Poor Ken Ham is heartbroken by the latest polling data.
Look at that! More people regard the Bible as a book of fables than ever before. This hurts the Hamster, who declares that they must keep doing more of what has discredited the book.
In this day and age, I consider Genesis, out of all the other books of the Bible, to be the most attacked, scoffed at, and ridiculed—from within parts of the church and outside. You see, because of the indoctrination in the belief evolution and millions of years through the education system and media, many people believe that Genesis 1-11 cannot be taken as literal history. As a result, such evolutionary teaching is a stumbling block to many non-Christians even listening to the gospel from the Word of God—and many people in the church are put on a slippery slide of unbelief in the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God.
Reports like this one on the poll emphasize the great need for creation-apologetics teaching in churches and homes.
Please, please, please keep it up -- these Bible literalists do so much to help the cause of atheism. When you insist that a short page of fuzzy poetry must supplant all of biology and must be regarded as absolutely, literally true in every word, rational people are given cause to doubt…and once they begin to doubt the first page of your sacred holy book, they begin to question page 2, and page 3, and page whatever, and quite soon the dedicated priests of your cult are wondering why there is a sudden, catastrophic loss of believers.
- Log in to post comments
Good news, to be sure. I wonder if views on astrology and other pseudo-sciences have also seen a drop though. If anything, things have gotten worse.
Oddly enough, as an atheist, I have been grouped with young earth creationists. By whom? By christians who think that the bible should not be taken litteraly. So what do you think the early jews believed? Did they believe the genesis story was a metaphor for "something else"? Did no one bother asking what the real real creation event was? "Hey Jesus, is this a metaphor and what did really happen?" Did ancient jews not care how things were really really created? And where do you draw the line between metaphor and real in the Bible? Did Adam live 930 years? What about all the other boys? Did insects have 4 legs as it says in the Bible or is that a metaphor?
I would say that it is time for those middle people (those people that think the Bible is inspired word but not everything should be taken literally) to wake up and smell reality.
===> Ancient people believed in all sorts of none sense.
@RD: Omg. There are books and educated people out there. You could inform yourself and learn.Then you would not have to write about dust and moon cleaning. It truly shocks me that somebody can be so ignorant (and be unaware of it). I am so sorry for you. But then the first comment kind of gave it away.
Dawkins, in your world, there are many sources of dust, which is primarily shed skin cells. there is no source of dust on the moon.
Reason 1; Nonsense 0
"The truth hurts, doesn’t it, Stefan Shithead? Have your boyfriend dry off your tears and change your frilly little panties if stark science and rude reality offend your delicate atheist sensibilities. Your whingeing and whining are giving the honest folk a headache."
'the honest folk'? Really? I'll never understand how people can use these kind of terms and expect to be taken seriously. But then, perhaps you don't want to. After all you ironically call this 'argument' of yours 'stark science'. If so, you got me.
But if you really could bring yourself to think this way then, yes. This does hurt a bit. You know from a humanists point of view, you and me are alike. Both created after the same imperfect image if you will. But then something happened to you on the way and look where you are. I mean, you could have become an intelligent person. Such loss ... . It causes despair.
"scoffed at, and ridiculed—from within parts of the church and outside. You see, because of the overwhelming contrary evidence, many people believe... "
Fixed that for you, Ken.
“Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”
Jesus has died (so to speak) and here we are 2000 years later still talking about Him and His flock. His movement hasn't "come to nothing", but has only swelled to 2.3 billion (living souls) in 2014. What's an atheist or critic to do? Denounce Him? Continue the ATTEMPT at debunking? "Please please keep it up." It's been kept up for centuries and "you will not be able to stop the Word; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.” An inevitable fail. You'd have better luck stopping the earth from spinning, or stopping the next tsunami. It's a spiritual matter, "not of human origin" and it's being perpetuated by momentum that supersedes your finite understanding. "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall never pass away." Good luck!
"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." We're all perishing physically of course, but could it be that nonbelievers are perishing in the worst kind of way - where their spiritual component or soul is concerned? You're sadly oblivious to this aspect of your being so I don't expect a confident answer, but yet a denial. If you believe that the message of the cross is foolishness though, might that damnation shoe fit you? Could you folks be in for a rude awakening? You can't rule out the possibility of your soul's existence, and therefore can't rule out it's potential destination. A tragic gamble to not have that figured out.
And as for that little chart, absolutely nothing to get excited about - hold the champagne celebration. Those numbers are small, but the trend is anticipated considering how broad that road is to destruction and how narrow the gate is to the other place. As the population grows and new "theories", philosophies and belief systems emerge, skewed views and confused interpretations are to be expected. The only interpretation of the Bible that matters however, is the one the Author intended.
Finally, WE CAN'T ESCAPE JESUS. There He is, a fairly recent historical Figure Who is not a figment of anyone's imagination, but changed the world with BOLD assertions and a BOLD life. We need not go back 6-7000 years or 4.5 billion to see God's greatest act of communication (who can truly know how old this rock is anyway, I can barely keep up with last month). What we can know is that this Man Jesus penetrated history by setting the standard for human behavior, showcasing supreme wisdom & supernatural power. A demonstration of God and His requirements if you will.
If any of the stuff concerning His walk on earth is true, many are in for an eternal mess. "Knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires." They will say, “Where is the promise of His coming?"
Escaping Jesus is easy. Escaping his fanatics -- a little trickier.
"Hey Jesus, do you exist?"
(*silence*)
If God can communicate at all, then God should communicate right now. God's silence is a strong argument for his nonexistence.
If reality is not a lie, then the Earth cannot possibly be less than 4.5 billion years old.
... and here's why:
Radiometric Dating : A Christian Perspective
Another issue is that the loudest people on the Religious Right live lives that are very much counter to the example of Jesus Christ. So many Christians reject their authority and listen elsewhere.
If your faith is about "my way is right", then what the scriptures actually say doesn't matter.
@Howard
The "loud religious right" annoys me, Fox News gets on my nerves, George W. Bush irked me when he was president and I get on my nerves. Being a Christian who can never quite live up to the standard set by Jesus is something every believer has in common. He was just too good (perfect in fact) and we can never be as consistent with righteousness, consequently there is no "authority" but Him. The disclaimer; Jesus is the template, so take a harder look at Him than you do the followers because ultimately we're just patients (who admit to our ailments) visiting the Physician. "(His) way is right" and nonnegotiable, our way or your way is irrelevant.
@Owlmirror
Escaping Jesus may not be as "easy" as you say. "At the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." You have absolutely no clue what awaits you on the other side of death. You can't disprove the existence of God or what may be the most significant aspect of your being/existence; your soul. If it works out that you have one, Jesus is ineludible.
Depending on where you live, you are likely reminded of His death and resurrection every Easter, and you're probably forced to observe the festive celebration of His birth during every month of December. Whether you partake in the festivities or ignore them, someone somewhere is persistently reminding you of Him. The number attached to the year that you were born has something to do with Him having walked among us as many countries base the lineage of time around His life. He's the center of time, the center of humanity, the King of the universe. Nowhere to hide. You mentioned how "escaping His fanatics can be tricky" and the fact that you're engaged with one is yet more proof of His inescapability considering that The Great Commission is His call: And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation." Not our idea. His resonance is most everywhere, and you're getting every opportunity to hear so that you are without excuse.
"Hey Jesus, do you exist? If God could communicate at all, then God should communicate right now." I assume atheists and nonbelievers wanna see walk on water, water into wine miracles to justify belief. I've had things transpire in my life that surpassed my understanding, but more often than not, like with any other relationship I've had to listen to what Jesus had to say (through the Bible of course) in order to gain understanding and intimacy. Moses did miracles to help doubters, Jesus did some you've heard about and some were demonstrated by the apostles. Other than that, your Creator's main tactic has been to use men to reach men with Words that penetrate the conscience and the spirit. Moses take My commandments to the people, Jesus take Me to the people, Apostle Paul take My message to the people and build My church/kingdom, etc. Being immutable - the same yesterday, today and forever - His strategy is the same in 2014.
Of course the problem is that most people don't want their God-given conscience seared, or to be told that they're sinners or that they need salvation, so Jesus - like a cop pulling them over for a traffic ticket - is the last Person they wanna deal with. That's where the burden falls on the individual. You have that morality meter that let's you know where you fall short, and if you don't wanna confront the truth of your fallibility, your chances at a revelation of God's Personality and holiness is diminished. The "fanatic" has the courage to acknowledge their sin/fallibility, therefore they repent and seek forgiveness which removes the divide.
Look around at the genius of creation, the material and immaterial evidence for God is abundant. Where you see love, kindness, peace, goodness, joy, true wisdom, you see invisible evidence of God as He is all those things. His expression of creativity through everything including mankind is "strong evidence for His existence" - and more proof that He is not "silent".
What "other side of death"?
As Sean M. Carroll writes:
Claims that some form of consciousness persists after our bodies die and decay into their constituent atoms face one huge, insuperable obstacle: the laws of physics underlying everyday life are completely understood, and there's no way within those laws to allow for the information stored in our brains to persist after we die. If you claim that some form of soul persists beyond death, what particles is that soul made of? What forces are holding it together? How does it interact with ordinary matter?
Everything we know about quantum field theory (QFT) says that there aren't any sensible answers to these questions. Of course, everything we know about quantum field theory could be wrong. Also, the Moon could be made of green cheese.
Or as I would summarize what he says: The existence of a nonphysical immortal soul or a nonphysical God are not just unevidenced claims, but are actually fundamentally nonsensical. The burden is on believers not just to show evidence for their claims, but first to demonstrate that they are not nonsense.
That's false, since even if the nonsensical concept of a nonphysical soul exists, Christianity could be false. For example, you might have a soul, but Islam or Judaism are true rather than Christianity, and you are one of the many damned for idolatry.
Actually, the fundamental claim of Christianity is not just that Jesus did magic tricks, but specifically did the magic trick of coming back from the dead, and (presumably) never dying.
So the only thing that would justify belief in Christianity would be Jesus himself living for the past 2000 years. But apparently, Jesus very conveniently disappeared, never to be seen again.
"Hey, Jesus, if Christianity is false, say nothing."
(*silence*)
I guess Christianity must be false.
According to your mythology, God is all-knowing and all-powerful. So by definition, all humans are dumber and weaker than God. Sending someone dumber and weaker than you to deliver an important message that should not be garbled or misrepresented, and which you can presumably deliver just as easily yourself, is insane.
(God is also sexist, but that's another argument)
In the myth of the bible, God talks to Cain, the first fratricidal murderer, who doesn't repent or seek forgiveness.
Why does God talk to an unrepentant murderer, but not to you?
Why do you make such nonsensical claims? All of those abstract qualities are just that, abstract qualities.
A putative person might have or feel some or all of those qualities, but it is nonsense to say that a person is all those qualities.
Really? When there are no writings from the same time he supposedly lived, no independent sources outside the scriptures (which were written and rewritten by men in order to keep the narrative as they wanted it).
sorry, if the only "proof" someone existed is contained in writings made AFTER the alleged life and by people who made their livings promoting the person - that's no proof at all.
Feelgood: Where you see love, kindness, peace, goodness, joy, true wisdom, you see invisible evidence of God as He is all those things. His expression of creativity through everything including mankind is “strong evidence for His existence” – and more proof that He is not “silent”.
Hahahaaha haahaa.. Let me take a breath, I'm laughing so hard. I assume you are a heterosexual male, as those are the only people assured of God's 'love.' For everyone else, he's got only hate
God hates wisdom, actually. That's why most scientists are on his sh*t list. Kindness? Nope. God doesn't have time for that- see the Magdalene Laundries, the Homes in Ireland, the Crusades, etc.
Peaceful? Yeah, the Hundred Years War, the Crusades, all of Charlemagne's campaigns- God supported that, you know.
God is a small minded, hateful, warmongering, eternal finger wagging in the distant sky. I'd rather live in the here and now, thanks. Besides, since I'm a woman who learned to read at six, and is currently single, I'm pretty high in the bad books.
@Owlmirror
There is no "burden on believers to show evidence for our claims" as we're talking about the invisible God who obviously can't be summoned to satisfy skeptics. The burden is on God to reveal what He wants, to who He wants, how He wants, when He wants - and for that person to respond when He convicts them. The only demonstration a believer can shoulder is proclamation, and the demonstration of Christlike character while we do it. The spiritual fruits you referred to as "abstract qualities", are actually attributes that Jesus had in abundance and believers are called to bear for the perpetuation of His cause. Everybody is made in the image of God so everyone can exude these fruits, but if the last thing you want to do is love, be patient, be kind, be peaceful or be gentle and you do it anyway, it's a spiritual exercise that profits (see among others MLK demonstrating peace and patience while loving his enemies/the Southern U.S. into civil rights progress - a modern Moses). God shining His light through men has done most of the heavy lifting in the Christian movement, and I don't know where you can find the kind of demonstration that would end your doubts. Oh, maybe I do!!! Seek Jesus aggressively, read up on Him.
Of course "nonphysical souls and a nonphysical God are fundamentally nonsensical" to the nonbeliever. Quoting another believer from another thread; "science deals only with the natural, the supernatural lies far outside the purview of science" so naturally "unevidenced" and "nonsensical" are terms you're gonna use to describe things that supersede your understanding. They don't make sense because they're beyond your senses - and though you can see and hear, you're blind and deaf in all the ways that matter. Jesus rising from the dead doesn't make sense to you but it does to me even though it defies the natural. I know it happened. I wasn't there, I have absolutely no way of proving it, but I know it happened. There's no way to make that digestible for you, nevertheless, your doubts don't make me, Jesus and billions of others wrong.
God is, His Son is and though they can't be produced materially or "proven", they prove themselves in the lives and hearts of people everyday. I have my secure relationship that generates all kinds of observable evidence within my own life, but would find those things difficult to articulate on a blog. You keep referring to the Bible as "the myth" or "your mythology", but it's well established that Jesus was no myth. I'm confident you'll get all the confirmation you need on that at some point as we're not dealing with Zeus or Hercules, but God incarnate - the King of kings. You may want to believe the Bible is a myth, you may want to believe believers are wrong, you may want the supernatural legacy of Jesus to be falsified or for souls to not exist, but what does that matter? The truth is all that does.
Your buddy Sean was right to ask: "What particles are souls made of? What forces (God of course) are holding it together? How does it interact with ordinary matter?" What what how indeed because he doesn't know. I don't know, but our ingnorance about what souls are made of doesn't mean they don't exist. There are all kinds of unsolved mysteries all around us, within us and above us. No one has a clue what God looks like or how He did everything, but He exists evidenced by what He's created and revealed. Jesus has insight on these matters so consult with Him via prayer if the substance of souls keeps you up at night. I'm more concerned with personally knowing God, knowing His will and getting my soul up yonder. I'll ask Him technical questions some other time.
On that note, there is nothing "false" about you running into Jesus in the hereafter (what I meant by "the other side of death"). Your belief about whether you do, or Islam's belief about whether they do is irrelevant. "For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son" and (again) "at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." This Jesus is an exclusive Fellow evidenced by the claim; "no one comes to the Father except by Me" and has the right to be exclusive given the nature and accomplishment of His death. If He goes through all that trouble, and God allows all that torture and ultimately His death, then He is THE one way ticket. That kind of suffering eliminates alternatives taking into account the value of the Person being sacrificed. He's the Son of God, loopholes would render it all a waste. "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved."
"Why does God talk to an unrepentant murderer, but not to you?" You'll notice that I stated: "your chance at a revelation of God’s Personality and holiness is DIMINISHED" if you're unrepentant, not that your chance was nil. He can speak to Cain, Bin Laden, you if not one "I'm sorry - please forgive me" is ever offered, but you wouldn't go into the White House or a king's castle with dog poop on your clothes, and you'd certainly want a clean change of clothes before you met royalty or the president. How much cleaner should you be to interact with God?
"Sending someone dumber and weaker than you to deliver an important message that should not be garbled or misrepresented, and which you can presumably deliver just as easily yourself, is insane." This is a reasonable argument for everyone but Jesus, He would be classified as God sending His best Man to do the job. As for the rest, maybe He wants to collaborate and include man in on His story. We are His crowning biological achievement - being made in His image and all - so out of all of the potential conduits, mankind makes the most sense. Furthermore "God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise and chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong", presumably for His own good pleasure and for His glory. Yeah that's a good place to close. "His good pleasure" is entirely His prerogative, and atheists and nonbelievers can't expect to put God on trial. We've got a pretty efficient creation; a superb job has been done on the human body (better than any of us could do), the wonders of nature are genius, the universe is awesomeness, etc. He doesn't owe you prosecutors anything more than the life, habitat and blessings He's already gifted you with. On top of that, executing the greatest act of love ever demonstrated in having His Son die for you, affording you the opportunity at reconciliation and salvation. It's all been accomplished, finished and His work with us has been thorough. I said the burden is on Him (so much has been done already), but you have a great deal of responsibility as well - starting with humility and contrition. Are you fallible? Does your conscience confirm that you are a sinner? Do you know everything or are you ignorant when it comes God and spirituality? Do you really want to know God (or do you just like debating people who say they do)? In your mind, do you need God?
Since no one (except Dean) denies that Jesus Christ once walked among us, and no one - despite MANY efforts - has been able to disprove His claims, miracles or resurrection; Who do you say He was? Was He a sociopath or liar? A magician maybe? What's your explanation for all the honor, praise and fame He's attained and maintained over the centuries? Why hasn't He been debunked? Are you CERTAIN you don't have a soul awaiting His judgement? Try to get a confirmation before you croak.
@Dean
You maintain those conspiracy theories if you want. Maybe you're right. Maybe the believers are all being duped (NOT). I never saw photos or videos of Thomas Jefferson, Julius Caesar or King Tut, I only read about them. Did they exist? "Writings by people who made their living promoting the person"? Huh? The Apostle Paul left wealth, power and a life of persecuting Christians to become one and convert others. He and the original disciples relied on the kindness of strangers, tent making and such to survive and execute their call, they earned little if anything from preaching. The perpetuation of the gospel and the fulfillment of their purpose was clearly their motivation, not money. In fact, Peter, Paul and Timothy all died horribly FOR "promoting this Person" so other than the spiritual currency, death was their payment.
God is bold and obvious, but also subtle at times. Jesus was not what the Jews were expecting when they were promised a Messiah, as God chose to make Him "like one from whom people hide their faces, despised, and held in low esteem." So when they participated in His execution, they couldn't see what they were doing or Who they were doing it to, because He seemed so meek and common. Paul's story was similar - the last person people would've thought to be preaching Jesus. He's right in front of us so plain, but some still overlook Him. I can't even wrap my head around how anyone can conceive of EVERYTHING on earth and in the universe being CREATED by accident or some random explosion. How is that even a consideration? Why is the earth a perfect sphere and not some off shape if it wasn't intelligently designed? I can't even draw a perfect circle. Why eyelids, conscience, saturn's rings, gravity, nose hairs, etc. etc.? Are you guys in denial or do you REALLY BELIEVE that there is no Creator? Maybe it's the ID folks who are missing something.
@Politicalguineapig
I love you single lady! You sound like someone who consciously or subconsciously knows that there is a God, but like a teenager rebelling against the authority of her parents, you're mad at Him because you're fed up with His rules and His way of doing things. Well like a domestic father He can get scary angry, be a STERN disciplinarian/stickler for the rules and be ruthless about justice. Fast forward to Jesus though. How sweet was He? Never hurt a fly and how nice was it of Him to die on a cross for the sins of man and womankind, satisfying the wrath of God. Justice has been served and all is well with the universe as Jesus demonstrated love, kindness, peace, goodness, forbearance and true wisdom to a higher degree than anyone before or since. Now anybody looking for a Big Brother or salvation can refer to Him for guidance and acceptance, and know their full potential by walking in His footsteps. God was so loving and kind to send Him our way :).
What a load of bullshit. You make remarkable claims and then say "Oh, I don't have to provide proof - you can see proof just by looking around." I'd like to think you aren't foolish enough to think that makes sense, but if I had to bet I would bet you are.
Apparently you are as delusional as you seem. We know those people existed because of
* items they left behind
* reports of their actions and lives written by others
* historical records that have been verified
None of those exist for your proposed Jesus. Your comment is simply a repetition of the asinine "Were you there?" comment used by others.
It isn't. But aside from that we have explanations (descriptions) for how planets form and for their shape based on, you know, science and facts, rather than mythology.
There is no need for the hypothesis of a creator, just as there is no evidence for one except in the imagination of the reality-challenged.
Okay Dean, Jesus was never here. There are no reasons to believe He was, you're right. Does that make you feel safe and comfy? Snuggle into that bullshit, take residence. The completely "FOOLISH" and "ASININE" idea that everything just happened without Intelligence has to be correct. I'm sorry for ever doubting you stupidity.
I almost want to encourage your "explanations (descriptions) for how planets formed and got their shape" without Intelligence, but I would feel guilt if you had to rehearse nonsense in your brain yet another time. Oh and to imagine what you might say about the intricacies of the human body, and how they came about without God. Out of love and concern, I can't be the reason you express it again.
FG, given you complete ignorance of science and history, I have to wonder why you chose to display such ignorance on a science based blog.
You are correct though - since the only reference for jesus' existence is the Bible written and rewritten by people who needed to continue the legend in order to maintain their status, there is no proof for the existence. Not in the sense any reasonable person would believe.
"Given you (<--- HUMAN ERROR) complete ignorance of science and history, I have to wonder why you chose to display such ignorance on a science based blog."
I like being on a science blog Dean. It's fulfilling. The ignorance and denial often displayed here about God is Bible confirming.
Tell me, are you a proponent of evolution?
The overwhelming scientific evidence has convinced me, yes. Only a moron would say there is nothing too it.
I'm guessing you buy the woo of creationism (unless you prefer its current name, intelligent design).
And yes, I make an occasional typing error. That is an error of mechanics, not an error of choice like your science denialism.
FG: I never saw photos or videos of Thomas Jefferson, Julius Caesar or King Tut, I only read about them.
There are photos and video of King Tut's body and belongings. If you haven't seen them, you haven't been looking. As for Jefferson and Julius Caesar, there's a ton of records including written records, artifacts, and even a house. (What is Monticello?) Everything associated with Jesus is of dubious authenticity. I imagine you're one of those people who believe Jesus was white and blonde.
As for the rest, my point seems to have sailed over your head. If God exists, he's so irrelevant to my life (and nearly everyone else's) that belief or not is meaningless. However, most believers like to use religion as a bludgeon to stifle scientific inquiry, ensure that evolution never gets taught, and choke off the development of future scientists and doctors. It's impossible that God exists or created the Universe because a little narrow mind could never create something like the Milky Way.
Sure there is. You're claiming that there is at least one nonphysical person (and actually, more than several billion nonphysical persons). You're actually claiming more than that (that all of the Christian claims about this nonphysical person are true, and there are many claims associated with this person), but that's the basics.
So the burden is on you to show that these claims are not imaginary.
I agree that it is impossible for an imaginary God to be summoned, or, indeed, to manifest voluntarily, at all.
It's odd that you use the word "summoned", though, as though God were an enormous distance away, and it would be a huge effort for God to cross that distance. Do you imagine that God is not omnipresent? Why don't you use the phrase "addressed", or better yet, "communicated with"?
When I imagine an all-knowing and all-powerful nonphysical person, I imagine one that knows immediately when it is addressed (because knowing when one is addressed is obviously a subset of knowing everything), and which can cause air to vibrate in the same way that a human voice can cause air to vibrate (because causing such vibrations is well within the set of actions that can be caused by a person that is all-powerful). I don't imagine that this person needs to move from where it is (assuming that it isn't everywhere) to either know anything or to cause any action (like a voice). Indeed, I imagine that such a person could easily hold personal conversations with every single human on earth simultaneously, and would in fact do so if everyone initiated a conversation.
What do you see as being wrong with what I imagine?
So assuming that this imaginary God exists, now you're claiming that he does not want me to know that he exists.
Why is the God that you imagine so perverse?
So now they're attributes that someone has, rather than being. Thank you for conceding that an atheist is correct about something. That's better than before, I suppose, but now I'm wondering why you believe it -- it's not like Jesus demonstrated all of those attributes simultaneously, even in the texts that are supposed to be about him.
In the real world -- not the world of the imagination.
As I wrote above, I should be able to seek Jesus in Jerusalem, and find him still living after 2000 years. But I can't, because he isn't actually around to be sought.
I'm not sure they're not fundamentally nonsensical to the believer, either. You're certainly not making the case that there is any sense in the concepts.
What does "supernatural" mean, though, and why should it be outside the purview of science, unless it actually is completely imaginary?
Lots of things within the purview of science are beyond our senses, but tools exist that translate what is outside our senses to something within our senses. Telescopes, microscopes, filters, lenses, circuits, and so on.
Why can't the God that you imagine translate himself into something within our senses, unless he is actually just completely imaginary?
I can certainly imagine it happening, but just because I can imagine it doesn't mean that it happened in reality.
I am confident that you are confident in your imagination, but that doesn't make what you imagine to be what happened in reality.
I have conversed with at least one Christian who was intellectually honest enough to emphasize that he believed that it happened, rather than that he knew that it happened. But he was a scientist, and had a better idea of the difference between "belief" and "knowledge" than you do.
Interesting that you phrase it that way -- the parts of the Bible about Jesus are not the only parts that there are. Do you think that any part of the Bible actually is myth?
Also, it is not well-established that the life of Jesus contains no myth. The two contradictory stories of his conception, birth, and early life, and the multiple contradictory stories of his death (and putative resurrection) strongly indicate that even if there was someone named "Jesus" about whom many stories were told, those stories were heavily mythologized.
Um, why does "God incarnate" provide exactly as much evidence of his existence as Zeus or Hercules?
Do you believe that snakes can talk? Do you believe that God talks to murderers? Do you believe that God deliberately drowned most life on Earth in a giant, world-covering flood?
Most of the Bible is obviously myth, and some of it is less obviously myth, and there's a few points, late in 2 Kings, where what the bible describes is partially corroborated by archaeology.
I am confident that believers are wrong, because they have neither evidence nor reason to support their beliefs. They believe in the face of the contradictions between reality and the bible (and the bible and itself).
I'm not sure what you mean by "supernatural legacy" -- do you meant the resurrection? Again, I have no reason to believe that the resurrection happened at all, since Jesus is not around to show that he is alive after being resurrected.
Why should I believe that souls exist? Just because people imagine that souls exist?
I am not sure that you care about what is true.
But you haven't demonstrated what God is made of, or that God is able to hold anything together, even himself.
It means we can be very confident that they don't exist, and that they are nonsensical concepts.
You don't get to simply claim that reality is a creation that provides evidence for a creator. You need to do more work than that.
It's interesting that you imply that Jesus is not God, and that Jesus has "insight" rather than "knowing". Just out of curiosity, are you a Jehovah's Witness?
Does Jesus tell you anything about the real world, as opposed to what you imagine?
So you imagine that God exists and that you can know his will despite the fact that he doesn't talk. Interesting.
What hereafter?
Ah. So imagine that your beliefs are relevant, despite the fact that they are imaginary, and no-one else's beliefs are relevant, despite the fact that they claim that your beliefs are irrelevant.
How, exactly, does it "eliminate alternatives"?
In the Old Testament, at least two people that I can think of -- Enoch and Elijah -- go directly to heaven, and no mention is made of Jesus. Are those parts myth?
In Luke 16:19-31, are Abraham and Lazarus saved and in Heaven, or are they in Hell?
Under Judaism and Islam, all of your claims about Jesus are simply false, and God handles salvation on his own. Since an all-powerful God would be able to do this, it makes more sense than that God would make Jesus to handle salvation.
It's odd that you misread the words that you copied and pasted. I didn't ask why God wouldn't talk to me, but to you.
According to you, you have done all that is necessary, so why doesn't God talk to you when he did talk to a murderer?
So you agree that God was insane when he spoke to all the other prophets, rather than speaking to people directly?
I don't see how Jesus was the "best", when in the bible it is not clear that salvation comes from belief, works, belief and works, or just the will of God alone. That sure looks like a garbled and misrepresented message to me.
Do you imagine that God is an old man with a white beard?
Ah. So you imagine that God is insane because he likes being insane.
Sure we can. Since God is imaginary, I can judge God to be imaginary.
If I declared myself infallible, would you believe me?
Why should I believe you when you pretend to be infallible?
My conscience demands to know what "sin" even means.
I know enough to be confident that "God" and "spirituality" are imaginary.
I'm curious as to why you imagine that you know God.
I don't need an imaginary friend, no.
Far more people than that deny that Jesus "once walked among us". I'm not sure that they're right, but I'm not sure that they're wrong, either.
That's a pretty weak standard of belief you have there -- someone who maybe lived a long time ago maybe made some wild claims and maybe did some magic tricks. Prove that it isn't true!
Those are all possibilities, sure. So is him being imaginary.
People can believe lots of false things for a long time.
What would be a thorough debunking of Jesus, according to you?
What soul?
Unlike Julius Caesar and Jesus, we actually have King Tut-ankh-amun's body, and have performed forensic analysis on it. I don't think Jefferson's body has ever been exhumed, though perhaps it could be.
Owlmirror: those stories were heavily mythologized.
They were also plagarized. Christmas is in December because of Mithras and Saturnalia, not to mention all the other competing pagan solstice celebrations. Oh, and let's not forget Deucalion and Utnapishtim, two other survivors of large floods.
Jefferson also has living descendants.
FG might believe he has won simply by engaging you in discussion even though he apparently does not understand science, logic, reason, argument and perhaps the origins of the biblical texts. It has been mildly entertaining scanning these posts but we have allowed an ignoramus to waste our time. Neither side will be convinced. Let him choose to remain uninformed and go on about the real activities of learning and living. Wm.
@Dean
"Error of choice like my science denialism"? If I were to deny science, there would be zero repercussions for such a denial as science is not in control of anything, it doesn't rule over anything or power anything. Science didn't create anything or give life to anything on it's own. It's not a living Entity, is it? Your "error of choice" however (God denialism) is loaded with potential repercussions and DANGER. If by chance you're wrong, no good. Wrong thing to be wrong about. The absolute worst mistake a person can make is to denounce God through their last breath (if in fact He exists).
I believe He does, so I don't worship science I worship Him. Science doesn't love you, God does. I recognize that science is necessary, but I also recognize that it could never exist without God because things have to be created before they can be studied. Science doesn't set moral absolutes, but The Creator does. My new definition: science is the study of an aspect of God's work. And if you know God, science is just another reason to give Him a round of applause - of course I denounce the type of science that denounces Him.
"Only a moron" would say assuredly, there is no God. Agnostics, they can't say one way or the other so sympathies to them, but atheists who say with all confidence that they know that there is no God, moronic. I sincerely love you people so I don't wanna get into name calling, but there is absolutely nothing educated about arriving at such a conclusion or making such a claim. The evidence for God is OVERWHELMING from my view, but that won't get me far with this crowd so I'll leave it at that.
Do you work in the field of science Dean? Are you an educator, or a scientist? If so, maybe you could help out the "educators" and science students in this video; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0u3-2CGOMQ who ALL FAILED to provide any convincing arguments or documented evidence for "one kind into another" evolution. It's about a year old, but I posted it in another thread and nobody stepped up to tackle my questions about it for some reason. There were accusations that the bits that actually gave proof got edited out to make it appear as though God kicked evolution's ass, but if you can provide what these folks couldn't, by all means lay it out. Some of them seemed so stumped and confused though, but again the conspiracy theory is that the ones who knew what they were talking about ended up on the cutting room floor. Since the evidence is "overwhelming", avenge them.
Another question I asked that I never got an answer to was: if humans evolved from apes or whatever before that, what are we forcasted to transform into next? Are we the pinnacle of evolution or is there more morphing to come? Many believers believe that the foretold end is near (no predictions), but in case it's not and humanity is allowed more millenniums, what does evolution have in store for us? Do we become X-MEN or something?
@Politicalquineapig
How you doin'? Good points on Caesar, Jefferson and King Tut's body as I do remember learning that he'd been preserved through mummification with all his riches and gold. Good point. Of course that would be impossible with Jesus if "He was taken up", but I can appreciate the argument about material stuff and what not. He was known to travel light keeping an inconspicuous, low profile so finding His beard grooming kit or favorite sandals might've been a challenge. And no I do not believe Jesus was "white and blond" but He must have looked more ethnic with darker skin.
"Everything associated with Jesus is of dubious authenticity." I used to relate. He reveals Himself, but initially I was hesitant to buy into the associated supernatural qualities. I never doubted that He existed or that He was somebody important, but I didn't know if I could wrap my mind around a dude walking on water and resurrecting from the dead. Long story short, He obviously got me and billions more over the centuries. We can't all be crazy and we're not all interacting with an imaginary friend as He's relevant in the lives of many. Contrary to your statement, I would argue that God is relevant to your life as well in that if nothing else, your life is being sustained and you have to be blessed in at least one or two ways (?). If you don't feel warm and fuzzy or recognize His presence it doesn't mean He's not around.
In closing, I am not one of those "believers who likes to use religion as a bludgeon to stifle scientific inquiry, and choke off the development of future scientists and doctors." However, I am one who thinks that future innovations in technology or medicine won't matter if God is disregarded. Life on this planet would become more chaotic and even crazier than it already is if EVERYBODY stopped acknowledging God. At any rate, feel free to watch the documentary posted in my response to Dean. Some of the "future's scientists and doctors" are represented.
@Owlmirror
To summarize:
1). You are confident God is imaginary (therefore YOU can judge HIM).
2). You are confident that believers are wrong.
3). You ask; "what soul?" so you are confident that they don't exist.
4). You ask; "what hereafter?" so you're confident that there isn't one.
5). You don't need God (since He's an imaginary friend).
6). You are confident the Bible is a myth (with the exception of a small bit late in 2 Kings).
7). You don't know what the supernatural is or what it means.
8). You are confident that spirituality is imaginary.
9). You don't know what sin means.
You are an unusually confident atheist. I'm confident you'll utter a simple and contrite; "oops!" in your future.
Agreeing with your suggestion that it would be more humble to use the term "believe" instead of "know", I "BELIEVE" YOU'VE GOT SOME PROBLEMS and if you take these thoughts to your grave I "BELIEVE" some other things. I'm sure; "what hell?" would be your response to what I'm implying, but some in New Orleans didn't believe reports that a massive hurricane (Katrina) was going to destroy their city, so they ignored the warnings and perished. The weather man's forecast was just a prediction, until it wasn't. "I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak" (Jesus Christ). "He will give justice with blazing fire to those who don't recognize God and don't obey the good news of our Lord Jesus. They will pay the penalty of eternal destruction away from the Lord's presence and away from His mighty glory." You're right, there's no God at the aforementioned address.
Now as you roll your eyes, remember "you don't simply get to claim" that there is no hell or Judge to send you there just because you haven't seen them - not everything has to be in material evidence to be in existence. It is possible that an invisible God has set up the universe in such a way that what is most significant is that which is invisible or spiritual, and what can be observed is just a fraction of the whole story. Those "telescopes, microscopes, lenses" you mentioned only see so much. How much of the universe might the telescope be missing?
What else could be said to one who's got it all figured out and is SO SURE about the non existence of everything spiritual, everything God? Hmm... There are so many verses relevant to you - though surely I'm throwing seeds on concrete trying to convince you of yourself through the eyes of God (as opposed to your own). I'm sticking with my claim that the burden is on God to reveal Himself and penetrate your RESPONSIVE conscience so let's close with something positive; "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life."
You determined the possibilities that Jesus could have been imaginary, a sociopath, a liar or maybe a magician. Let's throw another one in there for good measure; He could've also been Who He professed Himself to be - God in a man suit. "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him and without Him not anything was made that has been made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness hasn't overcome it. The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw His glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth." Maybe that solves the mystery. That just might be it - God came down to earth and explained Himself verbally (indicating that in at least some forms, He talks) and through visible demonstration of His Personality established His will for mankind so that we may know it. Now if your "intellectually honest enough" to acknowledge voids in your understanding of absolute truth, then you admit that this could be the answer to all the questions, doubts and mysteries about Jesus Christ. And if it somehow works out that this possibility is reality (over the magician, sociopath, liar theories), then your confidence about God being imaginary, the Bible being myth, believers being wrong, spirituality being imaginary, will be obliterated. And more good news, you'd eventually learn what supernatural and sin means due to your new found discovery of souls and hereafters.
Nobody here "worships" science either. And no, science is not a living entity, it is a means for investigation and understanding.
So you are basing an assumption (God exists) on the fact that you can't imagine anything existing without a creator. Rather circular - and conveniently avoids any need for serious thought, understanding, or indeed the science you claim not to ignore.
Is your "new definition of science" simply a ploy to say "god did it" and give you an excuse to ignore the part that works against him?
What does evolution hold for us next? Impossible to say - that's the answer. If you expected a precise result, not getting one isn't the fault of those you asked, it's your fault for not understanding the subject to begin with.
go back to your comment that "I don't need to provide evidence of anything" - the fact that you are making an amazing claim: it is evident that god exists - means that you have to provide that evidence: simply saying "I know it to be true", or "I can't imagine anything coming into existence without him", or "Something has to have a creator before it can exist" is not evidence of a god.
FG: Some of the “future’s scientists and doctors” are represented.
They can't be very good then. If a scientist is also a Christian, sooner or later, those beliefs are going to come into conflict with the facts, and they're going to end up falsifying their work, abandoning it altogether or having to give up their faith.
Christian doctors are at some point or another, going to need to choose between their faith or their patients. Sadly, most prefer their faith, and will end up killing their patients for their beliefs by willfully neglecting them.
I think you don't get the point of religion- it's not created for the warm fuzzies, it's all about blood. Blood of animals, blood of people, outright wars. Religion is simply a tribe demarcation and an excuse to wag fingers at people or kill them.
And again-see that great big universe? It's much too big for a God to have been involved.
Simple logic informs us that pointing out the fallacies and inadequacies of the Torah of the Jews, the New Testament of the Christians, and the Koran of the Mohammedans does not disprove the existence of a Supreme Being.
These books are obviously full of oddity that can be exposed, but it is a delusion to think that the existence of a Supreme Being is disproved by man-made guesswork fanatically presented as absolute information.
By way of illustration, if one presents a paper full of bad mistaken proofs that oxygen is necessary for the combustion of wood does that mean that oxygen is not necessary for the combustion of wood?
Of course, not at all, all that has happened is that a bad proof has been proffered.
An erroneous proof does not invalidate that which is to be proved. Similarly, erroneous man-made so-called scripture does not disprove the existence of a Supreme Being.
An erroneous proof only proves that the creators of that mistaken proof were incapable and inefficient to their task.
Similarly, nonsense so-called scripture only proves the ignorance of the writers involved.
Pointedly, if one extrapolates that because some writers are ignorantly producing nonsense scriptures therefore there is no Supreme Being, then such a stance only places one in the same category of prejudicial ignorance as the producers of the fallacious scripture.
One must conclude that such a discussion is just two sets of illogical, ignorant fools arguing from their own particular mistaken positions.
@William
As you "go on about the real activities of learning and living", keep in mind that learning whether or not a Creator created you is of the utmost importance. This piece of learning could give insight to your future lifestyle and activities. There has and will ALWAYS be debates about science, the Bible, Jesus, logic and reason until all truths become absolute and all theories are settled. We can all read books and click on a myriad of websites that will argue our respective perspectives, so it just might have to end up being death that finally settles it for us all as we each individually croak. The people of faith could die, the lights go out and that'd be it - we were wrong, no afterlife, no harm done. The same applies to the nonbelievers of course, they might die and find out that we were never alone and that there is a God after all - consequently experiencing whatever comes with that "ignoramus" oversight. Death will make us all shut up one way or the other.
@Dean
God existing is not an "assumption" from my perspective, it is reality. And I don't base "my" reality that "God exists on the fact that I can’t imagine anything existing without a creator", but I don't have to imagine anything existing without a creator because I know (or "believe" to appease Owlmirror) it doesn't. Now if "my" reality is not just me living in an imaginary fairy la la land, but God or the Spirit of God is actually participating in my life, then God existing is everyone's reality. Of course what I "believe" happens in my life does not prove God for anyone else (I get that), but if in fact He is actively participating in anyone's life anywhere on this planet, then He exists. I got a boat load of "personal evidence" and confirmations that eliminates the need for assumptions. I haven't been diagnosed with schizophrenia or anything similar so I don't believe I'm living in an imaginary fairy la la land, but who knows?
Before we go further, your thought on that video? Do you have any documented examples of one animal kind turning into another? Not drawings of an alleged evolution confirming fossil record, not drawings of a transition of monkeys into men, not dummies in a museum, not theories. Not a bird becoming a bird or a fish becoming a fish or changing bacteria, but some argument WAY MORE convincing than what the "educators", scientists and future scientists presented in that film.
As for my evidence for God, HE'S INVISIBLE so I just don't know what I can do. "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" and "without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who diligently seek Him." Believe me, if I could reach through this iPad with some God-given supernatural power and perform some kind of miracle or satisfying demonstration that confirmed God for you, I WOULD. We come into this world alone and we die alone so I think revelations of God happen on an individual basis, in an individual's heart, mind and soul. The aforementioned verses indicate (from the Bible's perspective) that God values faith and in fact insists on it. So if He exists and has decided to make Himself invisible (except for that one time), then maybe it's a parental strategy like getting a child to take their first steps. You let them go, you're not physically touching them but you're there to prevent a catastrophe, and you let them take steps toward you one by one. I don't know if that was the best analogy but the moral is; He may want us to come to Him, seek Him and call rather than making Himself obvious. I mean He's a supernatural God, so asking a natural man to present evidence for Him is asking a lot.
Since I'm SO SURE and I have so much "personal evidence" that He exists, I'll make it my goal to figure out more convincing ways to present a case for Him. As for now, all I can think of are Words (especially since we're on a blog). And as I stated in a previous post, the Jewish faith stands on Words, the Christian faith stands on Words as I never physically saw Jesus turn water into wine or walk on water, but I'm in like Flynn. Aside from the EXTREMELY necessary demonstration of God/the Holy Spirit in their personal lives, the 2.3 billion Christians got that way because of Words spoken by Jesus, His predecessors and "successors" (if you will). Of course, you view the Bible and the Words of Jesus the same way I view drawings of evolution theory, it may not be enough to sway either of us away from our beliefs. But if there is a God, we need to find out Who He is and where He is, so we can walk to Him. Of course my belief is He was Jesus Christ. It seems like He was once here, it's just a matter of figuring out whether He was full of it or telling the truth. If He was a truth bearer, nice thing of God to come down to visit and display Himself.
@Politicalguineapig
The future scientists and educators in that video were not Christians, they were atheists who believed in evolution. Did you watch it?
Also in what way would a Christian doctor have to "willfully neglect or kill" their patients in order to maintain faith in Jesus? What medical breakthroughs, procedures or medicines exist where you have to drop Jesus in order to pick them up?
Feelgood Goodman: Also in what way would a Christian doctor have to “willfully neglect or kill” their patients in order to maintain faith in Jesus? What medical breakthroughs, procedures or medicines exist where you have to drop Jesus in order to pick them up?
Have you been living under a rock for the past forty years? See contraceptives, abortion, birth complications, cancers caused by HPV and AIDs- all problems that would cause serious theological problems for Christians.
I have to admit I didn't watch the video- I assumed it would be more of Ken Ham's ilk and didn't have the time.
If you have no proof, just the feeling that nothing could be here without him - that is an assumption.
Science is the study of reality, and in reality, there can be repurcussions for denying what science has discovered.
For example, science would say that there is no way you can drink any poison -- especially the most harmful ones -- and not be harmed to some extent, if not killed. The Bible says that you can drink any poison, even the most harmful ones, and not be harmed.
Do you think that there would be zero repercussions if you drank a fatal mixture of strychnine, arsenic, cyanide, and bleach?
I'm sure that you can imagine repercussions and danger for denying what you imagine.
If your imagination were somehow true, there is no danger, because people who love other people do not endanger those they love.
Your definition is wrong: you imagine that God exists, and you imagine that reality is God's work.
So you actually mean that science is the study of what you imagine is the work of the God that you imagine.
I'm sure you imagine you do, but since your imagination is so confused, I don't believe you even know what "love" actually means.
Yes, I am sure that your imagination is overwhelming in your view.
What, exactly, is a "kind"?
Our descendants.
What do you think they are supposed to transform into? Rutabagas?
There is no "pinnacle" of evolution.
You could all be wrong, and I am confident that you are, since you don't even try to use the correct methods of evidence and reason to test your beliefs.
There's no difference between Jesus and an imaginary friend -- a real friend would be able to tell you things about the real world; Jesus does not tell you anything about the real world, therefore, Jesus must be imaginary and not real.
Since God is imaginary, I am not actually judging God -- I am judging humans who imagine that God is not imaginary.
Of course you're wrong -- you never show how you're right; you simply assume that you're right.
I am confident that you don't know what a soul is or how they might exist, or if they exist.
I am confident that you don't know anything in support of a hereafter besides what you imagine.
Correct.
Correct. I notice that you didn't answer my question whether you believe that any part of the bible is or might be myth.
I notice that you didn't answer my question about the supernatural, either. You don't know that it is or what it means either.
Why should I, besides you imagining it?
I am sure you can imagine all sorts of problems.
I notice that you didn't answer my questions about heaven and hell, either. I'm confident that you don't know the answers, so why should I believe anything you say about hell?
Hurricane Katrina was real, and left tons of evidence. Also, Hurricane Katrina did not love the citizens of New Orleans.
Your imagination is so confused you can't even imagine a proper analogy.
Your imaginary friend is not loving.
Interesting. So you don't believe that God is omnipresent, because your imaginary friend says that he isn't?
It's not just I who haven't seen them -- it's you as well. If your imaginary friend were not imaginary, then believers should have more information about the real world, or even consistent information about the "supernatural" world, that they could provide in support of their beliefs.
But believers are just as ignorant as non-believers. Indeed, their ignorance is so great that there are many tens of thousands of sects of Christianity alone, let alone of all the other religions. This is what would be expected when one person or group imagines something different from another person or group. They have no test in reality to resolve the differences, so they just split off.
Everything that is real has to have real evidence of its existence.
I'm not sure what you mean by "invisible" -- after all, empty space is invisible. Maybe you just mean "spiritual". but I suspect that, like "supernatural", you don't know that that is or what it means either.
Good grief. I specifically brought those up as examples of tools that make that which is invisible, visible to our senses, and asked you a question. And you ignored the question. Presumably, because you don't know the answer.
If Christians actually had "eternal life", they wouldn't die.
Christians do die, therefore, they don't have eternal life. So the verse is demonstrably false.
Jesus never professed himself to be "God in a man suit" in any of the gospels. The closest he came to that -- in John 10 -- was saying "The Father and I are one". But he does not defend himself by saying that he is God, but because scripture (Psalm 82) says "I said 'Ye are gods'", and he claims to have been sent by God.
I guess anyone can claim to be sent by God, and therefore to be one with God, by that standard.
I notice that you didn't answer my questions about why God doesn't talk to you, here and now.
Imaginary fits the confusion in the gospels better.
Why should this possibility be anything other than imaginary?
And yet, you don't know what these terms mean, despite being a believer. It makes more sense that you are confused, and imagining things, and are confused about what you are imagining.
Time is evidence of the Supreme: absolutely independent, absolutely necessary for any activity, absolutely necessary for existence, absolutely irrevocable, absolutely unavoidable, absolutely manifest, absolutely in control.
You are making the assumption that God existing is reality.
You shouldn't use the right words to appease me; you should use the right words because words have meanings, and you care about using the correct word with the correct meaning.
I suspect that you don't care about using the correct words because you don't actually care about what is or is not correct; you simply want to declare yourself correct.
There's only one reality.
Hm. But why wouldn't it, if God were real and not imaginary?
A God that was real but invisible would be able to demonstrate his reality despite being invisible.
A God that is invisible because he's imaginary would never be able to do so.
It's fascinating that you say this -- that you have the will to do what God could EASILY do -- if he were not imaginary.
Do you not wonder why your will -- to provide a demonstration of God's real existence -- is opposed to God's will, since he will not demonstrate his real existence, even to you?
Owlmirror, my work is done here don't you think? William from Wisconsin wants to keep me posting, now you're on me for more. I hopped on this blog knowing good and well I'm gonna be outnumbered 5 to 1 or greater, and I'm gonna be called an "ignoramus" or worse. I have enough faith in what I believe to brace for the punches and take on the opposing view, but I can't even get a response to a lousy YouTube video? Are you guys really scared of a little 40 minute challenge? All I asked for (3 times, 3 days ago) is a response to the interviewer's questions, and if a silly believer doesn't shy away from a blog where he's the minority, why should you bright folks shy away from a harmless video (considering all the "non imaginary" evidence for evolution)? If you stand on truth, you have nothing to worry about. “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent” (Thomas Jefferson) so if everything that I proclaimed is "nonsense" and nothing more than "an excuse to wag fingers at people or kill them", you would have watched - then attacked the documentary with confidence. It didn't happen and I understand. "One with God is a majority" (Martin Luther).
And to clarify again Dean, it's not "just a feeling that nothing could be here without him" it's knowledge that nothing could be here without Him. I'm not assuming, I'm knowing and I'd be telling a lie if I said anything different. I've been accused of "imagining things" (me and all the other believers in God) several times here, but it takes a MASSIVE IMAGINATION to imagine the universe and all of creation occurring without a Creator, which is what an atheist obviously does. And you've got to have a vivid one to imagine your ancestors as monkeys or something even less before that. As the "educator" from UCLA stated at the end of the documentary: "the problem (I think) with those that are unable to see evolution, is that they don't have imaginations." Well said professor.
For the most part the conversation has run it's course, and you can google the definitions of all those terms you're struggling with Owlmirror (sin, supernatural, hereafter, heaven, hell, soul) - or ask the next high school student you see. A few things in conclusion:
A). I don't believe that any part of the Bible is myth, but "ALL Scripture is God breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness." There are areas where God is silent, so I'm silent in those areas. And there is plenty that I don't fully understand or interpret correctly. God-through it-is explaining Himself to man rather than man attempting to explain Him (much like with Jesus, "I'll come to you"). 40 different authors (of various professions and backgrounds, many having never met each other), over several centuries, wrote 66 books (loaded with prophecy and the fulfillment of it - we don't have the time) that tell a cohesive chronological story that documents God’s involvement with humanity through the foretelling and arrival of His Son. This could be classified as “evidence” that the document indeed had one Author as the story would be all over the place if there wasn't a consistent Hand writing it. No email, no phones, no time machines and sometimes no knowledge of each other. To accurately write about events and people born after you’re dead and gone takes some skill, or God's involvement/inspiration.
B). God does talk to me btw, but we know how that would go over here so let's not go into detail ;). I'm not talking about seeing Jesus in my toast either - as contrary to what you THINK YOU KNOW, He has "demonstrated His real existence" to me and others.
C). Just doing the math, if Jesus was only here for 33 years and He anticipated His death and ascension, I wouldn't think He'd spend a lot of time teaching about finite stuff. Knowing that everyone else only gets a fixed amount of time here as well, and that the (your favorite word) "real" life is the eternal life, He'd probably spend the most of His short time teaching principles and truths relevant to eternity and spirituality as opposed to what's finite. Natural life is but a quick vapor so therefore, He got to the point and to the good stuff. You won't be here in a hundred years and whatever you think you know won't do you a bit of good at the "next stop." Aside from that, OF COURSE what He teaches has relevance to the "real" world as well. You can refer to anyone from Galileo to MLK to Tim Tebow ;) to see that. Picture the present United States without the leadership of (the Reverend) Dr. Martin Luther King; if we don't follow his direction and dream we have a completely different social and political landscape in 2014. He followed Jesus (love, peace, patience, kindness, turn the other cheek/nonviolence), the U.S. followed him, and "the real world" United States benefits in yet another way from a Man Who walked the earth 2000 years ago - whom you claim teaches His followers "nothing about the real world". WHERE'S ATHEISM'S MLK!?! Jesus' Personality, Spirit and teachings have been beyond influential on humanity so who cares if He didn't leave a manual on carpentry or future innovations. He renovates people as there isn't a more valuable resource.
D). “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became flesh, and lived among us.” Couple that with your cited assertion by Jesus; "I and the Father are one", AND "if you had known Me, you would have known My Father also", "from now on you know Him and have seen Him", "the Son is the image of the invisible God - the firstborn over all creation", "the one who looks at Me is seeing the One who sent Me", "the Son is the radiance of God's glory and the EXACT REPRESENTATION OF HIS BEING", etc. = God in a man suit (to paraphrase). You say I "simply want to declare myself correct", I care that He is correct. Who cares about my wants when you get down to what's really important.
My life needs my attention and I am CERTAIN that your life (soul) needs yours, but since I love you let me save you some googling time:
1). The definition of love applicable to this exchange is: the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another. A higher definition (that I OFTEN fail at): "Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres."
2). Supernatural: beyond the natural/of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe; especially of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil (pull his hands off your eyes).
3). Soul: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life. Or as I would say more simply; one's life.
4). Hereafter: an existence that comes after life ends, or life after death.
5). Heaven: Perpetual awesomeness!, the eternal kingdom of God, eternal Paradise, a place where the "good" people go, a place for those bought by the blood of Christ and ruled by Christ. Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm." "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have entered into the heart of man the things which God has prepared for those who love Him." OH GOODIE!!!
6). Hell: The devil's eternal domain, a place of eternal torment or the lake of fire, a place for those who suppress the truth and reject God, "where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth", eternal punishment/damnation "where the worms that eat them do not die, and the fire is never quenched."
7). Sin: Ignoring God, disobedience to God, an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law, an offense to God, rebelling against God, wrong doing.
Wonderful! The bible should be looked at as fables.
2 more for you Al:
"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
"The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit."
Quotes out of context. So what? There's your irony challenged misuse of intelligence and wisdom right there.
You could as easily unveil the word Baloney for God in those quotes and you'd have revealed the boasting puffery of grifters in sheep's clothing.
Now don't go fulfilling the prophecy by becoming frustrated Applesauce.
Do you see your work here as being to declare that you cannot possibly be wrong?
Creationists don't respond to the actual science of evolutionary biology.
I might take the time to watch it, but no promises. I am confident that it is full of the usual dishonest quote-mining, distorting, and misrepresenting of actual science.
You didn't respond to the question: What, exactly, is a "kind"? It certainly isn't a term from evolutionary biology.
Did you read what I posted above @#12 about radiometric dating? Or do you not think the age of the Earth is important?
How about this?
www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/use_and_abuse_of_the_fossil_record_…
Heh. I guess that's why there are so many Christian sects -- every person or group that split off imagines that they are with God, and are therefore a majority.
You calling "a feeling" knowing does not make it actual knowledge.
You're assuming that your feeling of knowing is the same as actually knowing.
I'm not sure you know what a lie actually is.
No, it doesn't. Because there is no sign of a creator that is a person, and nothing that indicates that such a person existing is even possible.
Of course your ancestors were monkeys. Why do you think you look so much like a monkey, in your anatomy?
It's not like anyone is saying that any of your recent ancestors were monkeys. This is going back many millions of years, after all.
Are the definitions correct, though? Do they make sense? What are they even based on?
So you do believe in talking snakes? You believe that the supposedly invisible God has been seen by some people? You believe that insects have four legs, even though you can count six legs?
You've been silent about talking snakes, even though God is not.
Heh. The story is indeed all over the place, because there is most certainly not a consistent hand writing it.
Heck, Genesis 2 contradicts Genesis 1 in the order of the creation of the animals and Eve/the first woman. It only gets worse as the stories continue.
No such accurate writing occurs.
I'm sure that you have imagined such speech. Why doesn't God tell you anything about the real world, though?
For example, if God talks to you, he could easily tell you something real about me, that would be difficult for you to find out otherwise. I have a small item near me, that I have in mind as I type this. Ask God what it is.
Of course, I'm sure you'll find an excuse for why the all-knowing God cannot answer such a simple question.
It's not much of a sacrifice if you know you're really going to live happily ever after forever.
Then it makes no sense to have it at all.
No, it's not that easy. Jesus also declared or implied that the Father was distinct from himself and greater than himself. You want to ignore those verses, because you want to declare yourself correct.
You want to pretend that it's not about your wants when it's really all about your wants.
Then the God that you imagine does not love everyone, since one of the most unselfish loyal and benevolent thing that he could do would be do demonstrate that he really does exist, here and now and not as a character in an old book of stories and myths.
You wrote: "The burden is on God to reveal what He wants, to who He wants, how He wants, when He wants " -- which is, of course, very selfish indeed.
And your imagined God fails at that definition as well.
What God? What spirit? What devil? What makes these things real rather than imaginary?
There are no hands over my eyes; you are only imagining such a thing.
So when we die, the soul disappears, by this definition.
What "existence" that comes after life ends? Why should I believe that there actually is an existence, rather than just the imagination of an existence?
I note that you still didn't answer my question about Luke 16:19-31.
Why should I believe that there actually is such a thing, rather than just the imagination of such a thing?
In the Old Testament, at least two people that I can think of -- Enoch and Elijah -- go directly to heaven, and no mention is made of Jesus. So do you believe that people can go to heaven without Jesus?
Again you mention the "devil".
Who do you imagine made the devil? Who do you imagine gave the devil all of his power? Do you imagine that doing so was a "loving" thing to do?
Why should I believe that there actually is such a thing, rather than just the imagination of such a thing?
Once again I ask: In Luke 16:19-31, are Abraham and Lazarus saved and in Heaven, or are they in Hell?
Well, by that definition, I cannot be a sinner, since I first have to imagine that God is real, and then imagine that I am disobeying him or rebelling against him.
Since I don't imagine that God is real, I cannot be a sinner. QED
Speaking of random juxtaposed bible verses...
'Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind'
'but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,'
Hm.
FG: Sin: Ignoring God, disobedience to God, an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law, an offense to God, rebelling against God, wrong doing.
Also, reading, the study of medicine, practicing medicine, the study of any sort of science or math, thinking while female, being compassionate to non-heterosexual people (or just being compassionate period), failing to kill non-Christians and non-heterosexual people, failing to turn up for the clinic protest, thinking people might be more important than fetuses or principles, not fouling up every bit of land you can, going for walks in the country, looking up at night or looking through a microscope. Fixed that for you.
The point is that there are SO many sins in modern life, we're all better off ignoring God. Unless you happen to see nothing wrong with most of the population never seeing thirty.
I would suggest saying "ignoring people who pretend to speak for God", rather than "ignoring God", because the latter buys in to the paranoid fantasy of (some) theists that everyone "knows" that God exists, and sinners just want to ignore him.
Nymphilidae butterfly males do only have 4 walking legs the other 2 are modified for mating
aside from that little quibble im a Christian also and frankly im ashamed to say that that lying a** hole ken ham is a coreligionist
id much rather deal with an atheist who's telling the truth
In reference to your questions about the order of creation in Genesis, the explanation about what it means to “make” and to “form” was interesting here: http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/1-2.html
In reference to accurately writing about future events and people, THERE ARE MANY passages of prophecy that have been fulfilled (http://www.bible.ca/b-prophecy-60.htm - http://www.reasons.org/articles/articles/fulfilled-prophecy-evidence-fo…). I'll give you one of the more important ones since you claim that "no such accurate writing occurs"; "He was wounded because of our rebellious deeds, crushed because of our sins; He endured punishment that made us well; because of His wounds we have been healed." The author (7-800 B.C.) was not talking about Rodney King here.
Sin: Ignoring God, disobedience to God, an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law, an offense to God, rebelling against God, wrong doing.
"Well, by that definition, I cannot be a sinner, since I first have to imagine that God is real, and then imagine that I am disobeying him or rebelling against him. Since I don’t imagine that God is real, I cannot be a sinner. QED"
That sums it up right there. There's only so much that can be said to penetrate that doomed fortress. Richard Dawkins is a born again Christian, Adolf Hitler was a great and moral man, Oprah Winfrey is an astronaut, the earth is flat, Jesus Christ never existed and God is imaginary. I cannot be a criminal, since I first have to imagine that the law is real, and then imagine that I am disobeying or rebelling against the law. Since I don’t imagine that the law is real, I cannot be a criminal and can do whatever I want (steal, rape, vandalize, not pay taxes, use drugs, murder whoever pisses me off, flip off cops and judges, lie under oath, etc.) because the law, court systems and jail are all imaginary. False because of course the law, judges and jails exist as does moral law, God and hell.
For both of us, simply declaring something does not make it true, but the absolute truth is (non-negotiably) what it is independent of our declarations. The only problem is we both can't be right. Either God is or He isn't. Either Jesus existed and was the Son of God, or He didn't/wasn't. Pascal's Wager is an argument relevant to our exchange in that it highlights how little I have to lose if I am wrong, and how much you have to lose if you are. The argument is useful in illustrating how your beliefs don't matter when it comes down to whether or not God actually exists, and how risky it is to bet against Him. To use your words; "I am confident" that your paradigm is doomed, but I'm not willing to say the same about you because you're still breathing and therefore hope remains. I'm rooting for you and I'm predicting with confidence that your discovery of God's existence is inevitable, so best to acknowledge Him while you're physically here. You are of course confident in the other direction, but still I say God bless and good fortune the rest of the way.