T-Nation Atheists

There are a number of sources outside of the New Testament that confirm that Jesus did in fact walk the earth. These are both literary and archealogical.

[quote]Buttered_Corn wrote:
Hamster wrote:
I have a couple thoughts on this:

First,

This idea comes from Josh McDowell’s book “More than a Carpenter,” and others have said it as well:

Jesus could not have possibly been just a “good guy.” He claimed to be God! So it stands to reason that either he was: a)God, or b)a liar and a great deceiver of many!

This idea of him being somewhere imbetween is hogwash. The only other viable options are that he didn’t exist at all (and thus the New Testament is pure fiction), or that what he said and claimed was misrepresented in the Bible.

Just a thought.

Please spare us the circular reasoning taken right out of the Bill Bright Campus Crusade handbook on “How to witness to the Wretched”.

You cannot possibly look at this with an objective eye given your current allegiance to Mithra, no, Osiris, no that?s not right, Ra? oh wait I am sorry you worship the other god-man who “walked” the earth… Jesus.

The fact is there are NO facts. You cannot tell me Jesus even existed apart from the new testament. You cannot prove the new testament by using the new testament. You need other sources. In addition, since those have yet to be returned to the Jerusalem library the evidence is not there.

To even consider your claims one must believe that the sources are credible. It?s funny to me how the bible speaks of these great and epic adventures of the creator of the universe doing mighty acts of power for the world to see. Now he?s relegated to a paper back book that you can read. I love the ?clause? in the new testament that doesn?t condone those people who actually want to see proof or visible evidence of his existence. They are just an ?evil and wicked generation? that seeks for a sign.[/quote]

Boy, I sure miss this thread being about non-believers/questioners talking amongst themselves.

I suppose it just goes to show that (some) Christians like to go sticking their noses in places where it does not belong, and is not wanted.

Thanks to those (haney) who are respectful, and can add to the discussion.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
toddjacobs13 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
toddjacobs13 wrote:
I used to work with dispersions and emulsions. The density difference, surface tension etc. are just way more important to what is happening. I wouldn’t even think to consider entropy when blending oil and water. I am just being too literal.[/quote]

I think that the fact that you wouldn’t even consider entropy in that situation to perfectly illustrate the point. Entropy is important, but it is not the end-all, be-all of physical laws. Plus, it is extremely hard for most lay people to truly understand, myself included. I believe that it is this misunderstanding that causes the principle to misapplied in situations like this.

Back when I took Thermo, we actually had a student argue that power plants should be impossible based on the Second Law of Thermodynamics. He wasn’t a stupid person. He just had a lot of trouble assimilating entropy as a concept into real world applications.

Todd

[quote]agshag wrote:
So what if man is not the center of creation? Why should that change anything? Suppose you are the oldest sibling and for a few years you are the center of your parent’s attention. Then a sibling comes along to grab that attention. Does that mean that your parents don’t love you as much as they did before?

You might be jealous at first, but you grow to love your sibling. Why can’t creation be viewed in that way? Being the center of everything is just a way to satisfy the ego. If we simply look at all of creation as coming from God and it is to be loved for that reason then what difference does it make if one is more important than the other. In the grand scheme of things all of creation is dependent upon the rest of creation for its survival.

If there are no more trees, we have no more air. If Planet X does not exist, the gravitational pull of Planet Y changes and suddenly the universe begins to collapse.

What specifically do you know about the world or universe that leads you to believe that God is not caring?

toddjacobs13 wrote:
Interesting post, agshag.

Here’s an issue I have. Man has continuously been pushed from a central position in existence since the birth of modern religions. Christianity made a lot of sense 2000 years ago. At that time, people honestly believed that the world was the extent of existence, or at least the center of existence.

Then about 500 years ago, Copernicus and then Galileo came along. They posited, correctly, that the Earth was not the center of the universe. Since that time, subsequent discoveries have further relegated man’s importance within the universe to virtually nonexistent. To me, at this point in time, it is the height of presumption to assume that despite all of that, man is somehow the focus of creation.

There may or may not be a God, but given what I know about the world and about the universe, I find it extremely hard to believe that any God that would exist would be particularly caring or interventionist. Once those characteristics can theoretically be removed, the discussion about the ultimate existence of God becomes rather moot in my way of thinking.

Todd

[/quote]

If God really exists and really cares, why is so much suffering allowed to happen. Why was there a Holocaust? Why was New Orleans allowed to be flooded? Why are people born with severe birth defects? Why do people get diseases?

[quote]agshag wrote:
So what if man is not the center of creation? Why should that change anything? Suppose you are the oldest sibling and for a few years you are the center of your parent’s attention. Then a sibling comes along to grab that attention. Does that mean that your parents don’t love you as much as they did before?

You might be jealous at first, but you grow to love your sibling. Why can’t creation be viewed in that way? Being the center of everything is just a way to satisfy the ego. If we simply look at all of creation as coming from God and it is to be loved for that reason then what difference does it make if one is more important than the other. In the grand scheme of things all of creation is dependent upon the rest of creation for its survival.

If there are no more trees, we have no more air. If Planet X does not exist, the gravitational pull of Planet Y changes and suddenly the universe begins to collapse.

What specifically do you know about the world or universe that leads you to believe that God is not caring?
[/quote]

I don’t think the extra sibling scenario really applies. It is one thing to have attention reduced as a result of an addition to the family.

What I described was not a change in the universe, but only our perception of it. I can certainly understand how the Bible seemed more applicable to people 2000 years ago. However, based on what we know now, specifically how inconsequential man’s position in the universe really seems to be, the basic concept of the Biblical God seems far fetched.

  1. Man created in God’s image. That sets the tone that man is the central figure in the universe. However, based on what we know now, this does not seem to be the case.

  2. Jesus sent to Earth to die for man and thus earn eternal salvation for all mankind. Same reasoning.

For me, it comes down to this:

  1. Christianity seems to raise more questions than it answers.
  2. The questions raised by Christianity seem more inane than those that were originally posed. (aka Where do we come from? Why are we here? etc.)

I think your tree example demonstrates that there really have been cause and effect processes that have brought us to the current state of life on this planet. I think your planet X argument disregards some basic scientific laws. I think it is a miracle that life occurred on this planet. To me, the concept of evolution (both of the universe as a mechanical system and of biological life) IS miraculous. Events could truly have turned out differently and life may never have gotten started on this planet.

I think I can appreciate the astronomical unlikelihood of life forming in any given place with an entirely secular point of view. I guess it comes down to whether I am ready to attribute those miracles to an active God based on what I know and understand.

Todd

[quote]toddjacobs13 wrote:
FlyingEmuOfDoom wrote:
How did something that didn’t exist (non living matter turning into living matter), which can’t be proven, manage to design all plants, animals and humans?

Let me guess you’re answers:

-Genetic Mutations:

Doesn’t show signs of anything positive in the real world.

-Evolution:

Only microevolution is proven which is animals adapting to their enviornment. Macroevolution is bullshit. It’s never been proven and it can’t because their is nothing to suggest that it did happen. But wait, smart scientists and archeologists with really convincing stories are telling me it did happen. Hmm, maybe I should believe them…

(Note sarcasm)

-All over billions and billions of years:

Which also can’t be proven. Human beings are incredibly arrogant to think they can comprehend and try to pick a part such an enormous time frame. Also, the dating methods have proven to be flawed.

Okay. So you are saying that we shouldn’t listen to scientists, who are really smart, but, rather, we should listen to you, who has established himself as an idiot.

Solid argument there.

Todd
[/quote]

Everything that I just said was truth. Explain what wasn’t true about what I said with facts.

You don’t know anything about me. You call me an idiot because you don’t believe what I typed. It’s a perfect example of what someone does when they have no argument, they result to calling people idiots, ignorant, etc.

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
Boy, I sure miss this thread being about non-believers/questioners talking amongst themselves.

I suppose it just goes to show that (some) Christians like to go sticking their noses in places where it does not belong, and is not wanted.

Thanks to those (haney) who are respectful, and can add to the discussion.[/quote]

ehh… I learn more from the atheist on this board than I do anyone else.

[quote]jeep7588 wrote:
eisenaffe wrote:
jeep7588 wrote:

Please show me one experiment that creates anything that is alive from what is not alive.[/quote]

Define alive.

It does if you make the analogy food equals lifeless building blocks of life.

Hmmm… chemical bonding?

I can and I allready did synthesize DNA.
It’s not that complicated. It goes something like this: Solid-phase synthesis - Wikipedia

To put it simple:

Everything in the universe tends to a state of the low energy.
Apples fall from trees because of to high energy.
The universe was an apple in a tree, it fell and became THE UNIVERSE.

It’ll eventually expand untill it reaches its lowest state of energy or it’ll eventually contract and reach a higher state of energy and become THE APPLE again.

Ignore emu, he is stubborn and sticks to his religious philosophy come hell or high water. I’m still sad about this thread, it was really good in the beginning…

[quote]FlyingEmuOfDoom wrote:
toddjacobs13 wrote:
FlyingEmuOfDoom wrote:
How did something that didn’t exist (non living matter turning into living matter), which can’t be proven, manage to design all plants, animals and humans?

Let me guess you’re answers:

-Genetic Mutations:

Doesn’t show signs of anything positive in the real world.

-Evolution:

Only microevolution is proven which is animals adapting to their enviornment. Macroevolution is bullshit. It’s never been proven and it can’t because their is nothing to suggest that it did happen. But wait, smart scientists and archeologists with really convincing stories are telling me it did happen. Hmm, maybe I should believe them…

(Note sarcasm)

-All over billions and billions of years:

Which also can’t be proven. Human beings are incredibly arrogant to think they can comprehend and try to pick a part such an enormous time frame. Also, the dating methods have proven to be flawed.

Okay. So you are saying that we shouldn’t listen to scientists, who are really smart, but, rather, we should listen to you, who has established himself as an idiot.

Solid argument there.

Todd

Everything that I just said was truth. Explain what wasn’t true about what I said with facts.

You don’t know anything about me. You call me an idiot because you don’t believe what I typed. It’s a perfect example of what someone does when they have no argument, they result to calling people idiots, ignorant, etc.[/quote]
Actually, there was no argument presented for me to refute. In order to create an argument you have to present evidence.

Evidence looks like this: DNA is an extremely elegant and complicated molecule. I submit that it is impossible for a molecule like that to have been created by random actions of less complex molecules.

If you said something substantive like that, we could have a discussion. Instead you call things BS without a scrap of evidence to substantiate your claims. Therefore, you are an idiot.

I don’t really consider this name-calling so much as appropriate classification.

Todd

[quote]seekingstrength wrote:
If God really exists and really cares, why is so much suffering allowed to happen. Why was there a Holocaust? Why was New Orleans allowed to be flooded? Why are people born with severe birth defects? Why do people get diseases? [/quote]

Why Does The Lord Let Bad Things Happen?

Sometimes the world can appear so cruel. In fact it is cruel if we look at it. Men can be so cruel. We don’t have to look very far back into history
to remember Adolph Hitler, what he did, the horror of exterminating six
million Jews. We don’t even have to look that far back if we know
anything about Cambodia and what has happened there lately, or even
some of the happenings that go on in South Africa today. Or on a
different scale, all we have to do is turn on our tv’s and we
can see things that happen in our own neighborhoods. And we can
wonder to ourselves, why does the Lord let man be so cruel to his
brother or sister? It is an amazing thing.

Also we can look at life, and life sometimes can appear to be so cruel.
Earthquakes or volcanoes burying thousands of people. Sickness and
disease, famines, have wiped out innocent children who did nothing
wrong. Why do these things happen? If there really is a loving God, why
does He allow bad things to happen to people?

Well one answer to this would be that there is no God, that life is just
sort of running in its own way in some sort of chaotic path, and no one
knows where it will go. Some people have looked at the world and come
to that conclusion, there can’t be a God with all this suffering. But many
of us have not come to that same conclusion. In the good times we’ve
seen that there is a God because we’ve felt Him. There have been times
when we’ve been up in the mountains away from the city, in nature.
We’ve felt God in that nature and had an understanding of Him deep in
our hearts. Even in times of distress we’ve felt that God was closer to
us. We’ve felt His presence. Perhaps when we were reading His Word
He spoke to us. And we know He exists. Then how do we reconcile this
loving God with the world that seems so cruel?

In the first place, no one can make the horror OK. It is horrible! No one
can say that these disorders that happen are good, are right. They
aren’t. The Lord does not make these disorders happen. The Lord does
not punish people. We cannot say it is God’s will when someone dies
before their time. It’s not. God wishes all people to grow and lead a
healthy and productive life. God won’t punish anyone for doing anything
wrong. The nature of God is Love itself, and we know that. It’s common
sense. Well, how can we turn around and say that Love itself is going to punish somebody, to hurt them for something they did wrong? It doesn’t
work that way. God is the God of love but He had to allow these things
to happen.

In order to get an understanding of this, we have to look at God’s view
of the world, the way the Lord looks at it and not from the way we look
at it. What is God? He is Love itself. In the beginning, whenever that
was in creation, however that took place, God created mankind so that
He would have someone to love outside Himself. The nature of love is
to love someone outside of yourself, to want to bless them, to make
them happy from yourself. But not only that, also to have that love
returned to you. We know, in relationships, when we think of a time,
maybe when we were in high school and had a crush on someone, how
much we thought that we loved them, and we wanted so much to have
them return that love to us, and how frustrating it was when they didn’t.
The same is even more true in adult relationships. We know that it takes
two to have a relationship, two to have genuine love, friendship,
blessing. So God created mankind, not only to love and to bless, but to
have man love Him back.

Now the only way that man can love God back is if mankind is free to
love God. And in order to be free to love and follow God, he also had to
be free to turn away. And when we turn away from the Lord, that’s when
we get into trouble. That’s when we hurt ourselves. That’s when a lot of
this horror is seen in the world that men do to each other. Freedom is
essential with love. If you take away freedom, you take away love.
Imagine yourself and some of the things that you love to do, even those
things that are wrong, maybe not terrible things, but the little habits that you love to do. Imagine if you were just getting ready to do them and
starting to enjoy yourself, and all of a sudden they were taken away
from you and you couldn’t do them any more. You’d feel robbed. You’d
feel as if you weren’t free. Imagine if you were in a world where
everyone was perfect, everyone appeared to be loving each other -
everyone was working for each other, but they weren’t free to do so.
They had to love each other. They had to work for each other. They had
to benefit each other. It wouldn’t work. It’s like something out of an
Orson Welle’s book, or one of the Star Trek episodes, to have that
happen.

Now the Lord couldn’t just set it up so there would be appearances of
freedom, but then if we went too far He would stop us. He couldn’t do that because that would wreck freedom for us. Imagine that. We could do anything we wanted. And yet as soon as we went to do something wrong, God would stop us, “Nope, you can’t do that.” It wouldn’t work that way. Someone asked me once, “Do you mean, Adolph Hitler was allowed to exterminate six million Jews simply to preserve his freedom?” And the answer is, yes, but not just
Adolph Hitler’s freedom, mankind’s freedom. God can’t break His rules.
If God came down and stopped Adolph Hitler by some miracle, everyone would lose their freedom. He’d take away humanity. Now God did work through man, through armies, through setting up situations to help man defeat Adolph Hitler but God couldn’t come down and break His laws of order. If He did, He would destroy our humanity. We have to be free to choose what we want to do wrong, even if that means we’re going to hurt other people.
If we had choices that were apparent choices but we couldn’t really
choose something wrong, it would be like going to someone’s house
and having dinner there, and then for dessert they said, “Would you like
apple pie or chocolate cake?” “Oh, I’ll take the chocolate cake.” “Sorry,
you have to have the apple pie.” It wouldn’t be fair, would it?
It would be a facade. If we didn’t really have those choices that we could
make, and choose and follow, even if it hurts our self physically, even if
we get into misery, we wouldn’t be free. We’ve got to be free to hurt
ourselves. God doesn’t like it. God wishes all of us would follow Him and
do His will. But He wants us to do that freely.

We can imagine that world where people are prisoners and have to do
good. Can you imagine a world where everyone’s giving, everyone’s
loving each other and sharing and growing together and concerned
about God, and they’re doing it because they want to, because they’re
free to do so? That’s heaven. That’s what the Lord wants us to have, not
only here on earth but together with Him forever, in eternity.

Now you might ask, why do bad things have to happen to good people? Why isn’t it just that when people do bad things, then they get it? Or the
evil people - whoever they are - why don’t they just get it? Well, it doesn’t work that way. Again, freedom would be taken away. Can you imagine every time you did something wrong, all of a sudden you were hurt because you did it? Imagine, you really cut somebody up bad today and then you walk out the door and get hit by a car and are in the hospital for six weeks? Or you really insult someone and then you get sick, violently sick for two weeks? After a while you’d realize, “I can’t do evil.” Now evil does bring about its own punishment, but never to the degree that we’re not free to do it. We are free. We’re free to hurt
ourselves. That’s what it’s all about. But, if every time someone did something wrong, they were punished, then everyone would walk around doing good in fear, afraid to do anything wrong. And that would take away our freedom completely.

It would be like going to someone’s house for dinner and asking for
dessert, and again being offered chocolate cake or apple pie. “Sure, you
can have the chocolate cake.” And then you eat it and get sick for six
weeks. After a while you’d realize, “I can’t have that chocolate cake. No,
I’m supposed to have the apple pie.”
The Lord has to give us that freedom. That’s why evil picks people
indiscriminately. He doesn’t pick people indiscriminately, but evil does
and He works with it. He works within bad things. He’s there, His
presence is there, He cares.

Now why are there natural disasters? Why do people get buried with
earthquakes and so on and so forth? Well, first we have to say that
natural occurrences are part of this earth. That’s the way they happen.
But again, you have to look back at the Lord’s plan for mankind. OK?
Not only did He create us to be here for a brief moment in time so that
He can render us blessed, but if you believe, we are created to be with Him forever, in heaven for eternity. Life on this world is a fleeting moment compared to the eternity of heaven that we can have with the Lord. And you should think about that as a very real place, very real. Your friends are there. You have bodies, you have a house. You have everything you have here. Heaven is a real place where people work together, support each other, where the Lord is and where you can be with Him forever.

Now if you think about that and realize that the thing God cares about
more than anything else, is that you can be with Him forever in heaven,
then it makes death a little less frightening. It doesn’t make it completely understandable but it makes it less frightening because death just
becomes a transition from one world to another. Death becomes a time when you go to meet your Maker, in a very real way. You know it’s twentieth century materialism and their religion humanism that makes death such a frightening, scary, final thing, that when we die it’s the end, that’s it. That’s robbing the Lord of His real purpose here. The Lord’s real purpose is that we can be with Him forever in heaven. And if a young person dies we can rest assured that they are will be with the Lord. If you have lost someone close to you, they are not gone. They are not wiped out. They will be with the Lord. That is the truth.

So a lot of times we can look at death and we can be sad, and we will be sad for our loss, for the loss that we have because that person’s gone, but we shouldn’t feel sorry for that person. They’re in good hands.
God’s plan for creation comes true, a heaven from the human race.

They will be with Him in heaven. And some day we will see them again.
Now, even in tragedy, whatever that tragedy is, it’s not as if the Lord just sets it up, lets it go, lets it happen, and gets away from it. Not at all. The Lord works in all tragedy to make the best possible good come out of it.

He wants us to recognize that. He doesn’t cause the tragedy, saying, “Well, this will make them learn their lesson.” No. But when
tragedy happens He is there in a very real way, and I’m sure some of you have felt that in a death. He’s there to bring good out of it. We’ve got to recognize that good and open our hearts to Him in those times of
tragedy. He’s there. And good can come out of bad situations.

[quote]violatepropriety wrote:
I agree with Irish… true Atheism is PROOF of the non existence of God. Got it? Lets see it.

Philisophically speaking, well, thats a new thread now isnt it. : )[/quote]

It is IMPOSSIBLE to prove that a god does not exist. The atheist is concerned with the lack of proof going the other way. He simply does not believe in any diety. And for that matter, why should anyone have to prove that something does not exist? Prove to me that there isn’t a omnipotent purple hippo living on the Sun swinging all the planets around.

[quote]toddjacobs13 wrote:
Actually, there was no argument presented for me to refute. In order to create an argument you have to present evidence.

Evidence looks like this: DNA is an extremely elegant and complicated molecule. I submit that it is impossible for a molecule like that to have been created by random actions of less complex molecules.

If you said something substantive like that, we could have a discussion. Instead you call things BS without a scrap of evidence to substantiate your claims. Therefore, you are an idiot.

I don’t really consider this name-calling so much as appropriate classification.

Todd
[/quote]

Well, what you said wasn’t evidence. Despite the fact that I agree with the part about the DNA, it was your opinion that I also believe.

Why are you trying to come across as being smarter than me and “classifying” me as an idiot. The example of evidence that you stated wasn’t evidence.

This is the internet. I can easily say the same thing - You’re an idot. It really hurts, boo hoo.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
bonzi50 wrote:
“Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.” - Karl Marx

"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas I’ll never know. - Groucho Marx[/quote]

the true Marx brothers. Groucho and karl. revolutionary and comedian.

[quote]jeep7588 wrote:
Wow I guess you have all the answers. [/quote]

Actually, it’s the questions that are fascinating.

The science of “life from non-life” is called abiogenesis. Put that word in Google and read. The stuff from talks.origin and what’s on the Wikipedia gives a good basic idea. Referenced works from those sites lead to more detailed information.

That’s a tough nut to crack. Still, while we don’t know currently, that doesn’t mean that we should give up on the question or stop searching for answers.

We ain’t done by any stretch of the imagination.

Communism sucks?

Because he doesn’t have to start from scratch every time. You can learn what Newton wrote, what Einstein, Bohr, Schrodinger, Planck, Hubble, Hawking, Witten, etc, etc, discovered.

“If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulder of giants.” -Isaac Newton

Well most of the Western nations are considered “secular societies” which separate religious authority from governmental authority and they seem to work pretty well.

Canada has the word “God” somewhere at the beginning of the constitution, but we also allow abortions and gay marriage and no particular faith is dictated by the government. Whatever “backbone of religious values” there once was, I’d say it’s been replaced by more modern values.

The same applies to a large swath of western countries. Sweden, Norway, France, the UK, etc. You’ll hear “God” and “King” and “Queen” here and there, but there roles are mostly ceremonial and traditional nowadays. In most western countries (except from the U.S.), the influence of most faiths is pretty minimal.

So basically, secular nation can and do work pretty well with only the rules of man.

[quote]FlyingEmuOfDoom wrote:
Why Does The Lord Let Bad Things Happen?
[/quote]

Your cut-and-paste botched all the line endings. It’s very hard to read.

For any interested, here’s the link: http://www.newchurch.org.au/sermons/bad_things.html

[quote]Well, what you said wasn’t evidence. Despite the fact that I agree with the part about the DNA, it was your opinion that I also believe.

Why are you trying to come across as being smarter than me and “classifying” me as an idiot. The example of evidence that you stated wasn’t evidence.

This is the internet. I can easily say the same thing - You’re an idot. It really hurts, boo hoo.
[/quote]

DNA being a complex and elegant molecule is a fact. The idea that the earth’s atmosphere initially contained less complex molecules is a common tennant of the Theory of Evolution.

That is one example of how you could start an argument based on facts and evidence.

Let’s paraphrase what you did: What I say is true, and I say evolution is BS.

That is not an argument.

I don’t think I’m expounding on real complicated topics here. You are strengthening my opinion that you really are an idiot.

Todd

Great.

Well, this thread wasn’t supposed to bash on the bible but since the kneeling faction tried so flamboyantly hard to save our souls with some 2000year old wise-ass-remarks, things somehow got a bit rough.

I’m a polite person, who has a lot of respect for the feelings of others, but preaching and making others feel spiritual inferiour is something I strongly detest, especially if those holy men were not invited.

@lifticusmaximus:
Greetings;
If I understand the definitions correctly, I’m agnostic.
But honestly, I really don’t care if I’m a atheist or an agnostic or a satanist.
To explain this:
You could ask a guy in Germany how he feels to be german.
He could look at you and say: I’m not really german, I

feel like a suddeutscher (from the south)
am a bavarian
half french, half german
am a frank
am european
.
.
You see, in certain debates, statistics, formal surveys etc. you need those concepts.
But to a private person it’s often quite meaningless.

@bibelhuggers
Hide behind your fundamentalist internet sites and piles of books you haven’t read.
Engaging in a pseudo-scientific discussion is so absurd.

Looking at history , we see that christianism wasn’t very fond of reason, logic or research. Logic and philosophy was used to undermine god’s existance. The arts were used to worship god. Joyful activities like sex or singing were considered acts of sin and faineance and were officially tolerated only in a religious context (in this case, procreation or praise).

Bur people felt this was crap. Theological logic and philosphy was utter crap. Stigmatizing sex was crap. Hindering the development of timesaving inventions was crap.

Please note that I don’t generally view religion as a nuisance or as totally unnecessary.
As I already posted earlier, religion was often needful and was very successful in doing what it was made for:

providing answers in non-scientific ages for natural phenomena (if you want, creating proto scientific theories, so ID could pass as dark age science)
rallying people under one flag (very useful, see what 12 “cartoons” can do to make several muslim states feel like brothers!)

being helpful in finding reasons to wage war
maintaining the local hierarchy/leadership through divine legitimation, therefore avoiding uprisings.
Legitimating the laws and traditions
.
.
.

Thankfully, humankind somehow emerged from these dark ages, bleeding and confused, but alive, breathing and curious.
Now some people ignore this, they say:“Hey let’s forget the past, remember it’s about love!”
Is it?

You guys failed to tell us why you r favorite book -which you kept most of the in Latin, therefore unreadable for us- is full of misconceptions, historical inaccuracies, deception, etc.

Instead of rambling if Jesus was a historical person,(which definitely isn’t a safe assumption, dammit!)ID is a science and Evolution is not, tell us:

why Mr. J’s teachings and in general the second chapter of that horrible book contradicts so much with it’s first part.
Why the former vengeful weather god(dess) had many names at first, had to compete with other gods, made mistakes and showed generally confusing attributs, later became a bit more benevolent, even had a bastard son (from a “virgin”), splitting himself in three and refused to show himself or anyone of his family after two thousand years.

Also, what’s with all the poor souls who did never hear of the word of god? Will they get cooked in hell like me? Wouldn’t that be unfair?

Of course you can only vaguely tell us about the greatness of the Lord, how we shall not make a picture of him or try to understand his grand work.
I know the answers. You don’t have to be particularly smart to see them.

Mankind really was in need for this stuff.
Today, however it is different.
I am not bitter. Not at all. It’s just such a sad situation one could cry, because intellegent people fall for ancient propaganda (It’ not exactly only propaganda, but most of the time it is the best desciption for the texts).

Dear ZEB, if we really could build a time machine [like you suggest in your thread], it would change a lot because you would see that

Your prophet was just some guy whose life was significatly different from what is written in the Bible. Perhaps he died on the cross but his meaning of death was so warped that it fitted the gusto of a young, sometimes ambitious but mostly lucky chuch. In other words, our saviour could also have been the Mithras guy if some roman emperor would have chosen so.

That history was in need of a powerful, monotheistic religion and history shows always that the ones who have the power try to blandish and glorify the past in order to preserve that power. You would see that was what every ancient culture did: the egyptians “lied” about the dynasties, the jews “lied” blatantly about their golden age and “Salomo”, the romans “lied” about their divine founding. You see, they had a different opinion on “history” and objectivity.

that, although the foundation of religion is somewhat awkward, it’s essence is not - compassion,love and forgiving can be real and you can be a good person without a bearded god at your side. That it is more rewarding for humanity to believe in mankind than in gods. That doing good for good’s sake and not for a window seat in heaven may be more challenging, but certainly is better for all humanity.

“A stupid man’s report of what a clever man says is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.”
– Bertrand Arthur William Russell, A History of Western Philosophy

[quote]toddjacobs13 wrote:
Well, what you said wasn’t evidence. Despite the fact that I agree with the part about the DNA, it was your opinion that I also believe.

Why are you trying to come across as being smarter than me and “classifying” me as an idiot. The example of evidence that you stated wasn’t evidence.

This is the internet. I can easily say the same thing - You’re an idot. It really hurts, boo hoo.

DNA being a complex and elegant molecule is a fact. The idea that the earth’s atmosphere initially contained less complex molecules is a common tennant of the Theory of Evolution.

That is one example of how you could start an argument based on facts and evidence.

Let’s paraphrase what you did: What I say is true, and I say evolution is BS.

That is not an argument.

I don’t think I’m expounding on real complicated topics here. You are strengthening my opinion that you really are an idiot.

Todd[/quote]

You are way smarter than me, I’m such an idiot.

I love you.