Total Posts:222|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The mind of "free thinkers"

Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says. I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses. When a person wants to truly understand and learn about another religion or view, they will open up and listen. In fact, intelligence is gained by listening through the ears according to Hebrew thought. Someone who cares about finding Truth will bring up their questions and be interested in having them answered rather than just bringing them up to mock others.

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of God." Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical, it's experimental by being a partaker with Jesus. Living in the Truth is practicing it. I directly tried to delve into the morals of the Bible and many people often don't want to get involved. It makes no difference if God is proven to exist or not, people aren't going to follow him anyway. Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exist.

Immanuel Kant philosophized that knowledge is limited to our subjective experiences. We don't actually "know" how things actually are, but how our experiences interpret them to be. Fritz Perls said that we often mistake our views as objective truth. We are all biased in our thinking and beliefs, thus it's a matter of the choices we make that will affect our lives.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

The problem with this kind of "free thinking" is that you've neglected to do any thinking,

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.
Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

When a person wants to truly understand and learn about another religion or view, they will open up and listen. In fact, intelligence is gained by listening through the ears according to Hebrew thought. Someone who cares about finding Truth will bring up their questions and be interested in having them answered rather than just bringing them up to mock others.
That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?
- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of God."
I mean this with all propriety and any due respect; why should anyone give two toad turds what the Bible says? How can you suggest you're practicing free-thought when you can't even manage to understand that the Bible holds no authority, shows no connection to God, and the ONLY reason you think it does, is that you were told thaty it's "God's word". It's the words of MEN! Nothing about the contents of the Bible or its origins even suggest it to be anything else.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

it's experimental by being a partaker with Jesus.
The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

Living in the Truth is practicing it.
You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

I directly tried to delve into the morals of the Bible and many people often don't want to get involved. It makes no difference if God is proven to exist or not, people aren't going to follow him anyway. Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exist.
You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.
Your assertion is of the same value as if I insisted that you wouldn't believe in fairies, even if they were "proven" to exist.

Immanuel Kant philosophized that knowledge is limited to our subjective experiences. We don't actually "know" how things actually are, but how our experiences interpret them to be. Fritz Perls said that we often mistake our views as objective truth. We are all biased in our thinking and beliefs, thus it's a matter of the choices we make that will affect our lives.
So if a person in Alaska sets up a counter to enumerate the radioactive rate of cesium 133 and finds it to complete 9,192,631,770 cycles per second, and a person in China sets up the same equipment at the same temperature and also measures the radioactive rate of cesium 133 at 9,192,631,770, that's just a subjective outcome?

If you want to talk about "free-thought", it would seem appropriate that you first engage in some. And I'm standing here telling you to your face, that you don't have the first clue what the term "free-thought" even means. And I say that because I want you to learn to engage in free-thought, rather than accusing others who do engage in free-thought, of not doing so, and then producing a ridiculous diatribe, which only shows that you have never engaged in any free-thought, and don't even understand the principle.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Truth_seeker
Posts: 1,811
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 11:07:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

The problem with this kind of "free thinking" is that you've neglected to do any thinking,

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.
Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

When a person wants to truly understand and learn about another religion or view, they will open up and listen. In fact, intelligence is gained by listening through the ears according to Hebrew thought. Someone who cares about finding Truth will bring up their questions and be interested in having them answered rather than just bringing them up to mock others.
That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?
- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of God."
I mean this with all propriety and any due respect; why should anyone give two toad turds what the Bible says? How can you suggest you're practicing free-thought when you can't even manage to understand that the Bible holds no authority, shows no connection to God, and the ONLY reason you think it does, is that you were told thaty it's "God's word". It's the words of MEN! Nothing about the contents of the Bible or its origins even suggest it to be anything else.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

it's experimental by being a partaker with Jesus.
The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

Living in the Truth is practicing it.
You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

I directly tried to delve into the morals of the Bible and many people often don't want to get involved. It makes no difference if God is proven to exist or not, people aren't going to follow him anyway. Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exist.
You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.
Your assertion is of the same value as if I insisted that you wouldn't believe in fairies, even if they were "proven" to exist.

Immanuel Kant philosophized that knowledge is limited to our subjective experiences. We don't actually "know" how things actually are, but how our experiences interpret them to be. Fritz Perls said that we often mistake our views as objective truth. We are all biased in our thinking and beliefs, thus it's a matter of the choices we make that will affect our lives.
So if a person in Alaska sets up a counter to enumerate the radioactive rate of cesium 133 and finds it to complete 9,192,631,770 cycles per second, and a person in China sets up the same equipment at the same temperature and also measures the radioactive rate of cesium 133 at 9,192,631,770, that's just a subjective outcome?

If you want to talk about "free-thought", it would seem appropriate that you first engage in some. And I'm standing here telling you to your face, that you don't have the first clue what the term "free-thought" even means. And I say that because I want you to learn to engage in free-thought, rather than accusing others who do engage in free-thought, of not doing so, and then producing a ridiculous diatribe, which only shows that you have never engaged in any free-thought, and don't even understand the principle.

lol and ironically, when challenged to a debate about the Bible's reliability sent weeks ago, you never responded :P
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 11:25:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 11:07:09 AM, Truth_seeker wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

The problem with this kind of "free thinking" is that you've neglected to do any thinking,

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.
Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

When a person wants to truly understand and learn about another religion or view, they will open up and listen. In fact, intelligence is gained by listening through the ears according to Hebrew thought. Someone who cares about finding Truth will bring up their questions and be interested in having them answered rather than just bringing them up to mock others.
That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?
- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of God."
I mean this with all propriety and any due respect; why should anyone give two toad turds what the Bible says? How can you suggest you're practicing free-thought when you can't even manage to understand that the Bible holds no authority, shows no connection to God, and the ONLY reason you think it does, is that you were told thaty it's "God's word". It's the words of MEN! Nothing about the contents of the Bible or its origins even suggest it to be anything else.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

it's experimental by being a partaker with Jesus.
The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

Living in the Truth is practicing it.
You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

I directly tried to delve into the morals of the Bible and many people often don't want to get involved. It makes no difference if God is proven to exist or not, people aren't going to follow him anyway. Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exist.
You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.
Your assertion is of the same value as if I insisted that you wouldn't believe in fairies, even if they were "proven" to exist.

Immanuel Kant philosophized that knowledge is limited to our subjective experiences. We don't actually "know" how things actually are, but how our experiences interpret them to be. Fritz Perls said that we often mistake our views as objective truth. We are all biased in our thinking and beliefs, thus it's a matter of the choices we make that will affect our lives.
So if a person in Alaska sets up a counter to enumerate the radioactive rate of cesium 133 and finds it to complete 9,192,631,770 cycles per second, and a person in China sets up the same equipment at the same temperature and also measures the radioactive rate of cesium 133 at 9,192,631,770, that's just a subjective outcome?

If you want to talk about "free-thought", it would seem appropriate that you first engage in some. And I'm standing here telling you to your face, that you don't have the first clue what the term "free-thought" even means. And I say that because I want you to learn to engage in free-thought, rather than accusing others who do engage in free-thought, of not doing so, and then producing a ridiculous diatribe, which only shows that you have never engaged in any free-thought, and don't even understand the principle.

lol and ironically, when challenged to a debate about the Bible's reliability sent weeks ago, you never responded :P

Correction; I did respond. I explained to you in one of my posts that I didn't see any point. If you can't understand that a book which claims that Earth - which is composed of elements fused in stars - could not have existed before stars, as the Bible claims, then what is the point of debating you? I've already won. You just don't realize it.

The Bible claims the Earth was covered in water (Gen 1:2) before it had an atmosphere (Gen 1:6-7). Without atmospheric pressure, water vaporizes at an explosive rate.

The Bible claims that water was flowing (liquid) in (Gen 1:9), yet there is no sun until Genesis 1:14-17. Without the sun the Earth would be -454 degrees Fahrenheit. Water freezes at a mere 32-degrees Fahrenheit.

The Bible tells us that plants were thriving on Earth (Gen 1:11-12), before the sun existed (Genesis 1:14-17). Again, that would mean the temperature on Earth would have been about -454 degrees Fahrenheit. Grasses and herbs would be killed in seconds, fruit trees would die in a minute or less.

That's four MAJOR false claims, in just the first 17-verses of the Bible. And you want to debate me with your claim that the Bible is reliable? If you can't admit that the Bible is a complete joke after reading the first half page, then you're pathetically incapable of even understanding the problems. (Debates here are all simply divided on belief. Theists vote for theists, atheists vote for atheists.) It's pointless.

How can one even suggest such a book is in any way reliable? On ANY honest logistics, you've already lost any debate on the issue.

Now... perhaps you could be bothered to address my responses to your rather silly O.P.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Praesentya
Posts: 195
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 11:29:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.

Shocking, isn't it, that some people don't want to enslave people or stone adulterers? From a logical perspective, the reason people don't believe is because their IQ is just a tad too high to worship mythical sky ghosts.

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.

You got me.

Since you 'forgot' to answer these questions which were already posted, I'll post them again.
- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?

I think the poster above me deflated your argument fairly well, so I don't need to go on to do the same. Essentially, you can't really base a 'free thinking' argument on the Bible, given the severe lack of thought put into in the first place.
bulproof
Posts: 25,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 11:43:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 11:29:27 AM, Praesentya wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.

Shocking, isn't it, that some people don't want to enslave people or stone adulterers? From a logical perspective, the reason people don't believe is because their IQ is just a tad too high to worship mythical sky ghosts.

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.

You got me.

Since you 'forgot' to answer these questions which were already posted, I'll post them again.
- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?

I think the poster above me deflated your argument fairly well, so I don't need to go on to do the same. Essentially, you can't really base a 'free thinking' argument on the Bible, given the severe lack of thought put into in the first place.

+1
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 11:43:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Morals of the Bible?
Are you saying that one"s righteousness is based on one"s obedience or ability to obey morals of the bible? I didn"t know the bible had, morals, I always thought living things had or didn"t have morals. And aren"t morals relative to the one who has them, or agrees to them?
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 12:08:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:

I'm beginning to think this is going to be another of your threads where you post an OP, make a number of inflated (or purely false), claims, and then fail to ever really address the vast majority of the challenges you receive. So I'm going to make this easy for you.

Christianity is blatantly false! The Bible is filled with false claims, known forgeries, and even known fables.

You can address that intelligently, or you can run and hide as I've seen you do in the past. "Free-thinking" means thought unencumbered with emotional pleas, social customs, traditions, and illogical myths. So show us some "free-thought" in addressing this. That means, you can't fall back on the Bible as though it contained the truth, because it simply doesn't. And critical thought (as well as true free-thought), will demonstrate that every time.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
ThinkFirst
Posts: 1,391
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 12:18:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.

I can only answer for myself, but the root cause you have selected (and assumed) is not even close to accurate. The fundamental fact of the matter is that the bible is simply not an authority, because it is so wrong, so inaccurate, and so unbelievable. You perspective presumes the absolute truth and infallibility of the bible. It is this fundamental presumption that is incorrect, in my view.

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.

You may "get the feeling" of something, but what is your actual REASON for this conclusion? Do you have one, or is it just "the feeling?"

When a person wants to truly understand and learn about another religion or view, they will open up and listen. In fact, intelligence is gained by listening through the ears according to Hebrew thought.

What is an individual to do, though, if the "open up and listen," but the explanations just don't make sense? It almost seems that it is inconceivable to you that ANYone who "hears the message" could do anything other than accept it. If you move forward with this presumption, I can see how you might arrive at the conclusions you have drawn. Unfortunately, it is the explanations that fall short of that which we have reasoned to be accurate...

Someone who cares about finding Truth will bring up their questions and be interested in having them answered rather than just bringing them up to mock others.

Once again, this statement rests on the presumption that the answer given is absolute truth. The absolute truth of something you have accepted is "clear" to you, but not necessarily to one who considers the answer in another light. If one considers something to be "self-evident," their conviction will be unshakable. Rejection of that "self-evident" information is the very core of the issue. The one listening may not find what they hear to be "self-evidently" true.

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of God."

What better way to preemptively create in the believer a sense of righteousness?

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical, it's experimental by being a partaker with Jesus.

And if that "experiment" has already been performed and found lacking?

Living in the Truth is practicing it. I directly tried to delve into the morals of the Bible and many people often don't want to get involved.

I, too, have delved into the morals of the bible, and I find the OT to be gruesome, in that respect. While the NT is more benign, it still fails to condemn much of the brutality and immorality of the OT, which negates its validity, for me.

It makes no difference if God is proven to exist or not, people aren't going to follow him anyway.

Preparing yourself, in advance, for contradiction shows that you don't seem to do any more "opening up and listening" than those you are currently critiquing...

Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exist.

Now, you are simply reiterating that which you have already accepted as axiomatically true. Look to what you have accepted. Next, examine WHY you accepted it. Last, try to refute it, yourself.

Immanuel Kant philosophized that knowledge is limited to our subjective experiences. We don't actually "know" how things actually are, but how our experiences interpret them to be.

This is universal, among humans. Much like the previous belief that the world was "flat," holding a belief can greatly influence that which we, as individuals, are willing to experience. It can be a debilitating leash, or a sense of anticipation of journey and experience... In order to experience one, the other must be released. They are mutually exclusive.

Fritz Perls said that we often mistake our views as objective truth. We are all biased in our thinking and beliefs, thus it's a matter of the choices we make that will affect our lives.

Have you pointed that statement at your own beliefs, just to see how they stand up?
"Never attribute to villainy that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
-----
"Men rarely if ever dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child. "

-- Robert A Heinlein
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2014 12:37:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of God."
-
Here is the majority of the problem, (As ThinkFirst has already pointed out). You talk about free-thought, then present a claim from the Bible as though it's beyond question. In free-thinking, no book is beyond question. EVERYTHING is open to scrutiny. And the Bible continually fails scrutiny. In appealing to the Bible for your claims, you've shown that you're not thinking freely.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
frbnsn
Posts: 353
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 4:14:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I believe in god and I believe that God put mind and conscience into humen.
Ethic in humen is based on these mechanisms.
But the problem is that people are reluctant to attach importance to God and conscience, but rather to tend to focus matters concerning their financial intrests.

As for The Bible, It is not motivate people to God and to conscience (and consequently moral). Because I think, It is by men and logically not convincing enough.
MsIndependent
Posts: 383
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 4:59:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

I agree. It's the thinking of having to "clean up" before they believe or turn their lives over. We tend to thing we have to be right or be better. When in fact, God says come as you are.

The problem with this kind of "free thinking" is that you've neglected to do any thinking,

I've heard plenty of humanists who accuse the Bible of many things, but to me, i get the feeling that they're just making excuses.
Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

Then there are those that completely misquote the scriptures and take them completely out of context. If they would take the initiative to find out what they really mean, they would stop quoting whatever they heard from their source of error ridden information and interpretation.
When a person wants to truly understand and learn about another religion or view, they will open up and listen. In fact, intelligence is gained by listening through the ears according to Hebrew thought. Someone who cares about finding Truth will bring up their questions and be interested in having them answered rather than just bringing them up to mock others.
That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?

If that was the case, you should know that the points you made above and the scriptures you are referring to are out of context. Maybe it's not that you know more, you just think you know, but really don't.

- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

Are you implying that Christians are uneducated?

The Bible essentially says that "the natural man rejects the spiritual things of ."
I mean this with all propriety and any due respect; why should anyone give two toad turds what the Bible says? How can you suggest you're practicing free-thought when you can't even manage to understand that the Bible holds no authority, shows no connection to God, and the ONLY reason you think it does, is that you were told thaty it's "God's word". It's the words of MEN! Nothing about the contents of the Bible or its origins even suggest it to be anything else.

Since you seem to state that as the final shot caller...I will skip it.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

it's experimental by being a partaker with Jesus.
The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

I see since everything you're stating is completely off base, I'm not sure it's worth commenting. But what the heck..Did you say the people who wrote the Bible didn't know Jesus. Are you sure about that?

Living in the Truth is practicing it
You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

I do. Now, what makes you think that God wasn't around before the celestial bodies? This statement implies that you think the Bible says that God began the day He created the Heavens and the Earth? No. That was the day that He made the heavens and the earth. It says nothing about how long He was here and it was just "space". Do you understand that?

I directly tried to delve into the morals of the Bible and many people often don't want to get involved. It makes no difference if God is proven to exist or not, people aren't going to follow him anyway.
Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exis

You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.
Your assertion is of the same value as if I insisted that you wouldn't believe in fairies, even if they were "proven" to exist.

What an incredible deep thinking mind you have. You're able to reason, think, debate, figure things out,..and that just happened? No. It would have had to be instilled. Reason, thoughts, critical thinking, didn't just evolve from mice.

Immanuel Kant philosophized that knowledge is limited to our subjective experiences. We don't actually "know" how things actually are, but how our experiences interpret them to be. Fritz Perls said that we often mistake our views as objective truth. We are all biased in our thinking and beliefs, thus it's a matter of the choices we make that will affect our lives.
So if a person in Alaska sets up a counter to enumerate the radioactive rate of cesium 133 and finds it to complete 9,192,631,770 cycles per second, and a person in China sets up the same equipment at the same temperature and also measures the radioactive rate of cesium 133 at 9,192,631,770, that's just a subjective outcome?

How about a being that created the entire earth, the intricate make up of your mind, body, veins, teeth for eating, eyes for seeing, blood vessels that pump blood to your from your heart to the rest of your body. Is that just a subjective outcome?

If you want to talk about "free-thought", it would seem appropriate that you first engage in some. And I'm standing here telling you to your face, that you don't have the first clue what the term "free-thought" even means. And I say that because I want you to learn to engage in free-thought, rather than accusing others who do engage in free-thought, of not doing so, and then producing a ridiculous diatribe, which only shows that you have never engaged in any free-thought, and don't even understand the principle.

Unfortunately we have no reason to believe you are standing. The fact that you lied about being in his face damages your credibility. I will have a hard time believing anything you say, since you didn't make any solid responses that havent been refuted and torn to pieces before, I'm apt to think you really need to study some more. Accuse? You-not him. Principle? That would includ
bulproof
Posts: 25,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:09:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
They turn up and have all the answers, things that no other christian has presented before and then BAM BAM they hit us with it.
You don't understand our book.

Well it's a goddamned head shot, we're outa the game just like that.

After all our work.

BAMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:42:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 4:59:26 AM, MsIndependent wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:

Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

I agree. It's the thinking of having to "clean up" before they believe or turn their lives over. We tend to thing we have to be right or be better. When in fact, God says come as you are.
Welcome to the forum.
So you think criminals disbelieve in law enforcement personnel? Does that really qualify as thought?

Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

Then there are those that completely misquote the scriptures and take them completely out of context.
And yet, I didn't even suggest or attempt to quote anything. It's that Christian entitlement to superiority... which is as imaginary as your relationship with Jesus.

If they would take the initiative to find out what they really mean, they would stop quoting whatever they heard from their source of error ridden information and interpretation.
Here is another good example showing that atheists know more about what is in the Bible than those who claim to believe it.
(Exodus 21:20-21) When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.

Feel free to explain the context in which beating a slave to death is perfectly moral.

That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?

If that was the case, you should know that the points you made above and the scriptures you are referring to are out of context. Maybe it's not that you know more, you just think you know, but really don't.
Consider yourself fully invited and even challenged to provide any context by which soldiers slaughtering children, raping wives and kidnapping young virgin girls is moral.

Sorry, but it was an independent survey (PEW 2010), and it showed that Mormons displayed superior religious literacy to Jews, who were superior to Christians, and the atheists/agnostics provided superior scores to those of the Mormons.

- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

Are you implying that Christians are uneducated?
Why don't you answer the questions and show us?

I mean this with all propriety and any due respect; why should anyone give two toad turds what the Bible says? How can you suggest you're practicing free-thought when you can't even manage to understand that the Bible holds no authority, shows no connection to God, and the ONLY reason you think it does, is that you were told thaty it's "God's word". It's the words of MEN! Nothing about the contents of the Bible or its origins even suggest it to be anything else.

Since you seem to state that as the final shot caller...I will skip it.
Please don't. Explain why we should automatically accept the statements in a book having no credibility.


The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

I see since everything you're stating is completely off base, I'm not sure it's worth commenting. But what the heck..Did you say the people who wrote the Bible didn't know Jesus. Are you sure about that?
It's right there in front of you. Can you not verify what it says by re-reading it? Yes, I'm quite sure. It's a distant topic but the authorships were assigned erroneously, and the texts themselves show the authors didn't know Jesus. In fact, as you peruse the evidence for Jesus, you find no one who actually knew him, writing anything about him. But you do have to appeal to logic and reason rather than Christian propaganda.

You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

I do.
Apparently not. Perhaps I should have simply referred to "stars".
Now, what makes you think that God wasn't around before the celestial bodies? This statement implies that you think the Bible says that God began the day He created the Heavens and the Earth? No. That was the day that He made the heavens and the earth. It says nothing about how long He was here and it was just "space". Do you understand that?
Your response indicates that you grasped no understanding of the question. It refers to the Bible's claim that Earth existed before stars. We know this cannot be true, as Earth is composed of elements which were fused in stars.

Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exis

You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.
Your assertion is of the same value as if I insisted that you wouldn't believe in fairies, even if they were "proven" to exist.

What an incredible deep thinking mind you have. You're able to reason, think, debate, figure things out,..and that just happened? No. It would have had to be instilled. Reason, thoughts, critical thinking, didn't just evolve from mice.
No one implied that it "just happened". It took approximately 3.5 billion years for natural processes to allow it to happen. Had it simply been "instilled", perhaps the ancient authors of the biblical texts would have held some understanding.

So if a person in Alaska sets up a counter to enumerate the radioactive rate of cesium 133 and finds it to complete 9,192,631,770 cycles per second, and a person in China sets up the same equipment at the same temperature and also measures the radioactive rate of cesium 133 at 9,192,631,770, that's just a subjective outcome?

How about a being that created the entire earth, the intricate make up of your mind, body, veins, teeth for eating, eyes for seeing, blood vessels that pump blood to your from your heart to the rest of your body. Is that just a subjective outcome?

It wasn't a being. It was a combination of natural processes.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
MsIndependent
Posts: 383
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 8:12:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I agree. It's the thinking of having to "clean up" before they believe or turn their lives over. We tend to thing we have to be right or be better. When in fact, God says come as you are.

Welcome to the forum.
Thank you!

So you think criminals disbelieve in law enforcement personnel? Does that really qualify as thought?

That's the problem. God isn't about punishing but about love.

Then there are those that completely misquote the scriptures and take them completely out of context.
And yet, I didn't even suggest or attempt to quote anything. It's that Christian entitlement to superiority... which is as imaginary as your relationship with Jesus.
What was your reference to owning slaves, ect referring to?

And they say Christians are judgmental..oowee you should see those athiests
What did I say that made you see that I have a superiority complex?
(other than me being a queen of course).. How do you know what is imaginary to me? I can have a relationship with a banana and if its a relationship to me, its still a relationship.


If they would take the initiative to find out what they really mean, they would stop quoting whatever they heard from their source of error ridden information and interpretation.
(Exodus 21:20-21) When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.

Feel free to explain the context in which beating a slave to death is perfectly moral.

Where did you read that God created or approved slavery? Slavery was a man made sin. We have many of those in the world. We can't blame God for something man created. Many of the slaves in the old testament were people sentenced to death and given mercy by making them serve their time. Lets not forget what God said about slavery now.." There is no Jew or Greek, slave or master,,," Galatians3;28
For someone who knows the bible, you sure don't.

If that was the case, you should know that the points you made above and the scriptures you are referring to are out of context. Maybe it's not that you know more, you just think you know, but really don't.
Consider yourself fully invited and even challenged to provide any context by which soldiers slaughtering children, raping wives and kidnapping young virgin girls is moral.

Sorry, but it was an independent survey (PEW 2010), and it showed that Mormons displayed superior religious literacy to Jews, who were superior to Christians, and the atheists/agnostics provided superior scores to those of the Mormons.

That sounds right. In no way do I feel superior to anyone. But I'm honored you think so highly of me.

- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

Are you implying that Christians are uneducated?
Why don't you answer the questions and show us?

Big bang-explosion- expansion. Cant prove expansion. Human mind. emotions
Evolution-Evolved from animals. But missing link, no proof of change between species, but boy they try.
Chaos Theory: Well since evolution goes against 2 law of thermodynamics, neither work. Order cant be created from chaos.
QM: Not proved, not observed. It may very well have a part in life just not in creation.
'
Please don't. Explain why we should automatically accept the statements in a book having no credibility.

Of course they have credibility. I thought you knew the Bible??
Not only has it been proven by history and research, but by its own prophecy that we have seen come true.


The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.
I see since everything you're stating is completely off base, I'm not sure it's worth commenting. But what the heck..Did you say the people who wrote the Bible didn't know Jesus. Are you sure about that?
It's right there in front of you. Can you not verify what it says by re-reading it? Yes, I'm quite sure. It's a distant topic but the authorships were assigned erroneously, and the texts themselves show the authors didn't know Jesus. In fact, as you peruse the evidence for Jesus, you find no one who actually knew him, writing anything about him. But you do have to appeal to logic and reason rather than Christian propaganda.

You are so not sure. But who am I to tell you what to believe. Erroneous assignment? lie. Not what the bible says,. I find myself logical, reasonable, and a little sad that you seem so

You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

I do.
Apparently not. Perhaps I should have simply referred to "stars".
Now, what makes you think that God wasn't around before the celestial bodies? This statement implies that you think the Bible says that God began the day He created the Heavens and the Earth? No. That was the day that He made the heavens and the earth. It says nothing about how long He was here and it was just "space". Do you understand that?
Your response indicates that you grasped no understanding of the question. It refers to the Bible's claim that Earth existed before stars. We know this cannot be true, as Earth is composed of elements which were fused in stars.

Even if there was evidence for his existence, people's carnal desires would be so strong that they would behave as if God didn't exis

You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.
Your assertion is of the same value as if I insisted that you wouldn't believe in fairies, even if they were "proven" to exist.

What an incredible deep thinking mind you have. You're able to reason, think, debate, figure things out,..and that just happened? No. It would have had to be instilled. Reason, thoughts, critical thinking, didn't just evolve from mice.
No one implied that it "just happened". It took approximately 3.5 billion years for natural processes to allow it to happen. Had it simply been "instilled", perhaps the ancient authors of the biblical texts would have held some understanding.

Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 8:19:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.

You can't talk about being a free thinker when you have the religious mindset they hey I live in Gods truth while everyone is wrong cause you know they are just being evil.

This gives you free licence to reject any and all objections to your beliefs because hey they are just being evil.

That exact same argument could be used to justify any and all religious belief. God wants us to kill those people over there and take their women. Hey people won't accept this cause they are just evil.

Lucky there is nothing like that in the bible right ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
jh1234lnew
Posts: 225
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 12:07:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

This is a false analogy: Truththinker's logic is: A does not believe B because of the consequence C that A brings.

While your logic is: because A dislikes C, when C is real, they disbelieve that B exists, when B is real.

Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

The Bible did not encourage slavery, it just listed guidelines that slave owners had to follow (e.g. no enslaving Israelites).

"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48)

This rule means that slaves who accidentally did wrong things will be punished less than wrongdoing out of malice, just like in real life legal systems where accidental actions come with less strict punishments than actions done out of malice.

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21)


While this may not sound really good by today's standards, it did mean that the Bible set guidelines on slavery.

No where in the Bible was slavery encouraged. The only mentions of slavery are restrictions on slavery.


That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?

Yet you appear to not understand the Bible's stance about slavery.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

Argument by assertion.

The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

No, the apostles did know about Jesus.

You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

Assuming that the Bible is false to prove that it is false.

You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.

I do not know how people would react to you if you wore shoes, therefore you have zero shoes.
LogicalLunatic
Posts: 1,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 12:27:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 12:07:52 PM, jh1234lnew wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

This is a false analogy: Truththinker's logic is: A does not believe B because of the consequence C that A brings.

While your logic is: because A dislikes C, when C is real, they disbelieve that B exists, when B is real.



Do you own slaves? Do you think it's moral to own slaves? What about slaughtering children and kidnapping virgins? Do you avoid doing those things because you believe they're immoral, or is that "just making excuses"?

The Bible did not encourage slavery, it just listed guidelines that slave owners had to follow (e.g. no enslaving Israelites).

"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48)

This rule means that slaves who accidentally did wrong things will be punished less than wrongdoing out of malice, just like in real life legal systems where accidental actions come with less strict punishments than actions done out of malice.

When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21)


While this may not sound really good by today's standards, it did mean that the Bible set guidelines on slavery.

No where in the Bible was slavery encouraged. The only mentions of slavery are restrictions on slavery.


That's something all Christians should read. You seem to forget that atheists tend to know morw about Christianity than most Christians do. That's not some blind assertion, it has been demonstrated through surveys. We tend to know more about Christianity than you do, yet you chastise us for not learning about it? Shall we look tp the Christians here who can't even remember that atheism is only a disbelief in any, and all, gods?

Yet you appear to not understand the Bible's stance about slavery.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

Argument by assertion.

The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

No, the apostles did know about Jesus.


You can't practice the truth until you know the truth. And if you think the Bible is the "word of God", you haven't even scratched the surface of anything truthful. Is it "true" that the Earth existed before the celestial bodies which created the elements of which Earth is composed? Do you even understand that question?

Assuming that the Bible is false to prove that it is false.


You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.

I do not know how people would react to you if you wore shoes, therefore you have zero shoes.

Finally, an atheist who is not rabidly Anti-Theist. That is, they are Anti-Christian, as they don't typically give a *expletive* about "debunking" religions other than Christianity.
A True Work of Art: http://www.debate.org...

Atheist Logic: http://www.debate.org...

Bulproof formally admits to being a troll (Post 16):
http://www.debate.org...
DPMartin
Posts: 1,096
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 12:38:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 12:27:18 PM, LogicalLunatic wrote:
Finally, an atheist who is not rabidly Anti-Theist. That is, they are Anti-Christian, as they don't typically give a *expletive* about "debunking" religions other than Christianity.

That"s true, at least its evident here, it probably bothers them the most because its true, and they can"t debunk it, because it isn"t man made.
MsIndependent
Posts: 383
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 12:48:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 8:19:39 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.

You can't talk about being a free thinker when you have the religious mindset they hey I live in Gods truth while everyone is wrong cause you know they are just being evil.

You can't talk about being a free thinker when you're set on being anti religion, no God, and are just being stubborn.

This gives you free licence to reject any and all objections to your beliefs because hey they are just being evil.

Can you quote me please? I'd like to know where I wrong that. Make sure I spelled it right.

That exact same argument could be used to justify any and all religious belief. God wants us to kill those people over there and take their women. Hey people won't accept this cause they are just evil.

Hmmm. No. That's not in my Bible.

Lucky there is nothing like that in the bible right ?
Just when the Canaanites were hanging out. Which in fact, ironically, the people you're referring to are from that line.

Do you watch the news? Do you know how many people without God murder every day? Yep people just like you. Maybe we should compare numbers? What book does your people go by?
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 4:39:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 8:12:05 AM, MsIndependent wrote:
I agree. It's the thinking of having to "clean up" before they believe or turn their lives over. We tend to thing we have to be right or be better. When in fact, God says come as you are.
God has never been shown to have said anything to anyone. It's all just claims of men which you accept, because you were told to.

So you think criminals disbelieve in law enforcement personnel? Does that really qualify as thought?

That's the problem. God isn't about punishing but about love.
According to the Bible, God created evil, Satan and Hell. If you disbelieve in God, you end up in Hell... eternally. That's not love. That's punishment of the most barbaric, heinous and unforgiving nature.

Then there are those that completely misquote the scriptures and take them completely out of context.
And yet, I didn't even suggest or attempt to quote anything. It's that Christian entitlement to superiority... which is as imaginary as your relationship with Jesus.
What was your reference to owning slaves, ect referring to?
It's pretty clear if you let yourself read it. It says a man may beat his slave to death and as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two, he has done nothing wrong.

How do you know what is imaginary to me?
There's that self-absorbed though-process peeking out again. Reality isn't just about you.

I can have a relationship with a banana and if its a relationship to me, its still a relationship.
Not when the other half of the relationship is imaginary. Then it's a delusion, not a relationship.

If they would take the initiative to find out what they really mean, they would stop quoting whatever they heard from their source of error ridden information and interpretation.
(Exodus 21:20-21) When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.

Feel free to explain the context in which beating a slave to death is perfectly moral.

Where did you read that God created or approved slavery?
It's in Exodus 21:20-21 and many other verses of the Bible. Ignoring them doesn't change the fact that they are there.

Slavery was a man made sin.
Nowhere - not even in the New Testament - does the Bible list slavery as a sin. The Bible claims that God permitted slavery. It shows God approving of slavery in, Leviticus 25:44-46, Exodus 21:2-6, Exodus 21:7-11, Ephesians 6:5 and other verses. The Bible... is a man-made atrocity against humanity.

We have many of those in the world. We can't blame God for something man created.
Perhaps you missed this but I'm an atheists. I don't blame God for anything. Man created God and gave himself permissions and restrictions, based on the false authority bestowed within his imaginary God.

Many of the slaves in the old testament were people sentenced to death and given mercy by making them serve their time. Lets not forget what God said about slavery now.." There is no Jew or Greek, slave or master,,," Galatians3;28
Yes, because the God of the Bible is a racist and believed only people of certain origins should be slaves.

For someone who knows the bible, you sure don't.
Is that why I just had to post a list of verses where God permits slavery in the Bible? You know Christian propaganda. You don't know the Bible at all.

Consider yourself fully invited and even challenged to provide any context by which soldiers slaughtering children, raping wives and kidnapping young virgin girls is moral.
I see you decided to shrink from this challenge, because you can't. So obviously, these things which are directives of God in the Bible, are purely immoral.

Sorry, but it was an independent survey (PEW 2010), and it showed that Mormons displayed superior religious literacy to Jews, who were superior to Christians, and the atheists/agnostics provided superior scores to those of the Mormons.

That sounds right. In no way do I feel superior to anyone. But I'm honored you think so highly of me.
Brush up on reading comprehension. I said the "religious literacy" of some people is superior to that of others. And I showed that you were wrong in blindly proclaiming that you have a superior understanding of the Bible. Clearly, you don't.
- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

Are you implying that Christians are uneducated?
Why don't you answer the questions and show us?

Big bang-explosion- expansion. Cant prove expansion. Human mind. emotions
There is no "explosion" in big-bang, only expansion. So anything that expands is big-bang? An elastic waistband is big-bang? There's a bit more to it. And yes we can "prove" ("demonstrate" is the proper word), expansion. Look up Edwin Hubble.

Evolution-Evolved from animals. But missing link, no proof of change between species, but boy they try.
No, evolution begins with proto-cells long before diversification into plant, animal and protist kingdoms. We have numerous transitional species which are ancestors to man. (i.e. Ardipithecus ramidus, Australopithecus anamensis, Australopithecus afarensis, etc.) Finally, humans ARE animals.

Chaos Theory: Well since evolution goes against 2 law of thermodynamics, neither work. Order cant be created from chaos.
So snowflakes, sand dunes and the veining patterns in leaves don't exist? No, the Second Law of Thermodynamics is in complete compliance with the theory of evolution. You've been dining on creationist ignorance and here you're regurgitating it. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is very clear that it applies only to isolated systems. Earth is not an isolated system.

(Wikipedia) "The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems always evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium, a state with maximum entropy."
http://en.wikipedia.org...

See what happens in debate when you repeat ignorant fallacies?

QM: Not proved, not observed. It may very well have a part in life just not in creation.
Creation is a fallacy. It violates the First Law of Thermodynamics
Science isn't in the business of "proving" anything. Aside from maths and alcohol, science doesn't subscribe to the concept of proofs. It violates science methodology.
Quantum Mechanics is both observed, and fully accepted on demonstrable evidence. The fusion of hydrogen into helium in the sun requires quantum tunneling. The video (top) demonstrates Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. Particle/wave duality is easily demonstrated as well. Even quantum entanglement has been fully confirmed.
Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (At top)

Wave/Particle duality

Chaos Theory

You have not disappointed me. I suggested that you would know every little about these rather common processes which participate in the outcomes you credit instead to God. You learned the childish fairytale explanation and never bothered to learn the reality. They you run around proclaiming that others don't understand your Bible, while you retain only one of over 38,000 confirmed int
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 5:28:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 8:12:05 AM, MsIndependent wrote:

Please don't. Explain why we should automatically accept the statements in a book having no credibility.

Of course they have credibility. I thought you knew the Bible??
Not only has it been proven by history and research, but by its own prophecy that we have seen come true.
The Bible is horribly contrary to history. The Exodus, the flood, even the existence of Jesus are all contrary to historical evidence.
The Bible is horribly contrary to science. The patterns in animal fur aren't caused by the view of the parents during copulation. Earth didn't exist before stars. Plants can't grow in cryogenic temperatures. You can't retain liquid water without atmospheric pressure, etc., etc., etc.

As for prophecies, nearly every religious book ("Qur'an", "Oahspe", "Book of Mormon"), claims fulfilled prophecies. Few of these are even close to verified. Arguably the most important biblical prophecy to all of Christianity is found in Matthew 16:28, Luke 21:32, Mark 13:30 and Matthew 24:34, and it failed some 1,900 years ago.

It's right there in front of you. Can you not verify what it says by re-reading it? Yes, I'm quite sure. It's a distant topic but the authorships were assigned erroneously, and the texts themselves show the authors didn't know Jesus. In fact, as you peruse the evidence for Jesus, you find no one who actually knew him, writing anything about him. But you do have to appeal to logic and reason rather than Christian propaganda.

You are so not sure. But who am I to tell you what to believe. Erroneous assignment? lie. Not what the bible says,. I find myself logical, reasonable, and a little sad that you seem so
Take a peek at the scholarly preface to "The Gospel According to Matthew" found in the NIV Study Bible.
The Holy Bible (NIV)
Preface to Book of Matthew

- "Although the first gospel is anonymous, the early church fathers were unanimous in holding that Matthew, one of the 12 apostles, was its author. However, the results of modern critical studies, in particular, those that stress Matthews alleged dependence on Mark for a substantial part of his gospel have caused some biblical scholars to abandon Matthian authorship. "Why," they ask, "would Matthew, a witness to the events of the Lord's life depend so heavily on Mark's account?"

So as it turns out, you're the one who doesn't know the Bible. Do you think that because the books are labeled "Mark", "Matthew", "Luke" and "John" that it means those people wrote the manuscripts? All four canonical gospels are anonymous writings. The authorships were assigned (erroneously), by church fathers in the 4th century, based on oral tradition. And they were selected from over 30 gospels which Christians commonly read prior to the 4th century when the Christianity you know was created at the Council of Nicaea.

No one knows who wrote these gospels but we can determine that none of the assigned authorships are correct. Read Luke 1:1-4. Now... did Luke write the "Gospel of Luke"? In the "Gospel of Matthew" we find the author referring to "Matthew" in the third person. The author claims to have seen Matthew and the context doesn't allow for metaphor or reflection. None of these were even written in Hebrew, they were all originally written in Greek.

We can show that the author to "Mark" didn't even know the 10 Commandments, that the author of "Matthew" copied almost the entire text of "Mark", and that the author of "Luke", along with admitting that they were not an eyewitness (Luke 1:1-4), copied and paraphrased about 300-verses from "Mark" as well as leaving a tell-tale clue that the copy of "Mark" they were using was damaged (missing or damaged 74.5 verses between Mark 6:46 and Mark 8:27).

You have not a single word said by Jesus, nor anyone actually quoting Jesus. In fact, if you knew the Old Testament, you'd see from where much of the false dialog for Jesus came. The authors simply took it from Old Testament verses.

Mark 15:34 comes - word for word - from Psalms 22:1.
Matthew 11:5 comes from Isaiah 35:5, Isaiah 26:19 and Isaiah 61:1
Matthew 21:2 comes from Zechariah 9:9. And not only did the author take it from the Old Testament, he apparently couldn't read or write Hebrew, so he took it from the Greek Septuagint, where there is a translation error, leading to the claim that Jesus asked for two donkeys, rather than just one.

So the existence of Jesus is not confirmed, nor is there enough evidence to confirm it. Yet here you have a book, assembled by men of the 4th century, who never knew Jesus and never knew anyone who knew Jesus, who selected the writings of the Bible without any way to know what was or wasn't true, assigned authors (and were wrong in nearly ever case), you have not a single word Jesus ever said, and yet you believe every word of this book, simply because you were indoctrinated to believe that you're supposed to believe it.

And here you are commenting on a post about "free-thinking". The irony meter needle is off the scale.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 5:45:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

Wait a minute! You've met a sky-diver who does not believe in gravity, and you think that gazelles do not believe in lions?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:02:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 12:07:52 PM, jh1234lnew wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

This is a false analogy: Truththinker's logic is: A does not believe B because of the consequence C that A brings.

While your logic is: because A dislikes C, when C is real, they disbelieve that B exists, when B is real.
They are one and the same. Look, you interpret Truth_Seeker (you have his name wrong) as "A does not believe B because of the consequence C that A brings."

And I offered Criminals (A) not believing in Police (B) because of the consequence (incarceration) that Police (A) bring.
Skydivers (A) not believing in Gravity (B) because of the consequences (smashing into the planet) that Gravity (A) brings.
Gazelles (A) not believing in Lions (B) because of the consequences (falling prey) that Lions (A) bring.

It's a perfect fit. So what are you babbling on about?

The Bible did not encourage slavery, it just listed guidelines that slave owners had to follow (e.g. no enslaving Israelites).
Which grants full permission (supposedly, from God), to engage in slavery. You could even keep slaves for life and pass them on as an inheritance. The Bible states that a slave is the owner's "property". So does this strike you as moral, or immoral?

"The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48)

Which does nothing to over-ride or eradicate Exodus 21:20-21 in which it states; "When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."

Now... enough trying to duck what the Bible says. Address it instead. Exodus 21:20-21 gives full permission to beat a slave to death, just as long as it takes a day or two for the slave to die from the beating. And it says that the owner should not be punished. SO....

Address this! Is it moral or immoral to own slaves? Is it moral or immoral to consider someone else as your personal property, and to beat them - even to the point of dying?

This rule means that slaves who accidentally did wrong things will be punished less than wrongdoing out of malice, just like in real life legal systems where accidental actions come with less strict punishments than actions done out of malice.
Every country on Earth has abolished slavery... because societies unanimously accept that it is immoral. So why does your Bible show God not just allowing slavery, but allowing slave owners to beat slaves, and to beat them to death?

While this may not sound really good by today's standards, it did mean that the Bible set guidelines on slavery.
Establishing that if you beat a slave to death, the slave had to suffer for a day or two before dying, is "setting standards"? It's barbarity, nothing less.

Let's cut to the chase; would you be in favor of re-instating slavery to biblical standards? Yes or no?

No where in the Bible was slavery encouraged. The only mentions of slavery are restrictions on slavery.
No, they are PERMISSIONS on slavery. No where does the Bible prohibit slavery. And keep in mind that the texts of the Bible span at least 1,500-years. And yet, in all of that time, there isn't a single word in the Bible suggesting that slavery is wrong, or in any way discouraging slavery.

(Exodus 21:7-11) "When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment."
- Female slaves are retained indefinitely.
- Male slaves are freed after 6-years.
- The owner can sell female slaves back if they don't "please" him.
- If the owner arranges a marriage between the female slave and his son, he must treat her as a daughter.
- If he marries a slave, he can also marry another wife, but most continue to treat the slave as a wife. (Polygamy - permitted by "God's word").

Yet you appear to not understand the Bible's stance about slavery.
The Bible's stance on slavery is full permission to engage in slavery. It's very clear. NO WHERE - not even in the New Testament - does the Bible ever declare slavery to be wrong.

Truth in Christianity is not mental or philosophical,
... nor is it present.

Argument by assertion.
Once again, Earth didn't exist before stars. Plants can't thrive in cryogenic temperatures. Liquid water can't be retained without an atmosphere, people can't live in whales, snakes lack vocal cords, goats aren't patterned after the view of their parents during copulation, etc. So it's argument by demonstration, not just assertion.

The Bible has nothing to do with Jesus, aside from containing one of many different Jesus stories, written by people who never knew him. Once again, if you can't work within that honest structure, then you can't make any claim regarding free-thought. Learn to think outside the tiny, dark, fallacious box of Christianity.

No, the apostles did know about Jesus.
According to... the Bible. But modern textual criticism and paleography, along with historical documentation show a very different story - one which suggests Jesus is nothing more than a myth.

Assuming that the Bible is false to prove that it is false.
No, no ASSUMING is necessary. Earth didn't exist before stars. Plants can't thrive in cryogenic temperatures. Liquid water can't be retained without an atmosphere, people can't live in whales, snakes lack vocal cords, goats aren't patterned after the view of their parents during copulation. If you'd care to demonstrate any of those falsehoods to be correct, then you have an argument. Otherwise, you're done.

You're WAY ahead of yourself. You can't talk intelligently about what people might do if God were "proven" to exist, when you still don't have the slightest hint of objective evidence that he exists.

I do not know how people would react to you if you wore shoes, therefore you have zero shoes.
You should remove your fingers from the keyboard when you have hiccups. What you typed is a complete non-sequitur.

You have no objective evidence for fairies, Leprechauns, unicorns, etc. Therefore you don't believe they exist.
You have no objective evidence for God, yet you believe he exists.
That's an indoctrinated double-standard. Lose the indoctrination, and you'll lose the double-standard.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:04:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 5:45:54 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

Wait a minute! You've met a sky-diver who does not believe in gravity, and you think that gazelles do not believe in lions?

Acquaint yourself with the word "analogy", Anna.
Those claims are analogies for the suggestion that atheists disbelieve in God because they don't want to stop sinning. It's pure horse-dung. And I'm using the analogies to illustrate that.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:08:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 12:27:18 PM, LogicalLunatic wrote:

Finally, an atheist who is not rabidly Anti-Theist. That is, they are Anti-Christian, as they don't typically give a *expletive* about "debunking" religions other than Christianity.

Christianity is the primary religion to over-step it's rights, violate the constitution, and attempt to imprison the general population of a country through legislation of the religious tenets. So you should be neither surprised, nor opposed to people fighting back against Christianity to retain their Constitutional rights, and keep Christianity from over-stepping its boundaries.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:17:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 6:04:17 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/27/2014 5:45:54 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/26/2014 3:00:54 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.
Yeah, like the way criminals don't believe in cops because they don't want to adhere to laws. The way sky-divers don't believe in gravity because they don't want to be smashed against the Earth. The way that gazelles don't believe in lions because they don't want to be eaten.

Wait a minute! You've met a sky-diver who does not believe in gravity, and you think that gazelles do not believe in lions?

Acquaint yourself with the word "analogy", Anna.
Those claims are analogies for the suggestion that atheists disbelieve in God because they don't want to stop sinning. It's pure horse-dung. And I'm using the analogies to illustrate that.

Then if you "analogies" hold, sin is a very real thing, isn't it?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MsIndependent
Posts: 383
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:28:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
That's the problem. God isn't about punishing but about love.
According to the Bible, God created evil, Satan and Hell. If you disbelieve in God, you end up in Hell... eternally. That's not love. That's punishment of the most barbaric, heinous and unforgiving nature.

God gives us choices. If we were forced those, like yourself, would have a problem being forced. It's like children. A parent could beat them into submission or force them to give them pretend love, but what parent wants that? Love if not given freely means nothing. He gave us a choice and a choice of obedience because He loved us.

It's pretty clear if you let yourself read it. It says a man may beat his slave to death and as long as the slave doesn't die for a day or two, he has done nothing wrong.

If I "let" myself read it. I'm sorry. I don't speak at myself in third person. I read it and understood it.
I do however think you should read over my answer again. I explained this.

How do you know what is imaginary to me?
There's that self-absorbed though-process peeking out again. Reality isn't just about you.

Actually, it is. Perception is reality. So ones reality differs from another's based on perception. How do you perceive this? You keep repeating terms like "self absorbed". Can you please explain the relation from what I've been saying and being self absorbed? As of now ill chop it up to a failed attempt to diminish my character and portray people who believe in God as selfish. Until you can somehow form some sort of believable, logical, explanation, it will be counted as nonsense.

I can have a relationship with a banana and if its a relationship to me, its still a relationship.
Not when the other half of the relationship is imaginary. Then it's a delusion, not a relationship.

My relationship with God is minuscule compared to His w me. So that is false. Much like a scorned ex girlfriend who keeps telling her ex boyfriends new wife that he doesn't love her and she will never compare.

(Exodus 21:20-21) When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property.
Feel free to explain the context in which beating a slave to death is perfectly moral.

I will not. It is not moral at all. Did you know there are approx 100 verses against slavery? You must of missed the scripture in which God made that clear:
Exodus 21:16 "Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death.
Luke 4:18 "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed,
Deuteronomy 23:15
"You shall not give up to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you.
Leviticus 25:39
"If your brother becomes poor beside you and sells himself to you, you shall not make him serve as a slave:
..just to name a few. I can go on if you'd like.

Slavery was a man made sin.
Bible... is a man-made atrocity against humanity.

That is false. As I proved in the verses above. Do you always go around stating falsehoods as truth? Or is this new?

Perhaps you missed this but I'm an atheists. I don't blame God for anything. Man created God and gave himself permissions and restrictions, based on the false authority bestowed within his imaginary God.

I'm confused. Or maybe you are.. You've stated things like God will send you to hell.. Ect. So do you or do you not believe in God? If not, you may want to stop speaking against something you say doesn't exist?

Many of the slaves in the old testament were people sentenced to death and given mercy by making them serve their time. Lets not forget what God said about slavery now.." There is no Jew or Greek, slave or master,,," Galatians3;28
Yes, because the God of the Bible is a racist and believed only people of certain origins should be slaves.

Oh so you're admitting there is a God? I see.

For someone who knows the bible, you sure don't.
Is that why I just had to post a list of verses where God permits slavery in the Bible? You know Christian propaganda. You don't know the Bible at all.

False.

Consider yourself fully invited and even challenged to provide any context by which soldiers slaughtering children, raping wives and kidnapping young virgin girls is moral.

Soldiers-not God. So what's the correlation, am I missing something?

I see you decided to shrink from this challenge, because you can't. So obviously, these things which are directives of God in the Bible, are purely immoral.

Shrink? Never.

Brush up on reading comprehension. I said the "religious literacy" of some people is superior to that of others. And I showed that you were wrong in blindly proclaiming that you have a superior understanding of the Bible. Clearly, you don't.

I'm sorry I just LOL'd. As you sit here repeating how you know all about the bible and I know nothing, you're talking to me about religious literacy and superiority? Hahahaha

- How much do you know about big-bang?
- How much do you know about evolution?
- How much do you know about chaos theory?
- How much do you know about quantum mechanics?
There are but a few secular ideas - scientifically supported realities - which Christians tend to know very little about. The criticism you've provided, is more appropriately levied against Christians, than against atheists.

Yet, you state that without explaining why. I'm listening.,,.

Are you implying that Christians are uneducated?
Why don't you answer the questions and show us?

Fallacy.

Big bang-explosion- expansion. Cant prove expansion. Human mind. emotions
There is no "explosion" in big-bang, only expansion. So anything that expands is big-bang?.

"According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" (1) In other words.."BANG"! Maybe you should study up a little more. You are already incorrect.

Evolution-Evolved from animals. But missing link, no proof of change between species, but boy they try.
No, evolution begins with proto-cells long before diversification into plant, animal and protist kingdoms.

You have theory. Nobody has ever seen a plant morph into an animal or a animal into a human. You'd think in all these years at least one person would see a ros" bud a little girl named Sue.

Chaos Theory: Well since evolution goes against 2 law of thermodynamics, neither work. Order cant be created from chaos.
So snowflakes, sand dunes and the veining patterns in leaves don't exist?

Do you need more time to research? Or is this your "strategy" pretending to know nothing? My previous answer addresses this. Any adaption is only proven within a species. Humans aren't animals. If we were animals we would be called animals. So you're saying that animals are humans? Why aren't they called animals? Why don't we just call them all animans?

I think Wikipedia is stricken sorry!
Hence the term "isolated". Get it?

See what happens in debate when you repeat ignorant fallacies?

"Microevolution refers to changes within a species. Macroevolution refer to evolution from one species to another."
Maybe you're confused? And yes I am well aware when ignorance prevails.

QM: Not proved, not observed. It may very well have a part in life just not in creation.
Creation is a fallacy. It violates the First Law of Thermodynamics
Science isn't in the business of "proving" anything.

So... You just admitted that science is just a theory. Well here I was thinking we disagreed. Nice!!

You have not disappointed me.
-Unfortunately, I can't say the same. Oh well...

http://www.big-bang-theory.com...
MsIndependent
Posts: 383
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:30:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Christianity is the primary religion to over-step it's rights, violate the constitution, and attempt to imprison the general population of a country through legislation of the religious tenets. So you should be neither surprised, nor opposed to people fighting back against Christianity to retain their Constitutional rights, and keep Christianity from over-stepping its boundaries.

Can you provide a source (other than Wikipedia) for this please? Thanks!
MsIndependent
Posts: 383
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2014 6:36:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/27/2014 8:19:39 AM, Illegalcombatant wrote:
At 9/25/2014 10:42:56 PM, Truth_seeker wrote:
I'm about to give you just my position on the secular humanist philosophy. From a biblical perspective, the reason why people don't believe is because they don't want to do what the Bible says.

You can't talk about being a free thinker when you have the religious mindset they hey I live in Gods truth while everyone is wrong cause you know they are just being evil.

I don't think you're evil.

This gives you free licence to reject any and all objections to your beliefs because hey they are just being evil.

I accept the argument. Do some critical thinking, and then reject it.

That exact same argument could be used to justify any and all religious belief. God wants us to kill those people over there and take their women. Hey people won't accept this cause they are just evil.

No. I don't want to kill evil people. Although, id rather them not kill me. :)
Lucky there is nothing like that in the bible right ?

Not in mine. Maybe others?