User Name:

Password:

FAQ Donate Join

General Discussion
Do you know everything?

Is it possible God excists in the things you do not know? There is a God and if you do not make sure you are right you will be in a lot of trouble. If you can give solid proof there is no God I will give you $20000. I hope you people are not stupid enough to believe in the big bang theroy are you ?

I don't know everything, but I know that neither the Essenes or the Cathars, believed in hell fire-and-damnation. I don't care what anyone's personal beliefs are, as long as their belief remain personal. Nobody is trying to prove to anyone that the invisible man is not there. However, if you are trying to prove a certain belief is true that is different story. If a person wants to prove the facts about ancient manuscripts that will take a lot of research, which most people are not interested in doing. They prefer to be told what to think.

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Qumran region of Palestine is a serious threat to organized Christianity. There have been two releases of the Scrolls transcripts by the Huntington Library in California and, the publication of all the facsimiles and translations of some of the most important texts by Robert Eisenman and Michael Wise.

Eisenman and Wise said that more important texts had remained suppressed for more than forty years, and the real reason was that in the Scrolls the members of the International Team had come upon material from the period of early Christianity that struck at the very foundations of Christian doctrine. Many so-called theologians do not have any idea of the impact of The Dead Sea Scrolls contents on Christian belief. For one, it is clear that the message of Jesus did not originate with him, and he was also not unique; he was at most one of several known as "Teachers of Righteousness" that were part of Jewish movement based in Qumran going back at least a hundred years before the birth of Jesus. Many of the practices believed to have originated with the Christians, like the Lords Prayer, can be traced to them, also going back to a century before the birth of Christ. The modern Christianity is really a creation of St Paul, Roman who never knew Jesus, and the teachings have nothing to do with Jesus or his message. The issue is not one of a personal conviction, faith, Christianity, or any other religion; the issue is that no one has the right to object to any belief. I do think that they should get all the facts, and unless people want to be preached to, they should probably keep their beliefs to themselves.

I do NOT believe in the big bang theroy.

But I DO believe in "Big Bang LeRoy!!"

I have all of his movies. Great Soundtracks, too.

The word "science" is the Latin word for knowledge: Just because we can't explain everything fully doesn't mean that we should stop looking for the answers. You have to explore to answer questions. A belief that does not support discovery or knowledge is evil. The past history is written from the side of the winners not the losers. The Romans wanted to control the world through a one world government and religion. This is the reason that not all the texts made it into the Bible. More powerful groups in Rome labeled these books no non-canonical or heretical books. The Gospel of Thomas (a Gnostic document) is an example of a book that originated from a group that was labeled heretical. It was discovered at Nag Hammadi, Egypt in 1945. It is distinctly Gnostic and places salvation purely in the possession of knowledge of the mysteries of the universe, a knowledge that constituted them a superior class of beings from those who did not know. Quantum science teaches that unless something is observed it is not real.

The Cathars may have continued these teachings, however their ideas were considered offensive and often heretical. They did not believe in priesthood, or the sacraments, the dignity of labor, women's equality, tolerance towards minorities, vegetarianism, meditation, euthanasia, even reincarnation. The Roman Church sent preachers to bring the Cathar population back into the orthodox fold by Pope Innocent III. The corrupt and ignorant priests and monks who were sent were made fun of by the Cathars. A Papal Inquisition was set up to eliminate the Cathars. It is obvious the burning of the library at Alexandria, the Inquisitions, burning books of the Cathars, and the Dark Ages was all part of a plot devised by a repressive government to use religion to control people.

It was continued by attacking the scientists who develop any theory that seemed to conflict with the "Bible." A theory is developed from facts that we do know, and can be used to find out things that we don't know. We know that the Universe is gradually expanding and cooling. In the 1920s, Edwin Hubble found that galaxies far from our own Milky Way are moving away from us. In fact, the further away galaxies are, the faster they are receding. So he concluded that the whole Universe must have been expanding. Those mocking this theory called it the "Big Bang" theory. There is no Big Bang Theory.

The theory does not involve an explosion; it is a theory based on the expansion of the universe, it is standing still while space expands dragging the matter with it. There is no "explosion" it is expansion that is carrying all the rest of the universe away from us. There is plenty of evidence behind the theory. Spectroscopy can determine the rate at which galaxies are moving away from us, and it takes light time to travel, the further away we look, the further back in time we are looking. That's how we know that all galaxies are moving away from us. The further they are the faster they are moving away. If you go all the way back the galaxies will come back together at a single point in time. And there is a theory that the collapse of a black hole can create a new universe and every time a universe is created the laws of physics that it is born with are slightly different from those of its parent universe. Our universe is just one among a multitude of universes. The birth of a universe might simply be a fluctuation of the vacuum, a creation out of nothing. If gravitational energy is negative, the energy required to make a universe is zero.

Antimatter is supposed to be an exact counterpart to matter, down to the same mass. This has been recently verified when it was shown experimentally that a proton and an antiproton have the same mass to within one part in 10 billion.2

I meant to say that the Cathars did believe in the dignity of labor, women's equality, tolerance towards minorities, vegetarianism, meditation, euthanasia, even reincarnation. And this set the a part.

"Is it possible God excists in the things you do not know?"

Sure. It's also possible that fairies steal socks out of the dryer and that leprechauns really hide pots of gold at the end of rainbows.

The real question isn't "Is this possible?" it's "Is it probable?" We should be concerned with whether or not a thing is actually true or likely true - not whether it's possibly true.

The default position for any claim is disbelief. Belief is the condition of having accepted the claim to be true (or likely true).

"There is a God and if you do not make sure you are right you will be in a lot of trouble. If you can give solid proof there is no God I will give you $20000."

You've got it backward. You're claiming there is a God, which means you have the burden of proof. Do we need to prove there are no leprechauns or mermaids? Can you prove that Zeus doesn't exist? What about Poseidon, Ganesh, Ah Puch, Quetzalcoatl, etc.?

If you can't prove that those don't exist - why don't you believe in them? (Or do you??)

"I hope you people are not stupid enough to believe in the big bang theroy are you ?"

So, you think it's stupid to accept a scientifically sound theory? Even if we're willing to reject that theory should the evidence lead in another direction?

Yet you think it's smart to believe in a God when your best arguments are "believe or you'll be in a lot of trouble" and "you can't prove he doesn't exist"?

Here's a tip:

If you're going to accuse someone of stupidity, you should try to have valid arguments and proofread your post.

Your religious beliefs have poisoned your brain to the point that you're eager to jump in to arguments that you're not ready for.

If you'd like to have a reasonable discussion, feel free to e-mail me. If you're only interested in polemics and threats - kindly go away.

-Matt sans_deity(at)yahoo.com

I think it is sensible to take a different approach to challenges (in spite of the lack of common sense) than those who can't stand any opposition. Especially considering that many people have been SOOOOO lied to! Most of the media has a heavy handed one-sided scale that slants heavily to the right with a religious bent. The other side of the argument in the mass media has limited coverage, and if anyone sticks their neck out they try to wring it. I think it is right to allow an open exchange of information, but I stand with you; they do not have a corner on the truth, and ignorance cannot be accepted over reason.

But as for me this stuff just goes in one ear and out the other as I've heard it so many times already! "Something" had to come from "nothing" unless God created everything; it's the only answer that works for me! But who created God? He was always there. Those who do not agree with them are discouraged by intimidation and bullying, because this is the way they were trained. Unquestioning faith is imprisonment; we have the right to seriously question anything we are being lead to believe. Only a phony can't be tested.

"Truth will do well enough if left to shift for herself. She seldom has received much aid from the power of great men to whom she is rarely known and seldom welcome. She has no need of force to procure entrance into the minds of men." Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776.

>"Something" had to come from "nothing" unless God created everything..."

When I hear this from an apologist, my first thought is to wonder where in the world they've ever seen "something" come from "nothing"? I've never seen that before. So, I wonder what makes them think that matter has its origins in "nothing"? If I toss out any scientific explanations--let's say I'm an apologist and I reject the science--and I just observe the universe around me...it certainly _appears_ that matter is eternal and has no known beginnings. What makes an apologist who rejects science claim that matter _must_ have an origin--when the observable reality contradicts this at every turn? It's really an odd conclusion to draw when we just consider reality and the properties of matter that we can all observe.

Well, Christian apologists or (believers) often argue that "scientist can't explain where everything came from" …or you can't make "something" from "nothing!" But when you turn it around and ask them where God came from (he was just always there) is a fine answer? They can't explain where God came from, am I right! When He made the "I am the lord your god" statement ...Why didn't they ask where He came from, and how he made everything?

The believers, to prove God exist; often use the "science cannot explain everything" claim. So why didn't they ask Him? Of course science can explain everything, it is just a matter of time, and being able to understand what the science has to say.

Scientist use fossil evidence to prove/explain how living things that once lived disappeared. The more they find out the more questions they can answer about extinction. Dogma can never grow because it never changes. Even when they found new much older manuscripts than the Bible they hide them. Why?

I think people should become more open to new Ideas, and new ways of thinking, although that's not too likely without vast improvement in the mass media.

Linda - I have a couple of responses to your comments.

"Well, Christian apologists or (believers) often argue that "scientist can't explain where everything came from" …or you can't make "something" from "nothing!" But when you turn it around and ask them where God came from (he was just always there) is a fine answer? They can't explain where God came from, am I right! When He made the "I am the lord your god" statement ...Why didn't they ask where He came from, and how he made everything?"

The biblical concept of God is of a timeless, immaterial, non-created being, therefore, to ask where or when God came from is an irrelevant question from a Christian perspective.

"The believers, to prove God exist; often use the "science cannot explain everything" claim. So why didn't they ask Him? Of course science can explain everything, it is just a matter of time, and being able to understand what the science has to say."

You seem to imply that at some point in the future that science will explain everything. I would like to ask you how you know this to be true? Did science tell us that this statement is true? It seems to me that science can only explain how things work, not necessarily why they work. This is not in competition with Christianity. Christian teaching states that God gives order to the universe and that is how we are able to study it. Also keep in mind, that science has told us many things that have turned out to be to our detriment. Certain chemicals used to help us have been found to be harmful. I often wonder what we do today that someday we will come to reject. I understand it is an ongoing process, but it seems that humility is a far more beneficial stance to take. To assume that science will someday reveal all knowledge seems arrogant.

"Even when they found new much older manuscripts than the Bible they hide them. Why?"

What manuscripts are you referring to? and who hides them?

"I think people should become more open to new Ideas, and new ways of thinking, although that's not too likely without vast improvement in the mass media."

I absolutely agree.

Quote - "The biblical concept of God is of a timeless, immaterial, non-created being, therefore, to ask where or when God came from is an irrelevant question from a Christian perspective."

ANSWER - SO IS THE TOOTH FAIRY!

Quote - "It seems to me that science can only explain how things work, not necessarily why they work. This is not in competition with Christianity. Christian teaching states that God gives order to the universe and that is how we are able to study it. Also keep in mind, that science has told us many things that have turned out to be to our detriment."

Answer - (The Bible On Astronomy) - Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth? The Sun does indeed revolve around the Earth - The Sunrise is an optical illusion. (My arrogant science teacher told me so!)

The Bible - (On Medicine) - Leprosy is caused by the wrath of God or the malice of Satan. Science - The disease leprosy is caused by infection with Mycobacterium leprae. We also know how to cure it. The Bible - (Math) - I Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2 - He made a molten sea, ten cubits from one brim to the other - it was round all about, and its height was five cubits - and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. There is a formula in mathematics that never varies for the circumference of circular objects. It's not 30 ft. C = ð2r, in which ð is about 3.1416

Quote - "To assume that science will someday reveal all knowledge seems arrogant."

Answer - Yes, but even if it doesn't the Bible will never reveal anything but ignorance.

Quote - "I understand it is an ongoing process, but it seems that humility is a far more beneficial stance to take.

Answer - Since when was skepticism, or the desire to learn, the opposite of humility. It seems to me that controlling is more like it. It would be far more beneficial to the established religions if everyone were just under control!

Quote - "Even when they found new much older manuscripts than the Bible they hide them."

Answer - The Dead Sea Scrolls - The Church as a political, economic and

social institution - That is why these institutions went to great lengths to keep suppressed the contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls for nearly half a century until in September 1991 the release of the Scrolls transcripts by the Huntington Library in California and, the publication of all the facsimiles and translations of some of the most important texts by Robert Eisenman and Michael Wise. In - The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered: The First Complete Translation and Interpretation of 50 Key Documents Withheld for Over 35 the real facts about the origins of Christianity are also brought out into the open. Eisenman and Wise said about one of the more important texts that had remained suppressed for more than forty years. The real reason was that in the Scrolls the members of the International Team had come upon material from the period of early Christianity that struck at the very foundations of Christian doctrine. I have studied the Essenes, Gnostics and Cathars; they were all labeled heretics and killed off. ( I have found other very old scriptures and that are very different from the Bible.)

Paul of Tarsus, was born in what is now Turkey, under the name Saul, an Israelite of the tribe of Benjamin - who never knew Jesus - There were serious disagreements over his teachings. But Paul was in a much better position to prevail (he had friends in high places) in Rome. There is also evidence to show a hijacking of the original movement by Paul in pursuit of his own ideology, and this was opposed by members of the early Church - by Jesus' brother, James, in particular. It emerges from the Qumran literature (and other early sources) that James was a much more important figure at the time than what Paul and other leaders of Christianity have been willing to acknowledge. James is mentioned in several early sources as the leader of the early Church of Jerusalem. Paul did not know Jesus personally. Next, Paul was a privileged Roman citizen who enjoyed the friendship and patronage of Roman authorities at the highest levels of the empire. This fact raises some intriguing questions about the role actually played by Paul: it suggests that he was much more of a politician than a religious figure. There are references about Jesus describing him as a 'Teacher of Righteousness.' It is clear that the message of Jesus did not originate with him, and he was also not unique; he was at most one of several known as "Teachers of Righteousness" that were part of Jewish movement based in Qumran going back at least a hundred years before the birth of Jesus.

I don't intend to base my beliefs on the false premise of Apostle Paul and a Pagan Constantine. Paul made Jesus God while Jesus historically has never claimed himself to be God. I It's a feeble excuse to say that the Bible is just to save people; it's not a science book. Well anyone that made everything should be able to do math!

The Bible has also needed a lot of revision from time to time - And a lot of (killing off rivals) which was essential to Christian survival. Look Up the Cathars

Quote - I absolutely agree. "I think people should become more open to new Ideas, and new ways of thinking, although that's not too likely without vast improvement in the mass media."

Right! Like watching the national media slobber over another Mega Church!

Linda - I am enjoying our discusssion!

"ANSWER - SO IS THE TOOTH FAIRY!"

Ok. Two entities sharing the same properties does not negate their existence. Using your logic I could say "grass is green, dragons are green - therefore - grass does not exist."

"Answer - (The Bible On Astronomy) - Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth? The Sun does indeed revolve around the Earth - The Sunrise is an optical illusion. (My arrogant science teacher told me so!) "

Joshua wrote the book of Joshua. From his perspective the sun did stand still. The point of that passage is that God delayed the passage of time to allow for victory in battle. If I say my stomach hurts and then find out later it was my appendix was I lying? No. I was giving you the best interpretation I could. It seems as if Joshua was giving us his best interpretation of God's actions.

'The Bible - (On Medicine) - Leprosy is caused by the wrath of God or the malice of Satan. Science - The disease leprosy is caused by infection with Mycobacterium leprae. We also know how to cure it.

God caused all matter, and God has used natural means to achieve his ends throughout the bible. The fact that a bacteria causes leprosy does not undercut the inference that God caused the bacteria that caused the leprosy.

"The Bible - (Math) - I Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2 - He made a molten sea, ten cubits from one brim to the other - it was round all about, and its height was five cubits - and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. There is a formula in mathematics that never varies for the circumference of circular objects. It's not 30 ft. C = ð2r, in which ð is about 3.1416 "

I guess they should not have rounded 31.1416 cubits to 30. Somebody should have told the author that we expect that all ancient documents to be accurate to the 4th decimal place - otherwise it must be discounted. How many historians or textural critics hold this view?

"Answer - Since when was skepticism, or the desire to learn, the opposite of humility. It seems to me that controlling is more like it. It would be far more beneficial to the established religions if everyone were just under control! "

I think skepticsm and the desire to learn are good things. I just don't think they lead to atheism. You implied that things should be under control and that the traits you mentioned are virtuous. Remember in the atheist worldview we are the result of a mindless uncontrolled accident, all you are witnessing when people act contrary to what you think they should be doing, is mindless activity governed by natural forces. Can you help me understand how the atheist worldview allows for "shoulds" or "oughts". When you say things like this you are appealing to a standard of behavior outside of your own standard - where does this come from in the atheist worldview?

"Answer - The Dead Sea Scrolls - The Church as a political, economic and social institution ..."

I am not a biblical historian - far from it. I have studied the bible and want to study much more. I cannot claim that I can mount a defense of the theory you have propsed - as it is filled with so many claims. But since you are claiming that you are in agreement with Eisenman and Wise. Why do you accept their views and not others regarding the DSS? The burden of proof is on you. A quick online review of comments of other scholars regarding their work reveals charges of inconsistency in methodology and knowlege gaps filled in with their own narrative supporting their own underlying assumptions. It seems as though it is not an open and shut case for this theory, far from it.

"I don't intend to base my beliefs on the false premise of Apostle Paul and a Pagan Constantine. Paul made Jesus God while Jesus historically has never claimed himself to be God."

According to the scriptures Paul made 3 trips to Jerusalem to confer w/ Peter and James regarding the Gospel message. To claim that Paul's letters are not consistent with the gospel message as found throughout the NT is false, also Jesus made explicit claims to deity, the following is a quote from gary habermas -

"I think it is plain that the Son of Man is a title of divinity or even Deity. For example, in Mk 2:1-12, Jesus stated that the Son of Man can forgive sins & his listeners cried "blasphemy." But then we are told that Jesus healed the man in order to show that he could, indeed, forgive sins. In Mark 14:61-64, Jesus answered "I am" to the High Priest's question of whether he was the Messiah, the Son of God. Then Jesus stated that he would share God's throne. The High Priest responded by tearing his clothes and declared that this was blasphemy. So does the NT think of the Son of Man as Deity? I think it's clear. Look at Acts 7:56 where Jesus appears standing on God's right hand. And in John, this title is connected with John's very high Christology. "

You have already stated that you believe the bible is inaccurate, but what sources are you drawing from to support your theory? If you are leaning on the DSS you'll have to show me where you get this, if you are leaning on some gnostic teachings or scriptures, these writings are much later than the books in the NT and should not be trusted as reliable.

"The Bible has also needed a lot of revision from time to time - And a lot of (killing off rivals) which was essential to Christian survival. Look Up the Cathars "

i did research the Cathars - The actions of the Church, and the teachings of Jesus are often in conflict. I won't defend the actions of those who have done these misguided things, they should be condemned. The church is full of sinners.

'Right! Like watching the national media slobber over another Mega Church!"

not sure what you are inferring here, but my hunch is that there are by far more agnostics or atheists in the national media than professing Christians.

You don't have any arguments - you only have excuses. By your standards we should believe in the tooth fairly. A belief without evidence is faith in faith. So when things in the bible are proven mistakes just make sh*t up. Why should anyone look for the facts when they have faith. Most people who claim to be full of Christ's love are viciously intolerant of criticism. Some people want facts to back up what they have faith in, and others just have faith? Do most reasonable people agree that if a book were written that was inspired by God the Creator of the universe, it would be a magnificent work? Probably the richest source of mathematical insight the earth has ever seen. Instead, the bible contains some very obvious errors. Centuries before the oldest books of the bible were written, both the Egyptians and Babylonians approximated pi to a few decimal places. And yet the Bible….divinely inspired…offers an approximation that is terrible even by the standards of the ancient world. (maybe they rounded it off?) MAYBE BUT HOW ABOUT ALL THIS: Adam was the first man, made (according to the Bible) about less than 6,000 years ago. Every scientist knows that human beings have been on the earth at least a half-million years, probably more. In Genesis 1:11, plants are created. Later, in Genesis 1:13, God makes the sun/moon/stars. Well, how can plants live without light? One possible explanation God created a (sun lamp) for the plants. Joshua's - God made the sun stand still and it stood still. This does show how little they knew about laws of the universe. They thought that if the sun stood still night wouldn't come. We know that day or night come by the revolution of the earth on its axis. This is obvious to anyone. The closest star to the earth is more than a billion miles away. A star was standing still and hovering over a manger. if any star came that near the earth or anywhere near the earth, it would immediately disarrange the whole solar system. Anybody who can believe this fairy tale isn't using reason. You must accept on faith because reason won't lead you to it! No, first get rid of all your knowledge and all your common sense to save your soul?

AND HOW ABOUT TWO QUOTES FROM TWO FAMOUS HOLY GUYS:

"Being crafty, I caught you with guile" ... For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my LIE unto his glory; why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" St. Paul. "What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!" Pope Leo X. The Sermon on the Mount. There isn't a single word contained in the Sermon on the Mount that isn't contained in what is called the Sacred Book of the Jews, long before Jesus lived ( not one fricken single thing.) Jesus was a Jew who had no intention of starting a new religion. It's generally accepted that the date for Christmas was arbitrarily selected to coincide with certain already existing pagan festivals, including the Roman Saturnalia, held on 25 Dec. WHY DO I BELIEVE ARCHEOLOGIST, SCIENTIST, ANTHROPOLOGIST, AND SCHOLARS OVER PREACHERS: The intent of most archeologist, scientist, anthropologist, and so forth is to find out what the facts are. (The truth) to detect fallacies, to point out errors, to correct mistakes; it is not to help support any religion . ... Archeology - There is no evidence for the existence of Abraham, or any of the Patriarchs; the same goes for Moses and the Exodus; and the same goes for the whole period of Judges and the united monarchy of David and Solomon. In fact, the authors argue that it is impossible to say much of anything about ancient Israel until the seventh century B.C., around the time of the reign of King Josiah. In that period, "the narrative of the Bible was uniquely suited to further the religious reform and territorial ambitions of Judah.

"There is no evidence whatsoever for a great, united monarchy which ruled from Jerusalem over large territories," said Israel Finkelstein, the director of the Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University. The Dead Sea Scrolls are much older than the Bible - But they are not the only ancient manuscripts - there is another one that says salvation comes from knowledge; the same as The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Gnostics. In 1991, Paul Mirecki, associate professor of religious studies at the University of Kansas, located a Coptic manuscript in the Egyptian museum in Berlin. The paleography suggests the it was written in the fourth or fifth century. Apparently Mirecki has also claimed a first or second century date for composition. Mirecki and Hedrick have produced an English translation, and a theory of how the fragments go together. The manuscript contains a number of sayings placed by the author in the mouth of Jesus - rather like the Coptic Gospel of Thomas. According to Mirecki: These works invariably say that salvation is available only through secret knowledge.

The Cathars - Salvation comes to these people through knowledge rather than faith... They see orthodox Jews and Christians as being duped by the evil creator of the material universe.... For example, one passage unique to the gospel reads, "I have overcome the Cosmos, so don't let the Cosmos overcome you."' The Cathars didn't use crucifixes, sacraments, or any of the trappings of Christendom. Both the Essenes and the Cathars were vegetarians, the women were on the same level as men, work was respected, they lived communally, there was no history of strife or violence amongst them, they were pacifist. Exceedingly superior to history of the "Christians" who actually murdered all of them. And Last But Not Least - Jesus was not Crucified. Under Rabbinic Law, criminals are to be stoned (John 8:3-11.) Jesus was stoned to death and then hung on a tree -- The cross is a later addition which has been soundly debunked. Jesus was killed and then hung in a tree -- just as the Jewish Toldoth states. Galatians 3:13 "Christ... being made a curse upon us... Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree" The Roman crucifixion is a fictional add-on which came upon the stage for political reasons. The resurrection of the Jesus came some 70 years after his death yet they were included in the canonized book of myths some 300 years later. CHRISTIAN MORALITY: As far as the bible preventing violence and promoting morality - Christianity has no history of non-violence or morality GOD OR THE DEVIL CAUSING DISEASE: If you don't know what causes disease you can't cure it (therefore God or the Devil did it) Behold the gods of hatred: Luke 14:26 WHAT I BELIEVE: There is no "superstition" or religion involved in the pursuit of knowledge. Studying a subject thoroughly does not imply a belief in anything. It's just the facts. Since I've done all the work so far, if you want to know anything more about anything (that's not in the bible) go to the library. "Train your mind to test every thought, ideology, train of reasoning, and claim to truth. There is no justice when even a single voice goes unheard."

Keep in mind that immaterial - MEANS IRRELEVANT You Said - "The biblical concept of God is of a timeless, immaterial, non-created being, therefore, to ask where or when God came from is an irrelevant question from a Christian perspective." So God Is Irrelevant - And that's a pretty Good evaluation! Good Bye

What about - Using your logic I could say "grass is green, dragons are green - therefore - grass does not exist."

OMG!You're right-'nuff said-I gotta go mow my dragon

Out of boredom, I'm replying to this post

Quoted: What about - Using your logic I could say "grass is green, dragons are green - therefore - grass does not exist."

Answered: OMG!You're right-'nuff said-I gotta go mow my dragon

My Question: How can you mow down something that doesn't even exist? ^_^

Quote - Using your logic I could say "grass is green, dragons are green - therefore - grass does not exist."

You have to prove that dragons are green….since a dragon is a fictional creature you can't (dragons are not dinosaurs) and dinosaurs are many colors - it's a very poor argument.

I think she was being facetious! When she said she was going to mow her dragon. But it was in line with the logic being presented.

Linda:

I would call this thread a whole-sale slaughter. You might spend weeks washing the blood stains from your clothes.

"Thinking" stated:

>You have already stated that you believe the bible is inaccurate

But he's totally agreed with you on this point (from his post):

>Joshua wrote the book of Joshua. From his perspective the sun did stand still.

Most Xians promote that god authored the text using people as human pens. But Thinking believes that "Joshua wrote" it, and that it is subject to all of Joshua's intellectual failings. So you've got him expressing the book is only as reliable as the limited intellectual capacity of nomadic Mid East cattle herders from thousands of years ago--and not a perfect, divine message from god.

When you compared his defense of god to the tooth fairy (his defense below):

>The biblical concept of God is of a timeless, immaterial, non-created being, therefore, to ask where or when God came from is an irrelevant question from a Christian perspective.

I thought you were clear that his argument above boils down to nothing more than an unverified, undefended assertion: "My god doesn't require an explanation--because that's what I've been told." Does Thinking place any import on whether or not what he's been told is actually true? Statements such as the one above do not support a "yes" on that front. Otherwise, he'd have to attempt verification--and since we can't examine god, we can't make any determinations or claims about god's existence--so any positive beliefs are based on "because that's what I've been told." When we believe what we're told in the face of an utter lack of ability to verify the claims, then we really aren't illustrating we actually care about the truthfulness of what we're accepting. We're simply following blindly.

I would also like to add--in regard to some of your statements about Biblical reliability--that the Bible in its current form contains forgeries acknowledged by the translators themselves. To provide just one example: John 7:53 through 8:11 is added text (aka a "forgery"). In modern translations of the NASB and the NIV, the translator notes indicate that "older "and "more reliable" manuscripts _do not_ contain these verses. So, why are they still in the Bible? If an error is found--shouldn't it be corrected? You'd think. But Xians just go on pretending it's a perfect and reliable book--and don't really want to know if it's not. Even when it's clearly stated by their own Bible translators and put right there on the same page with the verses--they still ignore it and continue lying that the book is flawless. I don't really see how much more "in denial" someone could be--or, again, how much less someone could care about whether or not their beliefs are actually true.

I also have to add this, because it was just such an odd coincidence. I just picked up a book of Bertrand Russell essays at the library on the way home tonight. Ironically, the very first essay dealt with Xian arguments, and the first one addressed was the First Cause--which is part of the topic at this strand. Thought I'd share:

"It is exactly of the same nature as the Hindu's view, that the world rested upon an elephant and the elephant rested upon a tortoise; and when they said, 'How about the tortoise?' the Indian said, 'Suppose we change the subject.' The argument really is no better than that."

It really _IS_ no better than that.

Hi, Tracie, I have heard the same tale with a different ending; "it's turtles all the way down."

bfa

I hadn't thought of that one. Although I just read something similar in a Bertrand Russell Essay--where he talks about the idea of an infinite regression of greater and greater gods creating the other gods. But then I have to wonder, why not just make it an infinite regression of universes? Then nobody has to knock himself/herself out trying to prove something exists that nobody can examine. At least we can actually examine the universe.

No one knows who actually wrote the 66 books that were eventually canonized to make the bible. (Many myths were not included.) The names associated with the books in the bible mythologies are not the individuals who wrote them. Much of the bible is anonymous or forgeries.

I didn't pursue the unscientific story of Joshua asking God to make the sun stand still, or all the other Christian myths that are grossly contradictory, because I thought a Christian would admit it was nonsense. The clergy has encouraged Christians to oppose fact finding, and questioning. It's of the devil! That's why they don't look for answers when they are as easy to find as reading any scholarly work. Like Joshua's slip-up - an excuse not an answer, and the excuse implies that it did happen, but Joshua just didn't know how. God making the earth stand still is the only way it could have happened, which of coarse would cause a catastrophe of biblical proportions. Except, they believe that God could do this while preventing a catastrophe. That's why (if you can believe this) they have scientist trying to prove it really happened instead of finding a cure for cancer. This is not a story told only out of ignorance it's a lie. Let's say all the excuses are true, it still never happened, because if the sun remained motionless in the middle of the sky for a full day, it would have had an enormous impression on people around the world. This amazing event would have been worldwide. You would think that this would have been reported, recorded and discussed from then on. It might have been passed on orally, and then eventually written down until it appeared in the history books. But, there is not one single record of this. The only account of the longest day in history of the world comes from Joshua, and he writes only a paragraph to tell the world of the most astonishing event ever witnessed by the entire population of the world.

This fable is typical of most of the bible; the stories were picked and chosen to have a certain impact on the public. Look what God can do to you or for you. The bible reveals nothing but an exclusivist ideology bent on expansion in the name of God for social and political reasons. And they never have to explain any of the absurdities involved in the making of Christianity?

I just gave a true picture of the origins of religion, and the reasons for imposing religion upon the human race.

Hi Linda,

I would love to know where you got all of your info on the Bible. Any helpful books or websites?

@Teresa Sturgill Counter-question: Do *you* know everything? After all, the group you seem to belong to believes God to be omniscient. But how can you be sure that he is omniscient without verifying everything, become omniscient yourself?

The real funny thing is: I am God. THE one. But of course you know that I am not speaking the truth here. Because... your will drives your phantasy to produce something new to enable you to believe that I am not the maker of the big black thing with stars in it. You want me not to be God. Which is kinda evil, energetically speaking.

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup

blip.tv ustream.tv

Join us for the Bat Cruise Lecture, 1:15pm September 27th at Trinity United Methodist Church, at 40th and Speedway. Lecturers will be Richard Carrier and Chris Johnson.

The ACA Bat Cruise is set for Saturday, September 27th, 6-8pm. Purchase tickets in advance here.

The audio and video from Dr. Shahnawaz August lecture is now available.