Why no straight answers?

[Zzyzx]

.
After eight years debating here I have YET to encounter a defender of fundamentalism / literalism / traditionalism (or the Bible in general) who will openly, accurately, honestly answer fundamental questions about Christian beliefs – including the following (with truthful answers in bold font)

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Jesus was anything more than human? None

Humans possess a soul? None

An afterlife exists? None

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred? None

Any of the claimed events such as floods, earthquakes, darkening sky, star stopping, Earth ceasing rotation, etc occurred as described? None

God intercedes in human affairs or life events? None

Bible writers were actually inspired by God? None



Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting the basic beliefs of Christianity must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it" and that doing so is not a rational basis for making decisions on matters of importance?

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 488 by Erexsaur]

Hi, Erexsaur,

Hello Blastcat,

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to express what I think. I will therefore express not only what I think, but mostly what I know.

You said,

You have your belief that the god you worship is infallible, and have prevented any questioning as to whether he actually IS infallible. You declare it such and that is that. End of discussion.

Sorry, but that wasn't me. It was rikuoamero. Perhaps you want to address yourself to him. Don't worry too much about a mistake like that.. Happens all the time.

I will take the opportunity to engage you a little, since the post WAS addressed to me. I wont answer ALL of what you wrote, because I'm trying to make my responses a bit shorter these days. When I started.. I wrote PAGES. Now, I realize that I don't like reading posts that long.

Now a few observations that I'd like to point out before I begin.

1. You make some over-generalizations, and that is never a good idea. It's way better to make more MODEST claims that all encompassing global ones, as they are WAY easier to prove.
2. You talk of "PROOF", but I don't see any of that. It's no good to ASSUME that there is proof without demonstrating that it actually exists. Here is your opportunity to not ONLY preach what you believe is true, but to SHOW us the proof that you so gladly proclaim.
3. If you think that debate is ONLY sharing with us what you happen to believe and are DONE?... that is not what most people think of when they think of a DEBATE about beliefs. We all have beliefs, a debate ABOUT beliefs needs to be more than just SHARING... If you wish to only share with us your beliefs, you are in the wrong kind of forum. Here.. our beliefs are CHALLENGED.
4. You mistakenly assume that atheist think of themselves as INFALLIBLE. This could be not further from the truth. Our fallibility is NOT in question.
5. I agree with a LOT of what I responded to, that's very refreshing.. We have a good start to an understanding.
6. You ask some VERY interesting and rather deep questions. I encourage you to stick around so that we get to answer each and every one of them. They are sometimes very good questions indeed.
7. I cut off my answers because I just thought it was long enough. No disrespect intended.

So, how about we get into it:

What should one believe other than the actual truth that settles debates? Only this is what I intend to share. Pictures from the Mariner spacecraft showing Mars to be a lifeless planet settled the issue whether Mars had civilizations or not. The Biblical gospel truth is like the Mariner when it comes to conflicting belief issues.

I have no idea why you would think that. Could you explain how they are the same?
One is an instrument that goes out into space and takes observations of what is actually there. The other, the Bible, is a book.

How is one like the other?

A lady was told in response to a question she ask about worship: “The hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. … the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him (St. John 420-24).�

Ok, that sounds like a prediction... That's nice.. I don't see at all how that explains anything.

If the title of this leg is, "Debating Christianity and Religion Why no Straight Answers?", my purpose then is to provide the proven straight answers.

Well, if you think that you have provided the proof of your "straight answers", I haven't seen any myself. What are those?

Debates are meant to fill in gaps in truth not fully revealed. But when the truth is made known in its fullness, what's the need for further debate?

Ah.. I see. Your belief ENDS all debates. Well, if you know everything that there is to know about it, then OK. I guess that you could imagine that there is nothing TO debate. What's left, then, preaching?

In response to my statement, “Thanks for your very helpful admission that we are all fallible. With that the case, why shouldn't we seek and trust a superior infallible being?�

I'm not sure we should trust just ANYONE without a sound reason, but in the case of gods, we should maybe check is there IS one of those, first, instead of following some STORY about it.

You said,

How could we know that someone is infallible if we are judging that person with our fallible minds? Sorry, that's a rhetorical question. I should avoid those.. they are very boring to read. I should say instead that if we are fallible, we can not expect to KNOW anything infallibly. So, what we may THINK is infallible might NOT be. We might have FAILED in our judgment.

Oh, sorrry, we have a case of mistaken identity. I am not riku.

That's ok, though, I will try to answer your questions. I'm not going to be able to defend someone else's argument, though, I don't know it well enough for that. But, maybe I can give you MY perspective on things.. you never know.. might help.

We learn of Infallible God that's Sovereign over sovereigns from gospel messengers sent by God called ministers or preachers.

Yes, we learn religion from the preachers, they aren't infallible.
It doesn't mean what the preachers say is true.

The Bible that's preached was given us by a people of a nation that God brought into existence called the Jews.

Yes, I think the OT is about the Jews and their religions at the time. The Jews weren't infallible, either.

It doesn't mean what THEY believed is true.

Gospel truth is yet continually proclaimed throughout the world.

Yes, many people are Christians. It's a very popular form of religion. Christians are fallible.

This doesn't mean what they believe is true.

Although children know their parents as superior, man too often needs to be made aware of his Superior Creator by announcement. But for too many, there's a bottleneck called rejection.

Yes, I wont be bothered to believe just anything my parents say any more. I grew up, and want to think for myself now. I reject all claims that are not supported by sound reasoning.

You are correct in saying, “So, what we may THINK is infallible might NOT be. We might have FAILED in our judgment.�

I'm happy that you agree.

Especially when you imagine that you KNOW everything that their is to KNOW, and you don't EVEN want to debate it, as if there was NOTHING to debate about. We call this being "closed" to any new information. That is a sure fire method to BE wrong. So, being closed minded is more LIKELY to make a person WRONG, than correct. Your judgement, if closed off from any new data, is headed for failure.

This scenario you cautioned against occurs repeatedly. Fallible man tends to promote himself into the seat of the infallible

I am an atheist and do not believe in any gods, including the one you believe. HOWEVER, do NOT infer from that I think of myself as being in any way INFALLIBLE. One does not go with the other. Be careful of over-generalizing like that.

We are more likely to be WRONG if we do.

while demoting God (or any representative authority) as fallible only to reap disastrous results every time.

Atheists do not DEMOTE what isn't THERE to begin with. To atheists, any god doesn't even enter the PICTURE. And you over-generalize. "Every time"? Do you have data that proves this disastrous even happens "EVERY TIME"? Try being a bit more modest in your claims.

Absolute statements like "every time" are too easily shot down.

I find it better to say that the atheist thinks that he lives by nothing that's Gods.

Agreed.
God doesn't even enter the picture for an atheist.

I would ask an atheist where did he find the ability to think, create, love, judge, make decisions, laugh, etc.?

From being human like the rest of the humans.
Biology and other sciences explain some of the mechanisms.

Where did he get his unique character and abilities and his good potentials? Although an atheist claims to see nothing in existence beyond the natural, what natural object produced the qualities and abilities I listed?

Humans are natural.

The atheist is only able to claim that he doesn't recognize God's existence.

True.

But what's the need to be an atheist?

Intellectual honesty dictates it, and an unwillingness to engage in wishful thinking. There is also a GREAT benefit that comes from transcending a religious indoctrination. Now, my thinking isn't RESTRICTED to it any longer. I can more easily think for MYSELF. I don't have to go check a book or a preacher to see what I SHOULD be thinking.

I can make up my own mind about it.
I think that to be intellectually mature, we NEED to put away our childish ways of thinking.

What's the advantage? Would you advise a child to ignore the fact that he has parents and depart from them and be proud?

All of us have actual parents.. This is a REALITY that we should not avoid.
And it's rather TRIVIAL to prove what we have them, too.

If God is truly non-existent, why so much effort to hold up the supposed “fact� that He doesn't exist?

Atheists concern themselves about the society they live in which is FULL of religious people causing harm. If religious people didn't cause any harm, you are right, we just wouldn't CARE. But if these people would want to ENGAGE in a debate about their beliefs, they enter into an intellectual arena, when THOUGHTS MATTER.

I care about people, AND thinking clearly, too.

How would you feel if I pretend you were non-existent and ignore your authority?

If you PRETEND that I don't exist, when I patently do, I would "feel" that you are delusional. People do, in fact, exist, and it's a TRIVIAL matter to prove that they do. Gods do NOT have the same kind of proof for their existence. In fact, I'm an atheist because I SEE no proof at all, and ONLY very poor evidence of any kind worth bothering about.

One must exit himself from the universe and also walk out of his body in order to escape God's sovereign authority. Is that possible?

Is it possible that a God exists in the manner you just described it? Yes, it's possible. Is it likely? ... well.. so far, no. It's not likely. HOWEVER, if you would like to offer us any solid evidence for one.. We will all be happy to take a good hard LOOK at any.

What evidence do you propose?

Our bodies deserve far greater appreciation toward its maker than any sports car. If a loss of a bodily function is experienced, who is usually blamed?

As far as we know.. our "maker" seems to be "nature".. should we worship NATURE?
I don't actually worship nature, myself.. but I DO appreciate it a lot. Maybe that's a kind of a worship.... not sure. I wouldn't go to a TEMPLE to appreciate nature, though.. I wouldn't ever want to pay a PREACHER to help me appreciate nature. Scientists and science teachers do that well enough already.

Official removal of God's final word of authority in government is what brought things like abortion on demand and marriage between other than a man and a woman. How may we but live by someone's final authoritative word? Are laws anything but final?

Hopefully, no law is "final". We want our laws to be IMPROVED if possible, so that we don't stagnate morally. If, say, it turns out that we have sufficient data that "abortion on demand" is morally and physically wrong, then I want my laws to ADAPT to the new information. We don't want laws that can't ever change.

Now, I will end this here.. because you didn't actually mean any of this for me. I just wanted you to see a bit of my thoughts on what you wrote. I find what you write to be rather thought provoking and fun. But.. it's a bit too long. Have fun debating.. and if you want to engage with me with the things that I have written back to you here, feel free. But try to keep it a bit shorter. I had to cut your other interesting ideas off.. just due to length.

[rikuoamero]

Erexsaur said

Official removal of God's final word of authority in government is what brought things like abortion on demand and marriage between other than a man and a woman. How may we but live by someone's final authoritative word? Are laws anything but final?

Here's the problem. You ARE living by someone's final authoritative word. The laws found in the Bible (and for the record, the Bible allows for abortions and non-monogamous marriages - most if not all the famous Bible patriarchs such as Abraham, David and Solomon had multiple wives, and not once is God depicted as saying anything against this) were written down by men thousands of years ago, being what THEY thought were God's laws.

[Zzyzx]

.
I submit that we get no straight answers because there are none that do not cause Apologists to admit there is NO evidence to support “souls� or “afterlife� or “divinity� of Jesus.

There are NO straight answers for why Bible tales make no sense because they make no sense. All the elaborate shucking and jiving, excuses, creative re-definitions, word play, “interpretations�, explanations, etc do not conceal that those ancient tales are ignorant and non-nonsensical. Evasive debate tactics may fool some people but those numbers seem to be declining.

It is understandable that ancient people without access to modern knowledge and information would make up or believe fanciful “explanations� for what they did not understand – and think possible that invisible “spirits� or “gods� controlled natural events and human lives.

However, it is less understandable that people with access to modern knowledge and information set them aside to believe (and defend) ancient tales born in ignorance.

[H.sapiens]

The OP asked for:

What verifiable evidence exists (beyond Bible tales and claims, opinions, testimonials and speculation) to substantiate that:

Jesus was anything more than human?

Humans possess a soul?

An afterlife exists?

Miracles described in Bible tales actually occurred?

Any of the claimed events such as floods, earthquakes, darkening sky, star stopping, Earth ceasing rotation, etc occurred as described?

God intercedes in human affairs or life events?

Bible writers were actually inspired by God?



Why no answers? Could it be refusal to admit that in the absence of verifiable information, accepting the basic beliefs of Christianity must be based on "Take my (or his) word for it" and that doing so is not a rational basis for making decisions on matters of importance?

Now let's see if you responded to the OP. I have changed to red everything that was responsive to the instructions and to at least one of the seven questions asked.

[Replying to post 451 by Blastcat]

Hello Blastcat,

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to express what I think. I will therefore express not only what I think, but mostly what I know.

You said,

You have your belief that the god you worship is infallible, and have prevented any questioning as to whether he actually IS infallible. You declare it such and that is that. End of discussion.

What should one believe other than the actual truth that settles debates? Only this is what I intend to share. Pictures from the Mariner spacecraft showing Mars to be a lifeless planet settled the issue whether Mars had civilizations or not. The Biblical gospel truth is like the Mariner when it comes to conflicting belief issues.

A lady was told in response to a question she ask about worship: “The hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. … the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him (St. John 420-24).�

If the title of this leg is, "Debating Christianity and Religion Why no Straight Answers?", my purpose then is to provide the proven straight answers. Debates are meant to fill in gaps in truth not fully revealed. But when the truth is made known in its fullness, what's the need for further debate?

In response to my statement, “Thanks for your very helpful admission that we are all fallible. With that the case, why shouldn't we seek and trust a superior infallible being?�

You said,

How could we know that someone is infallible if we are judging that person with our fallible minds? Sorry, that's a rhetorical question. I should avoid those.. they are very boring to read. I should say instead that if we are fallible, we can not expect to KNOW anything infallibly. So, what we may THINK is infallible might NOT be. We might have FAILED in our judgment.

We learn of Infallible God that's Sovereign over sovereigns from gospel messengers sent by God called ministers or preachers. The Bible that's preached was given us by a people of a nation that God brought into existence called the Jews. Gospel truth is yet continually proclaimed throughout the world. Although children know their parents as superior, man too often needs to be made aware of his Superior Creator by announcement. But for too many, there's a bottleneck called rejection.

You are correct in saying, “So, what we may THINK is infallible might NOT be. We might have FAILED in our judgment.� This scenario you cautioned against occurs repeatedly. Fallible man tends to promote himself into the seat of the infallible while demoting God (or any representative authority) as fallible only to reap disastrous results every time. As a child may be brought to the realization of his fallibility by correction, so is it true with man versus God. What's sowed is reaped. Human nature thus learns too often who is fallible and infallible the HARD way!

On the other hand, God's greatest display of infallibility is His unfailing grace and mercy that daily lifts fallible man above the prison of fallibility if fallible man accepts.

In response to my question, “Don't we live by someone's final word?�

You said,

Some people seem to think that. I suppose by "someone", you mean "God"?
Atheists don't live by "God's" anything.

The “someone� I'm speaking of in this instance refers to anyone in authority at the moment such as parents, boss, police, etc., whose positions were appointed by God. For example, the state has the final word as to how we should conduct ourselves on the state's roads to assure maximum safety (thus assuring God's command not to kill).

I find it better to say that the atheist thinks that he lives by nothing that's Gods. I would ask an atheist where did he find the ability to think, create, love, judge, make decisions, laugh, etc.? Where did he get his unique character and abilities and his good potentials? Although an atheist claims to see nothing in existence beyond the natural, what natural object produced the qualities and abilities I listed?

The atheist is only able to claim that he doesn't recognize God's existence. But what's the need to be an atheist? What's the advantage? Would you advise a child to ignore the fact that he has parents and depart from them and be proud? If God is truly non-existent, why so much effort to hold up the supposed “fact� that He doesn't exist?

You would have authority over me the moment I step into your house. How would you feel if I pretend you were non-existent and ignore your authority? I would be afraid of flying out of your front door with a sore behind if I did so. One must exit himself from the universe and also walk out of his body in order to escape God's sovereign authority. Is that possible?

What's the use for looking under the hood of a $500,000 fine car only to say that it has no maker to be appreciated with gratitude? What joy would there be in driving it with no object for appreciation for its magnificent performance? What should prevent temptation to abuse it? Our bodies deserve far greater appreciation toward its maker than any sports car. If a loss of a bodily function is experienced, who is usually blamed?

Official removal of God's final word of authority in government is what brought things like abortion on demand and marriage between other than a man and a woman. How may we but live by someone's final authoritative word? Are laws anything but final?

You said,

But then again, I have no idea what authority you are talking about.. the law? Yes, everyone has to obey the law or suffer consequences. But human laws do not imply any kind of god. You are correct. Good laws of the land are derived from the laws of God.

Thank you. I say again that I'm speaking about whatever authority we may happen to be under at the moment including the law. An example of a human law that doesn't imply God is a segregation law. Such a “law� has no place in society and was abolished. I know that you are happy that Ridda laws are none of God's! Otherwise I would be very, very sorry for all atheists!� God desires your cooperation in His development of your great potentials, not chop chop!

In response to my statement, "Is it final or debatable that one should never commit murder?�

You said,

I fail to see what this has to do with being fallible.

The finality of the command not to murder keeps fallible man cognizant of a limit that he may otherwise exceed and end up punished.


In response to my statement, "Who or what else should we trust for resolving ever present conflicts among us?"

You said,

Us.

But can "Us" always be trusted? Are we all always honest and willing to abide if a decision is made that wont allow us to have our selfish way? Are we not all in some way selfish? Why do children need help of their parents in the decision process? Regardless how old and how high a position we may attain, don't we face ever increasing challenges that make us increasingly susceptible to temptations?


In response to my statement, "As fallible beings, how do we know that what we know as truth is indeed the truth unless we know that it originated from a higher infallible Source?"

You said,

That's circular. The same question could be asked about the knowledge of that so called "higher infallible Source". How do we know what we know about that?

How does anyone know anything right or wrong unless originally communicated from He that knows All that's right and wrong (God)? Robbing ourselves of God only robs ourselves of the Foundation of knowledge.

The fact that we are fallible implies that we have limits. Who do children go to when at their limits?

History is full of instances where only God was obviously credited for victory and survival in otherwise impossible circumstances because limits in human ability were exceeded. George Washington's army won the battle at Valley Forge despite the fact that they were so badly equipped that victory against the British was practically impossible. In another case a dense, unusual fog saved his army from the British. He warned us later in his life that failure to acknowledge Providence (God) is unpatriotic. My mention of George Washington was only a drop in the historical bucket. I Can refer you to the historian whose broadcasts taught me the above if you want.

When we believe the Genesis creation account we know from it that man had fellowship with infallible God from millisecond #1 and that man broke fellowship because of breakage of the first sovereign command. You have only expressed in your statement our need to trust God that He is who He is to deliver ourselves from circular arguments. Lack of trust to the trustworthy only causes one to miss out on the good that the trustworthy has to offer.

You continued,

Of course, we do NOT know about that. The debates in here are to give an opportunity for theists to PROVE that such a "Source" exists other than in the imagination of the believers.

What would you do if you had the proof to your satisfaction?

In a world full idolatry, the gospel believer is instructed simply to inform and the hearer is simply to believe. If proof given is still not to your satisfaction, may I ask if you would trust and submit to God the moment you are satisfied with what's given? May I please caution that people do not generally turn from God because of a lack of proof, but because they were enticed away by lust? Even if not physically, they turn from God in His face in their conscience.

In response to my statement, "Even if unknown, wouldn't there be a collective cry for such?"

You said,

Crying for something isn't proof of it.
But crying for something represents desire.

OK. Maybe I should have said, “Even if unknown, wouldn't there be a collective desire for such?�
It is natural to desire someone more powerful than we are for our protection?

Erexsaur wrote
Did the laws of physics originate with any of us that are fallible?


You said,

Yes.

OK. You, a fallible person originated the infallible law of physics! (Note I said “originate,� not “discover.�) You are thus “greater� than even Darwin! Who decided that the earth, according to your physical laws should be at a certain mass and travel around the sun at a certain distance at a certain orbital period (24 hours)? What individual tuned all the variables for the earth to be at the right temperatures for life? Was it you?

In response to my statement, "Why shouldn't we acknowledge and trust Him that's revealed to us?�

You said,

Because there is no good reason to think that it exists.

Are you infallible to the point that you are absolutely sure about this statement? Hmm! It's not good to think that God that gave you your mind exists?


For the remainder of yous statements, get ready! I'm about to REALLY, REALLY, REALLY make you guys bored!

One thing that helps me as a person to know that God is real is the very large amount of effort put forth not to believe by those that don't believe. Since you guys like to believe the knowledge of God I share as fantasy and His word a collection of myths, I have a myth for you that I shared sometime before that I think would make you happy!

Suppose I tell an atheist one of two things; one is that (A.) a stolen piece of wood placed in the bow of a ship causes the ship to sail faster at night. This is the myth that has no scientific support whatsoever. The other would be (B.) truth supported by the Bible backed up by much science and much that surrounds us. An atheist would think that both are myths. Which would the atheist resist most vehemently? Would it be “A� or “B?� If I were a science teacher in a university that taught one of the above as a fact to my students, which do you think would get me into the most trouble? “A� or “B?� For which would I only be laughed at and let go and for which would I find myself in major trouble with the university and probably criminalized? Which? I ask you guys that you not tell me you don't know where I'm coming from with these questions because you know!

I learned of this myth on a bubble gum card sold for a penny back in the 50's called, "Rails and Sails." That was my first exposure to the word, "myth."

Take care,
Earl

Gee ... it's still all black text ... isn't that amazing?

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to Blastcat]

Hello Blastcat,

Thanks again for your invitation for me to stay in the discussion. I'm Sorry that I made the mistake of quoting the wrong person and making my last post too lengthy. This is an answer to post #490,

I will keep this post and my answers as short as possible even though there's much to answer. What I have below is a consolidation of answers to things you brought to my attention. The asterisks isolate paragraphs aimed at questions you ask that I didn't repeat. Thank you for your compliments in 5 and 6 of the 7 statements you made. I will try to make my answers shorter but I hope you will allow me liberty to expound some issues. Here goes.

You said,

Ah.. I see. Your belief ENDS all debates. Well, if you know everything that there is to know about it, then OK. I guess that you could imagine that there is nothing TO debate. What's left, then, preaching?

I do not know everything there is to know, but I speak only from knowledge that I have. What's the use for continuing debates without hope for settlement? Isn't a settlement what zzyzx sought for 8 years? If preaching is the only way for the settlement, doesn't the gospel preacher has his place in society to preserve it? Let's please beware of the ever present danger of a third party that may use controversy and intellectual debate as a tactic to destabilize public confidence in sound doctrine to make the public easy prey. This is happening! Should a house be moved from a rock to a sand foundation?
* * *
Beyond the countless number of systems of beliefs, is there not at least one that's genuine above all? And if one happens to find the one that's truly genuine, don't you think that he should proclaim it? Is there anything other than what's genuine to be desired? No other belief system but the Biblical gospel has a savior.
* * *
I do not think that you think yourself infallible as an atheist even though I did state a tendency for every one of us including myself to at times uplift ourselves too highly as if infallible because of human nature.
* * *
In response to my question, “But what's the need to be an atheist?�, you said,

Intellectual honesty dictates it, and an unwillingness to engage in wishful thinking. There is also a GREAT benefit that comes from transcending a religious indoctrination. Now, my thinking isn't RESTRICTED to it any longer. I can more easily think for MYSELF. I don't have to go check a book or a preacher to see what I SHOULD be thinking.

I can make up my own mind about it.
I think that to be intellectually mature, we NEED to put away our childish ways of thinking.

Thanks for your answer. Here's a word of comfort: You are correct in believing that the merciless, tantrum-prone, vengeful, cruel, unappreciative god that burdens with impossible demands for appeasement truly DOES NOT EXISTS! Such is not God of the Bible! Neither are true gospel believers promoters of such a god! Does that sound better?

God of the Bible is God of John 3:16 that sets us free from our inner prisons and “HATH NOT GIVEN US THE SPIRIT OF FEAR; but of power, and of love, and of a SOUND MIND (2 Timothy 1:7)!� Does that sound better? This is not fantasy. As for me, the above is only a fringe benefit along with my ultimate hope in the gospel. Yes, I am familiar with the passages in the Bible where God had judged such as in the case of the flood. But how is it possible for the fallible man with much limited understanding to judge infallible God that has control of the sea? Shouldn't final judgment come only with the complete picture? If a person wants eggs let him go to the source--the chickens or a duck. Is there an atheistic document that mandates a sound mind and love of brother? From my experience and observations the thing that you apparently walked from and found relief from was burdensome, legalistic application of Biblical knowledge void of the grace, mercy, and the redemptive power of God. Effort without such is vain and puffs up and only burns out. God commands us to avoid such! The more powerful a weapon the greater the danger of error and misuse.

Even though Jesus and Paul rebuked bad doctrine and warns to flee and repent from such, there is an anti-God movement with a document that dictates that all religion good and bad be placed in the same undesirable category to be eliminated. You have no part with such. The wolf offers stolen eggs only as bait. Were Dr. King, Billy Grams, and Mother Teresa bad people to be avoided?


You said,

Atheists do not DEMOTE what isn't THERE to begin with. To atheists, any god doesn't even enter the PICTURE. And you over-generalize. "Every time"? Do you have data that proves this disastrous even happens "EVERY TIME"? Try being a bit more modest in your claims.

Absolute statements like "every time" are too easily shot down.

I covered the god thing above. Even though our opposing worldviews make it impossible to exchange compatible answers, I will yet say that even Christian thoughts and actions carried out independent of the infallible Head (God) either fails or leads to ultimate failure every time! EVERY time! Should we expect the fate of non-Christians to be any better? As I said above, the non-existent god unworthy of reverence and respect is not God of the Bible!

You said,

As far as we know.. our "maker" seems to be "nature"

Are you willing to stake your life and final destiny only on what seems? How are you able to use the word, “seems� while claiming that what I shared with surety is without proof? 'Caught-cha!!

You said,

Yes, I wont be bothered to believe just anything my parents say any more. I grew up, and want to think for myself now. I reject all claims that are not supported by sound reasoning.

Neither would your parents want you to believe just anything, but instead want soundness and wisdom in your thinking as much if not more than you do! Neither would they want anyone “wiser� than they that may try to compromise your trust in them.

You said,

I'm not sure we should trust just ANYONE without a sound reason, but in the case of gods, we should maybe check is there IS one of those, first, instead of following some STORY about it.

One way to know who IS to be trusted is by his making himself known with his demonstration of faithfulness in keeping promises and covenants and unfailing faithfulness in delivering on them. Isn't that a sound reason? Jesus that I know fits this description perfectly.

God of the Bible is God of covenants whose acts are based on covenants. God's primary example of His faithfulness is that He kept His covenants with Israel despite their failures through history.

Even though there was more to answer, I will stop here.

Take care,
Earl

[Zzyzx]

.

What's the use for continuing debates without hope for settlement? Isn't a settlement what zzyzx sought for 8 years?

My purpose in debate is to present ideas for READERS to consider, evaluate, and compare to ideas presented by Apologists. Our threads receive hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of views – often by people who read without posting. THOSE are the people to whom I address comments. Opponents are just convenient “side rails� from which to “bank a shot� to the “object ball� (readers).

I do NOT seek “settlement� with Theists / opponents / Apologists and do not care what they think or believe. I certainly do not wish to change their ideas or positions – or to compromise to reach “agreement� on issues related to claims of knowledge about invisible, undetectable, proposed supernatural entities and events.

This thread is an example of my intent to demonstrate that if Apologists gave straight answers to several fundamental questions they would have to admit that their position is based on taking someone's word about gods and their feats – no different from any pagan worship system.

For instance: Is there verifiable evidence (not just conjecture or opinion) that:
Humans possess a “soul� that transcends death?
An “afterlife� exists as anything more than imagination?
Jesus was “divine� (or a god or part of a god) – or anything more than a wandering preacher?
Long-dead bodies come (or came) back to life?
A virgin was impregnated by a “spirit�?

All the above are BELIEFS / opinions / conjectures that have not been shown to be anything more than products of human imagination (as is the case for all claims and stories about supernatural “gods� and events) – no evidence – just talk.

[marco]

Thanks for your answer. Here's a word of comfort: You are correct in believing that the merciless, tantrum-prone, vengeful, cruel, unappreciative god that burdens with impossible demands for appeasement truly DOES NOT EXIST!

For all you know, Erexsaur, he may well exist. There is plenty of evidence of him in the books you uphold. Your charity has formed from the clay of imagination a nicer, friendlier god, but one still as silent as the grave.

God of the Bible is God of John 3:16 that sets us free from our inner prisons and “HATH NOT GIVEN US THE SPIRIT OF FEAR; but of power, and of love, and of a SOUND MIND (2 Timothy 1:7)!� Does that sound better?

It sounds ludicrously forgetful that a large part of the world suffers hunger and thirst, with no provision from that beneficent God of yours. Replace "us" with capitalised ME and you may have imaginative truth.

Are you willing to stake your life and final destiny only on what seems? How are you able to use the word, “seems� while claiming that what I shared with surety is without proof? 'Caught-cha!!

Semantically you've caught something. You use words indicative of certainty, despite the fact that millions of Muslims employ the same certainty to eulogise their god and extol their system. It is honest to say "there seems" in acknowledgement of human ignorance.

God of the Bible is God of covenants whose acts are based on covenants.

This SEEMS to be nonsense. God made some pact with some nomadic tribesman and his camel and modern minds are supposed to accept the solemnity of this. A god who works through artless semi-savages deserves to be ignored.

You have built your faith - from what you have written -on a fairy tale. The god in it may as well be the giant at the top of Jack's beanstalk, such is his credibility.

Go well.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 494 by Erexsaur]

Hi, Erexsaur

So far, I'm really enjoying our conversation.
I guess it's your style or something.. I think that possibly, it's because we can at least agree on SOME THINGS.

Sometimes, I am in debates with people who I can't agree with AT ALL... and that really gets frustrating.

So, to me, this is pretty great....................................... so far.

I will try to make my answers shorter but I hope you will allow me liberty to expound some issues. Here goes.

I really would love to discuss ALL of your points. I find them all very interesting. So.. length seems to be our mutual enemy.

Ah.. I see. Your belief ENDS all debates. Well, if you know everything that there is to know about it, then OK. I guess that you could imagine that there is nothing TO debate. What's left, then, preaching?

I do not know everything there is to know, but I speak only from knowledge that I have.

It's very gratifying to me that a theist will admit to at least SOME ignorance. It's a really great way to start. Not ALL of my debate opponents are so transparently HUMBLE.

Too bad for you.. I know everything so YOU LOSE.

What's the use for continuing debates without hope for settlement? Isn't a settlement what zzyzx sought for 8 years?

I think hoping for settlements in here is unrealistic.
We present our best arguments, and let the readers decide. That's what Z taught me right from the start. We can call the readers our "invisible audience".

Another reason to continue debate is that it takes a LONG time for some people to get out from under their religious indoctrination. Most, if not all atheists in these forums were theists before. We know what it's like to "Think inside the box".

Another reason.

I don't like to be wrong. Debates are a way for me to check if I am or not.
So, I learn a thing or two in here.. every day.

But the reasons that Z continues debates should be best explained by Z himself. He's rather good at that for a beginner.

If preaching is the only way for the settlement, doesn't the gospel preacher has his place in society to preserve it?

1. We have no evidence that a lack of preachers will destroy a society.
2. We have no evidence that preaching settles anything.

Let's please beware of the ever present danger of a third party that may use controversy and intellectual debate as a tactic to destabilize public confidence in sound doctrine to make the public easy prey. This is happening! Should a house be moved from a rock to a sand foundation?

I don't share your fears.

You seem to fear open debate in a democratic society. Perhaps we should end all debates in case someone uses it to make the public easy prey. Perhaps you are an advocate for censorship.

I could not agree less.
We NEED to keep debates going.

Beyond the countless number of systems of beliefs, is there not at least one that's genuine above all?

Not necessarily so.
All systems of belief might be false.

We really need to check for the evidence in order to know what is true and what is false.

And if one happens to find the one that's truly genuine, don't you think that he should proclaim it? Is there anything other than what's genuine to be desired?

I don't desire to be WRONG, that's for sure. But we have the unfortunate situation that a LOT of people proclaim to have found what is truly genuine, and not all of them agree with what that happens to be. And we KNOW that at least SOME of them are WRONG.

I don't LIKE to be wrong. So, I ask for evidence before I believe any of them.

No other belief system but the Biblical gospel has a savior.

The god depicted in the Bible can be perfectly unique and completely fictional.

I do not think that you think yourself infallible as an atheist even though I did state a tendency for every one of us including myself to at times uplift ourselves too highly as if infallible because of human nature.

I agree.

Fallible beings can be remarkably creative in the application of their fallibility.

That's why I promote critical thinking.

Here's a word of comfort: You are correct in believing that the merciless, tantrum-prone, vengeful, cruel, unappreciative god that burdens with impossible demands for appeasement truly DOES NOT EXISTS! Such is not God of the Bible! Neither are true gospel believers promoters of such a god! Does that sound better?

It doesn't really matter to me if it sounds better. Your beliefs might sound REALLY NICE. I only need to care about them if they can be demonstrated as TRUE. I can read the Bible, and don't happen to agree with your rosy assessment of the god.

I take the god as an evil psychopath.
Same book, WILDLY different take, don't you think?

God of the Bible is God of John 3:16 that sets us free from our inner prisons and “HATH NOT GIVEN US THE SPIRIT OF FEAR; but of power, and of love, and of a SOUND MIND (2 Timothy 1:7)!� Does that sound better?

I DO love the way that sounds.
I don't have any way to verify if it's true.

This is not fantasy.

You might want to demonstrate the truth of that statement.

As for me, the above is only a fringe benefit along with my ultimate hope in the gospel.

And yet, your HOPE that your beliefs are true is not evidence for the truth of your beliefs.

Yes, I am familiar with the passages in the Bible where God had judged such as in the case of the flood. But how is it possible for the fallible man with much limited understanding to judge infallible God that has control of the sea?

Then you should not judge the god ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

But you DO judge him GOOD.. or you just accept that he is good because it says so, or some preacher told you that.

You make a case for moral NEUTRALITY, then take a side.
This is inconsistent reasoning.

Shouldn't final judgment come only with the complete picture?

Then we should only decide after we are both dead. We won't get the "complete picture" until then. If I can't believe UNTIL I am dead, I will NOT believe while I am alive. That makes ME an atheist.

You want to believe AHEAD of the evidence.
I don't.

If a person wants eggs let him go to the source--the chickens or a duck.

We know that ducks and chickens exist. We do not have evidence that a god of any kind does.

Is there an atheistic document that mandates a sound mind and love of brother?

Atheism is not a religion. So, no.

From my experience and observations the thing that you apparently walked from and found relief from was burdensome, legalistic application of Biblical knowledge void of the grace, mercy, and the redemptive power of God.

Yes, that IS a part of what I walked away from. I also walked away from religious indoctrination and started to think about things for myself, instead of being told what to think. There are plenty of other books than just the Bible.

Some of those are pretty darn good, too.

Effort without such is vain and puffs up and only burns out. God commands us to avoid such! The more powerful a weapon the greater the danger of error and misuse.

I don't like to be wrong, vain or puffed up and burned out. I will avoid those and believe in things that I have more reason to think are TRUE.

Even though Jesus and Paul rebuked bad doctrine and warns to flee and repent from such, there is an anti-God movement with a document that dictates that all religion good and bad be placed in the same undesirable category to be eliminated. You have no part with such. The wolf offers stolen eggs only as bait. Were Dr. King, Billy Grams, and Mother Teresa bad people to be avoided?

That's a case by case thing. People don't get my esteem just because they wave a holy book around.

Atheists do not DEMOTE what isn't THERE to begin with. To atheists, any god doesn't even enter the PICTURE. And you over-generalize. "Every time"? Do you have data that proves this disastrous even happens "EVERY TIME"? Try being a bit more modest in your claims.

Absolute statements like "every time" are too easily shot down.

Even though our opposing worldviews make it impossible to exchange compatible answers, I will yet say that even Christian thoughts and actions carried out independent of the infallible Head (God) either fails or leads to ultimate failure every time! EVERY time!

Absolute statements like "every time" are too easily shot down.

Now, you have to prove your claim is the true at every time, EVERY time!
You've just made your burden all the more difficult.

All we need to find is ONE exception, and your whole argument is shot down. You should make your claims a little more modestly. Insisting that you are right EVERY TIME like that makes you way more likely WRONG.

I don't like to be wrong, so I avoid sweeping generalities like that.

Should we expect the fate of non-Christians to be any better? As I said above, the non-existent god unworthy of reverence and respect is not God of the Bible!

We are all entitled to our opinions.
You have yours.

That's acceptable.

If you want to convince others that your opinion is more probably TRUE than a mere claim, you will need to demonstrate how. Otherwise, your claim just falls flat.

As far as we know.. our "maker" seems to be "nature"

Are you willing to stake your life and final destiny only on what seems?

First of all, I have no evidence that there is a "final destiny" of any kind, and I DO like to base my life on what I can know is true and real. Fantasies are fun and all.. but I don't base my life on what is merely POSSIBLE.

Well, we KNOW that nature is real. God's existence is a little more debatable.
I guess it SEEMS to you that your god is real.

It doesn't seem that way to atheists, OR to those who believe in other gods.

How are you able to use the word, “seems� while claiming that what I shared with surety is without proof? 'Caught-cha!!

You might imagine that we don't have proof of nature.
It seems to me that we do.

You might have caught me, I'm certainly nibbling at your line, but you still have to get that fish in the boat, Mr. Fisherman. Your bait was good. Now, lets test your line for strength.

Neither would your parents want you to believe just anything, but instead want soundness and wisdom in your thinking as much if not more than you do! Neither would they want anyone “wiser� than they that may try to compromise your trust in them.

My parents were often wrong, due to their understandable fallibility. As a grown-up, my intellectual responsibility is to test my beliefs for TRUTH.

I don't want to be wrong.

One way to know who IS to be trusted is by his making himself known with his demonstration of faithfulness in keeping promises and covenants and unfailing faithfulness in delivering on them. Isn't that a sound reason? Jesus that I know fits this description perfectly.

What might fit a description in a book might not be true.
Not all fitting stories are true.

God of the Bible is God of covenants whose acts are based on covenants. God's primary example of His faithfulness is that He kept His covenants with Israel despite their failures through history.

Even though there was more to answer, I will stop here.

It seems that you greatest argument for the existence of god is prophecy. To say that Biblical prophecies have come true is a bit of a stretch. Ok.. let me be frank A HUGE STRETCH. But that's a complex topic all on it's own. Let's just say that for atheists who have looked into Bible prophecies... that line of evidence doesn't stand up.

If you really need to talk about prophecies as a proof for your god beliefs, I suggest that we create a new thread about just that. I can do it.. But I have to warn you, that kind of thing get REALLY long and technical in a hurry. Those claims are VERY difficult to demonstrate true.

But I think we have enough subject matter already.
I'm enjoying our conversation.

[PghPanther]

Erexsaur's effort to make belief palatable for what God is or isn't is of no relevancy to me.........

I don't care whether the God of the Bible is the greatest thing since sliced bread or a complete sociopathic evil manipulator........

.....neither makes the Bible and its world view more or less palatable to me.

After all the reality I deal with in nature doesn't care whether I like it or not but I better learn to deal with it regardless.

For instance, I don't like the idea that I can't breath underwater without the assistance of technology but I have to accept that if at sometime in the future I would have to deal with the reality of being underwater for any length of time.

So therefore the only thing I want to know is if you can validate the Biblical world view as a consistent and demonstrable fact in reality.

And that is where the Bible totally fails........

[marco]

So.. length seems to be our mutual enemy.

It is also the enemy of your readers - at least this one. I am unequal to the task of pursuing the essay to its eventual end. I was hoping to discover "why no straight answers", but I am still waiting. My warmest wishes!