you want the implausibility explanations of Evolution? And the list goes on...
I would need some specific requests, or I'm not going to spend my time. People write books about this sort of thing, you know.
"If you lived in Ancient Egypt you would be worshipping Ra, or Horus or Osiris (depending on the dynasty), I on the other hand, would be an atheist."--Beepbeep
You severely underestimate Christianity. Is that the reason so many Christians allow themselves to be martyred and persecuted, because they'll believe whatever their culture tells them to believe? Is that why there are Christians in all sorts of Muslim countries, being tortured, persecuted, and martyred in unspeakable ways? Is that why there are Christians in places like Communist China, who are persecuted and martyred for their faith? Is that why--during the Reformation--Christians were willing to be burned at the stake (just to name one method) by Catholics? Is that why, since the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Christians have been willing to suffer just about any injustice from any unjust persecutor for the sake of God?
The Gentiles had their own gods and theories, but many Gentiles converted to Christianity. (And Gentiles who convert today are often ATHEISTS before they convert.)
And, people like Moses and Joseph lived, and even held positions of royalty IN EGYPT, yet they put their trust in the One True God. You underestimate God's ability to reveal Himself (Matthew 16:17).
"Except, I would be a "quieter atheist", as one thing all religions have had in common, is the desire to kill those who do not convert to their faith. "--Beepbeep
Difference between you and me: I'm willing to die for what I believe--and know--is true. You would clam-up like a clamshell if your life depended on it, and I can see why: atheists have no hope after death.
"one thing all religions have had in common, is the desire to kill those who do not convert to their faith."--Beepbeep
Christians are called to love their enemies; to do good to those who hate them. Christians know that the battle is not against flesh and blood, that we should kill the opposition, but it's a battle for souls, and a battle against the devil and his demons. Christians who kill others--not doing it in self-defense--are victims of "zeal without knowledge," as the Bible says.
"Okay dude, here's the challenge: show me... and don't use the same PRATTs that I've heard every stinking time someone makes this same tall claim that you have. If your info came from Hovind, ICR, AiG, the DI, Vance Ferrell, etc... don't bother. "--iamb
I'm not sure I'm familiar with all of the names--or organizations--you mentioned. But, give me some time, and, if you want, I'll list all of the evolutionists I would deny YOU the right to use in a debate.
"But, anyway, it is of no use to post scripture to people who consider, the bible, like any other book, to be written by men.
I consider "The Bible" to have been as divinely inspired as "The Little Engine That Could" and just as relevant.
So cease and desist from posting biblical passages. Most of us have read the bible and consider it the writings of ancient camel herders who thought that belly button lint was a savoury after dinner snack."--Beepbeep
1.) You are an atheist. I am a Christian. Therefore, I will not stop quoting Scripture until you REMOVE ALL YOUR ATHEISTIC, HUMANISTIC, ANTI-GOD QUOTES from your site.
Even at that point, since you are an atheist, and I am a Christian, I still would not stop quoting Scripture because you are speaking AS AN ATHEIST. Therefore, I would not stop quoting Scripture until you stopped typing at all. Whence, our debate would consist of a blank white screen.
2.) Are you familiar with "Cliff Notes"? Because that's about how deeply I think you all have probably gone into the Bible. You read the Bible with about the same presuppositional attitude that a freedom-loving, democratic republic, Christian American would read the "Communist Manifesto." The difference? The aforementioned person would be right and justified in his presuppositions. You are not.
3.) In all honesty, it really doesn't matter what all of you "consider" or "believe" about the Bible. I could "believe" or "consider" you to be a 450 pound; 4'6" aborigine; who has long, purple, dreadlocks; wears short-shorts, long rainbow-colored, clown socks, a Hawaian shirt that says "Hawaia is a place in hell," and a Green Bay Packers' cheesehead. Would that make my beliefs about you relevant? You couldn't prove it to me. If you sent me a picture, I could say it wasn't you, or that you doctored the photo, or that you just have all the apparel I mentioned currently in your closet. You could travel to the United States so I could see you in person, but I could say that you had gotten an actor to pose for you. You could then show me your driver's license and other legal documents, but I could say they're forged. You could say that my opinion of your looks is impossible or unreasonable, but I could refuse to agree with you.
Does that make my "beliefs" or my "considerances" any more relevant? No. The truth is all that matters. Two separate beliefs don't make two wrong beliefs or two "maybe" beliefs.
Find somebody who doesn't believe in gravity, tell them to jump off a cliff, and we'll meet at the bottom to discuss how relevant what you believe and consider about the Bible is.
""But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: BUT WHOEVER shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." - Mat 5:22"--Beepbeep
Rather than stressing "BUT WHOEVER," you should've stressed "WITHOUT A CAUSE" earlier in the passage. I have a cause: atheists don't believe in God. And I didn't come up with the idea of the unbeliever being a fool on my own: it was the Bible's idea--God's idea. Therefore, I was merely quoting Scripture. Also, you'll notice that I carefully picked my words so that I was not inditing any one particular person, but the belief system of atheism.
Not to mention, I got the "plank/log" of not believing in God out of my eye a long time ago.
"Only the fool says in his heart: There is no god -- The wise says it to the world. "--Beepbeep
There should be a gameshow called "Wrong Again." I bet you could win some money on it.
Proverbs 17:28:
>Even a fool, when he keeps silent, is considered wise; When he closes his lips, he is considered prudent.<
Proverbs 18:2
>A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind.<
When you make your beliefs known, you only show yourself to possess even more foolishness. I'm debating you, because as Proverbs 26:5 says:
>Answer a fool as his folly deserves, That he not be wise in his own eyes.<
I'm not trying to insult you. I'm trying to instruct you with God's wisdom so that "you be not wise in your own mind." So that what you think is wisdom and right will not carry you to the grave.
Proverbs 12:15:
> The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, But a wise man is he who listens to counsel.<
It has been wisely said that it takes more faith to believe that there is NO God than to believe that there is. It would take a vast amount more of information to know God doesn’t exist than to know He does.
Well, that all depends. Given that no evidence (I mean of the observable, testable scientific kind) exists of God's existence, I would say that it takes precisely the same amount of the faith to believe that no god exists (strong atheism) as it does to believe in God's existence. It takes less faith to hold, as weak atheists such as myself do, that given the absence of evidence of God's existence, there is no reason to believe that God exists. (Just as there is no reason to believe in Santa or the Tooth Fairy.) That kind of talk gets me into trouble in certain quarters, but there it is.
We are not speaking to polarize and divide, but to convert and unite.
Right. But those who disagree with you are "fools." Because it says so in your holy book.
I am not afraid to be defined by my beliefs. Why? Because I know them to be true. I KNOW them to be true.
No, you don't. Otherwise you'd have to be omniscient as God himself.
But the fact is, those who believe there is no God do not possess this knowledge, but are so saturated with sin, the world, and themselves, that they’ve decided to shatter the first two Commandments (putting their own “graven image,” their own god and reason, above the One True God), with no plans to make amends.
How's that for a strawman argument, peeps? Let me have a go. (Ahem.) Those who believe in God are prone to molesting children, and then running to the confessional booth to redeem themselves, like a get-out-of-jail-free-card. I don't actually believe that--I just wanted to see what it feels like to bolster my own self-righteousness by slandering those who don't share my beliefs.
The best thing they can come up with is “The Theory of Evolution,” which has been proven false, impossible, and fraudulent time and time again
No, it hasn't. You make yourself sound foolish when you spout such nonsense Please cite the evidence that evolution has been "proven" false. Pamphlets and tracts that you picked up at your church on the weekend don't count. But, given that you're likely to recycle something half-understood from a "Why Darwin was Wrong" newsletter, please be aware that many have come (and had their asses handed back to them on a platter) before you. Check out this site before you really embarrass yourself.
RE: kingdom advancer: "Speaking for myself, I've stayed so far for your salvation, for God, and to fulfill what God would have me to do. (But, I may eventually move on. Just wanted to let you know in case you stop seeing "Kingdom Advancer" comments on your site.)"
So your reason for being here is to demand that I believe the same stuff as you. Hmmm . Interesting, but I am not sure how this fits into the concept of a "free society."
RE: "I'm sure you think that anybody who believes differently than you is "whacked out"--no matter how much smarter and more scientific they are than you."
Not at all, just the majority of fundamentalist christians are whacked out.
RE: "Secondly, I'm sure you read balanced perspectives on Christianity ,the Bible, and Evolution. Oh, wait, let me correct myself: I'm sure you DON'T read balanced--and accurate--perspectives on Christianity and the Bible and Evolution"
There is nothing "balanced" about believing in talking snakes. Let me see, will I spend a lot of my time on the talking snake theory, or science. UUmmmmmm. Ok, ya got me. Science.
RE: " You can either prove Evolution or you can't. And...you can't. Take the plank out of your own eye, as the Bible would say."
Once again, because you appear to be terminally retarded. Whether or not evolution is true or not, does nothing to prove the case for god.
RE: "disproving evolution is a step towards provong god"
No, it isn't. Only in your illogical mind it is.
RE: " Do you want quotes from evolutionists? Do you want quotes from former evolutionists? Do you want evidence of past FRAUDS trying to prove Evolution?"
Science is a continuous process of observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena, when faith can stand those tests, I will become religious.
In other words, when you correct the "talking snake theory" get back to me.
RE: "You severely underestimate Christianity. Is that the reason so many Christians allow themselves to be martyred and persecuted, because they'll believe whatever their culture tells them to believe? Is that why there are Christians in all sorts of Muslim countries, being tortured, persecuted, and martyred in unspeakable ways? Is that why there are Christians in places like Communist China, who are persecuted and martyred for their faith?"
Some christians love to feel persecuted literally and figuratively. They are kinda weird that way.
RE: "Difference between you and me: I'm willing to die for what I believe--and know--is true. You would clam-up like a clamshell if your life depended on it, and I can see why: atheists have no hope after death."
I know you are willing to die for your god belief. But you can't know it is true. If you knew it was true, you would be claiming to have special supernatural knowledge like a god. Do you claim that you are omniscient?
And you are right, I am not prepared to die for the "talking snake theory" or the "shag a virgin in paradise theory."
RE: " Christians are called to love their enemies; to do good to those who hate them. Christians know that the battle is not against flesh and blood, that we should kill the opposition, but it's a battle for souls, and a battle against the devil and his demons. Christians who kill others--not doing it in self-defense--are victims of "zeal without knowledge," as the Bible says."
So, do you believe in loving your enemies to death in war? Just a question.
RE: 1.) You are an atheist. I am a Christian. Therefore, I will not stop quoting Scripture until you REMOVE ALL YOUR ATHEISTIC, HUMANISTIC, ANTI-GOD QUOTES from your site."
Sorry, no can do. I have a right to an opinion and I think I have expressed it in the main without insult or malice. Free society dude.
You can't demand that I believe the same as you. And you can't demand that because you don't agree with the content on my site, that I do NOT have the right to post it.
If god exists, it doesn't need you to fight its wars for it. It is, afterall, all powerful, all knowing and everywhere.
Why, if it exists, it is even on my webblog as I am typing. So don't fret your pretty little head over it. (pat pat)
The reason I ask you to stop posting scripture is because it is MY site. Scripture is not going to convince any atheist that god exists, so it is just a waste of your time and mine.
I consider the bible to be the works of men. NO divine inspiration, just the works of men.
RE: "Find somebody who doesn't believe in gravity, tell them to jump off a cliff, and we'll meet at the bottom to discuss how relevant what you believe and consider about the Bible is."
How about you jump off a cliff and pray for god to save you on the way down.
RE: " Rather than stressing "BUT WHOEVER," you should've stressed "WITHOUT A CAUSE" earlier in the passage. I have a cause: atheists don't believe in God. And I didn't come up with the idea of the unbeliever being a fool on my own: it was the Bible's idea--God's idea.
Ahhh, I see you have reading problems. It is ok, many people do.
"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: " << one separate discrete thought.
"and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: " << another separate discrete thought.
(Raca is a jewish term of reproach meaning "worthless." So, "and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council" means >> whoever calls someone racca (or worthless) is in danger of the council.)
"BUT WHOEVER shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." << and the last, separate discrete thought.
Each statement has a separate punishment.
In the first one, if you are angry without cause, you are in danger of the judgement.
In the second one, if you call someone worthless, you are in danger of the council.
And in the last one, if you call someone a fool, you are in danger of hell fire.
I hope you understand your bible better now.
My, what a lot of words. Gave me quite a headache. Now, was that God speaking to me in a subtle but admonishing way? Or was it that reading mountains of religious dogma confuses and frustrates anyone with intelligence?
Pass the aspirin. Cheers.
I'm not sure I'm familiar with all of the names--or organizations--you mentioned. But, give me some time, and, if you want, I'll list all of the evolutionists I would deny YOU the right to use in a debate. -- Kingdom
It's not denying you the right to use them, per se... it's more of a warning. I've been around this debate for longer than most, excluding the Panda's Thumb crew and a few of the TalkOrigins contributors. The points it that anything you use from any of these organizations, whether you profess to know who they are or not (which is hard to believe that you're not familiar with them, since all of the arguments you've used so far come from one or more of those organizations), is something I've seen probably hundreds of times before. That's why some of us refer to them as "PRATTs" (Points Refuted A Thousand Times).
Ah, hell... go ahead and fire away. I'd like to see something unique and original, but throw me whatever you've got. Beware of the quotes though... they might get you burned worse than you think (I am a contributor to the Quote Mine Project). Anyway, give it your best shot.
Secondly, I'm sure you read balanced perspectives on Christianity ,the Bible, and Evolution.
With regard to evolution versus Creationism, it's not a question of achieving "balance." The question, rather, is this: which of the two is scientifically sound? Which of the two is best supported by the evidence? Which of the two operates according to the scientific method?
Science is the drawing of tentative conclusions about the universe based upon observation and evidence. They are tentative because they can always be overturned by new evidence. (Hint: Scripture doesn't count as evidence.) Creation "science" (and yes, those quotes belong there) puts the cart before the horse. It takes hard-and-fast "conclusions" from a holy book and tries to find evidence to support it. (To quote Seinfeld, that's how they do science in the Bizarro World.) Creationism tries to make the real world fit its own dogma. (Mainstream Christians don't have this problem, because they don't take the Bible literally.) That just isn't science.
You can either prove Evolution or you can't. And...you can't.
Nothing is "proven" in science. You can't prove gravity either, but what we do know is that it is currently the best explanation for the evidence we have regarding what happens between bodies of matter in space.
That's a 'logical fallacy.' Talk about what I want to talk about in the way I want to talk about it with bad arguments so that I can win...ad nauseam."
If your responses are peppered with logical fallacies and bad arguments, is that BeepBeep's fault, or yours?
You severely underestimate Christianity.
And you completely missed Beepbeep's point.
You are an atheist. I am a Christian. Therefore, I will not stop quoting Scripture until you REMOVE ALL YOUR ATHEISTIC, HUMANISTIC, ANTI-GOD QUOTES from your site.
Even at that point, since you are an atheist, and I am a Christian, I still would not stop quoting Scripture because you are speaking AS AN ATHEIST. Therefore, I would not stop quoting Scripture until you stopped typing at all. Whence, our debate would consist of a blank white screen.
Again, you miss Beepbeep's point. You're trying to convince Beepbeep of the viability of your religious opinions by hurling quotes from your holy book at her. But in order to be able to give such quotes any credence, she would have to share your religious opinions in the first place. Get it?
Post a Comment
<< Home