Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

When atheists go too far

Options
1…1718202223…47

Comments

  • Options
    #572
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    philologos wrote: »
    I'm with God. I believe He's right. That's all that's going to happen here. Your ad-hominems are nonsense and as a result it seems best to ignore them.
    Why? Have I misrepresented what you believe? No.
    I'm just holding you to account for your own position - don't try to hide behind God.


  • Options
    #573
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    dpe wrote: »
    Says who? Where in the Bible does it say Hell is the absence of God? And if its not in the Bible, where are you getting this from? There are plenty of places in the Bible that describe Hell, there are others that imply sinners just die and don't go to heaven (its not usually clear what happens next to them), and there are even a few places that imply everyone goes to Heaven! This is what I don't understand about religious people, you make this sh1t up as you go along. And yet you don't understand why atheists point out there might be a bit of an issue with the evidence...

    Not really. Isaiah 59:2 says that our sins separate us from God. It is Jesus who died in our place to reconcile us with Him on the cross by taking our sins (which separate us from God) away. By Jesus doing this on our behalf we receive the gift of eternal life with Him. If this doesn't happen and our sins continue to separate us then we are due condemnation for our rejection of God. Therefore hell is separation from God.
    steve06 wrote: »
    Bad logic. Just because you believe in him doesn't mean he's actually there, or that I'm tormented because I don't!

    Agreed. We can't both be right.


  • Options
    #574
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos wrote: »
    Not really. Isaiah 59:2 says that our sins separate us from God.

    And Genesis 19:30-36 says it's ok to sleep with your daughter... But it's not really.


  • Options
    #575
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    It is Jesus who died in our place to reconcile us with Him on the cross by taking our sins (which separate us from God) away.
    I don't think you trust in my,
    Self-righteous suicide,
    I cry when angels deserve to die


  • Options
    #576
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    steve06 wrote: »
    And Genesis 19:30-36 says it's ok to sleep with your daughter... But it's not really.

    No it doesn't actually. It is actually accounting for the origins of Ammon and Moab. Israel's neighbours and often enemies. Nowhere in that passage does it once say that it is OK. In fact other passages in the Jewish Torah condemn such sexual activity.

    Indeed, David commits adultery in 1 Samuel. It doesn't mean that the Bible praises adultery actually it tells you about the mistakes that people made so that we mightn't make the same mistakes.

    Typical of the type of strawman that critics of the Bible present.

    Edit: These type of objections are really nothing new. They have been presented hundreds of times on boards and demonstrated to be inaccurate.

    Seachmall: I don't see how it is self-righteous to say that God is right.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #577
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos wrote: »
    Typical of the type of strawman that critics of the Bible present.

    Well I criticise it because I don't believe in it and because people who do believe in it like to pick and choose the bits they want to follow.

    In my opinion the catholic church is the largest organised cult in the world. And in my opinion, god does not exist. Of course these are my opinions and you're entitled to yours.

    What gets to me is the arguing between believers and non believers. Non believers are happy not to believe, we usually just laugh at believers and don't understand how they can be that brainwashed, in our opinion. But believers like to try and convert us by filling us with crap about eternal hell and misery... We're happy how we are, live and let live.


  • Options
    #578
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Not at all. That's you deriving stuff that isn't actually in the passage from it. Nowhere does the Bible endorse incest. As I've mentioned already it was forbidden under Jewish law.

    It's not about picking or choosing at all, it's about reading it without dropping our own assumptions into the middle of it. That's simply a basic reading skill.

    It might be of better use to read the Bible for yourself with an open mind rather than actively seeking to make holes where there are none.


  • Options
    #579
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    Seachmall: I don't see how it is self-righteous to say that God is right.

    Talking about Jesus on the cross.
    What kind of sense does it make?
    To create a sinful creation that you judge from the gate
    And then send your only son to prohibit the fate
    That you ultimately responsible for


  • Options
    #580
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    God isn't responsible for what we have decided to do out of our own free will though. We've chosen to exercise it in one way or another, and we are accountable for our own actions in so far as I would see it.

    steve06: I'm not a Roman Catholic. So you're entitled to your own views about that church. I'm a Christian and I defend Christianity in the broadest sense. I believe that individual churches have severely messed up in the past. God hasn't though, and we still have to think about where we stand in respect to Him. I chiefly try to tell people of the Gospel, the good news is that we have a Saviour and in trusting in Him we can restore our relationship with God. On this thread it has been mostly the non-believers who wish to focus on what will happen to them if they don't accept the Gospel.


  • Options
    #581
    Shenshen
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,453 Mod ✭✭✭✭Shenshen


    philologos wrote: »

    Actually, it's a very mixed story. In public he professed Christian beliefs yes. In private he actually opposed Christianity according to Nazi memoirs. Documents were released following the Nuremburg Trials which suggested that Hitler wanted to eradicate Christianity. See here.

    He wanted to make it subject to Gleichschaltung, not eradicate it.
    He did what most Christians did in history : he wanted god to support his opinions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #582
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    God isn't responsible for what we have decided to do out of our own free will though. We've chosen to exercise it in one way or another, and we are accountable for our own actions in so far as I would see it.

    Omnipotence
    Omnipresence
    Omniscience

    He created us knowing he would punish us.

    (Couldn't find any suitable lyrics :()


  • Options
    #583
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Shenshen wrote: »
    He wanted to make it subject to Gleichschaltung, not eradicate it.
    He did what most Christians did in history : he wanted god to support his opinions.

    The evidence simply doesn't support your position. The private memoirs are in many ways anti-Christian. It seems to me that Hitler used Christianity as a tool, nothing more. It's simply inconclusive based on what we know about him.

    One such example of the private memoirs:
    Goebbels notes in a diary entry in 1939 a conversation in which Hitler had "expressed his revulsion against Christianity. He wished that the time were ripe for him to be able to openly express that. Christianity had corrupted and infected the entire world of antiquity."

    We need to be honest when we're aiming to discuss this.
    Seachmall wrote: »
    Omnipotence
    Omnipresence
    Omniscience

    He created us knowing he would punish us.

    (Couldn't find any suitable lyrics )

    Knowledge that something will happen != responsibility for it. I'm still accountable for what I do, as are you.


  • Options
    #584
    Mark200
    Registered Users Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭Mark200


    philologos wrote: »
    Knowledge that something will happen != responsibility for it. I'm still accountable for what I do, as are you.

    If you create something knowing what it's going to do, how are you not responsible for what it does?


  • Options
    #585
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    Knowledge that something will happen != responsibility for it. I'm still accountable for what I do, as are you.

    Creating something you created to, or knew would, fail and then punish it for failing?

    Sounds a little self-righteous to me.


  • Options
    #586
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Mark200 wrote: »
    If you create something knowing what it's going to do, how are you not responsible for what it does?

    God has given us the freedom of choice. By giving us this freedom of will we are accountable for what we do. If he had made us automaton (which he hasn't) then yes he would be responsible for what we do.

    It's entirely based on where one falls in terms of free will or determinism and to be honest with you I'm not entirely sure but I do believe that God has given us free will.


  • Options
    #587
    Mark200
    Registered Users Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭Mark200


    Also, ultimately these arguments are pointless. It doesn't matter if the bible tells the story of an ever-caring loving being or an evil manipulative being. People aren't atheists because they don't like the god of the bible, they're atheists because he/it does not exist. There is simply no credible evidence to suggest it does.


  • Options
    #588
    Mark200
    Registered Users Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭Mark200


    philologos wrote: »
    God has given us the freedom of choice. By giving us this freedom of will we are accountable for what we do. If he had made us automaton (which he hasn't) then yes he would be responsible for what we do.

    It's entirely based on where one falls in terms of free will or determinism and to be honest with you I'm not entirely sure but I do believe that God has given us free will.

    Well I disagree that creating us already knowing everything we'll ever do (including whether we'll be believers and whether we're going to end up in heaven or hell) is free will.


  • Options
    #589
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Mark200 wrote: »
    Also, ultimately these arguments are pointless. It doesn't matter if the bible tells the story of an ever-caring loving being or an evil manipulative being. People aren't atheists because they don't like the god of the bible, they're atheists because he/it does not exist. There is simply no credible evidence to suggest it does.

    Agreed, but they are far from pointless if the Bible is actually true and if God actually exists. Arguably then they are fundamentally important. Although I disagree with you on the evidence front. Personally I have good reason to believe in God and I have presented some of these over the years on boards.


  • Options
    #590
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    philologos wrote: »
    It's not about picking or choosing at all, it's about reading it without dropping our own assumptions into the middle of it. That's simply a basic reading skill.

    It might be of better use to read the Bible for yourself with an open mind rather than actively seeking to make holes where there are none.
    I don't want to read it because I have no interest in it. If I want to ready something that I believe is a fairy tale then I'll read something interesting that appeals to me and wont try to force a certain way of life down my throat.
    philologos wrote: »
    I'm a Christian and I defend Christianity in the broadest sense. I believe that individual churches have severely messed up in the past. God hasn't though, and we still have to think about where we stand in respect to Him.
    Only if we believe in him.
    philologos wrote: »
    I chiefly try to tell people of the Gospel, the good news is that we have a Saviour and in trusting in Him we can restore our relationship with God.
    But that's your opinion. If I told you that vampires are real you'd tell me to f*ck off. But there's no proof to say they aren't, and in the past people were killed for being vampires. The thing is, we became more intelligent and stopped believing in nonsense because that's what it is. I just can't see how the the belief in 'God' got through the net.


  • Options
    #591
    Ray Palmer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,368 ✭✭✭Ray Palmer


    on the main point I don't see how Dawkins went too far. He spoke at a private gathering and said some views are idiotic.

    Where as when I walk through Dublin you are often bombarded with religious views. Starting with the basics of huge churches chiming away at 12 and 6 not even to mention mass times. People literally shouting in the streets how I and others have lost their way. People flaunting thier religious views at me with their jewelry and outfits. Being passed change runs the risk of "god bless" and general murmurs of people around saying "i'll pray for him" and other banalities.

    Yet there is a law where by if I express my views against religion I could be jailed even though I am the one under constant assault. :eek:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #592
    POINTBREAK
    Registered Users Posts: 2,135 ✭✭✭POINTBREAK


    philologos wrote: »
    God has given us the freedom of choice. By giving us this freedom of will we are accountable for what we do. If he had made us automaton (which he hasn't) then yes he would be responsible for what we do.

    It's entirely based on where one falls in terms of free will or determinism and to be honest with you I'm not entirely sure but I do believe that God has given us free will.

    It free will with a twist though. Love and worship me, or burn in hell forever. Saner people have been locked up.


  • Options
    #593
    dpe
    Registered Users Posts: 520 ✭✭✭dpe


    philologos wrote: »
    Not really. Isaiah 59:2 says that our sins separate us from God. It is Jesus who died in our place to reconcile us with Him on the cross by taking our sins (which separate us from God) away. By Jesus doing this on our behalf we receive the gift of eternal life with Him. If this doesn't happen and our sins continue to separate us then we are due condemnation for our rejection of God. Therefore hell is separation from God.

    That's just gibberish. It comes down to "join our club or bad things will happen to you". Can't you see there's nothing there to back any of this nonsense up?


  • Options
    #594
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    God has given us the freedom of choice. By giving us this freedom of will we are accountable for what we do. If he had made us automaton (which he hasn't) then yes he would be responsible for what we do.

    It's entirely based on where one falls in terms of free will or determinism and to be honest with you I'm not entirely sure but I do believe that God has given us free will.

    Freedom of choice or not he created us knowing what choices we would make*. He then punishes us for making those choices. Do you see the problem there?

    *Obviously freewill and God knowing what we will do is somewhat illogical, but hey; we're discussing God, it comes with the territory.


  • Options
    #595
    POINTBREAK
    Registered Users Posts: 2,135 ✭✭✭POINTBREAK


    Ray Palmer wrote: »
    on the main point I don't see how Dawkins went too far. He spoke at a private gathering and said some views are idiotic.

    I didn't read that, but surely its OK to say that some views are indeed idiotic?


  • Options
    #596
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    If god gives us free will then he can't know what we will do therefore he is not omniscient, and if he does know what we will do when he creates us then we don't have free will.


  • Options
    #597
    drkpower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    philologos wrote: »
    God has given us the freedom of choice. By giving us this freedom of will we are accountable for what we do. If he had made us automaton (which he hasn't) then yes he would be responsible for what we do.
    Yet you hide behind god when you express your view that it is just that good people who do not believe in god should burn in hell for eternity.

    It seems that you act as an automaton unable or unwilling to reject as evil the things you purport your god as favouring.


  • Options
    #598
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    drkpower wrote: »
    Yet you hide behind god when you express your view that it is just that good people who do not believe in god should burn in hell for eternity.

    It seems that you act as an automaton unable or unwilling to reject as evil the things you purport your god as favouring.

    I don't hide behind anything. I have no interest in rejecting God because He's right in my opinion. I stand by Him.


  • Options
    #599
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    philologos wrote: »
    I don't hide behind anything. I have no interest in rejecting God because He's right in my opinion. I stand by Him.
    You believe in him. You don't know, therefore there is no reason, or way, to argue in his favor.

    Faith doesn't require reason. Stop looking for arguments, there are none.


  • Options
    #600
    Mindme
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭Mindme


    Freddie59 wrote: »
    The key words. By whom? Their peers? With whom they share the same values?

    Internationally acclaimed and very learned scientists like Carl Sagan and company.

    Most of the greatest thinkers and authors who have ever lived.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #601
    Shenshen
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,453 Mod ✭✭✭✭Shenshen


    philologos wrote: »
    The evidence simply doesn't support your position. The private memoirs are in many ways anti-Christian. It seems to me that Hitler used Christianity as a tool, nothing more. It's simply inconclusive based on what we know about him.

    One such example of the private memoirs:


    We need to be honest when we're aiming to discuss this.

    If I remember correctly, that quote is take from the infamous "Table Talks"...

    "The account of Hitler's remarks, usually at dinner with other Nazi leaders, was made at the instigation of Martin Bormann, who edited them from notes taken by Heinrich Heim, from July 1941 to March 1942. Subsequently Henry Picker took notes from 21 March 1942 until 31 July 1942. In 1951 Picker published his version of the conversations in the volume Tischgespräche im Führerhauptquartier, which was published in the original German. Bormann's edited transcript Die Bormann Vermerke was published in French by François Genoud in 1952. Hugh Trevor-Roper published the first English edition the following year and revised it in later editions."

    Those texts were edited nearly as much as the bible itself, with each editor adding their own spin on the subjects.
    The English version is based not even one the twice-edited German version, but on the re-edited and already translated French one.

    Honesty is a nice trait, and trying to present the Table Talks as first-hand data because it's near enough the only text quoting Hitler as being opposed to Christianity is negligent if not dishonest.


Advertisement