The plight of atheism, is this why the incessant arguing?

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Sixteen Ph.D.'s can't fix that, only the Christ you have no faith in can fix that.

What's taking Jesus so long?

Anyone who thinks Hitler was a real Christian is a total moron.

Yes, to be a REAL Christian, you have to pray and hope for the utter annihilation of basically EVERYONE, not just some random minorities, ethnic or otherwise.

It is Christ who knows who are Christians and who are not.

Supposedly Jesus, like God before him, needs some sort of label to identify his sheep. God needed bloody doorways to tell a Hebrew from an Egyptian and Jesus needs some sort of tattoo or something to tell his sheep from Satan's.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I don't understand your answer. I've already agreed that people imagine gods all the time. I'm talking about real ones ─ ones with objective existence. Only then can I answer the rest of your question.

So in the real world : What entity or thing is Jesus? A 2000 yo man? Something else? What? Do you have photos or videos? What life-systems keep him going? Where should we look for him? If we need anything more than a video camera, what do we need and why? How can the identity of this entity be confirmed as Jesus?

You are unaware that Jesus's recorded sayings give you the answers to these questions? You are unaware of His proscription to seek and find?

 

[columbus]

You are unaware that Jesus's recorded sayings give you the answers to these questions? You are unaware of His proscription to seek and find?

Are you unaware of how you changed the subject in the space of two sentences?
From "Jesus's recorded sayings", which we all know were written decades after He died, to "His proscription" which we can't trace back further than decades after He died?
Tom

 

[BilliardsBall]

I simply meant that I hope you can experience in person the care and respect another can have for you despite your views. And I would hope you learn to love and respect others depite theirs, since it is such a foreign concept to you.

Cheers

I have an immense respect for the great intellect and compassion I see atheists friends exhibiting.

I just question how you know love and respect are axiomatic moral imperatives. For example, I see Jesus advocating for love and respect. I'm unsure where skeptics get their notions of right and wrong from as axioms, since they are sometimes aligned with Jesus Christ and sometimes standing as polar opposites.

 

[BilliardsBall]

What has sound to do with omnipotence?

Omnipotence = infinite power

Power = energy expended over time

E=mc2 shows that energy cannot be infinite.

Who said God's energy is infinite? God would need sufficient energy to create this universe, which mass/energy has had finite estimates made of it.

We can say mass/energy is eternal from the BB expansion, as it cannot in sum be created or destroyed.

I know that God's understanding is infinite.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I will try to respond to all three of these by describing myself. It's a little complicated, but I honestly believe that my sort of thought processes are more common than religionists realize.

In casual discussion I usually refer to myself as a nontheist or atheist. That's because "culturally Catholic, agnostic, atheistic deist " is pretty long and cumbersome. And irrelevant to the discussion, usually. But each of those terms describes a facet of my world view.

The "cultural Catholic " is easy. I was raised in a huge Catholic family that was really a bit insular. My parents didn't have friends, they had relatives and parishioners. Even my schools were extensions of the church. I knew no other world until my teens. I have as my Catholic friends put it, a "C" engraved on my heart. No change to my theological beliefs can change that.

The "agnostic" is a bit more complex. It is not really about God or the supernatural at all. It is the recognition that human beings aren't too perceptive or smart, but we have a batch of instincts and mental processes that commonly result in beliefs about the ineffable and unknowable. That's religion. Believing in implausible things about aspects of reality we don't and cannot understand, at least at this time. We humans are just too limited to any important understanding of God, and that decidedly includes me. So I believe that the usual image of God is a fictional character that people re-imagine over and over. Creating God in their own image.

Which leads me to "atheistic". Theism isn't really the belief that "God exists". That's Deism. Theism is really the belief that one knows important stuff about God(s). God's history and character, plans and methods, wishes and feelings, etc etc. I am not able to believe that human beings know any of that, much less the primitive warlords and such who invented the foundations of the religions I mostly live with, the various Abrahamics.

But given all that, I do believe in God(sort of) . The universe does exist. I don't pretend to understand that, but I have no problem using the word "God" to refer to "the reason that there is something, rather than nothing ". But that doesn't tell us anything about God. Making up explanations seems a miserably poor substitute for the rigorous investigation of Creation. So I believe in scientific inquiry, not religion. I believe in using reason to improve our ethics, not revelation.

Does this make me, and likely a lot of other atheists, a little more understandable?
Tom

It does and I appreciate your kind and very patient explanation. It begs only one question to my way of thinking, so correct me if I'm wrong:

Making up explanations seems a miserably poor substitute . . .

I find the explanatory power of and evidence supporting the Bible substantial. Do you have evidence that 40-plus Bible authors writing over centuries, each looking to prior authors for revelatory, prophetic fulfillment, were "making up explanations"? Or is this a gut feeling?

 

[blü 2]

You are unaware that Jesus's recorded sayings give you the answers to these questions? You are unaware of His proscription to seek and find?

Now we're getting somewhere!

Seek and find a real WHAT, exactly?

 

[DavidFirth]

Ahh preaching... There, there.

You have evidence of christ or his "kingdom" or are you just relying on faith, what your elders tell you and wishfull thinking?

Yep. Read the entire Bible, particularly Isaiah and the New Testament. There is plenty of testimony concerning Christ there.

Or you can just ignore it and say it's poppycock. That's your choice.

 

[ChristineM]

Who said God's energy is infinite? God would need sufficient energy to create this universe, which mass/energy has had finite estimates made of it.

We can say mass/energy is eternal from the BB expansion, as it cannot in sum be created or destroyed.

I know that God's understanding is infinite.

Revelations 19:6, kjv, surprised youve not read the bible

No wer can't say energy (and hence mass) is eternal

First, there is no actual law of causality, its simply intuition.

Second, the physical laws (thermodynamic etc) did not begin to coalesce until AFTER the bb event

Therefore there is no scientific reason that the energy (and consequently, mass) in this universes existed prior to the bb.

And how do you know god, if he exists, understands? You asked him or you were told by someone with an agernda to perpetuate the illusion?

 

[ChristineM]

Yep. Read the entire Bible, particularly Isaiah and the New Testament. There is plenty of testimony concerning Christ there.

Or you can just ignore it and say it's poppycock. That's your choice.

Testimony is not evidence. It is hearsay, and hearsay 2 o3 generations down the line.

There is an old ww2 joke which goes, a captain gave a message to his runner to carry to a relay station for another runner to carry to a 3rd runner who would take the message to headquarters.
The message given was "send reinforcements, we are going to advance"
The message received at hq was "send three and four pence we are going to as dance"

And you expect a verbal story to be accurate over 2 or 3 generations?

Add to that the nt was selectively compiled a couple of hundred years after events. Has since been edited, translated, retranslated and reedited many many times to the stage that in the very early 1600s a king hired a bunch of guys to selectively recompiled it, not from original material but from 8 of the versions that were popular in 1600 to make a definitive Bible

Now there are over 200 different english lasing have versions of that bible, and who knows how many in other languages, giving rise to over 50000 cults, branches, offshoots of Christianity, all claiming these interpretation of the particular version of the Bible they favour is the correct interpretation and all others are wrong.

That's not choice that's fact

 

[Desert Snake]

In your country, maybe.

Ciao

- viole

Generally. Unless you are defined by your country statistics, which your statement implies.

 

[DavidFirth]

Testimony is not evidence. It is hearsay, and hearsay 2 o3 generations down the line.

There is an old ww2 joke which goes, a captain gave a message to his runner to carry to a relay station for another runner to carry to a 3rd runner who would take the message to headquarters.
The message given was "send reinforcements, we are going to advance"
The message received at hq was "send three and four pence we are going to as dance"

And you expect a verbal story to be accurate over 2 or 3 generations?

Add to that the nt was selectively compiled a couple of hundred years after events. Has since been edited, translated, retranslated and reedited many many times to the stage that in the very early 1600s a king hired a bunch of guys to selectively recompiled it, not from original material but from 8 of the versions that were popular in 1600 to make a definitive Bible

Now there are over 200 different english lasing have versions of that bible, and who knows how many in other languages, giving rise to over 50000 cults, branches, offshoots of Christianity, all claiming these interpretation of the particular version of the Bible they favour is the correct interpretation and all others are wrong.

That's not choice that's fact

Hahahaha. Testimony is evidence. You go kill someone with an eyewitness and see if you don't fry for it.

It isn't that far "down the line" and it was originally written by the original authors who were there. It was of course copied from the originals and handed down from generation to generation.

 

[ChristineM]

Hahahaha. Testimony is evidence. You go kill someone with an eyewitness and see if you don't fry for it.

It isn't that far "down the line" and it was originally written by the original authors who were there. It was of course copied from the originals and handed down from generation to generation.

Eye witness testimony is not reliable

Why Science Tells Us Not to Rely on Eyewitness Accounts

And at least here in Europe, unless corroborated, is rarely used in trials other than for background information. Im pretty sure that in the us, no one is convicted to execution any more on eye witness testimony

Murder Conviction, Based Solely on Eyewitness Testimony, Reversed after 25 Years

See also
convicted on eyewitness testimony - Recherche Google

For several other instances of the failure of eyewitness testimony in court cases

In psychological experiments when a group of people were shown an incident, vary rarely did they report seeing the same thing

Loftus and Palmer | Simply Psychology

The Bible was compiled long down the line.

Is there any actual evidence that the passages were copied from writings of original authors?

 

[ChristineM]

Hahahaha. Testimony is evidence. You go kill someone with an eyewitness and see if you don't fry for it.

It isn't that far "down the line" and it was originally written by the original authors who were there. It was of course copied from the originals and handed down from generation to generation.

I thought this may interest you

1,500-Year-Old Bible Found In Turkey States That Jesus Not The Son of God And Was Not Crucified At All

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Do you have evidence that 40-plus Bible authors writing over centuries, each looking to prior authors for revelatory, prophetic fulfillment, were "making up explanations"? Or is this a gut feeling?

It's evidence. That's how reason and evidence based thinkers roll. We don't have much regard for revelation, prophecy, or gut feelings.

 

[Curious George]

I have an immense respect for the great intellect and compassion I see atheists friends exhibiting.

I just question how you know love and respect are axiomatic moral imperatives. For example, I see Jesus advocating for love and respect. I'm unsure where skeptics get their notions of right and wrong from as axioms, since they are sometimes aligned with Jesus Christ and sometimes standing as polar opposites.

And that is a fair question. I would say that empathy is a strong motivator. Along similar lines there are theories of justice that are support a notion of non judgementality towards others. We are social creatures, we have social needs and wants. Other ideas suggest that we evolved to cooperate. Love and compassion are strong motivating forces. I personally don't understand how anyone could suggest that a particular belief be enough to negate these factors.

I know that being an atheist can make me no more human or inhumane than being a theist can make you such.

Your experiences, knowledge, and environment have led you to the belief that God exists. I do not think you have a choice to not believe. You could no more decide to not believe than I could choose to believe. The idea that I judge, reject, belittle, ridicule, etc over this is disconnected with my thought process. I have acted hurtful to others in the past for beliefs, not religious beliefs, but beliefs nonetheless (mostly political if you are curious). I can certainly get frustrated when others cannot see what I think I see so clearly. But that too is an attribute commonly found in all of us. Is it logical? No. But I certainly have not seen a belief yet that completely negates this.

I was raised around many religious people. These are people for whom I have cared deeply. When you care about others who have diverse beliefs, it is much harder to ridicule people for those beliefs.

Cheers

 

[BilliardsBall]

Are you unaware of how you changed the subject in the space of two sentences?
From "Jesus's recorded sayings", which we all know were written decades after He died, to "His proscription" which we can't trace back further than decades after He died?
Tom

Jesus's recorded sayings are the entire Bible. The Bible including Jesus's inspired words and Jesus's spoken words tell us how to seek, how to find.

And if you promised resurrection and did so, I'd remember what you said decades later and write it down to the best of my ability! I can likewise tell you much about my wedding day decades ago and etc. when great love was on display, even if I remember scant or no details of what happened weeks after that special day!

 

[columbus]

And if you promised resurrection and did so, I'd remember what you said decades later and write it down to the best of my ability! I can likewise tell you much about my wedding day decades ago

I'll bet that you could even tell me where your wedding took place. Unlike the Resurrection.

Jesus's recorded sayings are the entire Bible.

I am confident that Moses and the Prophets would vehemently disagree. And if Scripture is particularly reliable guide they have a far better connection to the God of Abraham than modern people do.
Tom

 

[BilliardsBall]

Revelations 19:6, kjv, surprised youve not read the bible

No wer can't say energy (and hence mass) is eternal

First, there is no actual law of causality, its simply intuition.

Second, the physical laws (thermodynamic etc) did not begin to coalesce until AFTER the bb event

Therefore there is no scientific reason that the energy (and consequently, mass) in this universes existed prior to the bb.

And how do you know god, if he exists, understands? You asked him or you were told by someone with an agernda to perpetuate the illusion?

I don't understand how Rev. 19:6 either agrees or disagrees with your claims above:

And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

So I cannot argue with you.

I would say, God exists and understands, based on the fact that human authors who've died were inspired to put down prophecies fulfilled dozens to thousands of years following their deaths.

I understand you will have several reasons why prophetic predictions were luck or coincidence, but once you've studied over one hundred such prophecies, as I have, the claim is irrefutable.

 

[BilliardsBall]

It's evidence. That's how reason and evidence based thinkers roll. We don't have much regard for revelation, prophecy, or gut feelings.

Your statement has an element of self-contradiction to it: "I want evidence, unless it's prophetic evidence or unless God personally makes a revelation to me, because I don't want that kind of evidence, either. Also, when I get a gut feeling that I am disobeying evidence I have, I will fight hard against such feeling . . . "