drugs and prostitution

[stahleyp]

No, I'm not saying it confirms the truth but I do think it  increases the odds. For instance, what are the odds that two of the world's major religions would have some random, poor carpenter as a big pieces of them?

 

Is your question as to Jesus vs the other deities? Well, here's why:

 

Jesus or his disciples are mentioned by several ancient authors. One of the better resources I've found is a book called Cold-Case Christianity. Some of the ancient ones include: Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, etc. Further, one must ask ourselves, why would the disciples die for something they know isn't true? All they had to do is is recant their beliefs and they would have died. They didn't. You also have non original disciples like Paul, who persecuted the Christians to actually becoming one. Look at the gospels. The first people to see Jesus, after the resurrection, were woman. If they were "making this stuff up" the writers wouldn't have had women be the first to see - they weren't considered trust worthy. Sure we could say this group was crazy. We could say they lied, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't know of too many crazy ideas that have stayed around for 2000 years.

 

Or, I don't recall finding things like this from other deity stories either:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9333052/Scientists-find-new-evidence-supporting-John-the-Baptist-bones-theory.html

 

Sure, it could be someone else...or not.

 

It's not random, it's like the anthropic principle, if things had turned out otherwise we might be talking about the prophet Mustafa or Roland or whatever. But that doesn't make it magical. Prophets are a dime a dozen. Out of all of them, most were forgotten and a few became very popular (through wars and indoctrination of illiterate people and children - for the longest time priests didn't even talk in a language that their audience understood). You can see how religions are created in real-time today by looking at the Mormon church and other sects, or even with how splintered christianity is. Don't you find it weird that UFO and paranormal sightings went down a lot since everybody has a camera in their pocket? Do you think that if 2000 years ago we had cameras and literate people who didn't believe in all kinds of crazy stuff that things would have turned out otherwise? Go ask a remote tribe of illiterate people never exposed to science what kind of stuff they believe in... Why don't we have blood raining from the sky and people being resurrected (like Lazarus, which apparently was no big deal) these days?

 

Anyway, if that kind of very weak sauce convinces you ("I don't know of too many crazy ideas that have stayed around for 2000 years." Really?), nothing I can ever write will have any impact, so I might as well stop here. Next we'll be arguing over thousands-of-years old supposed eye-witness accounts of raining frogs, Noah's ark, and Jesus walking on water... Finding a dude's bones doesn't mean anything. We could have a box full of selfies of Jesus, and that wouldn't make him a deity.

 

I'll leave you with a really fun read:

 

http://www.evilbible.com/

 

A compilation of all the evil things in the bible (rape, human sacrifice, slavery, lies, murder, genocide, sexism, infanticide, wars, etc), most committed by or under direct orders from god. Makes me scared when someone says they get their morality from there (but if they can pick & choose, doesn't it mean that they really get their morality from somewhere else? Maybe a place accessible to non-believers? oh boy).

 

Well, according to this guy...stuff like that still does happen.

 

http://www.crossroads.net/downloads/playVideo.php&idMedia=2516

 

Granted, I would find it more credible if it were on film.

[Liberty]

I've got a bridge for sale, any takers?

[stahleyp]

I've got a bridge for sale, any takers?

 

Dude, you didn't even watch it!

 

Oh yeah, by the way - it does mean people get their morality from another source rather than the Bible - God. ;)

[ERICOPOLY]

No, I'm not saying it confirms the truth but I do think it  increases the odds. For instance, what are the odds that two of the world's major religions would have some random, poor carpenter as a big pieces of them?

 

There is a "network effect" element to it.  Or perhaps that's the wrong term... anyways.

 

For example, your belief is apparently reinforced by the occurrence of Jesus in two major religions.  Were these to be minor religions, you would not be impressed.  Thus, it's like a snowball that gets more impressive as it grows membership.

 

Well, I'd counter that to say if God wasn't at work, the religions would stay relatively small. After all, if God is gonna interact in someway, chances are the results are gonna be pretty large. :P

 

Then why the need to send armies of people to the doorsteps of our private homes to recruit us?

 

How about the major religions instituting a self-imposed ban on proselytizing?  See how that works out for the theory that they grow due to the greatness of God.

 

It feels more like they grow due to an army of door-to-door salesmen.

 

If I had to guess, it's more of a maturing process. By sharing the faith, it helps with human bonding. If He does everything automatically, not a whole lot of learning would be done.

 

Do you then not agree that atheist billboards are just trying to aid in human bonding, and without them the learning would not happen?

 

[stahleyp]

I suppose that might be the case if the billboards weren't making fun of things.

 

Some aren't bad though, like this one:

 

http://i.imgur.com/7f42BRl.jpg

[Liberty]

I've got a bridge for sale, any takers?

 

Dude, you didn't even watch it!

 

Oh yeah, by the way - it does mean people get their morality from another source rather than the Bible - God. ;)

 

That people claim miracles are happening isn't news to me (it's always conveniently impossible to verify, or un-repeatable under lab conditions -- there are labs offering big money to anyone who can make anything unexplainable happen there). This is storytelling, not evidence. I have better uses for my time. But I've still got this bridge I need to get rid of!

[Liberty]

it does mean people get their morality from another source rather than the Bible - God. ;)

 

The god who does all this?

 

http://www.evilbible.com/

[stahleyp]

it does mean people get their morality from another source rather than the Bible - God. ;)

 

The god who does all this?

 

http://www.evilbible.com/

 

I'm well familiar with the site. I used it to bash the Bible for a while.

[stahleyp]

I've got a bridge for sale, any takers?

 

Dude, you didn't even watch it!

 

Oh yeah, by the way - it does mean people get their morality from another source rather than the Bible - God. ;)

 

That people claim miracles are happening isn't news to me (it's always conveniently impossible to verify, or un-repeatable under lab conditions -- there are labs offering big money to anyone who can make anything unexplainable happen there). This is storytelling, not evidence. I have better uses for my time. But I've still got this bridge I need to get rid of!

 

If you prayed and a miracle happened, would you believe or would you chalk it up to luck?

 

I wonder, have you and Eric every actually prayed?

[Liberty]

If you prayed and a miracle happened, would you believe or would you chalk it up to luck?

 

I wonder, have you and Eric every actually prayed?

 

Yes, of course, that would be solid evidence, and yes, when I was younger, before I learned about how the universe works and was just going along with cultural inertia from my parents.

 

But it would have to be something specific and statistically significant. None of that drawing the bullseye around the arrow after it has been shot crap, ie: "You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers.  You consider that to be evidence that prayer works.  And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God."

[yadayada]

No, I'm not saying it confirms the truth but I do think it  increases the odds. For instance, what are the odds that two of the world's major religions would have some random, poor carpenter as a big pieces of them?

 

Is your question as to Jesus vs the other deities? Well, here's why:

 

Jesus or his disciples are mentioned by several ancient authors. One of the better resources I've found is a book called Cold-Case Christianity. Some of the ancient ones include: Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, etc. Further, one must ask ourselves, why would the disciples die for something they know isn't true? All they had to do is is recant their beliefs and they would have died. They didn't. You also have non original disciples like Paul, who persecuted the Christians to actually becoming one. Look at the gospels. The first people to see Jesus, after the resurrection, were woman. If they were "making this stuff up" the writers wouldn't have had women be the first to see - they weren't considered trust worthy. Sure we could say this group was crazy. We could say they lied, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't know of too many crazy ideas that have stayed around for 2000 years.

 

Or, I don't recall finding things like this from other deity stories either:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9333052/Scientists-find-new-evidence-supporting-John-the-Baptist-bones-theory.html

 

Sure, it could be someone else...or not.

 

The Egyptian civilization and religion existed much longer then christianity. Yet barely anyone is talking about it now.

 

There are some really strange things about the bible. For example the tower of bable. They build a tower towards god, so god punishes them for reaching that far into the sky and let them all speak a different language. Now several thousand years later, NASA comes along...

 

Arc of Noah. Why the hell flood the earth? Why make the one guy who did things right suffer for your fuck up by making him build a impossibly large ship. Your god you can do anything...

 

Not to speak about the logical fallacy that God is allmighty and knows everything. Yet multiple times he messes up his creation. And fails to see 'bugs' in his creation. Everyone knows that if you tell someone not to do something they will do it due to how the brain processes language.  ::)  And then the second time he fks up again with arc of noah. Yeah a brilliant all foreseeing god alright.

 

And finally it turns out people are still bad! Yet now god says, aawww fk it. I give up. No more mass murders. Very consistent and whise alright.

 

Not to say, he is suposed to be an all good god. Yet when one of his creations makes the equivalent mistake of a child taking candy without asking, he kicks them out of paradise. That is like kicking your 5 year old out of your house when he takes candy without asking... Very forgiving and reasonable God alright.

 

I think you can safely say that the bible is mostly bullshit and that this version of god does not exist. No offense but you are a fking idiot if you believe in the god of the bible. And I do not respect your belief and I think your an idiot. Saying anything else would be sugar coating it. If someone tells me they believe in any current religion then I will think much less of them. They are the equivalent of the idiot in the local looney bin claiming he is santa claus. Except this form of insanity is somehow socially accepted.

 

And yeah I am very annoyed by religion, my parents are extremists who tried to jam this crap down my throat during my child hood so that is why I have this irrational dislike towards relgious people. The amount of hypocracy I saw...  :o

[stahleyp]

If you prayed and a miracle happened, would you believe or would you chalk it up to luck?

 

I wonder, have you and Eric every actually prayed?

 

Yes, of course, that would be solid evidence, and yes, when I was younger, before I learned about how the universe works and was just going along with cultural inertia from my parents.

 

But it would have to be something specific and statistically significant. None of that drawing the bullseye around the arrow after it has been shot crap, ie: "You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers.  You consider that to be evidence that prayer works.  And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God."

 

No, I agree with you. It puts God in a no-lose situation. "Well, maybe God doesn't think it's good" vs "God made it happen."

[stahleyp]

No, I'm not saying it confirms the truth but I do think it  increases the odds. For instance, what are the odds that two of the world's major religions would have some random, poor carpenter as a big pieces of them?

 

Is your question as to Jesus vs the other deities? Well, here's why:

 

Jesus or his disciples are mentioned by several ancient authors. One of the better resources I've found is a book called Cold-Case Christianity. Some of the ancient ones include: Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, etc. Further, one must ask ourselves, why would the disciples die for something they know isn't true? All they had to do is is recant their beliefs and they would have died. They didn't. You also have non original disciples like Paul, who persecuted the Christians to actually becoming one. Look at the gospels. The first people to see Jesus, after the resurrection, were woman. If they were "making this stuff up" the writers wouldn't have had women be the first to see - they weren't considered trust worthy. Sure we could say this group was crazy. We could say they lied, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't know of too many crazy ideas that have stayed around for 2000 years.

 

Or, I don't recall finding things like this from other deity stories either:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9333052/Scientists-find-new-evidence-supporting-John-the-Baptist-bones-theory.html

 

Sure, it could be someone else...or not.

 

The Egyptian civilization and religion existed much longer then christianity. Yet barely anyone is talking about it now.

 

There are some really strange things about the bible. For example the tower of bable. They build a tower towards god, so god punishes them for reaching that far into the sky and let them all speak a different language. Now several thousand years later, NASA comes along...

 

Arc of Noah. Why the hell flood the earth? Why make the one guy who did things right suffer for your fuck up by making him build a impossibly large ship. Your god you can do anything...

 

Not to speak about the logical fallacy that God is allmighty and knows everything. Yet multiple times he messes up his creation. And fails to see 'bugs' in his creation. Everyone knows that if you tell someone not to do something they will do it due to how the brain processes language.  ::)  And then the second time he fks up again with arc of noah. Yeah a brilliant all foreseeing god alright.

 

And finally it turns out people are still bad! Yet now god says, aawww fk it. I give up. No more mass murders. Very consistent and whise alright.

 

Not to say, he is suposed to be an all good god. Yet when one of his creations makes the equivalent mistake of a child taking candy without asking, he kicks them out of paradise. That is like kicking your 5 year old out of your house when he takes candy without asking... Very forgiving and reasonable God alright.

 

I think you can safely say that the bible is mostly bullshit and that this version of god does not exist. No offense but you are a fking idiot if you believe in the god of the bible. And I do not respect your belief and I think your an idiot. Saying anything else would be sugar coating it. If someone tells me they believe in any current religion then I will think much less of them. They are the equivalent of the idiot in the local looney bin claiming he is santa claus. Except this form of insanity is somehow socially accepted.

 

And yeah I am very annoyed by religion, my parents are extremists who tried to jam this crap down my throat during my child hood so that is why I have this irrational dislike towards relgious people. The amount of hypocracy I saw...  :o

 

I agree with the Tower of Babel. One would thing, if a tower that large existed, there would be something of it still around.

 

I suppose you think Prem Watsa and John Templeton are idiots then. They are/were both Christians.

[Liberty]

http://www.1111comics.me/comics/1111comics-00147-my-religion.png

[Liberty]

I suppose you think Prem Watsa and John Templeton are idiots then. They are/were both Christians.

 

It is very possible to believe things that are untrue without being an idiot.

 

Conversely, it's not because smart people believe something that it's true. It's true or false regardless of who believes; even if everybody believes the earth is flat, if people look at the evidence, they'll find that it isn't.

 

It also follows that if an idiot believes in something, that doesn't make it false (ie. if an idiot thinks the sky is blue, that doesn't make it green).

 

I like this way of phrasing it:

 

What is true is already so.

Owning up to it doesn't make it worse.

Not being open about it doesn't make it go away.

And because it's true, it is what is there to be interacted with.

Anything untrue isn't there to be lived.

People can stand what is true,

for they are already enduring it.

—Eugene Gendlin

[ERICOPOLY]

I suppose that might be the case if the billboards weren't making fun of things.

 

Some aren't bad though, like this one:

 

http://i.imgur.com/7f42BRl.jpg

 

 

Would you be opposed to changing the language on the dollar bill to read:

 

"In God We Don't Trust"

 

For the record, I oppose it just as much as I oppose the current statement of "In God We Trust".

 

Get rid of it, get rid of the "One nation Under God" crap too, and maybe, just maybe you'll get your wish of these atheist billboards going away.

 

The atheist billboards are retaliatory -- it's fortunate the atheists show more restraint than the Missourians who forced the proselytizing Mormons out of Missouri at gunpoint.. 

 

[writser]

This thread gets only better and better. I actually start to think I'm one of the moderates now .. :) . Next achievement: all 'most recent posts' are in this topic. Then we can finally force Parsad to rename this forum to Corner of Christ and Dawkins. Stocks are boring anyway.

 

Stahley, could you please explain what you mean by this? I literally don't understand it.

If God's character is good morals, they aren't arbitrary. They are his being.

[ERICOPOLY]

No, I'm not saying it confirms the truth but I do think it  increases the odds. For instance, what are the odds that two of the world's major religions would have some random, poor carpenter as a big pieces of them?

 

Is your question as to Jesus vs the other deities? Well, here's why:

 

Jesus or his disciples are mentioned by several ancient authors. One of the better resources I've found is a book called Cold-Case Christianity. Some of the ancient ones include: Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, etc. Further, one must ask ourselves, why would the disciples die for something they know isn't true? All they had to do is is recant their beliefs and they would have died. They didn't. You also have non original disciples like Paul, who persecuted the Christians to actually becoming one. Look at the gospels. The first people to see Jesus, after the resurrection, were woman. If they were "making this stuff up" the writers wouldn't have had women be the first to see - they weren't considered trust worthy. Sure we could say this group was crazy. We could say they lied, but that doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't know of too many crazy ideas that have stayed around for 2000 years.

 

Or, I don't recall finding things like this from other deity stories either:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9333052/Scientists-find-new-evidence-supporting-John-the-Baptist-bones-theory.html

 

Sure, it could be someone else...or not.

 

The Egyptian civilization and religion existed much longer then christianity. Yet barely anyone is talking about it now.

 

There are some really strange things about the bible. For example the tower of bable. They build a tower towards god, so god punishes them for reaching that far into the sky and let them all speak a different language. Now several thousand years later, NASA comes along...

 

Arc of Noah. Why the hell flood the earth? Why make the one guy who did things right suffer for your fuck up by making him build a impossibly large ship. Your god you can do anything...

 

Not to speak about the logical fallacy that God is allmighty and knows everything. Yet multiple times he messes up his creation. And fails to see 'bugs' in his creation. Everyone knows that if you tell someone not to do something they will do it due to how the brain processes language.  ::)  And then the second time he fks up again with arc of noah. Yeah a brilliant all foreseeing god alright.

 

And finally it turns out people are still bad! Yet now god says, aawww fk it. I give up. No more mass murders. Very consistent and whise alright.

 

Not to say, he is suposed to be an all good god. Yet when one of his creations makes the equivalent mistake of a child taking candy without asking, he kicks them out of paradise. That is like kicking your 5 year old out of your house when he takes candy without asking... Very forgiving and reasonable God alright.

 

I think you can safely say that the bible is mostly bullshit and that this version of god does not exist. No offense but you are a fking idiot if you believe in the god of the bible. And I do not respect your belief and I think your an idiot. Saying anything else would be sugar coating it. If someone tells me they believe in any current religion then I will think much less of them. They are the equivalent of the idiot in the local looney bin claiming he is santa claus. Except this form of insanity is somehow socially accepted.

 

And yeah I am very annoyed by religion, my parents are extremists who tried to jam this crap down my throat during my child hood so that is why I have this irrational dislike towards relgious people. The amount of hypocracy I saw...  :o

 

I agree with the Tower of Babel. One would thing, if a tower that large existed, there would be something of it still around.

 

I suppose you think Prem Watsa and John Templeton are idiots then. They are/were both Christians.

 

I believe psychology can rule out somebody being an "idiot" for their beliefs in these matters.  Social proof (for one thing) can be a powerful thing.  There are many, many reasons for why we believe the things we do.

 

 

[alwaysinvert]

What's constantly conflated in this discussion is truth and desirability. It might be perfectably desirable for us to have a god, but yet not be true. And the other way around.

 

The mere fact that a godless universe is unpalatable to someone does not in any way make it any more likely that a god exists and is not an argument for belief - if your view is that one should believe rationally, that is. If your view on the other hand is that you don't need rational reasons to believe, then a debate about truth cannot be had.

 

The question of truth in a philosophical discussion has absolutely nothing to do with morals. Morals can come only after you have established what is true.

[ERICOPOLY]

I wonder, have you and Eric every actually prayed?

 

I haven't ever done so sincerely.

 

However, there is convincing evidence that it would enrich me psychologically (what others call "spiritually"):

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/how-does-prayer-meditation-affect-brain-activity_n_1974621.html

 

When praying, you are being tickled by the "feel good" brain chemicals that reward you for social behavior (see, now we're back to the social instincts thing).

 

Sort of like how you can have sexual pleasure without a partner I guess, you can also have conversational pleasure without a partner.  Some form of conversational masturbation.

 

[ERICOPOLY]

Expanding on that idea, I believe as humans we want to feel a social connection to important or powerful people.  Some sort of instinct to be running with the strongest, perhaps.  Social climbers exhibit this.

 

So by "conversing" with the most powerful of all, the All Mighty, we just increase the amount of pleasure by having this special friend that we talk to.

 

The more powerful you make him up to be, the better the psychological reward ought to be.

 

[ERICOPOLY]

So proselytizing then would make the drug even more powerful, because your prayers would become more effective if everyone around you agrees that God is the most powerful being in the universe.  So powerful that he even created the universe.  The more everyone repeats the same thing, then the more success you'll have convincing your mind that you are conversing with the single most powerful social connection in the universe.  Thus, you get rewarded with the most powerful dose of brain chemicals possible for a social conversation.  Even though it's a make-believe one.  You need others to believe in order to help you believe even harder -- the "social proof" effect.

 

Thus, somebody of another religion, if converted or killed off, will either increase your belief if converted (and thus your chemical reward) or will prevent your faith from being shaken by counterarguments (if killed).

 

I don't know if singing a song like "I've Got a Friend Named Jesus" carries the same sort of psychological importance as the typical name dropping that goes on (I went to a dinner party and met the President!).

 

[RichardGibbons]

For what it's worth, I do think the atheists will eventually "win".

 

I find this statement surprising from someone who seems to believe in a higher power.  Almost all such people I've ever met seem to believe that in the end, the people who act according to what the higher power wants will end up in some wonderful place, and those who don't will end up in some bad place.

 

So, what do you mean by this?  The atheists eventually convert everyone, then everyone who believed in the higher power is fine, but everyone born after that is screwed? 

 

I'm really curious how you reconcile these two beliefs....

[stahleyp]

For what it's worth, I do think the atheists will eventually "win".

 

I find this statement surprising from someone who seems to believe in a higher power.  Almost all such people I've ever met seem to believe that in the end, the people who act according to what the higher power wants will end up in some wonderful place, and those who don't will end up in some bad place.

 

So, what do you mean by this?  The atheists eventually convert everyone, then everyone who believed in the higher power is fine, but everyone born after that is screwed? 

 

I'm really curious how you reconcile these two beliefs....

 

By "winning" I simply mean that I think, sometime, in the not terribly distant future (next couple hundred years or so), non believers will outnumber believers.

 

A couple reasons for that, statistics show that religion, at least in developed countries is on the decline. I think this will speed up over time. As more and more become less religious, it will be more socially acceptable. People will frequently look at things like the "evil bible" website without doing a lot of soul searching and actually reading the counter arguments. I'll admit, a big, big part of me didn't want to believe in God. However, after reading the counter arguments, I think it's more reasonable to believe in God and, ultimately, will lead to a more fulfilling life (there's plenty of research on that). I'm not arrogant enough to think I know how the universe works - I think we know less than 1% of what "reality" really is.

 

Secondly, that old ancient book by poor sheepherders even talks about a great "falling away" that will occur. If I had to guess, I don't think all the "unbelievers" will end up in Hell (or the negative outcome). I do think though, that people who knowingly do wrong and don't repent, might very well. After all, if someone willing does what they know is wrong and is never truly sorry, I don't see how that person's heart is in the right place.

 

As CS Lewis wrote:

 

"Every time you make a choice you are turning the central part of you, the part of you that chooses, into something a little different than it was before. And taking your life as a whole, with all your innumerable choices, all your life long you are slowly turning this central thing into a heavenly creature or a hellish creature: either into a creature that is in harmony with God, and with other creatures, and with itself, or else into one that is in a state of war and hatred with God, and with its fellow creatures, and with itself. To be the one kind of creature is heaven: that is, it is joy and peace and knowledge and power. To be the other means madness, horror, idiocy, rage, impotence, and eternal loneliness. Each of us at each moment is progressing to the one state of the other."

 

 

[ERICOPOLY]

As CS Lewis wrote:

 

"Every time you make a choice you are turning the central part of you, the part of you that chooses, into something a little different than it was before. And taking your life as a whole, with all your innumerable choices, all your life long you are slowly turning this central thing into a heavenly creature or a hellish creature: either into a creature that is in harmony with God, and with other creatures, and with itself, or else into one that is in a state of war and hatred with God, and with its fellow creatures, and with itself. To be the one kind of creature is heaven: that is, it is joy and peace and knowledge and power. To be the other means madness, horror, idiocy, rage, impotence, and eternal loneliness. Each of us at each moment is progressing to the one state of the other."

 

 

His thinking is in line with mine. 

 

Heaven is a psychological state you experience in this life, and so is hell.

 

You don't wait to die to experience hell, or heaven.  Therefore, these religions that just forgive you automatically for doing sins should not be misconstrued as a free hall pass.