Atheism-o-Phobia Part 3

forlife · November 27, 2010, 9:41pm

No Zeb, I don’t want the bible to be a science book. To the contrary, I’m challenging believers that treat the bible like a science book, as if it has anything to say about reality.

And it’s clear that you do view the bible as a reliable source of FACTS. You believe the bible is right about a supernatural being creating the world and sending his son to this planet, so he could walk on water and resurrect from the dead. Those are either FACTS or FICTION, and it’s obvious where you stand on that question.

The problem is, you have no reliable evidence at all for these beliefs, which you continue to view as FACTS.

Emotions are different from facts. They say nothing about the real universe, only about our perceptions and feelings toward that universe. So stop comparing apples and oranges. I understand that you have emotions about your god, but that says nothing about whether or not your god is actually real.

ZEB · November 27, 2010, 9:57pm

[quote]forlife wrote:
No Zeb, I don’t want the bible to be a science book. To the contrary, I’m challenging believers that treat the bible like a science book, as if it has anything to say about reality.[/quote]

You’re giving your self away as a hater with that statement. It has a lot to say about reality.

-Don’t steal

-Don’t covet your neighbors goods

-Don’t murder

-Don’t bear false witness

Okay, I’ll let you go see for yourself the many more things it has to say about reality.

And it’s obvious where you stand (and why).

[quote]The problem is, you have no reliable evidence at all for these beliefs, which you continue to view as FACTS.

Emotions are different from facts. They say nothing about the real universe, only about our perceptions and feelings toward that universe. So stop comparing apples and oranges. I understand that you have emotions about your god, but that says nothing about whether or not your god is actually real.[/quote]

Oh my God is real alright. The wisdom that can be gained from reading his word is great indeed. Try it sometime you might learn to like it (again).

forlife · November 27, 2010, 11:00pm

Your list of value statements has nothing to do with FACTS about the objective world. Do you understand the difference between FACTS and value statements?

Your bible contains value statements, and that’s fine with me. What I’m questioning is why you believe everything it says is FACTUAL, when by your own admission there is zero evidence for any of it?

You have no evidence that there is even a supernatural being who created the planet, because again by your own admission, all you have is FAITH for this claim. There is no EVIDENCE that it is anything more than wishful thinking.

All you have is an emotional feeling toward your idea of a god, with no actual proof that this god is anything more than an expression of your subconscious desire for meaning and purpose in your life.

When you say “my God is real alright”, what proof do you have for this claim aside from your emotional experience? And why do you think your emotional experience is any more reliable than the emotional experiences of others who believe in very different gods than you believe in?

Tiribulus · November 27, 2010, 11:13pm

[quote]forlife wrote:
<<< insisting that logic and science are the products of “fallen man” and hence are unreliable. >>>[/quote]Science and logic are products of the most high God who is the author of all true science and logic. Fallen man is fairly reliable in discovering God’s data (everything considered) and sinfully unreliable in his blasphemous autonomous interpretation and application.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I think Zeb is trying to point out that man does not always understand as much as he would like to believe . Man interprets the things he sees many time incorrectly. I still maintain if there is a God he had to create the operating system and our observations of that system are what we call Science .[/quote]Ya raised my eyebrows with this one. Pretty close man.

What men find unacceptable is the undeniable fact that their reality is just plain bigger than their finite created mind which leaves them by definition with fundamental holes in their understanding no matter how much it progresses.

I embrace that and thank the Lord God almighty that he has given me the gift of faith whereby I am thoroughly persuaded that in His immense beautiful mind all possible potential and actual objects and concepts of true knowledge are fully resolved. I don’t have to know what I know I can’t. I know He knows and that is not simply enough, it is gloriously fulfilling and peaceful. This goes for everything. Not just science and logic.

I’m pressed for time again.

ZEB · November 28, 2010, 2:11am

[quote]forlife wrote:
Your list of value statements has nothing to do with FACTS about the objective world. Do you understand the difference between FACTS and value statements?[/quote]

Do you understand the difference between living in a world where everyone does what they want with no respect for others? Maybe you don’t. If you did you would have more respect for a few of the 10 commandments that I tossed at you. YOU said the Bible has nothing to do with reality and I answered you with those commandments.

THAT is reality pal.

I never once said that there was zero evidence - You’re resorting to straw man tactics early this time. I said that it is “faith based”. Do you know the difference?

Having faith does not mean that there is no evidence. It just means that it cannot be proven. Do you know the difference between the two?

The best thing that I have is emotional feeling. Beyond that I have a great deal of evidence.

As I said science cannot prove the existence of God. The Bible has much scripture which clearly states that it takes FAITH. Beyond that there is a ton of evidence which indicates to me that there is a God.

Now tell me why are you so bitter forlife? Don’t you have what you want now? Is there still a reason to hate God?

ephrem · November 28, 2010, 5:06am

The Top Ten Daily Consequences of Having Evolved

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Top-Ten-Daily-Consequences-of-Having-Evolved.html#ixzz16YC427yk

florelius · November 28, 2010, 5:57am

[quote]ephrem wrote:
The Top Ten Daily Consequences of Having Evolved

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Top-Ten-Daily-Consequences-of-Having-Evolved.html#ixzz16YC427yk[/quote]

entertaining article, thanks for posting it ephrem.

krsoneeeee · November 28, 2010, 9:02am

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
You’re trying to have it both ways. You can’t claim compatibility between science, logic, and faith on one hand, while insisting that logic and science are the products of “fallen man” and hence are unreliable.

I find it amazing that you guys are calling science and logic unreliable, while using faith as your excuse for believing in your particular brand of religion, which even by your own admission is completely lacking in reliable evidence.

Will someone please explain to me how people can feel justified believing something to be true, when by their own admission, there is zero evidence for that belief?

When you dig into it, what you typically find is that they really do believe in “evidence”. Their idea of evidence is a religious experience, which is so profoundly moving that they can’t deny it. However, they refuse to even think about the possibility that this experience comes from very powerful subconscious desires. They also refuse to acknowledge that millions of other people from contradictory religions have had identical experiences. These people are as deeply convinced that their experiences are evidence for their own particular brand of beliefs.

So who is right???[/quote]

I’ve never stated that science is unreliable. Are you stereotyping again forlife? It’s just that I’ve lived long enough to see science be wrong often enough to know that it has not yet caught up with the Bible. And please don’t tell me that science has never been wrong.

Would you like me to give you a list on the many errors of science through the years. No, you don’t want that do you?
[/quote]

zeb, religion and the bible = ancient stories created but comparably unintelligent humans. Nothing reliable about that.

…you probably think robin hood is real too.

Makavali · November 28, 2010, 12:11pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
No Zeb, I don’t want the bible to be a science book. To the contrary, I’m challenging believers that treat the bible like a science book, as if it has anything to say about reality.[/quote]

You’re giving your self away as a hater with that statement. It has a lot to say about reality.

-Don’t steal

-Don’t covet your neighbors goods

-Don’t murder

-Don’t bear false witness

Okay, I’ll let you go see for yourself the many more things it has to say about reality.

And it’s obvious where you stand (and why).

[quote]The problem is, you have no reliable evidence at all for these beliefs, which you continue to view as FACTS.

Emotions are different from facts. They say nothing about the real universe, only about our perceptions and feelings toward that universe. So stop comparing apples and oranges. I understand that you have emotions about your god, but that says nothing about whether or not your god is actually real.[/quote]

Oh my God is real alright. The wisdom that can be gained from reading his word is great indeed. Try it sometime you might learn to like it (again).[/quote]

Stone unruly children, don’t forget that.

Makavali · November 28, 2010, 12:13pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I never once said that there was zero evidence - You’re resorting to straw man tactics early this time. I said that it is “faith based”. Do you know the difference?[/quote]

There is no difference. That is where you seem to misunderstand. If something is based in evidence, there is no requirement for faith. Faith = belief despite LACK OF EVIDENCE.

ZEB · November 28, 2010, 3:54pm

[quote]krsoneeeee wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
You’re trying to have it both ways. You can’t claim compatibility between science, logic, and faith on one hand, while insisting that logic and science are the products of “fallen man” and hence are unreliable.

I find it amazing that you guys are calling science and logic unreliable, while using faith as your excuse for believing in your particular brand of religion, which even by your own admission is completely lacking in reliable evidence.

Will someone please explain to me how people can feel justified believing something to be true, when by their own admission, there is zero evidence for that belief?

When you dig into it, what you typically find is that they really do believe in “evidence”. Their idea of evidence is a religious experience, which is so profoundly moving that they can’t deny it. However, they refuse to even think about the possibility that this experience comes from very powerful subconscious desires. They also refuse to acknowledge that millions of other people from contradictory religions have had identical experiences. These people are as deeply convinced that their experiences are evidence for their own particular brand of beliefs.

So who is right???[/quote]

I’ve never stated that science is unreliable. Are you stereotyping again forlife? It’s just that I’ve lived long enough to see science be wrong often enough to know that it has not yet caught up with the Bible. And please don’t tell me that science has never been wrong.

Would you like me to give you a list on the many errors of science through the years. No, you don’t want that do you?
[/quote]

zeb, religion and the bible = ancient stories created but comparably unintelligent humans. Nothing reliable about that.

…you probably think robin hood is real too.

[/quote]

Tell me, have you ever looked at the evidence that has been put forth that the Bible is real? What was your upbringing? Maybe you’ve never had the opportunity. Even secular archeologists have been involved in major digs which have verified many of the Bible stories.

No, it’s not “proof” as an atheist would like to see it. But once again as I’ve said, there is much evidence that surrounds it being real.

ZEB · November 28, 2010, 4:01pm

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:
No Zeb, I don’t want the bible to be a science book. To the contrary, I’m challenging believers that treat the bible like a science book, as if it has anything to say about reality.[/quote]

You’re giving your self away as a hater with that statement. It has a lot to say about reality.

-Don’t steal

-Don’t covet your neighbors goods

-Don’t murder

-Don’t bear false witness

Okay, I’ll let you go see for yourself the many more things it has to say about reality.

And it’s obvious where you stand (and why).

[quote]The problem is, you have no reliable evidence at all for these beliefs, which you continue to view as FACTS.

Emotions are different from facts. They say nothing about the real universe, only about our perceptions and feelings toward that universe. So stop comparing apples and oranges. I understand that you have emotions about your god, but that says nothing about whether or not your god is actually real.[/quote]

Oh my God is real alright. The wisdom that can be gained from reading his word is great indeed. Try it sometime you might learn to like it (again).[/quote]

Stone unruly children, don’t forget that.[/quote]

Gosh there’s so much wrong with you short statement I don’t know where to begin. I think I’ve schooled you in the OT before. But not being a good student you’ve probably forgotten.

Firstly, the OT states many things about children, nothing like what you’ve posted.

Secondly, much of the OT was a history of the Jewish people, right or wrong. When Jesus came to save the world the old law was washed away.

I could go on but I think you have enough on your plate right now.

ZEB · November 28, 2010, 4:06pm

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
I never once said that there was zero evidence - You’re resorting to straw man tactics early this time. I said that it is “faith based”. Do you know the difference?[/quote]

There is no difference. That is where you seem to misunderstand. If something is based in evidence, there is no requirement for faith. Faith = belief despite LACK OF EVIDENCE.[/quote]

My gosh you’re on a roll huh? Ha ha. Okay, once again I’ll keep it as short and sweet as I can. “Proof” is conclusive evidence. But all evidence is not necessarily conclusive proof.

Therefore, since my level of “proof” is quite high I never state that I have proof. However, as I’ve stated multiple times, there is a high degree of evidence that my faith is based upon fact.

I hope this helps.

forlife · November 28, 2010, 4:33pm

As predicted, you’re now claiming that you really do have evidence for your god. This happens every time you corner someone on their claim that faith is all you need, and I take it as an admission that faith really isn’t sufficient for your belief in a god. When forced to confront the facts, believers intuitively recognize that randomly choosing to believe in something makes zero sense, unless there is reliable evidence to back up that belief.

So the question is this: where is the reliable evidence for your beliefs?

Keep in mind that there are millions of Christians who use the same bible you do and have had the same profound spiritual experiences you have had, yet believe just as devoutly that their particular brand of religion is the true religion, and yours is false.

Who is right? Obviously, the bible is insufficient evidence and religious experiences are insufficient evidence, because they lead people to contradictory conclusions. Logically, you can’t all be right because your beliefs directly contradict one another.

So where is the reliable, repeatable evidence for YOUR beliefs?

ZEB · November 28, 2010, 7:00pm

[quote]forlife wrote:
As predicted, you’re now claiming that you really do have evidence for your god. This happens every time you corner someone on their claim that faith is all you need, and I take it as an admission that faith really isn’t sufficient for your belief in a god. When forced to confront the facts, believers intuitively recognize that randomly choosing to believe in something makes zero sense, unless there is reliable evidence to back up that belief.[/quote]

What you should be saying is “Zeb how can you believe without proof?” The scripture talks of a man who said “tell me of Jesus so that I might believe in him too”. One must be introduced to the scripture, be confronted with the truth. There must be something there first before one believes. But you know all this I’m sure. You’re just trying to twist things (that’s what Satan does too)I wonder why does this give you pleasure? You have fallen away and you must get other to do so? Satan also fell away and try’s to get others to do so. You’re not keeping very good company my friend.

[quote]So the question is this: where is the reliable evidence for your beliefs?
Obviously, the bible is insufficient evidence and religious experiences are insufficient evidence, because they lead people to contradictory conclusions. Logically, you can’t all be right because your beliefs directly contradict one another.

So where is the reliable, repeatable evidence for YOUR beliefs?[/quote]

Bible Prophecy: As you may or may not know the Bible is in fact a conglomeration of 66 books. With a very large gap of about 400 years between the last book in the OT Malachi and the first book in the NT, Matthew. There were over 300 predictions of “the Christ” in the OT. There were also many other predictions by the prophets in the OT which also came true. To my knowledge no other sacred writing has such perfectly accurate predictions of the future.

Dead Sea Scrolls: The Dead Sea scrolls discovered in 1947 is evidence that the Bible was translated accurately. We do hear a lot of people screaming about its accuracy and this to my mind puts that issue to rest. These manuscripts were 1000 years older than the oldest copy of the Bible.

Archaeological Digs: I have read of numerous digs often by non Christians which turn up further evidence that the various stories of the Bible are in fact true. Things like the Wall of Jericho, King David, The Wall of Jerusalem, Sodom & Gomorrah, The Giants of Nephilim (this one is very cool the skeletons of those dudes were like 14 feet long). There have been hundreds of digs which verify the Bible as being truthful.

The reliability of the New Testament: There has been extensive research performed by both believers and non believers on the validity of the NT. It was determined that the NT is even more accurate than any of the ancient writings of Plato, Socrates and others.

Finally, I have studied a wide array of other religions and philosophies, none of which have measured up to the Christian Bible and the rich history and sound factual information that it presents. I have web sites to back up everything that I’ve written above. But I have a feeling that nor anything else that I post will make a difference to you. You have an agenda and that means you have a closed mind.

One way or the other someday you will know that there is a God and his son Jesus Christ died on the cross for true believers.

forlife · November 28, 2010, 7:22pm

Zeb, you still haven’t answered my question.

There are millions of Christians that believe in the same bible you believe in. Those millions of Christians have had religious experiences as profound as your own.

However…

Those millions of Christians have beliefs that DIRECTLY CONTRADICT your own beliefs.

How do you reconcile that?

Clearly, your bible and your religious experiences aren’t proof of anything, since millions of people with the same “evidence” have beliefs which directly contradict your own.

florelius · November 28, 2010, 7:46pm