Theists cannot debate objectivly........

[secretasianman]

I haven't read through this thread yet - it's 6:40 AM, need to sleep... but if you're convinced that bible bashers etc. can't be objective... I've introduced a little thread concerned withChristian beliefs that *might* be what you were asking for... although after 24 hours w/o sleep everything looks nice and connected to everything else...

Shamelessly jacked your thread

Secretasianman strikes again :m: :m: :m:

 

[jayterrier]

evidence?
I can't even supply evidence the revolutionary war actually happened(other than written history).

 

[Acoustic Magic]

How ironic it is that religion, created to bring people together, is one of the barriers that separates us, and prevents us from acheiving utopia.

 

[jayterrier]

There is good reason to believe that Quirinius was actually twice in a position of command (the Greek expression hegemoneuo in Luke 2:2 which is often translated "governor" really just means "to be leading" or "in charge of") over the province of Syria, which included Judea as a political subdivision. The first time would have been when he was leading military action against the Homonadensians during the period between 12 and 2 B.C. His title may even have been "military governor."
A Latin inscription discovered in 1764 adds weight to the idea that Quirinius was in a position of authority in Syria on two separate occasions. There was definitely a taxing during this time and therefore, quite possible, an associated census

 

[everneo]

Originally posted by Acoustic Magic
How ironic it is that religion, created to bring people together, is one of the barriers that separates us, and prevents us from acheiving utopia.

yeah.. but that is not religion but poor understanding of that and misinterpretation of the message it carries.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by jayterrier
evidence? I can't even supply evidence the revolutionary war actually happened(other than written history).

Previously posted by jayterrier
Recent historical investigation has proved that Quirinius was governor of Cilicia, which was annexed to Syria at the time of our Lord's birth.

Please cite the "recent historical investigation ...", or retract the claim.

 

[Jaxom]

Originally posted by everneo
yeah.. but that is not religion but poor understanding of that and misinterpretation of the message it carries.

And also different belief systems for each religion, some that conflict. Religion tried to bond common people, but not humanity. Otherwise why would conflicting non-believers (infidels) be targeted for destruction, as both Testaments and the Qu'ran suggest. Not the best way to unite mankind, by killing those who oppose the religion.

 

[CounslerCoffee]

If somebody is a member of a religion, they agree with the teachings of that religion. This is not in dispute?

No. Just because I go to church doesnt mean that I think Homosexuality is wrong, even though the church thinks it is. You should really go on an individual basis, Im sure that you'll see that a lot of people disagree with their church sometimes.

As a result of their faith their views and opinions tend to clash with other religions that they are not members of. This is not in dispute?

My opinions do clash with others, but I dont feel the need to force my beliefs on them.

Obviously if somebody believes in a religion and therefore a god of some sort, they cannot possibly hope to argue objectivly with either a member of a different religion or an atheist or agnostic?

Did you just call all theists idiots who can't understand crap?

he members of the religion under fire turn to the holy books THEY believe in for answers and justification.

I only quoted the bible once, and that was to support an atheists claim. If you can quote Darwin, then I should be able to quote Jesus.

But if you need blind faith to follow a religion....how can you argue a point objectivly.

You'd be surprised. You have to keep an open mind, thats all.

I would argue that atheists and agnostics are the only members of sciforums that can take a step back and look at religion as a whole....

You obviously havent met me yet. Hi.

Than letting their faith effect their judgement.

Mine doesnt.

This is like the 1,000 thread started on the topic that theists can't debate, and have no common sense. This shows poorly on some of you atheists.

 

[TruthSeeker]

CounslerCoffee,

A follower of Christ must concider his teachings. If not, it is NOT a follower of Christ.

 

[Cris]

A follower of Christ must concider his teachings. If not, it is NOT a follower of Christ.

The problem with that is that no one can agree on the details of the teachings, hence the many hundreds of Christian cults; each with different interpretations.

The bible should be a good source but that has numerous variations and within those there are countless contradictions.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Cris,

His teaching is very evident:

John 13:35
"35 By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

Do you need it to be more evident?

The problem with that is that no one can agree on the details of the teachings, hence the many hundreds of Christian cults; each with different interpretations.

The bible should be a good source but that has numerous variations and within those there are countless contradictions.

The cults and contradictions are caused because people don't read the Bible as a normal book. Most people get a scripture out of nothing and tries to interpret it. Now, imagine if you would read a book and get a line out of it. Would it make sense? Certainly not! You would have to have read what comes before it. In the same way, when you read something about the Old covenant in the New covenant, you must read it in the light of the New covenant. As God Himself says:

Hebrews 8:13
"13 When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. "

Before Christ, we had to ask God to forgive us. After he came and died for us, our sins were forgiven. This is called grace and is the basic difference between the Old and New testament that God has with us. Now, if we sin, as far as He is concerned, we are sinless. Therefore, as we are not under the Law, but now above it, we can keep the Law more easily. What we do still affect us here, but our sins are forgiven. Our sins doesn't affect us internally anymore (becoming sinful), but they still affect us externally.

Galatians 6:7-10
"7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.
8 For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life.
9 Let us not lose heart in doing good, for in due time we will reap if we do not grow weary.
10 So then, while we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith. "

In the light of the new agreement, we live in peace. Catholics use some of the Old testament stuff to make people fearful so that they can get money out of it. It began when the King James version came about in about 1600. Some of the stuff they did is to get words in Hebrew that meant "allow" and made them "put" and such things. They made people be in bondage, having to pay for their sins, while they were already forgiven. That's just an example. Most of the churches are under the Law, while all the churches should be above it. Satan likes this situation, because people's ignorance limit and influence their choices.

Therefore, to understand the Bible one must read all of it and know it all as a whole (being able to get a part of it and compare to all others). Not even Christians fully understand it, but we understand enough to know that it is true and that we should follow Jesus, walking in love.

2 John 1:6
"6 And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it. "

 

[Acoustic Magic]

Fantasy Fiction

The bible is a great book. I've read it a few times. But you know, I take it at face value. I have the utmost respect for the majority of the pious, those who devote their lives to it are to be admired. That having been said, the bible is just a book, a great collection of ideas and legend. There are many other entertaining and engaging fantasy fiction books out there. Books that can also bring you to another place without subverting the primary world. I refer you to Tolkien, C.S. Lewis and Micheal Millgate. I also believe that if you are not a priest, pastor, rabbi or minister, then you have ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS in influencing people's beliefs. Be that by forcing religion, as has been done in the past, or suggesting it in a non-objective way.



"Many times I've gazed, along the open road...
Many times I've wondered, how much there is to know..."

Peace,
Keep an open mind, and keep diggin' for knowledge.

-The Acoustic Mage

 

[TruthSeeker]

The bible is a great book. I've read it a few times. But you know, I take it at face value. I have the utmost respect for the majority of the pious, those who devote their lives to it are to be admired. That having been said, the bible is just a book, a great collection of ideas and legend. There are many other entertaining and engaging fantasy fiction books out there. Books that can also bring you to another place without subverting the primary world. I refer you to Tolkien, C.S. Lewis and Micheal Millgate. I also believe that if you are not a priest, pastor, rabbi or minister, then you have ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS in influencing people's beliefs. Be that by forcing religion, as has been done in the past, or suggesting it in a non-objective way.

Do I really need to comment on that...?:bugeye:

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by TruthSeeker
The cults and contradictions are caused because people don't read the Bible as a normal book.

Read your variant of the victors' bible and tell me how Judas died, and who saw what in the tomb after the crucifixian. As a piece of evidence, the bible has a probative value approaching zero.

 

[TruthSeeker]

What the heck is "victor's bible"???? :bugeye:

 

[Acoustic Magic]

Not only is there no God, but try finding a plumber on Sunday.

 

[everneo]

Originally posted by Acoustic Magic
Not only is there no God, but try finding a plumber on Sunday.

weekend hangover.. all plumbers gone to sunday mass, u know

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by Acoustic Magic
Not only is there no God, but try finding a plumber on Sunday.

It's good form to credit the source.

Not only is there no God, but try getting a plumber on weekends.
-- Woody Allen, "My Philosophy," The New Yorker (December 27, 1969), Getting Even "My Philosophy" (1971)

 

[Tyler]

Hey! No stealing Woody's material!
Bastards.

 

[one_raven]

OK...
First of all...

Originally posted by jusmeig
Obviously if somebody believes in a religion and therefore a god of some sort...

Being a member of a religion does not necessarily imply a belief in God/Gods.

Originally posted by jusmeig
...they cannot possibly hope to argue objectivly with either a member of a different religion or an atheist or agnostic?

So you are sayiong that someone who believes in their religion can not be objective to other points of view?
Where do you get that?
People that believe in something can still be open minded, no?
If not, then how could you possibly believe that Atheists can be open minded and objective?
The believe in something.
They believe that God does not exist.
How could they possibly argue objectively with a Theist?
Have you ever heard of a Christian Apologist?
Have you ever heard of Saint Augustine?
Look it up.
Do a little reading and try being just a tiny bit objective yourself.

No one that believes in God can be objective??
That has to be one of the least objective statements that I have ever heard.

Originally posted by jusmeig
The members of the religion under fire turn to the holy books THEY believe in for answers and justification.

And you turn to the books YOU beleive in for answers and justification.
How is that a whole lot different?

Originally posted by jusmeig
But if you need blind faith to follow a religion....how can you argue a point objectivly.

Who says you do?
Buddha taught to not beleiev anything he says.
He taught to believe blindly in nothing.
Don't believe in anything you don't experience yourself.
Same rings true for many schools of Vedanta thought.
As well as mnay that follow Taoism.
Are you confusing Christianty with the word "religion"?
Even if you are, as I said there have been many well noted objective Christian apologists.

Originally posted by jusmeig
I would argue that atheists and agnostics are the only members of sciforums that can take a step back and look at religion as a whole....rather than letting their faith effect their judgement. I invite you to prove me wrong.........

I guess you would if you could, but I will have to take your word for it, now won't I?

(edited to add the wink because I read this and realized the last remark could come off as malicious and badgering, though it was not intended that way. It was intended more tongue-in-cheek)