How some creationists pushed me away from christianity

[Ar Cosc]

Gee I wonder who paid for that study? Was it called how to get your moneys worth out of your employees? Or perhaps the interdynamics of office workers and how to get them to be more productive.

What on the FSM's noodly earth are you on about?

 

[Jazer]

What on the FSM's noodly earth are you on about?

I asked WHO paid for that study? Simple question.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

I asked WHO paid for that study? Simple question.

Are you suggesting the World Health Org. paid for the study?

Or maybe Dr. Who?

 

[Ar Cosc]

I asked WHO paid for that study? Simple question.

I wasn't aware I'd mentioned any studies. But if it's studies you want, here's a list of abstracts from sciencedirect dealing with altruism: ScienceDirect - Search Results: ALL(altruism)

That's just one aspect of human judgement and morals. Feel free to do your own searches for other aspects you might be curious about.

 

[Cabal]

I asked WHO paid for that study? Simple question.

Relevance? Play the ball, not the man.

 

[Skaloop]

Are you suggesting the World Health Org. paid for the study?

Or maybe Dr. Who?

What is this, an Abbott and Costello bit?

"Who paid for the study?"
"Yes."
"Yes what?"
"WHO paid for the study."
"That's what I wanna know!"

And so on, etcetera.

 

[Phred]

What is this, an Abbott and Costello bit?

"Who paid for the study?"
"Yes."
"Yes what?"
"WHO paid for the study."
"That's what I wanna know!"

And so on, etcetera.

for the Discovery Channel, this has been Skaloop

 

[underheaven]

So it's fear that makes people religious?

No, it's more to do with the reality factor, plus a love of oneself and the people ,you have loved.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

What is this, an Abbott and Costello bit?

"Who paid for the study?"
"Yes."
"Yes what?"
"WHO paid for the study."
"That's what I wanna know!"

And so on, etcetera.

Seems to be the best approach with creologic.

 

[underheaven]

The part that stuck in my mouth is that Jesus as God means that really..what happened was he went on a 33 year vacation that kinda sucked. But when you are God..well that's superfluous. My issue with classic Christianity and why I think it'll will die out eventually in lue of universalistic Christianity is that it is ultimately an idea predicated on salvation due to nothing but complicity and punishment due to thoughtcrime.

Do you mean by universalistic Christianity,that there is no punishment,
or, that some of the ideas in 'cassic' christianity may be a bit skewed.?
Could you perhaps expand a bit?

 

[ToBeInChrist]

No, it's not amazing. We don't take 30 minute old second hand accounts of eyewitness testimony seriously if it doesn't corroborate, never mind 30 years old, so being required to accept this as a valid account is ridiculously inconsistent.

Well I don't expect you to not have questions and concerns about evidence and how to sort through evidence. When it comes to ancient subjects we take what evidence we have and do the best we can. A lot of ancient copies have survived, and there were a lot of sources that were written pretty early, pretty close to the events compared to other ancient events and people, really. Do you want more, ok. But we have what we have, for whatever reasons.

It's interesting though that you mentioned Roman emperors - the standard of evidence for some of them is up there, if not better than, the evidence for the existence of Jesus - and many of them were deified. Do we worship them? No - again, people would think that's silly. Consistency.

I don't expect you to believe something just because there is an old text. I understand you are still going to look at the claims made by the ancient emperors, the writings associated with early Christianity, and ask further questions. My point was simply that we do have a lot of early material tracing back to the first century Christians, so there is evidence to work with, and it wasn't written down all THAT much later than the events that the material is talking about, compared to lots of other ancient claims.

I get the idea of batting for your team, I really do, but there are some Christians who would have you believe that the resurrection is the most airtight account of anything that ever happened in recorded history, which is simply not the case.

Well there's evidence, but what do you make of the evidence. It certainly doesn't satisfy everyone. Some dismiss it as foolishness, sure, that's old news.

I think some Christians' don't quite appreciate what Paul was saying in Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 1:22-29

22For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29That no flesh should glory in his presence.

I believe I got mine from the evolution of social behaviour in complex hierarchical groups of individuals. And my opinion should matter to other people because it is structured around what causes the greatest amount of benefit and welbeing, as opposed to arbitrary commands, or a "might makes right" approach.

And your opinion, your judgment, really amounts to what, on the basis of such evolution of social behavior, etc.? I mean, did you think of judging evolution, and laying the view of evolution to blame for anything? Why not? Who says you understand the 'greatest amount of wellbeing", life, the universe, and everything?

We all have an innate sense of justice. Nobody likes to be duped or taken advantage of

Yet you want good things from God without seeking God's guidance, and think it's horrible of Him to let you choose to do things without Him and not have His good things or His guidance, eternally? God doesn't owe good things to those who don't want Him or His guidance, and yet He mercifully continues to give you good things. And for this, you judge Him because He would reveal Himself and call you to walk by His ways?

Sadly, there isn't any verifiable evidence that Jesus ever actually existed.

Sure there is. Both Pagans and Jews mention that in the first century there was someone named Jesus who was claimed to be a wonderworker, we have Pagans saying He was executed and that his followers worshiped Him and said He rose from the dead. That's evidence from people who weren't Christian, that these Christians existed and this Jesus existed.

And even if we want to grant that a guy actually existed whom the myth is based upon there is no evidence that anything like the "miracles" purported in the Gospels really happened.

Systematic radical doubt isn't all that and a bag of chips. Anyhow, I doubt you apply the same degree of radical doubt in every area of life to every thing or every claim.

Sure some people may look at the same evidence and have faith, others do not.

You're not offering me a better way, you're offering me YOUR way. A way that insists that I abandon actual thought and concentrate upon making contradictions seem reasonable.

I'm asking you to consider Jesus as He is presented in the NT. You can still think and avoid contradictions. But how much do you expect to make perfect sense to your intellect? Can you allow for some mystery or some things that are beyond you?

 

[Ar Cosc]

And your opinion, your judgment, really amounts to what, on the basis of such evolution of social behavior, etc.? I mean, did you think of judging evolution, and laying the view of evolution to blame for anything? Why not?

Evolution is a scientific theory, not a moral code. In a way, I do believe that evolution is responsible for problems in society, as well as benefit, but not in such a way that removes individual responsibility. I don't have to like the way human beings have evolved to believe things happened a certain way.

Who says you understand the 'greatest amount of wellbeing", life, the universe, and everything?

I don't, but at least I'm trying. I'm not the one who claims omnipotence, omniscience, and to be the ultimate moral standard, while at the same time, allowing millions of people to die in ways unimaginably painful to either of us.

 

[Cabal]

Well I don't expect you to not have questions and concerns about evidence and how to sort through evidence. When it comes to ancient subjects we take what evidence we have and do the best we can. A lot of ancient copies have survived, and there were a lot of sources that were written pretty early, pretty close to the events compared to other ancient events and people, really. Do you want more, ok. But we have what we have, for whatever reasons.

But why just that? If an omnipotent deity has control over communications, why is the communication so patchy? Given that we're the ones in trouble if we get the message wrong, and God allegedly cares for us so much, why leave a 30 year gap after 2000 years? To me, that just harpoons Christianity outright.

I don't expect you to believe something just because there is an old text. I understand you are still going to look at the claims made by the ancient emperors, the writings associated with early Christianity, and ask further questions. My point was simply that we do have a lot of early material tracing back to the first century Christians, so there is evidence to work with, and it wasn't written down all THAT much later than the events that the material is talking about, compared to lots of other ancient claims.

My point was a comparison to other ancient claims too. The evidence for the existence of many ancient figures is as good if not better - but my point is that it's regarded still not enough to justify worshipping them as deities. Jesus' documentation is hardly top of the pile, so why should he be worshipped when say, Julius Caesar (who was deified) isn't?

Well there's evidence, but what do you make of the evidence. It certainly doesn't satisfy everyone.

Inconclusive - contradictory, even.

Some dismiss it as foolishness, sure, that's old news.

I think some Christians' don't quite appreciate what Paul was saying in Corinthians

I'm usually wary of verses like these - they're typically used to deflect scrutiny, i.e. "well, this verse says people who disagree with what we say are fools! You don't want to be a fool, do you?"

And your opinion, your judgment, really amounts to what, on the basis of such evolution of social behavior, etc.? I mean, did you think of judging evolution, and laying the view of evolution to blame for anything? Why not? Who says you understand the 'greatest amount of wellbeing", life, the universe, and everything?

Who says a Christian understands their basis for morality any better?

 

[underheaven]

Ok, lol ....I find it to be the pinnacle of irony that some people refuse to believe in God , yet they believe we , who are having a convo online in the year 2011, came from one cell organisms in a " random " universe, that made itself !

And they also believe,that they have, and will have, control over the material universe,and if there is a God/Creator,they might not be able to do what they want.Better to bury the head in the sand .

But for some it is not a matter of not believing in a creator ,but the version of the one, many rather ignorant Christians believe in.
When one meets some of these one is not impressed ,and I am not talking
about the ones I will all the 'candy floss' ones ,who are the other side of a bad coin,from the 'hell is just around the corner ones'.

 

[Ar Cosc]

And they also believe,that they have, and will have, control over the material universe,and if there is a God/Creator,they might not be able to do what they want.Better to bury the head in the sand .

But for some it is not a matter of not believing in a creator ,but the version of the one, many rather ignorant Christians believe in.
When one meets some of these one is not impressed ,and I am not talking
about the ones I will all the 'candy floss' ones ,who are the other side of a bad coin,from the 'hell is just around the corner ones'.

This is not what I believe, and as I have repeatedly stated, the idea that atheists can somehow change what they believe at will because they want to have sex or eat shrimp is ridiculous.

 

[ToBeInChrist]

Evolution is a scientific theory, not a moral code.

Ok. So do you admit that there is no evolutionistic scientific grounds for claiming that you have a moral code, or that your moral code is right?

In a way, I do believe that evolution is responsible for problems in society, as well as benefit, but not in such a way that removes individual responsibility. I don't have to like the way human beings have evolved to believe things happened a certain way.

Ok. So we should agree that there is individual responsibility. When we do things that are horrible it isn't good for us to blame nature or God.

But why just that? If an omnipotent deity has control over communications, why is the communication so patchy? Given that we're the ones in trouble if we get the message wrong, and God allegedly cares for us so much, why leave a 30 year gap after 2000 years? To me, that just harpoons Christianity outright.

Ok, so there are such questions about why things didn't happen differently, why we don't have different sorts of evidence, or more of this kind of evidence or that kind of evidence.

When I read the Gospels in the NT, and enter the story personally, I am confronted, challenged, in lots of ways by what I see in the Gospels. I am drawn to respond.

Then some more questions come up. Ok. Who do I trust? Why? How? What is going on personally in my response to what I see in the Gospels in the NT?

but my point is that it's regarded still not enough to justify worshipping them as deities. Jesus' documentation is hardly top of the pile, so why should he be worshipped when say, Julius Caesar (who was deified) isn't?

When I read about Julius Caesar, I do not feel so personally challenged and drawn to respond, for starters.

The claims made in the NT Gospels are much more important than ones about Julius Caesar.

I'm usually wary of verses like these - they're typically used to deflect scrutiny, i.e. "well, this verse says people who disagree with what we say are fools! You don't want to be a fool, do you?"

Actually, Paul when speaking to the Corinthian church says few of them are wise in the world's eyes. I am saying, yes I know this looks foolish to others. Yes I know I must appear foolish to some. I'm aware of it, it is to be expected.

Who says a Christian understands their basis for morality any better?

Ok. Good question. Do you think there is a basis for morality? A real basis?

 

[Cabal]

And they also believe,that they have, and will have, control over the material universe,and if there is a God/Creator,they might not be able to do what they want.

Utter guff. It's a strawman, and it's seriously tiresome.

Yeah, I'm just an atheist because at best I'll have 80 years of life with no supernatural help followed by the cold embrace of the grave, that sounds like an absolute lol.

But yeah, you Christians, you are so all about doing the right thing, right? I mean, you get a deity holding your hand through life and then eternal life in a handpicked house in a bejewelled city, where there is no pain or suffering or sadness. Yes, you just follow God because it's the right thing to do, and not a massive carrot-on-a-stick at all!

And control over the material universe? Are you kidding me? And "faith that can move mountains" is WHAT, exactly?

 

[Cabal]

Ok. So do you admit that there is no evolutionistic scientific grounds for claiming that you have a moral code, or that your moral code is right?

Non sequitur. ToE is what created the moral code, the theory itself (or rather, what the theory is describing) is not the moral code.

Ok, so there are such questions about why things didn't happen differently, why we don't have different sorts of evidence, or more of this kind of evidence or that kind of evidence.

When I read the Gospels in the NT, and enter the story personally, I am confronted, challenged, in lots of ways by what I see in the Gospels. I am drawn to respond.

Then some more questions come up. Ok. Who do I trust? Why? How? What is going on personally in my response to what I see in the Gospels in the NT?

What does "personal response" have to do with validity? If anything, it can skew one's perception of it greatly.

When I read about Julius Caesar, I do not feel so personally challenged and drawn to respond, for starters.

I would say that's wholly irrelevant to the matter of establishing what actually happened.

The claims made in the NT Gospels are much more important than ones about Julius Caesar.

Nope, sorry. They both claimed that their subjects were gods. Pretty important claims across the board.

Actually, Paul when speaking to the Corinthian church says few of them are wise in the world's eyes. I am saying, yes I know this looks foolish to others. Yes I know I must appear foolish to some. I'm aware of it, it is to be expected.

As long as it isn't used as a shield from considering you might be wrong....

Ok. Good question. Do you think there is a basis for morality? A real basis?

I'm with Ar Cosc on this one.

 

[underheaven]

But why just that? If an omnipotent deity has control over communications, why is the communication so patchy? Given that we're the ones in trouble if we get the message wrong, and God allegedly cares for us so much, why leave a 30 year gap after 2000 years? To me, that just harpoons Christianity outright.



My point was a comparison to other ancient claims too. The evidence for the existence of many ancient figures is as good if not better - but my point is that it's regarded still not enough to justify worshipping them as deities. Jesus' documentation is hardly top of the pile, so why should he be worshipped when say, Julius Caesar (who was deified) isn't?



Inconclusive - contradictory, even.



I'm usually wary of verses like these - they're typically used to deflect scrutiny, i.e. "well, this verse says people who disagree with what we say are fools! You don't want to be a fool, do you?"



Who says a Christian understands their basis for morality any better?

Jesus Christ says that He was the alpha,and the omega,and He is,
and I will expand on that in due time,but Caesar was just a general,and a Caesar
like many before him and since.
Jesus Christ has transformed life on earth like no one before Him or since.
Without his coming to earth[for me,too much is made of the sacrifice]
he made for he did it willingly,and the god in him knew that death was just a
temporary moment ,but the man feared it ,as we all do.
He went down into Hell to release those imprisoned for their terrible sins ,the
greatest is denying God's existence,and he showed masses of generations
how to build a new self in order that there would be enough collective loving ,
purified,energy to prepare for the time when Uranus
would be 'seen' [not discovered] and release it's God created energy to
allow scientific advancement to begin.
The universe unfolds according to God's ordained plan.
Nothing happens without His designation,we simply react either in the
positive or negative way to the energies within the plan.

I will be pleased to have questions,or comments ,but smart a..s
ones will be ignored.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Yet you want good things from God without seeking God's guidance, and think it's horrible of Him to let you choose to do things without Him and not have His good things or His guidance, eternally? God doesn't owe good things to those who don't want Him or His guidance, and yet He mercifully continues to give you good things. And for this, you judge Him because He would reveal Himself and call you to walk by His ways?

I do not want or expect anything from a god/s. I'm saying we are good without god/s. God/s are not needed at this point in time.