Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 02:17 PM

macgyver - 05 May 2009 12:09 PM

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 05:03 AM

btw. have you given a look at the video, i have linked to ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXFurmM49WI&feature=channel

I watched the video. Try to get at least some of your understanding of science from someone who is a true expert on the subject. Get a degree in cosmology at a university and then come back and listen to what this guy is saying. I doubt you’ll be impressed by him afterward. You can’t get a science education from a bunch of youtube yahoos with an ax to grind and expect to actually have learned something useful.

i would prefere you to go straight to the point, and show if there is any wrong scientific data in the video…

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”  Albert Einstein

I’m not a cosmologist but then neither is the person who made that video and that’s what he is counting on. He relies on the fact that the subject he is discussing is truly beyond the knowledge base of most people (including himself) so he can make whatever claims he wants and only someone with a degree in cosmology or nuclear physics would be able to pick apart the claims. The fact that three helium atoms can combine to form a carbon atom because they have the “same resonance” is somehow proof of god. OK, Uh how? I can’t refute the claim that this reaction occurs because of a common resonance but unless you can somehow show a link between that concept and a supernatural being it doesn’t really matter. Then he presents quantum theory as another “proof” of the existence of god because the quantum world is “ruled by uncertainty”. I never realized god was so uncertain. This video does the same thing you are constantly doing. It brings up things that aren’t completely understood or things that supposedly are very unlikely to occur by chance and then claims “there you have it. Proof of god”. In fact its proof of nothing.

I don’t have the requisite education to refute what he is discussing with authority, but I do have the background needed to pull apart the idiotic claims made at the other site you recommended. I did so above in a post and you conveniently chose not to respond. I’ll assume that by default you concede my points and agree the site is rubbish.

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 01:58 PM

Chicken - 05 May 2009 08:05 AM

Mriana - 05 May 2009 07:30 AM

I’ve spent more years studying and researching various religions and mythologies than you have knowledge about your own religion in your little pinky and I can give you a list of non-apologists who I have either studied under or inquired of over the years. 

That is the perfect explanation for why this thread is like beating your head against a wall.  Most of us can say that we have arrived at our beliefs, because of all of the time we have spent in research mode. 

Angelo, what you don’t understand is that all of the websites you refer to and the bible are well know positions.  We have read and discarded them through actual debate and research.  You, however, say that you will not read any books to the contrary, because you do not want to become an atheist.

I converted myself , when i was 18, because i believed in the bible. What came afterwards, just confirmed my belief. Its maiby the inverse, as it should be, but thats how it worked. After my conversion, God began to work in my life and in my heart, and strenghtened my faith more and more. Science does confirm, what i believe. Debates with atheists has given me a indepth knowledge of their standpoints, and i discard them, since they don’t seem reasonable at all to me.

Something tells me you did not confirm your belief via science.  I have a feeling you only looked for things to confirm your concept and disregarded all the rest.

Jules - 05 May 2009 06:41 AM

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 06:10 AM

Helen - 04 May 2009 10:52 PM

I heartily recommend Dan Barker’s “Losing Faith in Faith,” and John Loftus’ “Why I Became an Atheist.” Both books were written by former EVANGELICAL ministers.

why should i read these books ? i have absolutely NO intention to become a atheist. the atheistic standpoint looks to me completely unrealistic , a hypothese, which i discart categorically. I am a christian for over twenty years, and learned enough lessons, i do experience God in my daily life. How could i deny his existence ?

The word of God , the bible - the creator’s best gift to man.

Why should you read these books? Perhaps you should read again your first message on this forum, where you expressed curiosity on the subject and said that you sought to understand why someone would choose to be an atheist. I don’t understand why you would ask this question, and then when someone directs you to excellent books about the subject of which you inquire, you dismiss them.

It seems you did not come here to learn ANYTHING at all. You came here saying you were curious about atheists, yet when people share personal experience and discuss the scientific evidence that led them to this life path you plug your fingers in your ears. 

You have no intention of learning anything about, or from, atheists.  It’s a shame, and it is frustrating. There are wonderful people here reaching out to you. It appears you came here to toy with them, perhaps out of boredom.

I think Jules answered your question very well. I will add a few thoughts.

First, I would like to point out one statement you made that is in error. There is no one here on this board that chose to be an atheist. Atheism/agnosticism is simply the default position after exhausting all the other possibilities and dismissing them for lack of evidence. I also doubt that anyone here would emphatically proclaim that there absolutely is no God - but rather that they do not believe in any God as they have found no credible reason to do so. If you do not understand the difference then you need to brush up on critical thinking skills.

Second, while the people who have attempted to answer your questions have done a fabulous job (IMO, of course) I don’t know how many of them come from the same kind of religious background that you are in. I do. I spent about 20 years of my adult life in a born again, evangelical, Calvinistic, Presbyterian church. The “frozen chosen” pride themselves on being intellectually superior to your average fundamentalist and I’ve read my share of evangelical literature, especially those books with a more academic edge. I know from experience that you are more isolated in your Christian world than you think or will ever admit to. The books I recommended will answer your questions and come from authors who have been where you are now. They are written with love and kindness, not arrogance or malice.

Lastly, when I read the first several pages of posts in this thread, I thought you were here for one of two reasons. #1. You believe your responsibility as a good Christian is to go anywhere and everywhere to preach the gospel and save people from their sins, and my, what big points you’ll score if you can convert an ATHEIST! Or, #2.  there were some intellectually curious brain cells in the back of your neocortex, struggling to be set free, and you needed us to help you make the leap. After 13 pages of you attempting to refute every intelligent post here, I am convinced that # 1 is the reason for the lack of reason.

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 01:09 PM

you start from a false premise.

How completely funny.  Do you know that the “false premise” you site comes directly from your web link?  All that I have bulleted in bold are things from your web link and all the rest are my points against those claims.  You are disagreeing with yourself.  Pay more attention.

thats just your point of view. i see it differently. hate is very well the oposit of love.

And that is what I pointed out as ignorance.  You can say that is my view point, but more to the point, it is my experience.  If in your life you have not loved and hated at the same time, it does not mean that both emotions can not coexist in your heart toward one person.  I understand that you have no frame of reference for this, that is exactly what ignorance is:  lack of knowledge.  You can not tell me something that I have witnessed or experienced is not true, just as I can not tell you that the little voice in your head is not god.  It can be god for you, if you’d like.  I sincerely have no problem with you believing in a god.  But the idea that you planned to come on to this website to “spread the good word of the Lord” is arrogant and naive.  We’ve lived in your neighborhoods and our doorsteps have been darkened by the hooves of those wishing to convert.  It is the same whether you admit it or not.  Spreading the word is adding to your cult.  I’m not buying, sorry, you got the wrong sucker.  I’ve seen this dance and I’m not impressed by the song.  You came here as if sent on assignment by your church to convert heathens.  It is lame, and by the way, there are members of your faith which would serve this cause better than you.  Sorry, but your lost in translation evidence gathering from the web is not impressive. 

You are making a analogy between a kid, and Adam and Eve. But Adam and Eve where fully acountable for theis disobeyance . They were not innocent kids. They had full capability to make their choices. They had direct community with God, before the fall, and so had no reason to doubt about God’s sincerity. But what was Gods intention with humanity ?  God did not intend for us to be living in this amoral, fallen world. God intended for us to abide by His commandments, and if we chose to live in His will, we would not be afflicted with evil. The Adam and Eve story demonstrates the type of world we would have lived in if we did not choose sin.
Mankind’s reaction to temptation has been revealed to us in the Adam and Eve story. Adam and Eve failed to obey God. We lie, do take things that aren’t ours, do hate, and do commit various other sins. Sadly, we fall to temptation and give in to these sinful urges just as Adam and Eve disobeyed God. You, i , we are all not better than Adam and Eve were. We have no excuse whatsoever.
God warned of the judgment He would cast onto Adam and Eve if they disobeyed Him; similarly He warns us of the judgment He will cast onto us. We willingly choose to invoke His wrath by our decision to disobey Him.

Very forgiving god you got there.  Adam and Eve did one thing wrong, and they are damned, as is everybody (until Jesus) including the animals.  No, you are right, that makes sense.  The previous statement was sarcasm, in case that was to oblique.  Your idea that Adam and Eve were not innocent kids intrigues me.  Did god create them with what we ourselves are not born with?  Did god give them previous understanding of how consequences work?  That isn’t something you are born with.  I know when I tell my son the consequences, sometimes he likes to test the boundaries.  I think you brush over what is clearly written in your bible.  Now it has been awhile since I’ve had a bible to physically reference, but here is the first thing that came up in google (and, Angelo, if you have a preferred web translation I’d be more than happy to debate using that as reference):
And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” 4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate.
This is from Genesis 3 and it clearly demonstrates that god, not only lied to Adam and Eve, but made them about as capable of handling that situation as any 7 year old being talked to by a snake.  It took very little for the snake to get them to disobey god.  So, why put the tree in the garden at all?  Why tempt them at all?  Your last sentence:  “We willingly choose to invoke His wrath by our decision to disobey Him,” sounds like what an abused wife would say.  Not my kind of all-powerful being.

how do you arrive to this conclusion ? his finding is in accordance with science, isnt ‘it ?

No, Herbert Spencer does not have scientific findings.  Here is wikipedia:  Herbert Spencer (27 April 1820 – 8 December 1903) was an English philosopher, prominent classical liberal political theorist, and sociological theorist of the Victorian era.  He isn’t a scientist, although, he was friends with Darwin.  Be careful who you choose to quote in your web scouring attempt to prove yourself right.

Me:  we are now aware (thanks to Einstein) that space and time are one.

You:  thats new to me….. 

Believe it or not, that does not surprise me.

a lot. What would be the alternative ? ” nothing ” would be the origin of all created….    it takes a lot of faith to believe that.

You are very myopic.  Christian God or no god.  Have you not heard of any other theology?  For me, it is more interesting to look at life through the lens of creation well beyond our comprehension.  I see people more like a cancer on the body of the earth.  Mostly, I like to suppose in the areas left open by the extents of what we can know.  There was a very informative documentary regarding viruses and their role in evolution.  Fascinating!  Life is bigger than god or no god.  I don’t see any relevance in holding on to a very old, very distorted idea of a super power forged at a moment of a heightened level of social ignorance. 

I don’t know what a Rorschach blob is….

The Rorschach test is a piece of paper with an ink blob on it and usually the paper is folded in order to make a free form design.  When people look at the ink blob/blot they see different things based on their emotion and mental perspective.

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

Question: “Why did Noah curse Ham / Canaan?”

http://associate.com/library/www.christianlibrary.org/authors/Grady_Scott/noahcurse.htm

Again, this is from your link so if you don’t like the quote, don’t blame me. 

1. It is very possible that Canaan was involved in some way. In verse 22 the text specifically states that Ham was the father of Canaan. It seems to be of some significance that Moses does not specify any of the other sons. It is quite possible that Canaan had the same base disposition as his father. It is even possible that Canaan participate in some way in this shameful episode. Noah also speaks in a loving, kind toward Shem and Japheth for their faithfulness toward him.

The website you refer to claims that Noah’s curse could be seen as prophetic and not against Ham per se, but only Ham’s children.  Irregardless, I think it is interesting that this site decides to give Canaan an active role in a bible passage which does not give any such actions to Canaan.  Noah’s curse is for all of the descendants to be enslaved, and if the purpose of the bible passage is not to damn descendants for Ham’s actions, which are pretty benign, then why mention the drunken nakedness and Ham at all?  It takes many assumptions to try to steer this bible story away from what it simply states.  Ham told Shem and Japheth about drunken, naked Noah, and Noah decided to curse all of the Canaanites.  Why is Ham the shameful one in this story and not Noah?

We follow Christs mandment to go to all the world, and to tell other people the good news of the gospel, forgiveness of sins, god’s love and offer of eternal life. My focus at a atheist site is to show the comprehensive evindence, that hints to God, through science. What YOU do with the message given, is entirely YOUR business. That means, if you want to react positively to the gospel and my testifying , than YOU must convert from your sins, and your old life, to a new life in Christ. Its not ME to do that for you. That’s why i do not convert anyone, but each one has to convert by its own to Christ, if wish so. What generally is meant , when someone says : ” you try to convert someone ” - than someone wants to FORCE others to its own believe. That’s never my intent.

Maybe you should heed Jesus’ words to his disciples:  And if any one will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town.   That is Matthew 10.  WWJD? Jesus would not seek out an atheist forum and rehash what they all know and have found lacking.

Lastly, when I read the first several pages of posts in this thread, I thought you were here for one of two reasons. #1. You believe your responsibility as a good Christian is to go anywhere and everywhere to preach the gospel and save people from their sins, and my, what big points you’ll score if you can convert an ATHEIST! Or, #2.  there were some intellectually curious brain cells in the back of your neocortex, struggling to be set free, and you needed us to help you make the leap. After 13 pages of you attempting to refute every intelligent post here, I am convinced that # 1 is the reason for the lack of reason.

I wonder why your inquiry, why i am at this forum, if i have given the reason right in my introducing post. the posters may have made intelligent posts, but what is postulated, does not convince me at all. Actually, it does back up even more my faith, since the arguments are so weak.

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 04:33 PM

I wonder why your inquiry, why i am at this forum, if i have given the reason right in my introducing post. the posters may have made intelligent posts, but what is postulated, does not convince me at all. Actually, it does back up even more my faith, since the arguments are so weak.

No, really, WHY are you HERE. We are mostly atheist and agnostics. Almost without exception we come from religious backgrounds. We have READ the bible, we have HEARD the sermons, we have attended the SERVICES, and found them LACKING. We did not ‘choose’ atheism, atheism chose us, when it became the only viable answer. You are rehashing the same garbage that turned us away from religion in the first place, and you are not able to answer the same questions we have asked of our religious leaders and gotten the same non-answers.
                                                            WHY ARE YOU HERE???
                                                                     

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 04:33 PM

Actually, it does back up even more my faith, since the arguments are so weak.

This coming from someone completely unable to prove his god exists.

Adonai, I notice you’ve done a good job of ignoring my posts, which directly address the character of your Bible’s god. You have also utterly failed to provide one shred of evidence your god exists. This is a skeptical forum and if you want to convince anyone of anything you’ll need to get your head out of the Bible and give us examples from the real world. Show us some scientific evidence Yahweh exists, or admit you have no evidence.

fotobits - 05 May 2009 04:46 PM

This coming from someone completely unable to prove his god exists.

maiby you could tell me, where i made the assertion, i would be able to prove God’s existence ?

George - 05 May 2009 09:37 AM

Hmm, I am not sure if you’re trying to sound poetic or philosophical, Paul, but I would personally stay away from terms like agape or eros when trying to make some sense of this complex behaviour. “Hatred is Love’s opposite in the dimension of harmony; indifference is Love’s opposite in the dimension of passion.” What does that mean? And why group love for your kids with love for your spouse? These are certainly two very different experiences. I really don’t know what to make of your post.

This is all part of the Human Faith model as I’ve expanded it over the past 12 years. I define Love as “the emotion that mirrors the loved one’s welfare.” That means that a loved one’s happiness gives me happiness; a loved one’s sorrow makes me sad. Because I view Love mainly as an emotion, since that is where it’s creative power lies, it makes sense that its opposites would be hatred (an intense negative emotion) and indifference (the absence of emotion-in-relation). I have found that the definition helps put both agape and eros into perspective. I’m not grouping different kinds of Love, but this definition and this explanation accounts for them all.

To answer your other question, which I’ve italicized, hatred is disharmony with the other’s welfare and indifference is the absence of passion.

In twelve years of working with this conception, I have yet to see a case where it didn’t fit or that it didn’t help to explain.

George - 05 May 2009 02:00 PM

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 01:09 PM

He loved us and gave his son

As far as I am concerned he could have kept his son and give us instead, say, a cure against cancer so that thousands of newly diagnosed children every year won’t have to suffer.

When my son Matthew was taping David Paszkiewicz’s so-called history classes, there was a fascinating interchange. Matthew asked Paszkiewicz whether he would allow one of his children to suffer forever in a fire that never killed him and never extinguished the pain. Paszkiewicz’s response was “No, but I didn’t die for him.”

By that logic, I would prefer that Jesus wouldn’t die for me. Think it through.

Chicken - 05 May 2009 02:22 PM

Very interesting.  I have never considered love to be a “multicellular animal” for lack of a better term.  I can understand a disharmonious passion leading to thoughts of obsession like killing out of jealousy.  (1) However, I would like to pose this to you, isn’t a person who has a jealous love really only exercising self-love? (2) Couldn’t you see a scenario in which you love and hate someone and the reason has nothing to do with jealousy or a disharmony, at least on your part?  Let me give a scenario, lets say you are a victim of abuse from a family member and you are young so you have a hard time separating yourself from the abuse.  What of that child’s love and hate.  Could not the child love and hate the family member, or even better, parent?  (3) Does the disharmony in that scenario come from the parent or family member? (4) If so, does that make the child’s love for that parent or family member not true or their hate not real?  It is an interesting thing to ponder.

(5) One thing further, I have always considered fear a response to ignorance not the opposite of love.  I think ignorance motivates fear of all types whether it be a fear of spiders or a fear of Communist invasion.

(1) Sure, but people still call it love. It’s an emotion, which means it doesn’t have to be rational.

(2) Of course. Who says that Love and hate can’t co-exist - not peacefully, but they co-exist just the same.

(3) I don’t know what “come from” means. Can you elaborate?

Whatever the elaboration may be, aren’t you positing an obvious false choice?

(4) All emotions are real.

(5) That may be true, but you don’t appear to be looking at it as an experience. You’re looking at “response” and “motivation,” which move across time; I’m looking at Love as an experience in the here-and-now. That’s a different “animal.”

I’m curious what people think has prompted such an outpouring of posts. Far and away, this is the most active topic in the forum in quite some time. My suspicion is that this is because Angelo is so completely divorced from the methods of reason that we value so deeply. For me, and I suspect for many others, this is a source of tremendous personal pain, so we are drawn to address it.

I’d be interested in the views of others. By no means is what I just wrote necessarily the only reason for this flurry of passion and activity.

Adonai888 - 05 May 2009 05:10 PM

fotobits - 05 May 2009 04:46 PM

This coming from someone completely unable to prove his god exists.

maiby you could tell me, where i made the assertion, i would be able to prove God’s existence ?

Ah, I see. We have to prove our positions, but you do not. I’m done here. You ignore my questions, deflect my criticisms, and refuse to hold yourself to the same standards to which you hold us. You consider a mythical god the creator of the universe while ignoring what our senses, intellects and instruments can see, deduce and measure. I’d wish you a nice life, but anyone who believes all thoughts are evil is incapable of happiness.

I will ask you to do one thing. Read the Bible you profess to believe. Study the parts where your genocidal, sociopathic god orders his followers to kill thousands of people. Think about what you worship. I used to believe the Bible. I spent 1.5 semesters in a Pentecostal seminary, but was asked to leave when I started asking simple questions such as “Where did the light between the galaxies come from?”

Goodbye, Adonai.

PLaClair - 05 May 2009 05:43 PM

I’m curious what people think has prompted such an outpouring of posts. Far and away, this is the most active topic in the forum in quite some time. My suspicion is that this is because Angelo is so completely divorced from the methods of reason that we value so deeply. For me, and I suspect for many others, this is a source of tremendous personal pain, so we are drawn to address it.

I’d be interested in the views of others. By no means is what I just wrote necessarily the only reason for this flurry of passion and activity.

That pretty much sums up the reasons I posted here after months of relative inactivity. Maybe I needed the mental stimulation of debating a Christian. Maybe I just wanted a sparring partner. Whatever my reasons for posting here, I am finished debating Adonai. I’ll follow this thread, and maybe chime in when someone posts something stimulating, but debating Adonai further is pointless.

PLaClair - 05 May 2009 05:43 PM

I’m curious what people think has prompted such an outpouring of posts.  I’d be interested in the views of others.

  Nah, I think it’s the opposite.  We all recognize that his mind is completely closed, so we aren’t trying to convert him.  Most of us here have thought through our reasons for our beliefs and our responses to the theistic arguments, and just like to practice our debate skills.  The other reason may be that it’s such an easy target that it’s fun. 

Occam