Customer Discussions > Religion forum

I REALLY wish that Atheists would just give it a rest...

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 5451-5475 of 1000 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Jun 16, 2012 7:59:57 PM PDT
brunumb says:
Exactly.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 1:36:40 AM PDT
Theo says:
Charles- do the math...the Apostle Paul died in AD 67.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 1:58:15 AM PDT
Theo says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 1:59:27 AM PDT
Theo says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 8:25:19 AM PDT
D. Thomas,

Here's your original statement: "The Christian faith is based on the belief that the Bible is the 'word of God,' or at the very least divinely inspired."

No one has argued that any "... denomination doesn't view scripture as essential to Christianity[.]" I have argued that the 'divine inspiration' or 'inerrancy' of the bible are not central beliefs to christianity. It is simply historical fact that any religion with sacred writings will hold those writings in some exalted esteem. The Catholic Church, for example, holds the writings of the Church Fathers and its own Catechism as inviolable as the bible.

As for your referencing Paul, you initiate a debate that has riven christianity since its beginnings: do we believe Paul when his words oppose the words of Jesus? Let's throw a bit of history into this debate: Jesus was speaking as a Jew to Jewish followers ("not a jot, not a tittle of the Law will pass away..." thus granting status to the Jewish scriptures); Paul was speaking as a converted Jew to Gentiles in a time when nascent christianity was trying to establish its legitimacy; he, therefore, leaned on the antiquity of Jewish scriptures. Unless you think he was granting his own epistles divine inspiration? I don't think even Paul was that vain.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 1:17:29 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 17, 2012 1:18:09 PM PDT
T: "Besides the evidences I see in nature, I see all of the OT prophesies concerning the Messiah fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ; down to the exact time he was to be born."

RB: What in nature gives you evidence of a divinity? And your knowledge of the exact time of Jesus' birth is extraordinary, considering no one else can even agree on the *day* he was born.

T: "I believe the eyewitness accounts of his ministry of teaching and miracles to be true and accurate."

RB: Then you definitely lack critical thinking skills. For one, there are no eyewitness accounts. Everything you've placed your faith in was written after the "fact". Secondly, the Bible is riddled with factual errors and contradictions.

T: "I see that all of our 'hearts' are deceitful and desparately wicked and our only hope is to put our faith and trust in the one and
only Savior of the World who was judged for all sins, past, present and future."

RB: How very sad that you've been taught to see evil everywhere and to live in fear.

T: "I see where the Word of God is alive and powerful and changes lives for the better, etc. etc. I see it (with spiritual eyes) as
crystal clear."

RB: And it will continue to be crystal clear until you take the blinders off and start asking questions that demand concrete, real-world answers.

(Edited for spelling)

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 2:31:25 PM PDT
Nat says:
I love that site.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 8:39:53 PM PDT
Mens Sana says:
I don't know. I just buy the largest size, and my last two were "Alpine fresh".

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2012 10:34:45 PM PDT
D. Thomas says:
This is not a consequential issue for me. I find the question of the centrality of scripture rather arcane and precious.

You seem not to have picked up the suggestion at the end of my last post that I'm not interested in exploring it further.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 2:58:23 AM PDT
Theo says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 7:56:04 AM PDT
D. Thomas,

You asked a question which I was bound to answer.

Posted on Jun 18, 2012 9:30:17 AM PDT
D. Thomas says:
But didn't.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 9:37:56 AM PDT
D. Thomas,

Yours: "But didn't."

Mine: ... to your satisfaction. Too bad. Time to move on?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 9:45:12 AM PDT
The Weasel says:
Bubba says:
We just keep the front door on our front loader cracked open, and haven't had any mold/mildew.
**
cool my set arrives on Friday -- whirlpool duet with 'steam' -- why do i need steam? i have no idea, but it the same price as the one without steam so......

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 9:47:56 AM PDT
Theo,

If I understand your point, you're suggesting that I'm wrong to assert that word-of-mouth was the only way to spread the gospel. Paul wrote his epistles within that time, so I'm wrong? True, but a minor point. It's fairly well established that stories about Jesus, what he taught (the "Gospel") and what he did circulated by word of mouth for at least that long, until they were collected in Q, "Mark," and other collections. Since many bible-thumpers don't actually read the bible, I'll guess that you don't know, or haven't noticed, that Paul only talks about Jesus dying for the sins of others and extends his apocalyptic message; Paul never tells any stories about Jesus's deeds -- how could he? He wasn't there. And I'll repeat a question I've asked of D. Thomas: Do you think Paul was including his own letters when he said all scriptures are give of god?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 9:51:33 AM PDT
MaryAnn H. says:
Make sure that when it is installed, it is properly leveled. That way you don't have to snap the washer door closed but it will stay in the closed position. My neighbor's drives me nuts - the washer door remains all the way open so if you walk into the laundry room, it smacks you. Obviously, I don't go there often enough to level it myself...

Regarding the steam feature - it's good to get wrinkles out!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 10:40:11 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 18, 2012 10:45:05 AM PDT
D. Thomas says:
Theo wrote: "Besides the evidences I see in nature..."

As I said earlier, if you believe God made all things, it's a near-certainty that you'll regard all things as evidence of the hand of God.

If you believe that scripture is inspired by an omniscient being, it's a certainty that you'll regard scripture as inerrant.

That sort of reasoning is tautological. It's thinking that goes in circles: X is true, therefore X is not false.

Simple declarations of faith don't constitute evidence of anything, let alone the existence of a deity.

If I were to say to you, "I believe that Xenu was the dictator of the Galactic Confederacy 75 million years ago," would you be persuaded that that is a historical fact?

Only a fool would take my word for such an outlandish statement. Rest assured that "I see all of the OT prophesies concerning the Messiah fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ" is equally unpersuasive to those of us who don't accept the tenets of Christianity.

Don't you realize that your creedal declarations have sub-zero persuasive value? Why do you keep repeating that stuff?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 10:52:01 AM PDT
D. Thomas and Theo,

Perhaps the credal statements get repeated, not because Theo's trying to convince non-believers, but because he's trying to persuade himself?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 10:57:09 AM PDT
quert says:
RB: Me? I'm a Folgerite. And I know for a fact that those Starbuckians are going to Hell!

q: I'm a recent convert to Keurigianism myself...

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 12:35:16 PM PDT
D. Thomas says:
Excellent point.

(I can't seem to pin down the spelling of creedal/credal. I prefer "credal," but my spell checker likes "creedal.")

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 12:46:47 PM PDT
MaryAnn H. says:
"q: I'm a recent convert to Keurigianism myself..."

Yes, I too am a recent convert to Keurigainism. I felt it was a good compliment to my existing Pastafarianism.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 1:00:45 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 18, 2012 1:42:03 PM PDT
D. Thomas,

Since I don't trust my spelling I went to check. Here's what I found at dictionary.com:

cre·dal (krdl)
adj.
Variant of creedal.

I'll use the more frequent spelling henceforward.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 1:09:53 PM PDT
CFM: "Perhaps the credal statements get repeated, not because Theo's trying to convince non-believers, but because he's trying to persuade himself?"

RB: A classic example of one of the reasons why religion still thrives. Repeat something enough, it becomes truth. Ignoring anything and everything that contradicts that truth is the other side of the coin.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 18, 2012 1:41:09 PM PDT
RB,

Yours: "Ignoring anything and everything that contradicts that truth is the other side of the coin."

Mine: Well, partly. There's also the possibility of attempting to refute or explain away those contradictory facts. This can take a number of different "colors" like blatant denial or stigmatizing those facts as "demonic" and their proponents as "evil." One of my personal favorites is to simply remove the whole topic from empirical scrutiny: "these facts are not subject to proof or disproof."

In "The Mind of the Bible-Believer," the author recounts a story about one of the 18th century protestant preacher who, doubting his faith, consulted his mentor. His mentor advised him to preach and testify the more. Apparently, others coming to believe the message is presumed to validate the "truth" of the message. Historical accuracy need not apply.

Posted on Jun 18, 2012 4:14:09 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 19, 2012 8:44:28 AM PDT
D. Thomas says:
CFM: "One of my personal favorites is to simply remove the whole topic from empirical scrutiny: "these facts are not subject to proof or disproof."

That epistemolgical dodge is embraced by "process theologians," who are often educated, non-evangelical Christians - Jesuits and the like. They characterize reliance on evidence as antiquated and confining - "Can't we free ourselves from the shackles of empiricism?" - as though reliance on evidence were superficial, and has been superseded by intuition, rationalism and reason.

It's a useful weapon in the theistic propaganda arsenal.
Discussion locked

Recent discussions in the Religion forum

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Announcement
Amazon Discussions Feedback Forum
1279 2 days ago
Science II 4011 1 minute ago
God: The Evidence 1072 5 minutes ago
Why are Creationists laughing at Evolution? 418 21 minutes ago
God's Presence 3842 37 minutes ago
Islam "Religion of peace" :) 172 44 minutes ago
Is Internal Religious Experience Proof of Anything? 786 1 hour ago
What's happening with SSM in the post Prop 8 world? 2122 1 hour ago
Another 10,000 Quotes... 3500 1 hour ago
Define God's Character (given the assumption that he does actually exist) 44 2 hours ago
Is God good? Or is Good god? 31 2 hours ago
Dear atheists, 584 2 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  242
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Feb 28, 2012
Latest post:  Sep 21, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 10 customers

Search Customer Discussions