Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

hinault · 23-04-2015 09:38PM

looksee wrote: »

I have just read all that stuff about roasting lambs and the minute detail of what people were to do to avoid being killed, and I do not see anything about warning the Egyptians. God created Egyptians as well as Hebrews, why is it reasonable for them to be killed with no warning?

Exodus Chapters 1 to 11 are filled with warnings to the Egyptians.

Safehands · 23-04-2015 10:50PM

hinault wrote: »

Did you read the two links supplied earlier?

I read one of them and that was enough!

MrPudding · 24-04-2015 06:30AM

hinault wrote: »

Exodus Chapters 1 to 11 are filled with warnings to the Egyptians.

See, now you are starting to sound like a battered wife talking to an A&E doctor explain how your husband really does love you, deep down.

MrP

katydid · 24-04-2015 07:45AM

MrPudding wrote: »

See, now you are starting to sound like a batter wife talking to an A&E doctor explain how your husband really does love you, deep down.

MrP

What do you expect with someone who reads scripture with the mind and world view of a bronze age shepherd?

PopePalpatine · 24-04-2015 08:50AM

katydid wrote: »

What do you expect with someone who reads scripture with the mind and world view of a bronze age shepherd?

Or a Daesh-esque Crusader.

MrPudding · 24-04-2015 08:57AM

katydid wrote: »

What do you expect with someone who reads scripture with the mind and world view of a bronze age shepherd?

I have to say that I found you views and some of the arguments you made on previous thread to be troublesome and lacking in coherency. But I find myself agreeing with many of the posts you have made on this and other threads more recently.

Whilst I don't have a great deal of time for religion, and for many of the people that follow it, I find myself liking you and your attitude towards religion more and more.

Hmmm, now I feel durty.

MrP

Safehands · 24-04-2015 08:58AM

katydid wrote: »

What do you expect with someone who reads scripture with the mind and world view of a bronze age shepherd?

Katy, that's very harsh.

Some bronze age shepherds were very bright! I'd even have them on my quiz team, specialist knowledge: "the Stars at Night"

katydid · 24-04-2015 09:08AM

MrPudding wrote: »

I have to say that I found you views and some of the arguments you made on previous thread to be troublesome and lacking in coherency. But I find myself agreeing with many of the posts you have made on this and other threads more recently.

Whilst I don't have a great deal of time for religion, and for many of the people that follow it, I find myself liking you and your attitude towards religion more and more.

Hmmm, now I feel durty.

MrP

Maybe you'll look back and find coherency in my other arguments, if you really really open your mind. I tend to stick to the same thread of argument... :cool:

silverharp · 24-04-2015 09:45AM

katydid wrote: »

Maybe you'll look back and find coherency in my other arguments, if you really really open your mind. I tend to stick to the same thread of argument... :cool:

I'm not trying to be smart but is your view that judaism was just another man made religion with no particular 2way communication up til Jesus and that god selected it as a suitable vehicle?
If you could send a camera back in time would you expect to see any supernatural activity up until Jesus?

Huntergonzo · 24-04-2015 11:00AM

hinault wrote: »

We're not debating anything.

You deliberately attempted earlier to misrepresent a verse from the Bible.
Anyone can make a mistake. But what you did was deliberate.

You asking something honestly?
No thanks.

I won't be replying further to you on this thread.

I didn't misrepresent anything I posted the verse exactly as is written in the bible, you obviously have a very hard time dealing with facts.

Haha fine don't respond, I think you've more than proven yourself inept at basic debating, but to give you credit you are persistent at avoiding questions and throwing around petty insults, have a good day lad.

Michael OBrien · 24-04-2015 12:59PM

hinault wrote: »

The part that you were addressing in that parable is clear though. The parable says that no matter what level of proof is provided, some people will never accept that proof regardless.

And by the way, God did allow someone to die and come back to life. Jesus.

Jesus said before he died that he would be killed but that he would return from the dead.
People refused to believe what he said.
Then when Jesus rose from the dead, people still refused to believe.
So no matter how much Jesus foretells and no matter that He fulfilled what He foretold, people refuse to believe.

But you say now that you don't believe in Jesus in any more.

Oh come on, Luke was written half a century after the alleged death of jesus.
Jesus would be a special case as he is allegedly god. Also the purpose was not to give testimony of an afterlife but as a sacrifice.

I said that the passage was about not returning from the dead to give testimony of the afterlife. Many of those that claim to have returned from the dead and were shown hell or heaven contradicts that passage which supports belief in the prophets and having faith in their teachings.

Yes as an atheist I don't believe jesus was anything special, and its unlikely we even know anything much about him even as a historical figure. He is most likely a legend. I don't mean to insult any christian by that, but as an atheist, it makes sense that I would not hold the same view as a christian.
I can however intellectually discuss the theology from viewpoints I don't hold. Much like a christian could discuss the quranic theology without accepting personally the premises.
So while I don't believe the christian theology, I can still point out perceived inconsistencies within it and later claims by christians.

indioblack · 24-04-2015 07:07PM

hinault wrote: »

An accusation of a coverup from a poster who deliberately ignored 28 preceding verses from a text is laughable.
Your amateurish attempt to further misrepresent continues.

As posted out earlier verses 1-28 denote in detail the warnings given by God
and how the warnings must be heeded to access mercy.

Verse 29 follows verses 1-28, and where the warnings outlined in 1-28 are not headed, justice is dispensed as explained in verse 29

You're a rank amateur in your attempt at misrepresentation.

God is the source of all life. God can therefore decide to give life or take life.
It is His and it is his to decide, should He do so.

In reading the Bible there is no instance in which God did not first issue a warning.
Where the warning was ignored God dispensed justice.
Where the warning was heeded, God dispensed mercy.

After the death of the first-born the Pharaoh let the Israelites go, so it may be assumed that he was warned - and chose to ignore the warning/warnings.
The Pharaoh was the king of Egypt. I'm assuming that he decided the fate of the Israelites. Perhaps with some advice from others in positions of authority.
But most people would have had little or no say in this matter and it can be surmised that they did not ignore the warning - they were powerless to do anything about it.
If the purpose of the killing of the first-born was to free the Israelites and exhibit god's power and authority, that I can understand.
But to do it in such a way that most of those killed would have been unable to prevent what transpired - well, this is not "gentle Jesus, meek and mild."
"God can therefore decide to give life or take life."
And therefore we may get an inkling of this god, whose view of justice and morality is at odds with ours.

katydid · 24-04-2015 07:22PM

silverharp wrote: »

I'm not trying to be smart but is your view that judaism was just another man made religion with no particular 2way communication up til Jesus and that god selected it as a suitable vehicle?
If you could send a camera back in time would you expect to see any supernatural activity up until Jesus?

Judaism developed as a particular way of understanding the divine. In that part of the world, every tribe and nation had its own set of gods, and the Jewish tribes had at one point a very similar kind of understanding, but developed a unique understanding of a single God. That understanding developed into a highly sophisticated religion, that saw a very special relationship between God and the Jews. The advent of Jesus saw a change in that relationship - Jesus taught that the relationship with the divine was with individuals, not with a particular nation.

That doesn't mean that either Jews or Christians have some kind of monopoly on understanding God. It just means that the understanding has developed and changed over millennia.

Some - a lot - of what is in the Old Testament is not based on actual supernatural events, but on folk tales and myths, but it's told to try to explain the divine. That's not to say that there weren't manifestations of the divine, but a lot of it is confused with these folk tales. Likewise with the New Testament; it is more reliable, as the same story was told by different people, who either directly or indirectly had contact with the person at the centre of the narrative. I, as a Christian, believe that Jesus did carry out activities that have no scientific or rational explanation, but I also believe that not everything outlined in the New Testament happened exactly as it is described, as a story told by different people always tends to end up with variations. And of course each writer had their own agenda to portray a particular aspect of Jesus, so no doubt were selective about what they wrote.

It doesn't take away from the essence of either the Old or the New Testament. You just have to read them intelligently.

marienbad · 24-04-2015 07:48PM

katydid wrote: »

Judaism developed as a particular way of understanding the divine. In that part of the world, every tribe and nation had its own set of gods, and the Jewish tribes had at one point a very similar kind of understanding, but developed a unique understanding of a single God. That understanding developed into a highly sophisticated religion, that saw a very special relationship between God and the Jews. The advent of Jesus saw a change in that relationship - Jesus taught that the relationship with the divine was with individuals, not with a particular nation.

That doesn't mean that either Jews or Christians have some kind of monopoly on understanding God. It just means that the understanding has developed and changed over millennia.

Some - a lot - of what is in the Old Testament is not based on actual supernatural events, but on folk tales and myths, but it's told to try to explain the divine. That's not to say that there weren't manifestations of the divine, but a lot of it is confused with these folk tales. Likewise with the New Testament; it is more reliable, as the same story was told by different people, who either directly or indirectly had contact with the person at the centre of the narrative. I, as a Christian, believe that Jesus did carry out activities that have no scientific or rational explanation, but I also believe that not everything outlined in the New Testament happened exactly as it is described, as a story told by different people always tends to end up with variations. And of course each writer had their own agenda to portray a particular aspect of Jesus, so no doubt were selective about what they wrote.

It doesn't take away from the essence of either the Old or the New Testament. You just have to read them intelligently.

But could you just as equally read The Iliad and The Odyssey or Plato or Lucretius ?

katydid · 24-04-2015 07:50PM

marienbad wrote: »

But could you just as equally read The Iliad and The Odyssey or Plato or Lucretius ?

You could indeed. But that doesn't include the reality of the Christian story.

marienbad · 24-04-2015 08:17PM

katydid wrote: »

You could indeed. But that doesn't include the reality of the Christian story.

What do you mean ? Are you saying the Christian story is divinely inspired or what ?

katydid · 24-04-2015 08:19PM

marienbad wrote: »

What do you mean ? Are you saying the Christian story is divinely inspired or what ?

Yes. That's what I believe.

hinault · 24-04-2015 11:57PM

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I didn't misrepresent anything I posted the verse exactly as is written in the bible, you obviously have a very hard time dealing with facts..

You quoted a verse correctly.

You deliberately misrepresented the context of the verse that you correctly quoted.

They're the only facts.

hinault · 25-04-2015 12:35AM

indioblack wrote: »

After the death of the first-born the Pharaoh let the Israelites go, so it may be assumed that he was warned - and chose to ignore the warning/warnings.
The Pharaoh was the king of Egypt. I'm assuming that he decided the fate of the Israelites. Perhaps with some advice from others in positions of authority.
But most people would have had little or no say in this matter and it can be surmised that they did not ignore the warning - they were powerless to do anything about it.
If the purpose of the killing of the first-born was to free the Israelites and exhibit god's power and authority, that I can understand.
But to do it in such a way that most of those killed would have been unable to prevent what transpired - well, this is not "gentle Jesus, meek and mild."
"God can therefore decide to give life or take life."
And therefore we may get an inkling of this god, whose view of justice and morality is at odds with ours.

So God gets blamed because, despite issuing warnings to the Pharaoh which the Pharaoh entirely ignored, the warnings were not issued to every single individual person in Egypt :rolleyes:

You're aware that the sole authority in those societies was the Pharaoh/King/Chieftain and when that sole authority said jump their subjects obeyed without question?

When you read Exodus, it is clear that the Pharaoh could not be in any doubt as to the warnings given. God not only gives the Pharaoh warnings, God gave Moses supernatural powers to try to convince the persuade the Pharaoh.

And even as the warnings began to be fulfilled, the Pharoah and the Egyptian wisemen and magicians refused to acknowledge the supernatural powers afforded to Aaron and Moses by God.

katydid · 25-04-2015 12:38AM

hinault wrote: »

So God gets blamed because, despite issuing warnings to the Pharaoh which the Pharaoh entirely ignored, the warnings were not issued to every single individual person in Egypt :rolleyes:

You're aware that the sole authority in those societies was the Pharaoh/King/Chieftain and when that sole authority said jump their subjects obeyed without question?

When you read Exodus, it is clear that the Pharaoh could not be in any doubt as to the warnings given. God not only gives the Pharaoh warnings, God gave Moses supernatural powers to try to convince the persuade the Pharaoh.

And even as the warnings began to be fulfilled, the Pharoah and the Egyptian wisemen and magicians refused to acknowledge the supernatural powers afforded to Aaron and Moses by God.

You give Christians a bad name. You do realise this is all a STORY, don't you? There is a basis of historical truth, but most of the supernatural elements are just folk tales. They were used by the scripture writers to explain more profound ideas - you don't have to take them literally.

indioblack · 25-04-2015 07:22AM

hinault wrote: »

So God gets blamed because, despite issuing warnings to the Pharaoh which the Pharaoh entirely ignored, the warnings were not issued to every single individual person in Egypt :rolleyes:

You're aware that the sole authority in those societies was the Pharaoh/King/Chieftain and when that sole authority said jump their subjects obeyed without question?

When you read Exodus, it is clear that the Pharaoh could not be in any doubt as to the warnings given. God not only gives the Pharaoh warnings, God gave Moses supernatural powers to try to convince the persuade the Pharaoh.

And even as the warnings began to be fulfilled, the Pharoah and the Egyptian wisemen and magicians refused to acknowledge the supernatural powers afforded to Aaron and Moses by God.

Why should these people be penalised by god for the actions of their ruler?
As for issuing a warning to everyone - well, pointless as it would have been, god can surely do that.
You're right, Pharaoh was the boss, in this story he was responsible, so the compulsion to act should have been placed on him alone.

indioblack · 25-04-2015 07:36AM

katydid wrote: »

You give Christians a bad name. You do realise this is all a STORY, don't you? There is a basis of historical truth, but most of the supernatural elements are just folk tales. They were used by the scripture writers to explain more profound ideas - you don't have to take them literally.

They must have been good stories, for a sizeable amount of Christians accept them as relating to actual events. Are these folk tales still being taught to children as historical reality?
What profound idea underpins this story?
How many of the victims in this tale had no hand in the events that led to their deaths?
God chose to support one bunch of people - and exacted retribution on any other bunch that got in their way.
God's power, authority and favour is demonstrated in this fable - and his apparent indifference to the fate of any but his chosen people.

Huntergonzo · 25-04-2015 08:55AM

hinault wrote: »

You quoted a verse correctly.

You deliberately misrepresented the context of the verse that you correctly quoted.

They're the only facts.

How do you contextualise mass murder? You see this is the dangerous thing about religion, it can make normally good people (which I presume you are) do and or think very bad things.

To quote Stephen Weinberg = “in the ordinary moral universe, the good will do the best they can, the worst will do the worst they can, but if you want to make good people do wicked things, you’ll need religion”.

Now you can throw the word misrepresent at me all you want, but just like calling me an amateur I quite enjoy it, I see it as a poor attempt to dodge the issue, nothing more.

galljga1 · 25-04-2015 09:01AM

hinault wrote: »

God gives life, and with each life God separately gives each person free will.

A slave doesn't have free will. A slave cannot obey his/her will.
A slave only obeys the will of their master.

Which is what you blindly appear to be doing.

MrPudding · 25-04-2015 09:41AM

galljga1 wrote: »

Which is what you blindly appear to be doing.

But he is choosing to blindly obey. Like a battered wife chooses to stay with her abuser.

MrP

J C · 25-04-2015 10:18AM

MrPudding wrote: »

But he is choosing to blindly obey. Like a battered wife chooses to stay with her abuser.

MrP

Your analogy of a disfunctional marriage of violence and abuse would be appropriate to the relationship between and occultist and the powers of darkness he/she seeks to control and use ... but which, in fact, control and abuse him/her.

It certainly doesn't apply to the loving and respectful relationship between Christian's and God and His merciful love towards them. Jesus actually used the analogy of a loving mutually respectul marriage to explain His relationship with His church.

J C · 25-04-2015 10:30AM

katydid wrote: »

You could indeed. But that doesn't include the reality of the Christian story.

What is the reality of the Christian story?

The reality of a story ... sounds like an oxymoron to me.

J C · 25-04-2015 11:00AM

hinault wrote: »

When you read Exodus, it is clear that the Pharaoh could not be in any doubt as to the warnings given. God not only gives the Pharaoh warnings, God gave Moses supernatural powers to try to convince the persuade the Pharaoh.

And even as the warnings began to be fulfilled, the Pharoah and the Egyptian wisemen and magicians refused to acknowledge the supernatural powers afforded to Aaron and Moses by God.

God chose to intervene so that His Chosen People (for the salvation of Mankind) would survive to produce a Saviour.
The situation in ancient Egypt was that the very survival of the Israelite Nation was at stake - and if you doubt me, consider the attempt at genocide by Pharaoh’s army, chasing the fleeing Israelites, that was only thwarted by the miraculous opening up of the Red Sea … and its closure on the pursuing army, after the Israelite’s had crossed.
In a modern context, would anybody blame God for sending plagues to Hitler and the Nazis to prevent their planned annihilation of the Jews?

Because we live in the Church era, God didn’t intervene … and it took millions of soldiers and millions of lives lost to eventually thwart Hitler’s malign intentions.
If a few large-scale plagues directed at Hitler and the Nazis by God, could have prevented the Holocaust … they would have been quite justified IMO … and ditto with the plagues in Ancient Egypt.

katydid · 25-04-2015 11:09AM

J C wrote: »

What is the reality of the Christian story?

The reality of a story ... sounds like an oxymoron to me.

Stories are not necessarily fictional.

The reality of the Christian story, to those who believe, is that God became incarnate, lived, died and rose again, and showed us how to live.

I thought that was fairly well known

galljga1 · 25-04-2015 11:09AM

J C wrote: »

God chose to intervene so that His Chosen People (for the salvation of Mankind) would survive to produce a Saviour.
The situation in ancient Egypt was that the very survival of the Israelite Nation was at stake - and if you doubt me, consider the attempt at genocide by Pharaoh’s army, chasing the fleeing Israelites, that was only thwarted by the miraculous opening up of the Red Sea … and its closure on the pursuing army, after the Israelite’s had crossed.
In a modern context, would anybody blame God for sending plagues to Hitler and the Nazis to prevent their planned annihilation of the Jews?
Because we live in the Church era, God didn’t intervene … and it took millions of soldiers and millions of lives lost to eventually thwart Hitler’s malign intentions.
If a few large-scale plagues directed at Hitler and the Nazis by God, could have prevented the Holocaust … they would have been quite justifiable IMO … and ditto with the plagues in Ancient Egypt.

I do not have the energy to contradict this. It is in the book, it must be true, I give up and am saved.

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

Comments