My bad, I didn't catch that you agree with that. Tradition is what makes them dismiss my arguments as false, not because they're actually "false".
Maybe we should look at what it means to believe. Typically people of faith believe because of faith. Their belief is faith. This is a good thing because what they believe in is real. God is real but the personal concept they believe in isn't. Thus the faithful and atheists alike believe and disbelieve in a god that doesn't exist. This is because the knowledge of God's existence is had via entry into a God conscious state. in such a state of consciousness one doesn't have faith that God exists, one enters into God Being. This is the state of Real Knowledge. One need have no faith because the apperception of God is manifest. That is a completely different kind of faith. One doesn't believe, one knows via direct experience.
One can't go get that state of consciousness because seeking it is ego. It comes by grace with ego death, the recognition of the hopelessness of our ordinary conscious state. It is like discovering the blackboard when all the chalk on it is wiped away. It is the emptiness on which everything is written rather than the writing itself. It is the ultimate state of knowing and the total lack of belief in anything. One is full of emptiness. All that can exist there is what is real and what is real is love the infinite love of everything.
Correct. There are some good messages in the Bible, but you have to weigh those against the bad things too.
What a wonderful, pithy formulation of the problem. If religion is the cause of all the worlds evils, and genocide remains part of the human condition after religion is eradicated, then genocide isnt evil. If atheists are right and all religion is a human artifact, then getting rid of religion will do nothing to solve the worlds problems. Man will merely replace his religious ideology with some sort of secular ideology, leaving mans irrational and superstitious tendencies in tact.
Day also has recently criticized the idea that scientists are more rational than the rest of us. Its not that science isnt a rational pursuit; its that scientists are the weakest part of the scientific enterprise. Merely participating in the scientific enterprise does nothing to make a person more rational and less susceptible to non-rational biases. Thus, to eliminate all religions and replace it with science will do nothing to make people less superstitious and more rational. We will live in a culture that lacks the means that has historically been most common and effective in teaching moral values to the younger generation.
Atheists usually claim religion is behind all the problems in the world, but since they also believe religion is human-created, they are eventually forced to end up advocating mass murder of one form or another. It would appear that Maxpower has forgotten the extraordinarily lethal behavior of a number of powerful, well-known atheists in dozens of countries during the 20th century. The late James Lee may be unusual, but he is unfortunately no unique aberration. The seed for mass slaughter is sown when atheists who share Lee's faith in Malthus rather than the Apostle Paul and Darwin rather than the Gospels take positions of power.
At least atheists can't fall back on fairy-god-mother justifications to justify their atrocities to themselves. Which makes it ever-so-slightly-more-difficult for them to look at themselves in the mirror if they do commit atrocities. Which may actually lead to them committing fewer atrocities, "per-atheist-capita."
The bad? The Bible is a book of positive messages, but at the same time, it reports what's said to have happened, and its candor in that regard is why I like it so much. It doesn't remotely attempt to hide what people would be repelled by.
It takes more of a "take it or leave it" approach. Closing your eyes and ignoring the "bad" parts (as many Christians do) don't magically make them go away.
I'll address the rest later on.
Yeah, you've either not read the Bible, or are being dishonest. I did quote a rather evil commandment earlier. I'll give you a few more.
"A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death." - Leviticus 21:9
"All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense." - Leviticus 20:9
"From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces." - 2 Kings 2:23-24
"If even then you remain hostile toward me and refuse to obey, I will inflict you with seven more disasters for your sins. I will release wild animals that will kill your children and destroy your cattle, so your numbers will dwindle and your roads will be deserted." - Leviticus 26:21-22
"If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife." - Deuteronomy 22:23-24
"Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them." - 1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ." - Ephesians 6:5
Positive? The hell is wrong with you?
Quotes without context anyone? I don't comment on Hinduism because I don't know enough. I CAN speak on Christianisty. If want to know...Christianity has several covenants. Look them up to see what that means. It should fill in any gaps of knowledge that you might have about the verses above, and give you the context needed.
As to some earlier posts of atheists not murdering in the name of religion? They HAVE. It took one search to find several examples. The difference of motivation is moot to the murdered however...so I'll leave it.
M
The answer to this is in post 10.
The question is a bit flawed though. Did Dahmer do what he did because he also did not believe in Santa? For his justification to be atheism, it would then logically follow that not believing in anything would be justification for those actions. So, not believing in Santa, the Easter Bunny, Tom Brady not being a cheater ect. Anything he did not believe in would seem to then be a justification, and I bet you do not believe that.
So, why would his non-belief in God be a justification any more than his non belief in Santa?
Quotes without context anyone? I don't comment on Hinduism because I don't know enough. I CAN speak on Christianisty. If want to know...Christianity has several covenants. Look them up to see what that means. It should fill in any gaps of knowledge that you might have about the verses above, and give you the context needed.
As to some earlier posts of atheists not murdering in the name of religion? They HAVE. It took one search to find several examples. The difference of motivation is moot to the murdered however...so I'll leave it.
M
Quotes without context anyone? I don't comment on Hinduism because I don't know enough. I CAN speak on Christianisty. If want to know...Christianity has several covenants. Look them up to see what that means. It should fill in any gaps of knowledge that you might have about the verses above, and give you the context needed.
As to some earlier posts of atheists not murdering in the name of religion? They HAVE. It took one search to find several examples. The difference of motivation is moot to the murdered however...so I'll leave it.
M
It sounds like you are saying you have to believe in something that you can not perceive until you believe. Would that be correct or did I miss what you are saying?
Abandon belief and non belief. They are the trap of duality. I am saying there is a giant paradox that resolves itself at a higher dimension of being.
Mountains are mountains before you start down the path where mountains become other than mountains until you arrive at the end, where mountains are mountains again.
There is no path. There is no arriving. You are where you want to go. Enlightenment is a flash of intuition that ends seeking. It is a shift in perspective, a shift from thinking to being, like a child laying on the grass enraptured by clouds passing by. We have always been perfect. We have always been in God. He is our image and our image is he. There is only love.
To say you have to 'anything' is conflict. It is the ego saying I will do this for my reward. The ego is the vision by which the thinker sees the world. I am asking you to be blind. To think deeply and hard and long is to reach the end of one's rope. Can you see that thought is of the past, memory of yesterday, programs and propaganda, creations that do not exist? Thought is division and strife, conflict and separation. Thought is duality in action. See that. See the trap. We know nothing. our being is emptiness of mind and fullness of heart. I love you. right here right now in this timeless moment. The love you feel for God is the love He feels for you. There is only that. You are the universe and the universe is you. What is the reality and what the reflection when they are the same.
I covered the covenant cop-out; the conditions that will put the NT covenant, the seventh one, in effect, are outlined in Jeremiah 31:31-34. Those conditions have never been met, aren't being met, nor will they ever be met. Ergo, the commandments are to be followed.
Not like it matters; you just stated that murdering a rape victim because she didn't scream in the city, and stoning a child to death because he made a slur towards his parents, are justifiable in certain contexts.
You've conceded that the Bible commands these things, where your argument was that it doesn't. That settles it.
Atheists murdering in the name of religion? That's a non sequitur.
I covered the covenant cop-out; the conditions that will put the NT covenant, the seventh one, in effect, are outlined in Jeremiah 31:31-34. Those conditions have never been met, aren't being met, nor will they ever be met. Ergo, the commandments are to be followed.
Not like it matters; you just stated that murdering a rape victim because she didn't scream in the city, and stoning a child to death because he made a slur towards his parents, are justifiable in certain contexts.
You've conceded that the Bible commands these things, where your argument was that it doesn't. That settles it.
Atheists murdering in the name of religion? That's a non sequitur.
Best strawman ever! You also failed at researching Christianity. .......Just saying that using Wiki to understand several hundred pages is not the way to go. No need to thank me for pointing out the obvious
M
Best strawman ever! You also failed at researching Christianity. .......Just saying that using Wiki to understand several hundred pages is not the way to go. No need to thank me for pointing out the obvious
M
Frank Turek, is that you?
When a Bedouin who had been taught there are two things in life, dates and experience, entered his first city and encountered halva for the first time, he said to himself, this must be experience. I conclude therefore I must be Frank Turek, even though I haven't any idea who you are talking about.
I will simply say there is one truth and it covers all of use; it has a million names and a million faces and is one thing all the same.
But the bible was the inspired word of God, and the portrayal of the world we live in was an inspired portrayal. So that little image of the universe was what God inspired in his most devoted followers, the ones who wrote his holy texts. Seems like omniscient God didn't take enough science courses.Oh yea this is what I was taught in catholic school derp. Right after biology I - evoloution and AP physics.
I still wonder how the flood gates let out such small and dispersed drops of water. And what lies below the abyss.
I feel the need to clarify that I'm being sarcastic. Cause someone might actually be tricked. Thats sad.
Best strawman ever! You also failed at researching Christianity. .......Just saying that using Wiki to understand several hundred pages is not the way to go. No need to thank me for pointing out the obvious
M
But the bible was the inspired word of God, and the portrayal of the world we live in was an inspired portrayal. So that little image of the universe was what God inspired in his most devoted followers, the ones who wrote his holy texts. Seems like omniscient God didn't take enough science courses.
Of course, once science produced overwhelming evidence of the true(r) nature of the universe, religion could hardly continue to dig in its heels and insist that that historical perception of the universe was still the correct one. Lucky you; you were born into a time when religion has become less dominant.
Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed, believers continue to spew their false-reality doctrines in the gaps left to them by science. Some things never change.
Ummmnnnn science cannot disprove faith, nor can faith stand-in for science. To assume that they can shows a distinct lack of understanding of science AND faith.
M
Strawman. Show my statement please......otherwise.....
the rest.....waiting on the first.
M
The bad? The Bible is a book of positive messages, but at the same time, it reports what's said to have happened, and its candor in that regard is why I like it so much. It doesn't remotely attempt to hide what people would be repelled by.