1. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    30 Sep '11 00:022 edits
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You don't even have a Bible, you said. So how can you possibly have
    enough knowledge to think about it and come to any rational decision?
    You are too ignorant to do so.
    I didn't decide not to be a Christian. I decided not to believe in any god/gods.

    Have you read every holy book of every religion to decide that you don't believe them?

    You are an atheist to every religion (god) but one... I just went one step further.

    I don't need to read the bible to be an atheist because no book is going to convince me god exists.
    Regardless of what it says.

    To prove an extraordinary claim you need extraordinary proof.
    The bible, and any other holy book, proves nothing beyond their own existence (and a few other trivialities).


    We have discussed before what it might take for me to believe in the existence of god and the bible doesn't cut it.

    I look for evidence for what reality might be, (whatever it might be) in the world around me, through scientific skepticism,
    experimentation and reason.
    I have, and have access to, a lot of knowledge gained this way.

    However what I don't have any of is evidence for the existence of a god or deity of any kind.

    Absent that the default position is non-belief.... ie agnostic atheism.

    Also for you to call anyone ignorant makes me think strongly of the phrase...
    Pot, kettle, black.

    However don't let that deter you.


    EDIT: also I would refer you to this guy http://www.atheist-experience.com/people/matt_dillahunty/

    Who has certainly read the bible, in great depth, and was intending to be a minister.
    And he will tell you that you don't need to read the bible justifiably not believe in god, and why.

    Given what I have said about the bits of the bible I have read I would think you would want to discourage me from
    reading more of it lest I come across the bits where it condones rape, incest, genocide, and slavery....
    Except I already did....


    EDIT2: For complete accuracy's sake, I did have a bible... and possibly still do... somewhere...
    I got given one on leaving my C of E junior school... which was a Highly disappointing leavers gift at the time.

    Some time between then and now it's location has become undetermined.

    Such that if I do still have it, I can't find it....

    Fortunately a great number of people have seen fit to put the bible online, where i can read it in all its... um... glory...

    As I said before, this is probably not to your advantage, as the more I read the less I like it.

    If I had actually tried to read my bible I would probably have binned the thing before I reached the end.

    However as all the version are so different, accessing it online and so seeing all the different version is better
    as I can see how much the translations agree, or not, as the case might be.
  2. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    30 Sep '11 00:21
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You don't even have a Bible, you said. So how can you possibly have
    enough knowledge to think about it and come to any rational decision?
    You are too ignorant to do so.
    Sure, Mary was a *wink wink* Virgin.
  3. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12734
    30 Sep '11 00:34
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    I didn't decide not to be a Christian. I decided not to believe in any god/gods.

    Have you read every holy book of every religion to decide that you don't believe them?

    You are an atheist to every religion (god) but one... I just went one step further.

    I don't need to read the bible to be an atheist because no book is going to convince me god exi ...[text shortened]... bits where it condones rape, incest, genocide, and slavery....
    Except I already did....
    I have investigated other holy books, but once I realized there was only
    one God and the Holy Bible contained His story, there was no reason to
    investigate the holy books of the false gods. Let me make it easy for
    you, you do not need to investigate the Quran (Koran), the Veda, the
    Book of Morman, or any other so called holy book other than the word
    of truth, the Holy Bible.
  4. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    30 Sep '11 00:40
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I have investigated other holy books, but once I realized there was only
    one God and the Holy Bible contained His story, there was no reason to
    investigate the holy books of the false gods. Let me make it easy for
    you, you do not need to investigate the Quran (Koran), the Veda, the
    Book of Morman, or any other so called holy book other than the word
    of truth, the Holy Bible.
    Yeah, but a Muslim would tell my I only needed to read the Qur'an,
    A Hindu? the Vedas,
    A Mormon the book of Mormon,
    A Jew, their Torah...

    From an outside perspective you are all the same, and equally implausible
    and unjustified.

    Plus as I say, the more of your bible I read the less I like it and the more
    contradictions, falsehoods, absurdities, and obscenities I can point out.
    A few months ago I couldn't have pointed out the passage instructing
    the forcing of women to marry their rapists...
    How much more ammo against you and your region do you want me to get?
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52619
    30 Sep '11 00:41
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I have investigated other holy books, but once I realized there was only
    one God and the Holy Bible contained His story, there was no reason to
    investigate the holy books of the false gods. Let me make it easy for
    you, you do not need to investigate the Quran (Koran), the Veda, the
    Book of Morman, or any other so called holy book other than the word
    of truth, the Holy Bible.
    Well, you can't all be right, but you sure as hell can ALL be wrong.
  6. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12734
    30 Sep '11 00:47
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Sure, Mary was a *wink wink* Virgin.
    Mary had to be a virgin. I can't think of any reasonable explanation for
    Christianity, if she were not. I know you can not understand this because
    of your ignorance. Dasa would just call you dishonest and I sometimes
    agree with him, but some people are just ignorant, like yourself.
  7. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12734
    30 Sep '11 00:55
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Yeah, but a Muslim would tell my I only needed to read the Qur'an,
    A Hindu? the Vedas,
    A Mormon the book of Mormon,
    A Jew, their Torah...

    From an outside perspective you are all the same, and equally implausible
    and unjustified.

    Plus as I say, the more of your bible I read the less I like it and the more
    contradictions, falsehoods, absurditie ...[text shortened]... marry their rapists...
    How much more ammo against you and your region do you want me to get?
    But Yahshua (Jesus) made a new covenant and you can read about it in
    the New Testament of the Holy Bible. He came to restablish the truth
    and atone for our sins so that we all might have life instead of death.
  8. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    30 Sep '11 11:22
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Mary had to be a virgin. I can't think of any reasonable explanation for
    Christianity, if she were not. I know you can not understand this because
    of your ignorance. Dasa would just call you dishonest and I sometimes
    agree with him, but some people are just ignorant, like yourself.
    Ok, for some convoluted nonsensical reason Mary had to give birth while still a virgin.

    This is due to prophecies and doctrinal reasons stated in the old testament.

    The new testament was written after the old testament by people who had read the old testament.

    The new testament was written 90 odd years after the events in it were supposed to have happened
    Which given that the average lifespan back then was about 40 it's about 2 generations after Jesus
    allegedly died.


    Given that the New testament was written by people who weren't there to witness what happened.
    (And even if they were, they still wouldn't be trustworthy sources of information)

    And they knew all the prophecies and doctrine there story was supposed to meet.

    And they had a vested interest in making sure their story met those conditions.

    They could have adjusted, or simply made up, bit's/all of the stories to fit.

    You can't prove it either way.

    Which means that what the bible says, is of zero evidentiary value whatsoever.

    I think you and dasa resort to insults like ignorant and dishonest because you have no actual
    arguments with which to challenge me/others.

    You flail around insulting people because you can't rationally justify your beliefs.
    Which must suck, but that's your problem not mine.
  9. Joined
    28 Jul '04
    Moves
    69643
    30 Sep '11 11:24
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I can't think of any reasonable explanation for Christianity, if she were not.
    I can.
  10. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    30 Sep '11 11:26
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    But Yahshua (Jesus) made a new covenant and you can read about it in
    the New Testament of the Holy Bible. He came to restablish the truth
    and atone for our sins so that we all might have life instead of death.
    First; that isn't an argument against my post.

    Second; and I will say this again.

    I don't care what it says in the bible it doesn't prove anything.

    Third; there are abominations in both testaments.

    Fourth; Its still the same god in both testaments and the fact he might have cleaned
    his act up a bit in the new testament doesn't mean he stops being a monster.

    Fifth; show me the bible verse in the new testament where JC says you can throw out the
    old testament it no longer applies....
  11. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    30 Sep '11 11:36
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    She wasn't a virgin... she cheated on her husband and when she became pregnant her excuse was that her pregnancy came from God. Joseph's visions are delusions caused from severe emotional and mental stress because of a scandalous wife.

    Now a vote. With the knowledge we have today who thinks that the passage above is a more believable version of events than the biblical version?
    First of all, the story was probably all made up after Jesus' death in an attempt to fit prophesy.
    However, there are a number of flaws in your version.
    Fist of all, she conceived before marriage, and if she cheated, it was probably with her future husband. There would have been no need for a story if they had got married then conceived as her husband would presumably have been having sex with her.
    If the story was told to her parents at the time, then it was to avoid admitting that she had slept with Joseph before marriage.
    However, I don't think even the most religious parents would have believed such a story, and I am convinced the story was made up many years later. The virginity part was definitely added in later.
  12. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    30 Sep '11 11:43
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    First of all, the story was probably all made up after Jesus' death in an attempt to fit prophesy.
    However, there are a number of flaws in your version.
    Fist of all, she conceived before marriage, and if she cheated, it was probably with her future husband. There would have been no need for a story if they had got married then conceived as her husband w ...[text shortened]... nced the story was made up many years later. The virginity part was definitely added in later.
    Very reasonable and well thought out...

    Now if only someone could have said this several times already ;-)

    I would have to disagree about the parents bit though.
    It is amazing how gullible and willing to accept absurdities people can be.
    However it is indeed much more likely (many many orders of mag) that
    the story was made up later to match (some, the Jews have different prophecies
    while using the same old testament, which is why they don't think JC was the
    messiah as he doesn't meet all of them) the prophecies.
  13. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12734
    30 Sep '11 18:26
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Yeah, but a Muslim would tell my I only needed to read the Qur'an,
    A Hindu? the Vedas,
    A Mormon the book of Mormon,
    A Jew, their Torah...

    From an outside perspective you are all the same, and equally implausible
    and unjustified.

    Plus as I say, the more of your bible I read the less I like it and the more
    contradictions, falsehoods, absurditie ...[text shortened]... marry their rapists...
    How much more ammo against you and your region do you want me to get?
    You have not pointed out any contradictions, falsehoods, absurdities, and obscenities that I can see. Misrepresenting one little point is hardly ammo.
    It certainly has no effect on my faith in Yahshua and the accuracy of the
    Holy Bible.
  14. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12734
    30 Sep '11 19:021 edit
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Ok, for some convoluted nonsensical reason Mary had to give birth while still a virgin.

    This is due to prophecies and doctrinal reasons stated in the old testament.

    The new testament was written after the old testament by people who had read the old testament.

    The new testament was written 90 odd years after the events in it were supposed to hav an't rationally justify your beliefs.
    Which must suck, but that's your problem not mine.
    You are being dishonest again for you do not know when the New Testament
    was written. Mathew, Mark, John, Peter, and James were eyewitnesses to
    what happened. Even Paul, though a non-believer at first, because of his
    experience, became possibly the greatest evangelist of all times. Luke points
    out that he verified everything he wrote and has been proven correct in every
    detail by skeptics. These people were so convinced by what they saw that
    none of them ever made a contrary statement and many faced martyrdom
    rather than recant their belief in the resurrection of the Christ. To me it is
    unreasonable to believe these people would die for what they knew to be a
    lie. Especially, Peter, who due to fear, denied even knowing the man called
    the Christ, three times immediately after Yahshua was taken into custody.
    Yet, historians report he requested to be crucified upside down because he
    did not feel worthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord. I have
    enough to convince me, however, you can believe as you want. But don't
    insult Christians for believing as they do or you will certainly get those insults
    bouncing back at you.
  15. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    30 Sep '11 19:23
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You are being dishonest again for you do not know when the New Testament
    was written. Mathew, Mark, John, Peter, and James were eyewitnesses to
    what happened.
    And you, apparently, don't even know who wrote it, let alone when.
    None of the New Testament was written by anyone who actually met Jesus during his lifetime.
Back to Top