Total Posts:92|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The outsider test of faith in Christianity

Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 7:49:30 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions.

It's sad how few people look into it. So many of my atheist friends reject religion purely because they can't be bothered.

This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

I always thank God for my Christian upbringing, It meant that I wasn't shielded, and that I could make every decision for myself. The Christian upbringing gives you a choice. The atheist upbringing,doesn't really. Sure you may hear a bit about it in primary school, but pretty much all that's presented to you by your friends, films, parents, books, TV and advertisements is atheist. After this people simply refuse to look into Christianity, and that's sad.
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 8:39:38 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 7:49:30 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions.

It's sad how few people look into it. So many of my atheist friends reject religion purely because they can't be bothered.

This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

I always thank God for my Christian upbringing, It meant that I wasn't shielded, and that I could make every decision for myself. The Christian upbringing gives you a choice. The atheist upbringing,doesn't really. Sure you may hear a bit about it in primary school, but pretty much all that's presented to you by your friends, films, parents, books, TV and advertisements is atheist. After this people simply refuse to look into Christianity, and that's sad.

So why does God give some people an advantage? Why does he give people muslim, yazidi, Buddhist, Sikh or Hindu upbringings? Someone's upbringing usually dictates their religion. I was bought up in a half hearted Christian family but after researching Christianity I discovered it was a lie. My dad and sister are now atheists and my mum and brother agnostics due to the flaws in Christianity I have shown them.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 8:47:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 7:49:30 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
The Christian upbringing gives you a choice. The atheist upbringing,doesn't really.

VB, you're perhaps conflating religious education with religious instruction.

By your age, although I had no religious beliefs of my own, I knew a great deal about the faiths of many different cultures. In part that was from my own interest; in part from a school system that taught cultures outside the Atlantic traditions.

That interest has continued, by the way. Sadly, I know of few Christians who know much religious myth or history outside Judaeo-Christian traditions. Most have no idea that key elements of their faith can be traced to other sources.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 2:20:17 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Every religion teaches its followers to be good and to live up to moral principles. When children growing up see religion working for their parent and their devotion to religion, they automatically adopt that religion. If it works why fix it.
If the family lives in an area where there are groups of other religious beliefs. They might learn a thing or two about the other religion and not being threatened develop religious tolerance.
But what if a family is dysfunctional and tbe children see religion and hypocracisy as the cause. That would necessitate some introspection, outsider tests and critical analysis of the role of religion as a whole. People only believe what is useful to them and discard what is no longer deemed useful or practical and religious beliefs are no different.
Are atheists then liberated from religion or their atheism stems from their dysfunctional family experiences?

Why we know about atheists are rather alarming.

"According to a recent study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry religious affiliation is associated with significantly lower levels of suicide compared to religiously unaffiliated people, atheists and agnostics. Source: Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004).
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org...

Concerning atheism and health, there is considerable amount of scientific evidence that suggest that theism is more conducive to mental and physical health than atheism [2]

The prestigious Mayo Clinic reported on December 11, 2001:

"In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.
The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.[1]

Dr. Stephen Joseph, from the University of Warwick, said: "Religious people seem to have a greater purpose in life, which is why they are happier. Looking at the research evidence, it seems that those who celebrate the Christian meaning of Christmas are on the whole likely to be happier.[4]
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 7:03:25 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 2:20:17 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Every religion teaches its followers to be good and to live up to moral principles. When children growing up see religion working for their parent and their devotion to religion, they automatically adopt that religion. If it works why fix it.
If the family lives in an area where there are groups of other religious beliefs. They might learn a thing or two about the other religion and not being threatened develop religious tolerance.
But what if a family is dysfunctional and tbe children see religion and hypocracisy as the cause. That would necessitate some introspection, outsider tests and critical analysis of the role of religion as a whole. People only believe what is useful to them and discard what is no longer deemed useful or practical and religious beliefs are no different.
Are atheists then liberated from religion or their atheism stems from their dysfunctional family experiences?

Why we know about atheists are rather alarming.

"According to a recent study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry religious affiliation is associated with significantly lower levels of suicide compared to religiously unaffiliated people, atheists and agnostics. Source: Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004).
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org...

Concerning atheism and health, there is considerable amount of scientific evidence that suggest that theism is more conducive to mental and physical health than atheism [2]

The prestigious Mayo Clinic reported on December 11, 2001:

"In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.
The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.[1]

Dr. Stephen Joseph, from the University of Warwick, said: "Religious people seem to have a greater purpose in life, which is why they are happier. Looking at the research evidence, it seems that those who celebrate the Christian meaning of Christmas are on the whole likely to be happier.[4]

So you are basically acknowledging theism is a load of rubbish with no credibility but it should be adopted for health benefits?
VirBinarus
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 7:16:10 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 8:47:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:49:30 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
The Christian upbringing gives you a choice. The atheist upbringing,doesn't really.

VB, you're perhaps conflating religious education with religious instruction.

No, there is definitely a choice involved.

By your age, although I had no religious beliefs of my own, I knew a great deal about the faiths of many different cultures. In part that was from my own interest; in part from a school system that taught cultures outside the Atlantic traditions.

That interest has continued, by the way. Sadly, I know of few Christians who know much religious myth or history outside Judaeo-Christian traditions.

Most have no idea that key elements of their faith can be traced to other sources.
e.g. ???
"Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing."
1 thessalonians, 5:11
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 7:20:16 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 7:03:25 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 2:20:17 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Every religion teaches its followers to be good and to live up to moral principles. When children growing up see religion working for their parent and their devotion to religion, they automatically adopt that religion. If it works why fix it.
If the family lives in an area where there are groups of other religious beliefs. They might learn a thing or two about the other religion and not being threatened develop religious tolerance.
But what if a family is dysfunctional and tbe children see religion and hypocracisy as the cause. That would necessitate some introspection, outsider tests and critical analysis of the role of religion as a whole. People only believe what is useful to them and discard what is no longer deemed useful or practical and religious beliefs are no different.
Are atheists then liberated from religion or their atheism stems from their dysfunctional family experiences?

Why we know about atheists are rather alarming.

"According to a recent study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry religious affiliation is associated with significantly lower levels of suicide compared to religiously unaffiliated people, atheists and agnostics. Source: Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004).
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org...

Concerning atheism and health, there is considerable amount of scientific evidence that suggest that theism is more conducive to mental and physical health than atheism [2]

The prestigious Mayo Clinic reported on December 11, 2001:

"In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.
The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.[1]

Dr. Stephen Joseph, from the University of Warwick, said: "Religious people seem to have a greater purpose in life, which is why they are happier. Looking at the research evidence, it seems that those who celebrate the Christian meaning of Christmas are on the whole likely to be happier.[4]

So you are basically acknowledging theism is a load of rubbish with no credibility but it should be adopted for health benefits?

I am saying there is evidence that the absence of religion in more detrimental to social development than the unquestionable acceptance of faith in the religion one is born with, since all religions teach good deeds and moral principles and harmonize with our humanity. Anything other than that are exceptions to the rule and a perversion of religion.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 8:19:50 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 7:20:16 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:03:25 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 2:20:17 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Every religion teaches its followers to be good and to live up to moral principles. When children growing up see religion working for their parent and their devotion to religion, they automatically adopt that religion. If it works why fix it.
If the family lives in an area where there are groups of other religious beliefs. They might learn a thing or two about the other religion and not being threatened develop religious tolerance.
But what if a family is dysfunctional and tbe children see religion and hypocracisy as the cause. That would necessitate some introspection, outsider tests and critical analysis of the role of religion as a whole. People only believe what is useful to them and discard what is no longer deemed useful or practical and religious beliefs are no different.
Are atheists then liberated from religion or their atheism stems from their dysfunctional family experiences?

Why we know about atheists are rather alarming.

"According to a recent study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry religious affiliation is associated with significantly lower levels of suicide compared to religiously unaffiliated people, atheists and agnostics. Source: Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004).
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org...

Concerning atheism and health, there is considerable amount of scientific evidence that suggest that theism is more conducive to mental and physical health than atheism [2]

The prestigious Mayo Clinic reported on December 11, 2001:

"In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.
The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.[1]

Dr. Stephen Joseph, from the University of Warwick, said: "Religious people seem to have a greater purpose in life, which is why they are happier. Looking at the research evidence, it seems that those who celebrate the Christian meaning of Christmas are on the whole likely to be happier.[4]

So you are basically acknowledging theism is a load of rubbish with no credibility but it should be adopted for health benefits?

I am saying there is evidence that the absence of religion in more detrimental to social development than the unquestionable acceptance of faith in the religion one is born with, since all religions teach good deeds and moral principles and harmonize with our humanity. Anything other than that are exceptions to the rule and a perversion of religion.

Religion has caused or been used to justify many wars, executions, murders, acts of violence, oppression of learning, racism, slavery, sexism, homophobia, torture and persecution of people who dare to question religion.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 8:57:05 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 7:16:10 PM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/24/2016 8:47:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:49:30 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
The Christian upbringing gives you a choice. The atheist upbringing,doesn't really.
VB, you're perhaps conflating religious education with religious instruction.
No, there is definitely a choice involved.
People raised irreligiously can do so with extensive religious education; just not religious instruction. It has been observed that atheists often have broader, deeper knowledge of religion than many religious. [http://www.pewforum.org...]

By your age, although I had no religious beliefs of my own, I knew a great deal about the faiths of many different cultures. In part that was from my own interest; in part from a school system that taught cultures outside the Atlantic traditions.

That interest has continued, by the way. Sadly, I know of few Christians who know much religious myth or history outside Judaeo-Christian traditions.

Most have no idea that key elements of their faith can be traced to other sources.
e.g. ???

You do not know that key elements of Christianity and Judaism have been traced to other sources? At fourteen, you should know that, and the people who instructed you to believe should know it too.

As you learn more about the history of the faith you've already accepted as true, you might want to look into the following:

* The scripture of Babylonian creation myth, called Enuma Elish;
* The religion of the Mesopotamians;
* The religion of the Canaanites;
* Zoroastrianism, which we might also call the religion of ancient Persia, though it still exists today;
* Ancient Greek gods, and in particular the myths of Dionysus; and
* Hellenistic Judaism, which predates Christianity.

In addition to looking at these beliefs, I would suggest reviewing the influences Christian and Judaic historians trace from these beliefs to the faith of the Israelites, and then subsequently to pre-Christian Jews, and eventually Christians.

While you are at it, you could also look at early Christian history, and especially the early church heresies, and how they were resolved. I'd invite you to think about why there were so many heresies so early, and why they appeared, and why so few of those heresies survive today, and how modern Christian canon of the Eastern and Western churches were actually formed. It helps to read the histories and letters of the early Church fathers, to see what they actually thought and did.
nonwo
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 9:05:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 8:57:05 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:16:10 PM, VirBinarus wrote:
At 3/24/2016 8:47:35 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:49:30 AM, VirBinarus wrote:
The Christian upbringing gives you a choice. The atheist upbringing,doesn't really.
VB, you're perhaps conflating religious education with religious instruction.
No, there is definitely a choice involved.
People raised irreligiously can do so with extensive religious education; just not religious instruction. It has been observed that atheists often have broader, deeper knowledge of religion than many religious. [http://www.pewforum.org...]

By your age, although I had no religious beliefs of my own, I knew a great deal about the faiths of many different cultures. In part that was from my own interest; in part from a school system that taught cultures outside the Atlantic traditions.

That interest has continued, by the way. Sadly, I know of few Christians who know much religious myth or history outside Judaeo-Christian traditions.

Most have no idea that key elements of their faith can be traced to other sources.
e.g. ???

You do not know that key elements of Christianity and Judaism have been traced to other sources? At fourteen, you should know that, and the people who instructed you to believe should know it too.

As you learn more about the history of the faith you've already accepted as true, you might want to look into the following:

* The scripture of Babylonian creation myth, called Enuma Elish;
* The religion of the Mesopotamians;
* The religion of the Canaanites;
* Zoroastrianism, which we might also call the religion of ancient Persia, though it still exists today;
* Ancient Greek gods, and in particular the myths of Dionysus; and
* Hellenistic Judaism, which predates Christianity.

In addition to looking at these beliefs, I would suggest reviewing the influences Christian and Judaic historians trace from these beliefs to the faith of the Israelites, and then subsequently to pre-Christian Jews, and eventually Christians.

While you are at it, you could also look at early Christian history, and especially the early church heresies, and how they were resolved. I'd invite you to think about why there were so many heresies so early, and why they appeared, and why so few of those heresies survive today, and how modern Christian canon of the Eastern and Western churches were actually formed. It helps to read the histories and letters of the early Church fathers, to see what they actually thought and did. : :

Ruv, Christians don't even know what "faith" means. They know what belief is but faith is something they've never experienced.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 9:16:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

The Bible tells us all about it. Through Isaac's seed the world would be blessed. Through Ishmael's seed the world would be cursed, his seed violent with his hand against his brother and against his neighbors...

From Isaac came the Jews, and Christ. From Ishmael came the Middle East.

Hmmm....looks like the Bible was right...

The Bible also tells us that God has a "seed"/children and Satan has a "seed"/children.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 9:20:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
God speaks to Satan -

"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel."
(Genesis 3:15)
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 9:24:08 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Imagine being exposed to only Atheism your entire childhood. You'd be an Atheist in likelihood. Now imagine you are shown that the prophecies are coming true, presented the Kalam cosmological argument, the Firmi Paradox, and the philosophical and mathematical impossibiltiy of Atheism being true. Could you accept it, or would you be blinded with strong confirmation biases that fit your preconceived ideological mindset?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 9:59:19 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 9:24:08 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Imagine being exposed to only Atheism your entire childhood. You'd be an Atheist in likelihood. Now imagine you are shown that the prophecies are coming true, presented the Kalam cosmological argument, the Firmi Paradox, and the philosophical and mathematical impossibiltiy of Atheism being true. Could you accept it, or would you be blinded with strong confirmation biases that fit your preconceived ideological mindset?

I've been exposed to plenty of Christianity so that does not apply to me. If I was presented with credible evidence of any religion being true then I would change my views. Currently no evidence of any religion being true exists. Proof to me constitutes scientific or clear physical evidence or a personal message from a god. No unvarifiable ancient scripture constitutes proof.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,862
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 10:34:39 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).
Loftus is a moron. You are simply fighting self hatred Chloe. They have therapy for that you know.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 10:40:59 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 9:05:57 PM, nonwo wrote:
Ruv, Christians don't even know what "faith" means. They know what belief is but faith is something they've never experienced.
Hi Brad. :) I hope you're well and happy. I enjoyed your guitar-playing Youtube video too.

I'm a slide player, but enjoy all finger styles. These days I'm getting into music production, as the following image will attest: [http://imgur.com...]

Anyway... back to topic. :)
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 10:42:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 9:59:19 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 9:24:08 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Imagine being exposed to only Atheism your entire childhood. You'd be an Atheist in likelihood. Now imagine you are shown that the prophecies are coming true, presented the Kalam cosmological argument, the Firmi Paradox, and the philosophical and mathematical impossibiltiy of Atheism being true. Could you accept it, or would you be blinded with strong confirmation biases that fit your preconceived ideological mindset?

I've been exposed to plenty of Christianity so that does not apply to me. If I was presented with credible evidence of any religion being true then I would change my views. Currently no evidence of any religion being true exists. Proof to me constitutes scientific or clear physical evidence or a personal message from a god. No unvarifiable ancient scripture constitutes proof.

All those things do exist.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 10:51:21 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 9:59:19 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 9:24:08 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Imagine being exposed to only Atheism your entire childhood. You'd be an Atheist in likelihood. Now imagine you are shown that the prophecies are coming true, presented the Kalam cosmological argument, the Firmi Paradox, and the philosophical and mathematical impossibiltiy of Atheism being true. Could you accept it, or would you be blinded with strong confirmation biases that fit your preconceived ideological mindset?

I've been exposed to plenty of Christianity so that does not apply to me. If I was presented with credible evidence of any religion being true then I would change my views. Currently no evidence of any religion being true exists. Proof to me constitutes scientific or clear physical evidence or a personal message from a god. No unvarifiable ancient scripture constitutes proof.

Here ya go if you are truely interested.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 10:51:42 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Bronto Debate

http://www.debate.org...

Bronto Debate #2

http://www.debate.org...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 11:19:32 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 10:34:39 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).
Loftus is a moron. You are simply fighting self hatred Chloe. They have therapy for that you know.

You might not like the fact loftus makes some great points causing you to doubt your beliefs. The fact is no rational person would see Christianity as any more credible than the thousands of other religions invented by men if they had never heard of any of them and then shown the scriptures from each one of them and asked to find the truth amongst the lies. However if a scientific argument was presented it would clearly appear more credible bases on the fact it is based on facts and evidence not myths and speculation. No I don't hate myself. Although you clearly hate me! Lol

I'm sure you wish the old testament laws were still in place and you could stone me to death!
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 11:24:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 10:51:42 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Bronto Debate

http://www.debate.org...

Bronto Debate #2

http://www.debate.org...

You are not even trying to prove Christianity in these debates. You are trying to disprove atheism. So how do these debates prove Christianity?
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 11:41:22 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

You got a chance of converting. It happens all the time. You just happen to get the death penalty if you come out.
A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

Hold on are you suggesting there's no such thing as a Muslim convert?
B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam?

There is immense pressure from their families and governments where it is Muslim controlled. You can easily end up exhiled from you family, imprisoned, or cut down, or forced to pay that extra tax given to non believers.
I'd say that's a lot of reasons. In secular societies it's mostly family pressure.
where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth?
I really need a clarification on if you just don't think there are converts and if there are, why would they risk their own life over an extremely unpopular belief?
What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.
I don't think certain beliefs can be backed up by evidences you might suggest in the lab. History generally to me is the biggest factor as well as eyewitness testimonies by billions of people since man began. Then there is the cosmological evidence that points to a beginning.
Of course for me personally which can't be tested and I'm sure many other Christians would say the most convincing thing is the holy spirit moving in their lives and their personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.
If I had to guess it's likely to say you don't work for NASA. Do you believe the depiction given for Mars? Or what the moon is made of? Or any fact known about the cosmos dictated to use through NASA? Don't you trust NASA on faith? That they wouldn't lie to you.


C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

I think God reveals himself vto all peoples. Some reject some accept.
The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Well if you want to be fair I could make the same argument for your scientifical beliefs whatever they may be are dictated by an environment you grew up in. You never thought for yourself because under your premise thasts impossible
nonwo
Posts: 100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 11:46:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 10:40:59 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/24/2016 9:05:57 PM, nonwo wrote:
Ruv, Christians don't even know what "faith" means. They know what belief is but faith is something they've never experienced.
Hi Brad. :) I hope you're well and happy. I enjoyed your guitar-playing Youtube video too.

I'm a slide player, but enjoy all finger styles. These days I'm getting into music production, as the following image will attest: [http://imgur.com...]

Anyway... back to topic. :)::

Nice set-up you have my friend. I like your Les Paul, too. One of my high school friends had one just like. I played a custom Les Paul in the last band I played in before my girlfriend told me it was the band or her before we got married in 1982. She won.

I have improved considerably since I made that video at my oldest son's home playing his guitar. I hadn't played for about six years during the time I had to do all the writing and preaching the gospel for our Creator. Since then, I got an old 1971 Japanese copy of a Martin acoustic and been playing that quite regularly so I'm sounding much better today.

Back to business.

Compare the Voice of God to IBM's Watson, Microsoft's Cortana and Apple's Siri and you will get a better understanding of who I am speaking for this past 7 years. The Voice of God is technology that is much further advanced than these programs that we use in the simulation program we're in but at least now I have a way to teach believers who we are and how we came into being. Our Creator ( whoever that is ) spoke his thoughts into the Voice of God and we are the result of that process along with everything we experience. However, we're never going to see the Voice of God.
Stronn
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2016 11:58:16 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 11:24:37 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 10:51:42 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Bronto Debate

http://www.debate.org...

Bronto Debate #2

http://www.debate.org...

You are not even trying to prove Christianity in these debates. You are trying to disprove atheism. So how do these debates prove Christianity?

Not only that, but many of the arguments are not even arguments for the existence of a God. The KCA, for instance, makes no claim about the nature of an uncaused first cause.

And calling the argument that in infinite causal regress is impossible a mathematical proof is laughable. No one with any sort of formal training in mathematics would use wording like "it is paradoxial, illogical, unacceptable comprehensively, and 100% impossible mathematically." The argument amounts to a mere assertion that an infinite regress seems absurd. Not to mention that it, too, is not an argument against atheism.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 12:11:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 11:41:22 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

You got a chance of converting. It happens all the time. You just happen to get the death penalty if you come out.
A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

Hold on are you suggesting there's no such thing as a Muslim convert?

I'm asking why it's rare for conversions to Christianity from Islam if it is actually so much more logical. A similar number of people also convert from Christianity to Islam.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam?

There is immense pressure from their families and governments where it is Muslim controlled. You can easily end up exhiled from you family, imprisoned, or cut down, or forced to pay that extra tax given to non believers.

Maybe so but if Christianity was true and it was so obvious would it surely still be worth converting due to the benefits of spending eternity in heaven compared to eternal torture in hell for staying a Muslim?

I'd say that's a lot of reasons. In secular societies it's mostly family pressure.
where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth?
I really need a clarification on if you just don't think there are converts and if there are, why would they risk their own life over an extremely unpopular belief?

I agree their are converts. Surely converting would be worthwhile due to the benefits in the next life?

What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.
I don't think certain beliefs can be backed up by evidences you might suggest in the lab. History generally to me is the biggest factor as well as eyewitness testimonies by billions of people since man began. Then there is the cosmological evidence that points to a beginning.
Of course for me personally which can't be tested and I'm sure many other Christians would say the most convincing thing is the holy spirit moving in their lives and their personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Many other religious people claim relationships with different gods from different religions.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.
If I had to guess it's likely to say you don't work for NASA. Do you believe the depiction given for Mars? Or what the moon is made of? Or any fact known about the cosmos dictated to use through NASA? Don't you trust NASA on faith? That they wouldn't lie to you.

Yes that's true. However scientists have no motivation to lie. There are also many different people researching the same things so if one scientist claimed that mars was made of cheese thousands of other scientists would prove him/her wrong. That's why contested and disputed things in science are called theories.


C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

I think God reveals himself vto all peoples. Some reject some accept.

It's strange how not one person in known human history has become a Christian without reading about it or being told about it by someone else. If your opinion was true people of remote tribes would be Christians despite no contact with the outside world. That is not the case.

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Well if you want to be fair I could make the same argument for your scientifical beliefs whatever they may be are dictated by an environment you grew up in. You never thought for yourself because under your premise thasts impossible

True if I had been born in the 1800s I would most likely be a devout Christian. If I was born in Iran I would be a devout Muslim. Fortunately i have been born in a secular country in the modern world. I have been free to come to my own conclusion on how everything came to exist based on the facts.
bigotry
Posts: 1,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 2:53:49 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/25/2016 12:11:35 AM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 11:41:22 PM, bigotry wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

You got a chance of converting. It happens all the time. You just happen to get the death penalty if you come out.
A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

Hold on are you suggesting there's no such thing as a Muslim convert?

I'm asking why it's rare for conversions to Christianity from Islam if it is actually so much more logical. A similar number of people also convert from Christianity to Islam.
Power. Ill elaborate if you dont see what I mean.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam?

There is immense pressure from their families and governments where it is Muslim controlled. You can easily end up exhiled from you family, imprisoned, or cut down, or forced to pay that extra tax given to non believers.

Maybe so but if Christianity was true and it was so obvious would it surely still be worth converting due to the benefits of spending eternity in heaven compared to eternal torture in hell for staying a Muslim?
Thats why you have muslim converts even against the penalty of death ect.

I'd say that's a lot of reasons. In secular societies it's mostly family pressure.
where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth?
Well simply for the most part that not a single person is born into Christianity. You have to accept Christ into your life yourself. No one can do it for you.
look I get the impression that you havent so much as picked up a bible or qur'an and honestly studied it, maybe Im wrong but feel free to talk to anyone who is an ex muslim. They will tell you.
I really need a clarification on if you just don't think there are converts and if there are, why would they risk their own life over an extremely unpopular belief?

I agree their are converts. Surely converting would be worthwhile due to the benefits in the next life?
No its worthwile to know the truth. No Christian lives to escape hell if thats what your getting at.

What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.
I don't think certain beliefs can be backed up by evidences you might suggest in the lab. History generally to me is the biggest factor as well as eyewitness testimonies by billions of people since man began. Then there is the cosmological evidence that points to a beginning.
Of course for me personally which can't be tested and I'm sure many other Christians would say the most convincing thing is the holy spirit moving in their lives and their personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Many other religious people claim relationships with different gods from different religions.
Yes and even the bible shows the many interactions his followers had with these people.
But I take this to be strong evidence for an ultimate truth.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.
If I had to guess it's likely to say you don't work for NASA. Do you believe the depiction given for Mars? Or what the moon is made of? Or any fact known about the cosmos dictated to use through NASA? Don't you trust NASA on faith? That they wouldn't lie to you.

Yes that's true. However scientists have no motivation to lie.
You must be a youngin. Its the same motivation for all men and women. Power. Should you doubt scientists are not perfect and have personal motivations in research ill gladly share you some interesting things.
There are also many different people researching the same things so if one scientist claimed that mars was made of cheese thousands of other scientists would prove him/her wrong. That's why contested and disputed things in science are called theories.

This is the same exact argument and reason behind why scholars find the NT and OT to be true testimoney.


C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

I think God reveals himself vto all peoples. Some reject some accept.

It's strange how not one person in known human history has become a Christian without reading about it or being told about it by someone else. If your opinion was true people of remote tribes would be Christians despite no contact with the outside world. That is not the case.
Well your looking at Christianity from a western eurocentric perspective. Its really just about having a relationship and giving up worship to the God that mad us and his son. Its comparable to the group of people paul is sent to for example where they have been searching for this God they know to be real but they dont know WHO he is and so paul explains it for them. Jonah and the ninivites. Ect.

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Well if you want to be fair I could make the same argument for your scientifical beliefs whatever they may be are dictated by an environment you grew up in. You never thought for yourself because under your premise thasts impossible

True if I had been born in the 1800s I would most likely be a devout Christian. If I was born in Iran I would be a devout Muslim. Fortunately i have been born in a secular country in the modern world. I have been free to come to my own conclusion on how everything came to exist based on the facts.
Why is any of that fortunate or unfortunate? Your basic argument is that truth is relative is it not?
Your not free to come to your own conclusions...why did you ever need to attend school?
bulproof
Posts: 25,197
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 3:08:57 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 9:16:42 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The Bible tells us all about it.
OYG
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 3:10:19 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/24/2016 8:19:50 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:20:16 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/24/2016 7:03:25 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/24/2016 2:20:17 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

Every religion teaches its followers to be good and to live up to moral principles. When children growing up see religion working for their parent and their devotion to religion, they automatically adopt that religion. If it works why fix it.
If the family lives in an area where there are groups of other religious beliefs. They might learn a thing or two about the other religion and not being threatened develop religious tolerance.
But what if a family is dysfunctional and tbe children see religion and hypocracisy as the cause. That would necessitate some introspection, outsider tests and critical analysis of the role of religion as a whole. People only believe what is useful to them and discard what is no longer deemed useful or practical and religious beliefs are no different.
Are atheists then liberated from religion or their atheism stems from their dysfunctional family experiences?

Why we know about atheists are rather alarming.

"According to a recent study published in The American Journal of Psychiatry religious affiliation is associated with significantly lower levels of suicide compared to religiously unaffiliated people, atheists and agnostics. Source: Kanita Dervic, Maria A. Oquendo, Michael F. Grunebaum, Steve Ellis, Ainsley K. Burke, and J. John Mann. "Religious Affiliation and Suicide Attempt" (161:2303-2308, December 2004).
Full article online: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org...

Concerning atheism and health, there is considerable amount of scientific evidence that suggest that theism is more conducive to mental and physical health than atheism [2]

The prestigious Mayo Clinic reported on December 11, 2001:

"In an article also published in this issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Mayo Clinic researchers reviewed published studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews and subject reviews that examined the association between religious involvement and spirituality and physical health, mental health, health-related quality of life and other health outcomes.
The authors report a majority of the nearly 350 studies of physical health and 850 studies of mental health that have used religious and spiritual variables have found that religious involvement and spirituality are associated with better health outcomes.[1]

Dr. Stephen Joseph, from the University of Warwick, said: "Religious people seem to have a greater purpose in life, which is why they are happier. Looking at the research evidence, it seems that those who celebrate the Christian meaning of Christmas are on the whole likely to be happier.[4]

So you are basically acknowledging theism is a load of rubbish with no credibility but it should be adopted for health benefits?

I am saying there is evidence that the absence of religion in more detrimental to social development than the unquestionable acceptance of faith in the religion one is born with, since all religions teach good deeds and moral principles and harmonize with our humanity. Anything other than that are exceptions to the rule and a perversion of religion.

Religion has caused or been used to justify many wars, executions, murders, acts of violence, oppression of learning, racism, slavery, sexism, homophobia, torture and persecution of people who dare to question religion.

That is being very disengenous. People don't adopt a religion to justify wars, executions, murders, acts of violence, oppression of learning, racism, slavery, sexism, homophobia, torture and persecution of people who dare to question religion. Those are exceptions to the rule and a perversion of religion.
If that were true with over 5 billion believers of religious we would have driven the human race extinct with acts acts of wars, executions, murders, acts of violence, oppression of learning, racism, slavery, sexism, homophobia, torture and persecution of fellow humans. The opposite is true. Religion has provided the stability that contributes to population growth.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2016 3:19:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/23/2016 7:47:13 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
John Loftus wrote a book entitled "The Outsider Test for Faith," which is summarized at the following website:

https://docs.google.com...

The Outsider Test for Faith (John Loftus)

What if you had been born in Saudi Arabia as a Muslim and were given the opportunity to examine the Christian faith as a born and raised Muslim?

A. If you acknowledge you probably would have remained a Muslim in these circumstances " there is a high probability your belief is simply an accident of birth and culture, or at the very least not the result of careful, objective reasoning.

B. If you believe the "evidence" would have convinced you to convert to Christianity, that means one of two things:

1. You believe you have solid, objective and falsifiable evidence that can be examined through the eyes of a Muslim and still be self-evident. Why then don"t more Muslim"s convert or consider the Christian religion as a serious alternative to Islam? Where is this evidence and why doesn"t it seem to convince people who aren"t born into Christianity by accident of birth? What is it that personally convinces you that a god exists? If this were discredited, would you still believe it? If so your belief is not based on reason or evidence.

2. You are delusional with faith, which is not so much a virtue as willingness to believe something that there is no evidence for whatsoever.

C. If you had been born into isolation and not exposed to or even heard of religion for the first thirty years of your life, and then were suddenly exposed to all of the religions that have ever existed all at once, how would you come to the conclusion that the one you believe in now is true and all of the others are false? Imagine comparing the Samoan creation story with the Biblical creation story if you had never been exposed to either? What makes one more plausible than the other?

The outsider test makes it obvious that the object of a person"s faith is in almost all cases determined by the circumstantial elements of a the person"s parentage and place of birth, and not, except in extremely rare cases, by the result of an analytical comparative study of the world"s religions. This fact is readily apparent to an atheist but stubbornly indiscernible to the average Christian (or other theist).

In fact the outsiders actually prove much of prophecy by their opposition.

Even the fact that true Christians are in such a minority adds to the evidence that they are correct.

We are living in a time when it is vitally important to listen to the message that these true followers of Christ deliver, despite the knowledge from scripture that few will. As Christ said, and it is true today as it was then:

Matthew 7:13, 14
13 "Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it.

The choice is yours. Do you want to be amongst the few? or are you happy to perish with the many?

You only have a very limited time to decide before the decision is made for you.

Do you want to be a part of Jehovah's New World, where you will have the opportunity to live forever in perfect peace, perfect health and complete security?

Or do you want to perish with the rotten system which is all around us now?