***[Moderator Note] Pahu is no longer a member of Think Atheist. If you would like to add your thoughts to this thread, that is your prerogative; however, the original poster is not able to respond.[/Moderator Note]***
When we set out to explain why and how something happens, we must use the evidence, facts and experience available to us if we are to arrive at a logical conclusion. Using available evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we know that the universe had a beginning and that before that beginning there was no universe and therefore there was nothing. We know this because of the Law of Causality (for every cause there is an effect and for every effect there is a cause). Based on this law, we can use the following logic:
1. The universe exists.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Before the beginning of the universe, there was no universe.
4. Since there was no universe, there was nothing.
5. Since the universe does exist, it came from nothing.
6. Nothing comes from nothing by any natural cause.
7. Therefore the cause of the universe is supernatural.
8. Life exists.
9. Life always comes from pre-existing life of the same kind (the Law of Biogenesis).
10. Life cannot come from nonliving matter by any natural cause.
11. Since life does exist, the cause of life is supernatural.
Many people with a naturalistic worldview assume everything can be explained by natural causes. From the beginning, they reject the possibility of a supernatural cause. Because of this they are left with no scientifically valid answers to the question of how the universe could come from nothing, which is impossible by any natural cause of which we are aware. Many answers have been proposed that go beyond the realm of known evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation and therefore enter the realm of fiction.
The same logic applies to life. Using available evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we know that life only comes from pre-existing life of the same kind.
[color=blue][i]“Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has never been observed. All observations have shown that life comes only from life. This has been observed so consistently it is called the Law of Biogenesis. Evolution conflicts with this scientific law by claiming that life came from nonliving matter through natural processes”[/color][/i] [[url=http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/]From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown[/url]]
Life never comes from non-living matter by any natural cause of which we are aware.
Now that we have seen proof that God exists, using logic based on known evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we need to see if He has revealed Himself to us. In the Holy Bible there are hundreds of prophecies given by God who is speaking in the first person. In both Bible and secular history we find that those prophecies have been accurately fulfilled. No other writing on earth comes close to doing this! Only God can accurately reveal the future, ergo, He is the author of the Holy Bible. Within the pages of the Holy Bible He reveals His nature, our nature, His relationship to us, our need for salvation and His plan of salvation for us.
The reason the universe and life cannot come from nothing by any natural cause, but can come from a supernatural cause is because God is the self-existent creator of everything and everyone. He is not subject to His creation. He created it and sustains it. It is a mistake to judge God by human standards and human perspectives. God reveals that He is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.
If you are interested in more detailed proof, read, [i]“Evidence that Demands a Verdict”[/i] by Josh McDowell.
[[url=http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000005147#] From “Reincarnation in the Bible?” [/url]]
Replies are closed for this discussion.
I'll agree with you that Hitler wasn't your average Catholic - but then I'm not Acatholic, am I? I'm Atheist because it's the cockamamie superstitious folly of the theist (especially self-proclaimed deity) that is ripping this world apart. There are no gods, spirits, ghosts, or supernatural energies manipulating the cosmos capriciously - and if you believe there are then you aren't paying attention to the facts.
Granted, even some people who don't believe in any of these things can be awful - but that's just because they are awful people. Awful people do awful things, whether or not they believe in malarkey; the problem is that theism causes otherwise decent people to do atrocious things.
If all you sky pilots could just pull your heads out of your asses for a few months we might just stand a chance of taking action to make this world a better place. As long as you are all eager to be done with this life so you can get on with your make-believe second incarnations (whatever they may be) we will never have a chance as a species to deal with the reality we live in today.
In Germany, school children were supposed to pray to Hitler. (During World War II) Is THAT Christianity?
I would like to see a source for this. My grandfather was a schoolboy in Germany during the war and was in the HJ; he never did such a ridiculous thing. I don't know if some schools or organizations required children to pray for Hitler, but that wouldn't be any different than God Save the Queen.
My grandfather was Catholic.
Again, I can't find a reply button, so I'll write it here.
I will say that I partly agree, and partly completely disagree with you.
People do wicked things, no matter of their philosophy. I am merely objecting that a person who is religious who does an evil thing should not have his or her actions necessarily attributed to their philosophy anymore than an atheist, should he murder someone, should be attributed to his belief - although it is a possibility.
I would argue, and I don't want to continue this too much because it has slowly become more of a bitch slapping contest than an educated conversation, that there is no reason for saying that, for at least Catholicism, that being a religious makes you a bad person.
Heck, you'll never find a place where people are so oft to give their lives to live in filth and sacrifice everything, such as my American Catholic hero, Dorothy Day, for the sake of making lives better for others.
All in all, your last paragraph seems like baseless accusations that carry a good, proud tone, but are ultimately hollow.
Ha, Ha, What a laugh. 'Genesis is not supposed to be read completely in a literal sense'. Why not? Who decides what is supposed to be literal or not?
If you have to explain your manuel for life, a person is supposed to pick out the good bits of what is true and what is a story.
You follow a book written by primitive people with the morals and ethics of a nat. Full of hate, violent men who are territorial and misogynistic. I don't care what anybody believes in, I believe in evolution. If you want to believe that a bloke started all this, that's okay, I don't care. it's the hate, the advocation of violence, and the vilification of sex, and therefore women. Jesus was (supposed) to be celibate, are you? - once again, many different interpretations and opinions, from the same book - there are different religions that ban marriage, because they read the same book you do - but have a different interpretation - the result is misery to millions.
People have read the same book you have, and out comes the Spanish Inquisition and the German Inquisition etc. etc.
So, can you tell me, what is supposed to be taken literally and what is supposed to be taken non literally.
Do you play with snakes and drink arsenic - oh, sorry, that was 'written in' after the original. Bits and pieces added - you are reading only ONE VERSION, the operative word being version.
Kids being tossed out of home, because they are atheist or gay - Ah, yes, christians are truly loving people.
If somebody tells me 'I am christian' I run. Christians can do anything evil, rape children, as do catholics and jehovah witness, steal as in corporations, cheat AND steal as evangelicals, and they are forgiven - that's is why they can and will do it again.
No morals, no ethics no conscience.
Ok, I'll be honest and say that I have a good deal of temptation in answering in as petty and with senseless smearing as you did right now.
Miss, you see a christian... and you run? I heard that phrase from Christopher Hitchens, I believe. Are you saying you'd see a mother Theresa and run? Is it because you're weaker than that frail old lady? I honestly don't find the connection on why you should RUN.
While I certainly believe that the priests who have fallen into pedophile way of being are scum as priests... do you know that statistics show that parents are still the #1 child molesters?
Are you saying we should remove children from the custody of their parents? Should we brand all parents as pedophiles because they are the #1 child molesters?
If you're going to put the finger on the evils many believers do... why can't we also notice the evils non-believers do. Hitler, Mussolini, communist China, communist Korea. They are CERTAINLY not believers.
Many of them are atheists... yet even I don't believe atheism false merely because it is responsible for a definitely good share of deaths and evils.
If Christians keep doing evils because they will be forgiven, then empirically speaking, atheists should be able to kill, maim, murder, and do all sorts of things for the sake of their own pleasure --- because it is only this life you'll ever have. Might as well spend it for yourself, even if it is at the cost of others.
Christians and others fall into sin because they were either weak and were overcame with temptation, or because they chose to do an evil act. It has nothing to do with the veracity of a doctrine. If anything, it acknowledges it, since it is Christian doctrine that says we are fallen creatures.
You believe in evolution. My former pope, Pope John Paul II, was the one to say "Evolution is more than just a theory". (a.k.a., evolution does not affect a single hair of my belief, and over more, I find it very convincing)
If we're going to talk about the reasons people read differently and other interpretations, here is a good video that explains it all a bit well:
And I know this will sound corny, but sorry if I lashed out a bit. It's one thing to politely reject a belief and a completely different thing to smear it by taking things out of proportion.
Before you go calling Hitler and Atheist you should really pull your nose out of your dusty, old, irrelevant, bronze age holy book and check some facts. Nazi belt buckles carried the slogan "Gott Mit Uns" (God With Us) and if you even read a chapter of Mein Kampf then you would know it was a devoutly Christian manifesto.
Now that you know the facts of the matter, the real question is whether or not you will stop lying and pretending that you don't? I doubt it, because all of you apologists base your twisted rationalizations on lies - if you didn't then you would come to your senses and stop spewing this childish nonsense about your imaginary friend.
The thing is that we do have ancient Egyptian records from that time and they provide no support for the events mentioned in Exodus.
I have to accept that I don't know that much about the historical references of Christ during his times.
Fair enough. If you do look into it, you'll find that there is nothing written about him from the time that he is supposed to have lived.
The Pauline epistles were written much earlier than the gospels and you'll notice that Paul doesn't seem to know any details about the life of Jesus. What do you make of that?
One difference is the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses within a few years of the events.
Sorry, but the gospels cannot reasonably be seen as eyewitness accounts.
First, it is reasonably well established that they were written several decades after the time of the events on which they purportedly report. So, even if they were intended to be eyewitness testimony, the gap between the supposed events and the writing of the books means that they are less likely to be reliable. Even fresh eyewitness testimony is recognized as one of the least reliable forms of evidence. For example, many wrongly-convicted and imprisoned people who have been freed on the basis of DNA evidence were convicted on the basis of eyewitness testimony.
Human memory is "plastic". That is, intentionally or not, our memories tend to get shaped to match our biases and expectations, especially as time goes on. Furthermore, we have a strong tendency to make errors in how we perceive that which is going on around us. See this web site for more information on that if you're interested.
Second, the authorship of the gospels is unknown. The names attached to them are based on tradition but serious Bible scholars (not the biblical literalists by whom you've been influenced) will tell you that it is simply not known who wrote them. That isn't true of the entire New Testament -- for example, it is pretty well established that most of the epistles attributed to Paul were actually written or dictated by him -- but the gospels are anonymous.
So, what we have are decades-old anonymous writings. These cannot be taken seriously as eyewitness testimony.
Third, one must consider the intent of the gospels. It is fairly well accepted that the purpose of the gospels was to promote certain doctrines within the fledgling Christian religion and to oppose certain other doctrines. That is, they were intended to be doctrinal tracts and not necessarily historical accounts.
There was no time for mythology to grow.
Joseph Smith had is first "vision" in 1820. Only ten years later, in 1830, he was able to formally establish what was to become The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints -- the Mormons. There was considerably more than one decade between the writing of the gospels and the events which they supposedly portray. I think that leaves plenty of time for mythology to grow.
hahaha! comedy hour.
No, comedy month(almost)
So why does the loving god give kids bone cancer?
Because god wants them with him in heaven so he can share his love with him. Bloody pervert.