• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Faith is not evidence. This is why atheism has more of an advantage.

Audie

Veteran Member
I think it is quite clear to those who have studied Native American religion that there is much more substance there than a series of nice storied myths about the landscape.

Did you think I meant denigrate the Native Americans or their religions?
Not at all.

I was showing an example of how a supernatural explanation might be
casually invented and become tradition.

What sort of substance do you see?

Are you suggesting that the divers spirits and supernatural explanations
of any society are actually true?
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Did you think I meant denigrate the Native Americans or their religions?
Not at all.

I was showing an example of how a supernatural explanation might be
casually invented and become tradition.

What sort of substance do you see?

Are you suggesting that the divers spirits and supernatural explanations
of any society are actually true?
I am suggesting that explaining natural phenomenon may not be a significant part of why religions came to be.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I am suggesting that explaining natural phenomenon may not be a significant part of why religions came to be.

Oh, yeah, could be, dunno how to quantify.

Maybe the innate psychology of the human mind
is properly classed with natural phenomina?
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
We may nothing about Him but, as I view it, the laws determine that there is a law giver even if we don't know anything about Him. We know HOW these laws or discover the laws that are working that we still don't know about but we have no ability to create these laws. Only the Creator can be the law-giver
This makes absolutely no sense and employs such a vast array of assumptions that it is quite simply awful. We don't have any clue the origins of the "laws" that govern this universe. There may be no origin. What we experience may simply be the way things are anywhere, everywhere, and simply "are." Why is that explanation not as good as the position that there is some sentient being out there who put it all into motion? Where did that sentient being come from? Doesn't the acceptance of a God only raise MORE questions? It would for me. And if it answered EVERYTHING for you, then maybe you should take a look at why that would be. Because you certainly don't accept the CURRENT universe at face value - you insist there must be a God behind it all. So why do you think your mind would simply stop questioning once you found what you thought to be "God?" Why wouldn't you naturally then wonder about the circumstances surrounding this new reality?

It's kind of like the old question of, if you felt you wasted this life, then what makes you think you'd fare any better in another life? If you don't feel you can accept this universe as simply "being", what makes you think you can accept God's universe/reality as simply being, even if you find Him?
 

socharlie

Active Member
What part dont you agree with
I felt that comparing of fundamentalist and atheist is not 100 % fair in non material side of the divide. Normally atheism accepts only physical side but not metaphysical while fundamentalism would accept metaphysical side and has closed mind accepting archetypes and allegories but see it literally.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I felt that comparing of fundamentalist and atheist is not 100 % fair in non material side of the divide. Normally atheism accepts only physical side but not metaphysical while fundamentalism would accept metaphysical side and has closed mind accepting archetypes and allegories but see it literally.

I was referring only to "material". A fundamentalist has no choice but to ignore,
deny, mistepresent, distort realities of the physical world in order to maintain
their "metaphysics", re flood, 6 day poof etc.

I am 100% on that.

As for what metaphysics even is, few, I think among the religious
could say what it means. It does not interest me, personally.

As for allegories, archetypes, what on earth would make an atheist
literal minded or unable to perceive those for what they are?

For sure, not true of me.

Actually, I think I am way better at it than ye average "fundy"!

Generally, fundies dont had much education; true, that is how it is.
I have a minor in English lit, my mom taught same at a college in Hong Kong.

I do have an eye for such things as metaphor! And a bit of an analytical bent.

As for the literary devices in the bible, I'd say I am far better at seeing them
than your average xtian, let alone a "fundy"! For, lo, they are ghey ones
who get all literal!

All of science and good sense says: no flood. Just a story.

"Fundy" : Did so happen.
 

Guy Threepwood

Mighty Pirate
Not one shred of proof has been shown that proves the existence of God. People only know what they've been told and shown in a book. Science has testable evidence that is in your face daily. For me, following science makes sense.

Thank about it - most of us believed in Santa Claus with the same passion as a deity until we knew better. I used to listen for the sled and hooves landing on my roof or a very fat man squeezing down my chimney. I believed it because it's what I was told for several years. I don't see any difference in religion.

Last, if you believe in the Bible, you must believe every text in it literally. There is no room for riddles or interpretations. We know there are things in this world that are physically impossible. Just because it's in the bible, doesn't mean a miracle allowed an incident to negate physics. A man lived in the belly of a big fish for 3 days, Moses parting the red sea, Noah being able to squeeze 2 of every animal species on to a boat (which means he was able to feed, remove all feces, keep them from eating/fighting each other for the entire journey)? This is physically impossible. Two of every species of animal would not fit into the ark mentioned in the Bible.

Please join this discussion and explain your views.

Thanks.

we all believe in something, whether that is God or the Flying Spaghetti Multiverse

Blind faith is faith which does not recognize itself as such.
 

socharlie

Active Member
I was referring only to "material". A fundamentalist has no choice but to ignore,
deny, mistepresent, distort realities of the physical world in order to maintain
their "metaphysics", re flood, 6 day poof etc.

I am 100% on that.

As for what metaphysics even is, few, I think among the religious
could say what it means. It does not interest me, personally.

As for allegories, archetypes, what on earth would make an atheist
literal minded or unable to perceive those for what they are?

For sure, not true of me.

Actually, I think I am way better at it than ye average "fundy"!

Generally, fundies dont had much education; true, that is how it is.
I have a minor in English lit, my mom taught same at a college in Hong Kong.

I do have an eye for such things as metaphor! And a bit of an analytical bent.

As for the literary devices in the bible, I'd say I am far better at seeing them
than your average xtian, let alone a "fundy"! For, lo, they are ghey ones
who get all literal!

All of science and good sense says: no flood. Just a story.

"Fundy" : Did so happen.
I have some different ideas about atheism...
 

Neb

Active Member
What's your unique way of reading the creation story? I would think you would say creation "fact" instead of story.

So do you believe God is black or white? Not to start any racial debate. This a question that must be asked, because if many believe God is white, then there is the possibility that he has racists tendencies. I believe evolution is much richer, makes more sense, and will eventually be proved fully.
Some scientists believe they are very close to solving the mystery.
What, the missing links Darwin couldn't find, they've found them? Where? Embedded in the crust of the earth? How many? "In countless numbers" Really? Oh, is that mean there is no God at all?
 
I just don't think there is any upside to viewing belief in the existence of god as a goal as opposed to an accident of aesthetical perception.

Theism is only advantageous over atheism in the sense that it motivates people. But the downsides are many and severe. It is just not something worth pursuing.

Still, I think apatheism is far superior to either theism or atheism.

Apatheism is not a third option here though. Not unless you start redefining language to suit your position rather than endeavor to (more productively) use existing language to articulate it.

Atheism=no belief
Theism= belief

Apatheism=who cares?

Everyone on Earth falls into one of the first two categories. You either hold that belief, or you don't.

The third can describe a way of looking at or a modifier to either of the first two, much as agnosticism does.
 

Sapiens

Polymathematician
I'm no Bibliophile, but I don't know of any evidence that proved the Exodus fictional. I've just heard that there has been no evidence discovered to support it.
If you took the trouble to click on the provided link, "None of This Really Happened" you'd not be so in the dark. Here's the critical paragraphs:

This Never Happened

The Hebrew people did not exist before Canaan. They gradually and peacefully emerged as a subset of Canaanite culture somewhere around the 1200s B.C.E.,which is roughly the time we were told they invaded the land. Before that time they simply. didn’t. exist.

The violent conquest of Canaan never actually happened. We know this for certain. We’ve gone to the places that was supposed to have happened and we dug our way down to the bottom. Didn’t happen.

The wandering in the wilderness for forty years? Also never happened. That story was made up. We know this for certain. We canvassed that entire region a hundred times now and not so much as a coin or a piece of pottery or anything at all that would signify they were ever there.

The dramatic exodus of millions of Hebrews from Egyptian captivity? We know for a fact that never happened. It’s not even a debate anymore, not among scholars, historians, or archaeologists. The story was undeniably made up. That means that the Passover never happened. Nothing even remotely like it.

There wasn’t even a group of Hebrews in Egypt in the first place. There never was. That whole bit about 400+ years in captivity, with a dozen tribes growing into a large but enslaved nation? Made up out of thin air. We know this for a fact now.

Think about what this means for a second. It means there was no Moses. No Aaron. There was no Abraham, no Isaac, and no Jacob. There was no Sarah, no Rachel, no Leah, no Rebekah, etc. All fascinating stories, yes. And could there have been real life analogues many centuries later that got cobbled together into an origin story for the nation of Israel? That’s certainly possible.

But basically every story and every person which appears prior to Israel’s presence in Canaan around the 12th century B.C.E. is a product of pure fiction. After that, much smaller versions of the stories appear to have happened in real life: for example there probably was a King David, only his “kingdom” was more like a small insular group of technologically challenged herdsmen. But never anything like the geopolitical giant the Bible paints him, or them, to be.

I really feel like everybody around me needs to sit and soak in the gravity of this realization.

Everything that happened in the first five books of the Bible is pure fiction. And the next few books don’t get much better. They are stories made up to teach lessons and to provide some kind of political basis for competing factions of ancient Israel, quarrels which no longer mean anything to us today but leave us with the mistaken impression that this people group existed many centuries before it actually did.

Now, I hang out with atheists a lot, so I’m accustomed to hearing people dismiss the entire Bible at once as nonsense. But the reality is that at least some of what the Bible recounts probably did happen, even if in reality the magical parts didn’t. For example, it has become increasingly canon for atheists to confidently assert that Jesus of Nazareth never existed at all.

But they don’t really know that. They’re simply arguing that we don’t have any credible evidence outside of the Bible itself that such a man existed, and they could be right. But on that matter I still have to point out that most biblical scholars (regardless of their religious orientation) are convinced that somebody named Jesus did exist, even if he didn’t perform party tricks or die and come back from the grave.

So the existence of Jesus is a debatable subject…but the exodus is not. Nor is anything that was supposed to have happened leading up to it nor afterward. That entire phase of Israel’s history is made up—including the sacred Passover itself—and we know this. Even their own rabbis have taken to admitting this, controversial though the admission may be.

The Dirt Doesn’t Lie

Back before World War II, biblical historians had a more limited number of resources to draw from in order to ascertain fact from fiction. They had to rummage through the annals of Egyptian and Sumerian and Babylonian historical accounts to see if this divinely favored nation ever got mentioned, but they kept coming up empty handed.

Sometimes they would come across something that sounded enough like a Bible name that they would count that as confirmation and move on. For most of them the standard of verification was very, very low. Quite frankly, in retrospect, they were wearing their desperation on their sleeves.

But instead of finding evidence of a mighty kingdom spreading across a large geographical region governed by legendary kings with hundreds of wives and concubines, all anyone could turn up was an occasional reference to a small confederation of tribal heads inhabiting negligible territories sandwiched between much more powerful kingdoms which were constantly taking them over. And nothing at all prior to their supposedly forceful conquest of the Promised Land.

Biblical Archaeology was a relatively young science at the time, but considering how difficult it was to move around in most of the territories that historians wanted to explore, there wasn’t much we could do. But then the First and Second World Wars happened and, after the region underwent a whole lot of forceful territorial reassigning, the “Holy Land” once again became open for business.

Over the next couple of decades, archaeologists carried their students and volunteers on hundreds of excavation trips to every biblical place you could imagine, digging down as far as they could go in order, quite literally, to get to the bottom of what happened. What they discovered was disappointing to say the least.

There were no Hebrews prior to their gradual and peaceful emergence within Canaanite culture in the 1200s B.C.E. None of that stuff in the Bible prior to Canaan appears to have ever happened. And even when they did begin to slowly emerge as a people group, they looked and acted almost exactly like their surrounding neighbors, but with a couple of notable quirks: they left behind no pig bones, and they seemed disproportionately fond of one particular member of the Canaanite pantheon, Yahweh, the god of war.

At first, Yahweh (aka “Elohim,” which also may have referred to a whole group of gods) appears to have had a wife named Asherah. We know that the worship of the goddess still continued for centuries into Israel’s history despite many leaders’ attempts to cleanse the land of her memory (like ISIS, physically destroying monuments and disposing of her corresponding cultus). But subsequent versions of the Israelite religion became increasingly monotheistic, vehemently disavowing all of its polytheistic precursors. Occasionally you will still find remnants of this culture war preserved for us in the biblical texts.

A Valiant Attempt, Thwarted

No one walked through this eye-opening discovery more directly than William Dever, a post-war biblical archaeologist with a Disciples of Christ education who later studied at Harvard and led hundreds of students on dozens of excavations all over Israel. After a lifetime of study and first-hand exploration of the biblical lands, Dever reports:

After a century of exhaustive investigation, all respectable archaeologists have given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob credible “historical figures.” Virtually the last archaeological word was written by me more than 20 years ago for a basic handbook of biblical studies, Israelite and Judean History. And, as we have seen, archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus has similarly been discarded as a fruitless pursuit. Indeed, the overwhelming archaeological evidence today of largely indigenous origins for early Israel leaves no room for an exodus from Egypt or a 40-year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness. (emphasis mine) [ William Dever, What Did the Biblical Writers Know & When Did They Know It? (p.98-99)]

Remember the story of the wall of Jericho? Didn’t happen. Archaeologists like Dever inform us there wasn’t even a wall in existence during the time the Israelites were supposed to have taken the city. And the city, which by the way was likely abandoned before these invaders were supposed to have gotten there, was in its heyday no larger than the size of a couple of baseball fields side-by-side, occupied by no more than maybe 600 people. Can you imagine a nation of over a million adults marching around such a place, waiting for something miraculous to deliver this small town into their hands? They could have just walked right in and eaten their lunch.

There is not so much as a Late Bronze II potsherd of that period on the entire site…Nor is there any other possible candidate for biblical Jericho anywhere nearby in the sparsely settled lower Jordan Valley. Simply put, archaeology tells us that the biblical story of the fall of Jericho…cannot have been founded on genuine historical sources. It seems invented out of whole cloth. (emphasis mine) [Dever, Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? (pp.46-47)]

Try for a moment to imagine millions of Israelites. According to the Bible, there were 600,000 men who left Egypt on the night of Passover. Given that most adult men counted as heads of households would have been married, and given that the Bible stories show each family punching out at least half a dozen children a piece, we are being told that somewhere in the neighborhood of 3-4 million people exited a nation of only about 6 million in one single evening, leaving not a single trace of their presence in that country.

So we are to believe that those 3-4 million people spent 40 years in a deserted wasteland (getting their water from a rock, by the way, with their food just falling from the sky every morning) and yet somehow left not a single trace of their presence anywhere. No evidence of their existing in Egypt, no evidence of their dramatic departure, no evidence of their presence in the wilderness for decades, and zero evidence of their forceful takeover of any territories prior to their gradual emergence among the Canaanites several hundred years after the time they were supposed to have first come to be.

In short, none of this happened. The whole story is just made up. We know this.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Not one shred of proof has been shown that proves the existence of God. People only know what they've been told and shown in a book. Science has testable evidence that is in your face daily. For me, following science makes sense.

Thank about it - most of us believed in Santa Claus with the same passion as a deity until we knew better. I used to listen for the sled and hooves landing on my roof or a very fat man squeezing down my chimney. I believed it because it's what I was told for several years. I don't see any difference in religion.

Last, if you believe in the Bible, you must believe every text in it literally. There is no room for riddles or interpretations. We know there are things in this world that are physically impossible. Just because it's in the bible, doesn't mean a miracle allowed an incident to negate physics. A man lived in the belly of a big fish for 3 days, Moses parting the red sea, Noah being able to squeeze 2 of every animal species on to a boat (which means he was able to feed, remove all feces, keep them from eating/fighting each other for the entire journey)? This is physically impossible. Two of every species of animal would not fit into the ark mentioned in the Bible.

Please join this discussion and explain your views.

Thanks.
Why can’t a person follow science and God?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I'm no Bibliophile, but I don't know of any evidence that proved the Exodus fictional. I've just heard that there has been no evidence discovered to support it.
Though Sapiens gave the definitive answer let me try to give you a Cliff Notes short version for you.

Certain events would leave evidence of those events occurring. For example if a good friend of yours called you and swore up and down that a herd of buffaloes had just stampeded through his kitchen and you ran over and found it to be neater than a pin you would know that he was just teasing you. A herd of buffalo would have left evidence that could not be cleaned up in days, much less a couple of minutes. The Exodus story has on the order of 2 million Hebrews traipsing through the Middle East. No evidence can be found of the 40 year trip and to an anthropologist that would be as noticeable as your friends herd of buffaloes. The lack of evidence is extremely strong evidence that it never happened.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Sounds like a generalization to me.

Of course it was. It was based upon personal observations at several forums. I am not stating that it is an absolute fact. But there are Christians, probably a majority today, that can and do accept the theory of evolution, that know the Noah's Ark story was a myth, as is the Tower of Babel. They do not require a literal belief in Genesis or even Exodus to be Christians. But if you insist that to be a Christian one must read Genesis literally then you are stating that those people cannot follow science and God since the sciences have shown those ideas to be false.
 

Baroodi

Active Member
Not one shred of proof has been shown that proves the existence of God. People only know what they've been told and shown in a book. Science has testable evidence that is in your face daily. For me, following science makes sense.

Thank about it - most of us believed in Santa Claus with the same passion as a deity until we knew better. I used to listen for the sled and hooves landing on my roof or a very fat man squeezing down my chimney. I believed it because it's what I was told for several years. I don't see any difference in religion.

Last, if you believe in the Bible, you must believe every text in it literally. There is no room for riddles or interpretations. We know there are things in this world that are physically impossible. Just because it's in the bible, doesn't mean a miracle allowed an incident to negate physics. A man lived in the belly of a big fish for 3 days, Moses parting the red sea, Noah being able to squeeze 2 of every animal species on to a boat (which means he was able to feed, remove all feces, keep them from eating/fighting each other for the entire journey)? This is physically impossible. Two of every species of animal would not fit into the ark mentioned in the Bible.

Please join this discussion and explain your views.

Thanks.


(Today We shall save your body so you will be a sign for those after you. Verily many in mankind are heedless of
our signs) Translated Quran 10:93.

Quran talking to Pharaoh of Moses. He was drowned but his body was retrieved to be a sign for all mankind after him. All atheists need urgently to help themselves by visiting the museum in Egypt to see the body of Pharaoh.
please read as well what was written by Dr. Maurice Bucaille who was interested in Egyptology.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
(Today We shall save your body so you will be a sign for those after you. Verily many in mankind are heedless of
our signs) Translated Quran 10:93.

Quran talking to Pharaoh of Moses. He was drowned but his body was retrieved to be a sign for all mankind after him. All atheists need urgently to help themselves by visiting the museum in Egypt to see the body of Pharaoh.
please read as well what was written by Dr. Maurice Bucaille who was interested in Egyptology.
How is this supposed to be evidence of the Exodus myth? Why did you not include a valid link to support this claim?
 
Top