Atheism
ReportReport this topic to moderators FlagFlag as not safe for work.
Views: 7,917
RATE
75
Posted: 2010-02-08 01:34:33
Psst.
Responses (138) / Sorted by points
there is a reason for this, people have missed the true meaning behind Christianity and other religions. Its not the rituals and such its the core message, Try to be a good human being and when you die you'll be rewarded. That is what almost all religions are when you break them down and is there a less worthy thing to aspire to than being a good person?
Name one thing wrong with not believing. I'm only saying that you don't need to believe in god to be a good person, not that believing is wrong. In fact, I understand why people want to believe in god. But I personally don't feel like the evidence is there.
if we could do it my way thered be no religious post jus c&h and bacon and boobs nd bacon nd hot chicks nd bacon nd dogs nd bacon nd peanut butter nd bacon lolz
I'll compare God to Orange Juice.
When you pray to God, he answers your questions 3 ways. Yes, No, or Wait. With yes, you get what you prayed for, say 50$. With no, you don't get it, and say it wasn't meant to be. With wait, you wait maybe 6 months and win the lottery, get 50$ for it. God answered you prayer all three ways.
Time for some Orange Juice. Say that Orange Juice is what you prayed too...
When you pray to the Orange Juice, it answers your questions 3 ways. Yes, No, or Wait. With yes, you get what you prayed for, say 50$. With no, you don't get it, and say it wasn't meant to be. With wait, you wait maybe 6 months and win the lottery, get 50$ for it. The Orange Juice answered you prayer all three ways.
Also, I just want to say... Orange Juice is awesome. And now I'm thirsty.
When you pray to God, he answers your questions 3 ways. Yes, No, or Wait. With yes, you get what you prayed for, say 50$. With no, you don't get it, and say it wasn't meant to be. With wait, you wait maybe 6 months and win the lottery, get 50$ for it. God answered you prayer all three ways.
Time for some Orange Juice. Say that Orange Juice is what you prayed too...
When you pray to the Orange Juice, it answers your questions 3 ways. Yes, No, or Wait. With yes, you get what you prayed for, say 50$. With no, you don't get it, and say it wasn't meant to be. With wait, you wait maybe 6 months and win the lottery, get 50$ for it. The Orange Juice answered you prayer all three ways.
Also, I just want to say... Orange Juice is awesome. And now I'm thirsty.
And if there was a God, surely he/she/it would notice the atheists faking belief to get into eternal paradise and unceremoniously boot them out?
I'm an atheist, by the way.
EDIT: Sorry, this was meant to be a reply to some stuff further down.
I'm an atheist, by the way.
EDIT: Sorry, this was meant to be a reply to some stuff further down.
i know science doesnt explain everything its why i keep an open mind on things
Science can solve everything because science is everything. physics is everything from a single atom to the entire universe. It only takes time to understand everything, whether the human race has that much time is unlikely, but it doesn't mean the answer isn't there.
Science can solve everything, you just have to put the pieces together, and at this point, the pieces lie very very far out in the universe.
i tried to put my life in gods hands but i got screwed over worse than the people working of bernie madoff so im done beleiving in something that was created to explain the unexplainable just like the greek and roman gods and if you look at an astrological spectrom jesus and the sun have alot in common.
Ok Logos385, here is some evidence for Christianity. How do you explain the 85 prophesies predicted about jesus hundreds of years before his conception and how he fulfilled them all? If you say that jesus didnt exist, thats wrong because most atheist agree that jesus was alive in the time christians say he was.
I know for a fact that Logos would never think Jesus didn't exist. It's Jesus' divinity that is in question. Those prophecies, if you can find any of them, are more likely to have sprung from mithras, the 'divine being' that jesus is based on. Mithras was born 600 years before Jesus and after his death it's likely several prophecies were made of his return, just as Christians have done with jesus and the end of the world and anything else they thought would happen, only to be proven wrong each time.
Thanks Dannyl. And of course a Jesus existed: it was quite a popular name for the time period. And maybe he was even a proposed messiah, there were countless numbers of them as well. However, the prophecies? What evidence do you have to say he fulfilled any?
The only unbiased sources mentioning Jesus at all are Pliny the Younger, Josephus, and Tacitus. Josephus has one single paragraph about the proposed Messiah, and many scholars believe this to be fabricated around the time of Contantine. Pliny the Younger provides next to no evidence, and Tacitus is the same.
Jesus, according to Biblical lore, also fulfills prophecies for the False Messiah or Anti-Christ. Namely obtaining a Kingdom peaceably, and changing "times and laws."
Jesus also, according to Biblical lore, does not fulfill the requirement of being called Immanuel. Or being a descendant of David (his only line is through Mary, as he is not Joseph's son; and there is no evidence Mary is related to David). Or the destruction of the Jewish countries before maturity.
Jesus fails on many counts.
The only unbiased sources mentioning Jesus at all are Pliny the Younger, Josephus, and Tacitus. Josephus has one single paragraph about the proposed Messiah, and many scholars believe this to be fabricated around the time of Contantine. Pliny the Younger provides next to no evidence, and Tacitus is the same.
Jesus, according to Biblical lore, also fulfills prophecies for the False Messiah or Anti-Christ. Namely obtaining a Kingdom peaceably, and changing "times and laws."
Jesus also, according to Biblical lore, does not fulfill the requirement of being called Immanuel. Or being a descendant of David (his only line is through Mary, as he is not Joseph's son; and there is no evidence Mary is related to David). Or the destruction of the Jewish countries before maturity.
Jesus fails on many counts.
i cant beleive the person who designed that didnt take that into consideration how someone with a dirty mind would see that
Stephen Hawking is a know atheist who speaks out about the lack of a God often. You'd think if God was almighty he'd go back in time and punish him somehow . . . . Oh wait . . .
*This is intended as a joke before people go freaking out lol
*This is intended as a joke before people go freaking out lol
Good ole sickipedia. I covered that joke in a post the other day -www.sharenator.com/Jokes_and_funnies/ and don't worry, it's always good to offend some people
Haha i never saw that post but i have heard the joke before (obviously lol)
BTW awesome post i was laughing pretty much the whole time XD
BTW awesome post i was laughing pretty much the whole time XD
ok so i have a question if some one today was like i spoke to god and all this shit then put together a new bible ... do you think he would be taken seriously? because i think they would send him off to the crazy bin... so why do people follow the same kinda people they call crazy now days? the only difference is they lived a long ass time ago
I've always wondered that. If one man believes a kettle created the universe and everything around us, that the kettle loved us and would speak to him and help him in his life then he would be locked away. If another person believes all the same things of God then it's completely different and people consider it unacceptable to say anything against it. There's protection in numbers it seems.
All religions are decided by the amount of followers. Jedi is now an official religion because loads of people claimed to be part of the Jedi faith. Same with Scientology.
If you're one man who believes something, you're insane. If you're a few men who believe something, you're a cult. If you're many men who believe something, you're a religion.
All religions are decided by the amount of followers. Jedi is now an official religion because loads of people claimed to be part of the Jedi faith. Same with Scientology.
If you're one man who believes something, you're insane. If you're a few men who believe something, you're a cult. If you're many men who believe something, you're a religion.
does anyone else on this site believe in God? I feel like Im the only one.
The reason evil exists according to the bible is free will. We ate the forbidden fruit, granting us the power of a God (ability to choose right and wrong). so now we have to live in a "sin cursed world" and choose good. (not an easy task) as a punishment. it explains it all in genesis.
we had free will before we ate the forbidden fruit. otherwise adam and eve would not had chosen to disobey god. also did you ever ask why did god put the forbidden fruit in the garden to begin with? or why did he allow the serpent there? if god controls all then he let this happen.
I find arguing god's existence to be a tad pointless, debate is fun, but here's why I think it's high time that we put it to rest:
1. We can't prove that there is a god. Religion is not an argument as far as I'm concerned, as most of it was written by primitive people, with little understanding of the world (not knowing where the sun went at night, not knowing that demonic possession was in reality, mental illness, etc not only that, but why should we trust the eye-witness accounts of people who we've never met, especially when the stories look made up in the first place? This is why I find it so hard not to be condescending to religious people. ) There is no other evidence to support this, other than the basis that we can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he isn't real. But by this logic, you can believe ANYTHING.
2. Even if we assume there is a god, what is god responsible for? We have explanations for almost everything we know to exist that doesn't have a supernatural explanation. Most of the creation of the universe is even explainable without god. We then have to assume that god is either not omnipotent, doesn't know we exist (Therefore, not omniscient) and/or doesn't give a shit about us (definately not benevolent.) If it lacks any/all of these traits, why should we call it god?
3. Even if there is some kind of god, does that automatically mean there is an afterlife? Seeing as this is the only reason to believe in god, fear of death and hoping there's life beyond death. (Or saving your ass from eternal damnation, but here's something else to think about: Why would the creator of the universe, with all of that power and wisdom not know better than to create a place to torture people who didn't live life a certain way for all eternity? That is not something anyone, let alone a god would be cruel enough to do.) Let's all be honest, this is what we're all hoping is real. Not god, but heaven. An afterlife is impossible to conceive (Where is it located? How can it fit everything that has ever lived? Is it just for humans? Are there multiple afterlives based on each religion, or can only one be right?) All we can do is speculate, and since we can't find a way to fathom how it works, there's no reason to lose sleep over it.
1. We can't prove that there is a god. Religion is not an argument as far as I'm concerned, as most of it was written by primitive people, with little understanding of the world (not knowing where the sun went at night, not knowing that demonic possession was in reality, mental illness, etc not only that, but why should we trust the eye-witness accounts of people who we've never met, especially when the stories look made up in the first place? This is why I find it so hard not to be condescending to religious people. ) There is no other evidence to support this, other than the basis that we can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he isn't real. But by this logic, you can believe ANYTHING.
2. Even if we assume there is a god, what is god responsible for? We have explanations for almost everything we know to exist that doesn't have a supernatural explanation. Most of the creation of the universe is even explainable without god. We then have to assume that god is either not omnipotent, doesn't know we exist (Therefore, not omniscient) and/or doesn't give a shit about us (definately not benevolent.) If it lacks any/all of these traits, why should we call it god?
3. Even if there is some kind of god, does that automatically mean there is an afterlife? Seeing as this is the only reason to believe in god, fear of death and hoping there's life beyond death. (Or saving your ass from eternal damnation, but here's something else to think about: Why would the creator of the universe, with all of that power and wisdom not know better than to create a place to torture people who didn't live life a certain way for all eternity? That is not something anyone, let alone a god would be cruel enough to do.) Let's all be honest, this is what we're all hoping is real. Not god, but heaven. An afterlife is impossible to conceive (Where is it located? How can it fit everything that has ever lived? Is it just for humans? Are there multiple afterlives based on each religion, or can only one be right?) All we can do is speculate, and since we can't find a way to fathom how it works, there's no reason to lose sleep over it.
nice danny but my opinion is "God" is something that we cannot understand or prove because its something so *Other* that we wouldnt be able to understand it either that or its in everything around us but i really hate argueing about religion and god
i believe its called something else though exactly what is slipping my mind atm
Atheist-one who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods
Yes, disbelieving meaning "not believing," which means that if one is unsure, but does not fully believe, they are atheistic.
There are 4 labels to use here:
"Theism" meaning belief, "Atheism" meaning nonbelief.
"Gnostic" meaning knowing, "Agnostic" meaning not knowing.
Thus, there are 4 combined classifications.
1. Gnostic Theism: One believes in God, and also claims to know god exists.
2. Agnostic Theism: One who believes in God, but does not claim concrete knowledge.
3. Gnostic Atheism: One who does not believe in God, and claims to know god does not exist (extremely rare subset).
4. Agnostic Atheism: One who does not believe in God, but does not claim concrete knowledge.
The two most common are 1 and 4.
Hope this helps!
There are 4 labels to use here:
"Theism" meaning belief, "Atheism" meaning nonbelief.
"Gnostic" meaning knowing, "Agnostic" meaning not knowing.
Thus, there are 4 combined classifications.
1. Gnostic Theism: One believes in God, and also claims to know god exists.
2. Agnostic Theism: One who believes in God, but does not claim concrete knowledge.
3. Gnostic Atheism: One who does not believe in God, and claims to know god does not exist (extremely rare subset).
4. Agnostic Atheism: One who does not believe in God, but does not claim concrete knowledge.
The two most common are 1 and 4.
Hope this helps!
Extremely, thanks for clearing it up for me. :)
I do understand. I'm not saying that's the only way to better yourself as a person. Also from what I understand many of the first churches ran off of a perfect system. They were complete socialism. But the reason I don't agree with it here is because back then it was voluntary.
But what I was refering to was complelty voluntary socialism. Quite similar to native American tribes everyone shares everything. This really would only work in a small group and work extra well in a small religious group. The socialism created here in America would not be voluntary and they would not be completly the same.
if and when people go to "church" i think is is unacceptable to dress up. dont get me wrong you shouldent go looking your worst but "GOD" made us in HIS image so he dose not care what you look like, and to the people who are looking for the meaning of life its simple, survive as long as possible and reproduc. Simple yet complex.
I have yet to accept jesus as my Savior, i still want a clear rxplanationon what a savior is?
I have yet to accept jesus as my Savior, i still want a clear rxplanationon what a savior is?
I've heard quite some humorous arguments to that. Here is my favorite:
Let's say god is a cellular being. Then he created our universe and maybe the cellular being that is god looks like a human or maybe he's just a giant green blob made up of cells. His own image could just mean he is like us when it comes to what makes us.
Let's say god is a cellular being. Then he created our universe and maybe the cellular being that is god looks like a human or maybe he's just a giant green blob made up of cells. His own image could just mean he is like us when it comes to what makes us.
Actually, somewhere in the Bible, the verse is slipping my mind, it says that you're supposed to wear your best clothes.
God is real.
We all have a purpose in this world.
I think its sad when people don’t believe and don’t see there purpose in life.
God so loved us that he gave his one and only son to die for our sins.
We should think about what were doing in life, and leave it all to God.
God warned us, he said it wont be easy. But its worth it:)
that goes for all you unbelievers.
he loves us all, believers and unbelievers.
God has worked through my life in many ways and i thank him for that:)He WILL do the same in yours.
We all have a purpose in this world.
I think its sad when people don’t believe and don’t see there purpose in life.
God so loved us that he gave his one and only son to die for our sins.
We should think about what were doing in life, and leave it all to God.
God warned us, he said it wont be easy. But its worth it:)
that goes for all you unbelievers.
he loves us all, believers and unbelievers.
God has worked through my life in many ways and i thank him for that:)He WILL do the same in yours.
God MIGHT be real.
We all have the right to believe what we want and express our beliefs.
I think it's sad when people unjustly pity others as if they are better than them.
Jesus' divinity was designed 300 years after his death by Constantine, before then he was viewed as a prophet, but mortal. His story was mixed with Mithras. Feel free to look up similarities between the two.
We should think for ourselves and not use a possibly fictional being to justify our own acts.
God would not use a smiley while informing people of their fate in life.
Unbelievers should not be told what to believe, it is their choice.
I knew a girl once who loved me, I didn't love her back. I don't consider myself a bad person because of that fact.
I have worked through my life and i deserve the praise or repercussions that come from my actions.
We all have the right to believe what we want and express our beliefs.
I think it's sad when people unjustly pity others as if they are better than them.
Jesus' divinity was designed 300 years after his death by Constantine, before then he was viewed as a prophet, but mortal. His story was mixed with Mithras. Feel free to look up similarities between the two.
We should think for ourselves and not use a possibly fictional being to justify our own acts.
God would not use a smiley while informing people of their fate in life.
Unbelievers should not be told what to believe, it is their choice.
I knew a girl once who loved me, I didn't love her back. I don't consider myself a bad person because of that fact.
I have worked through my life and i deserve the praise or repercussions that come from my actions.
I have yet to understand why people put blind faith in a possibly fictional character. It's like that chick on yahoo questions who "knew" that edward cullen was coming to take her away. It's just pathetic.
Note you said possibly, this makes your analogy obsolete. We know Edward Cullen is not real.
It wasn't a true analogy, it was simply an attempt at poignant humor, one which I think succeeded. The more accurate analogy would be, with a nod to Dannyl, Mithras and Jesus. Or any other Pagan or religious deity for that matter.
Why not believe in them, eh?
Why not believe in them, eh?
Why not believe in another deity? Is that what you're asking?
As far as I can tell, Christianity is the only religion (Have not studied all religions though, tell me if there's another) where the founder died a significant death and of course, as I believe the stories in the Bible are true, he rose up three days later.
Interesting. Well, yes, Jesus was a martyr... but there are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of other martyr stories to base religious views upon. There are quite a few resurrection claims as well. As Dannyl said, why do you believe the Jesus story over the others?
1. I have experienced miraculous things. I have spoken in tongues after repentance of my sins many times. I have also heard others too. This is one of the many things that happened on the day of Pentecost. (fifty days after the resurrection of Jesus for anyone who doesn't know.)
2. Faith.
3. Raised in it.
2. Faith.
3. Raised in it.
Speaking in tongues has been proven to be a purely naturalistic process, borne from neurological/psychological desires and needs. It is endorphin/dopamine producing/boosting, and can be induced at will, even by unbelievers who used to believe to the point of speaking in tongues.
Also, it has no basis in scripture : P.
And as we have stated, faith has no/is not evidence.
Also, it has no basis in scripture : P.
And as we have stated, faith has no/is not evidence.
Posted: 2010-02-11 15:19:26 Report
So you're telling me that someone who has never heard another language can speak it? And you didn't ask me for evidence, you asked me what made Christianity more believable for me. And what do you mean by no basis in scripture.
And Dannyl, Epilepsy?
And Dannyl, Epilepsy?
Posted: 2010-02-11 19:18:19 Report
What tongues are you talking about? For the tongues I am familiar with are essentially the spouting of gibberish no one understands.
And speaking in tongues is not referenced in scripture.
Fair, I did ask for believability, which implies evidence usually, but not always. My mistake, I apologize.
And speaking in tongues is not referenced in scripture.
Fair, I did ask for believability, which implies evidence usually, but not always. My mistake, I apologize.
Posted: 2010-02-11 22:14:17 Report
I have heard claims like these before, but none of them ever have any evidentiary backing. And without any form of such backing, this is nonsensical hearsay testimony.
And when, in the Bible, the Holy Spirit infuses a man, he is understand by all peoples, no matter what language they know. The Holy Spirit is not a simple language changer, but provides the speaker with all languages in one. Thus, you cannot say that the Holy Spirit infusions present in scripture support this kind of tongue speaking: they are different things entirely.
And if you were around missionaries for long enough to be converted, don't you think you would pick up enough of the language to spout random, nonsensical phrases?
And when, in the Bible, the Holy Spirit infuses a man, he is understand by all peoples, no matter what language they know. The Holy Spirit is not a simple language changer, but provides the speaker with all languages in one. Thus, you cannot say that the Holy Spirit infusions present in scripture support this kind of tongue speaking: they are different things entirely.
And if you were around missionaries for long enough to be converted, don't you think you would pick up enough of the language to spout random, nonsensical phrases?
Posted: 2010-02-12 05:17:49 Report
In African Missionary work there are men, women and children that have been heard to speak English when receiving the Holy Ghost but have no idea what they were talking about. I have no idea what I'm talking about since the only languages in my church are Spanish and English, no one is fluent in anything else.
As for scriptural evidence:
Acts 2: 2-4
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
And to show that we can receive it today,
Acts 2: 38-39
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
And also, apology accepted. :)
As for scriptural evidence:
Acts 2: 2-4
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each one of them.
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
And to show that we can receive it today,
Acts 2: 38-39
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
And also, apology accepted. :)
Posted: 2010-02-12 05:02:00 Report
okay first of all comparing love for a girl is not the same with Gods love.
he died for you! helloo!
and i used a smiley because he changed my life so you cant tell me to smile or not.
and if God wouldnt use a smile to inform people, well 1 i am not God and two it doesnt say anywhere that he never smiled.
in fact talking about Gods love does make me smile:))))))
and im not saying i am better than others because i am not.
we are all going to cofess And bow down to him one day so i think its sad when people dont realize that.:)
he died for you! helloo!
and i used a smiley because he changed my life so you cant tell me to smile or not.
and if God wouldnt use a smile to inform people, well 1 i am not God and two it doesnt say anywhere that he never smiled.
in fact talking about Gods love does make me smile:))))))
and im not saying i am better than others because i am not.
we are all going to cofess And bow down to him one day so i think its sad when people dont realize that.:)
Not trying to be a smartass but yeah, that's what she said. (unintentional pun)
Hmm...how is that possible? Hear o Israel the Lord our God is one Lord. Not three.
The Trinity is borne out of the attempt to rationalize Jesus's divinity.
Since God is the only God, but since Jesus is also "lord" according to some parts of the Bible (man according to others), an explanation was needed to allow for a divine Jesus, "Son of God." Also, the magical tongues of fire granting magical language skills and igniting passion in the apostles needed an explanatory device.
Thus, the rationalization goes like this:
1. There is only one God.
2. Yahweh (God) is God.
3. Jesus is Divine.
4. The Holy Spirit is Divine.
5. Since there is only one divine force, God, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus must not only be interrelated, but all be truly one entity.
6. God is God, Jesus is God (and God's son), and the Holy Spirit is another godly manifestation.
7. Thus, the concept of "God" turns into the "Trinity," the "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" of the Doxology.
Hope this also helps! ; P.
Since God is the only God, but since Jesus is also "lord" according to some parts of the Bible (man according to others), an explanation was needed to allow for a divine Jesus, "Son of God." Also, the magical tongues of fire granting magical language skills and igniting passion in the apostles needed an explanatory device.
Thus, the rationalization goes like this:
1. There is only one God.
2. Yahweh (God) is God.
3. Jesus is Divine.
4. The Holy Spirit is Divine.
5. Since there is only one divine force, God, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus must not only be interrelated, but all be truly one entity.
6. God is God, Jesus is God (and God's son), and the Holy Spirit is another godly manifestation.
7. Thus, the concept of "God" turns into the "Trinity," the "Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" of the Doxology.
Hope this also helps! ; P.
my brain hurts because that is a paradox
Hmmm... I think there is only one God and not three separate entities. God is God. Jesus is God robed in flesh. And the Holy Ghost (Spirit, whichever you prefer) is God's living in us.
Some Scriptural Evidence:
God Robed in flesh?
John 1: 1
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Notice, it says the Word was God, thus, 'Word' is one of God's many titles. Later in the first chapter,
John 1: 14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
1 Timothy 3: 16
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
Some people try to use this scripture as evidence of the trinity. (Below)
Matthew 29: 18
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"
That sounds like three entities, right? Notice it says name, not names. Well in Acts: 4: 12 the Bible says,
"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Speaking of Jesus)
All of this Scripture is King James by the way.
So if the Father is Jesus, The Son is Jesus and The Holy Ghost is Jesus, I think we can assume that Jesus is Jesus. Right?
Some Scriptural Evidence:
God Robed in flesh?
John 1: 1
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Notice, it says the Word was God, thus, 'Word' is one of God's many titles. Later in the first chapter,
John 1: 14
"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
1 Timothy 3: 16
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."
Some people try to use this scripture as evidence of the trinity. (Below)
Matthew 29: 18
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:"
That sounds like three entities, right? Notice it says name, not names. Well in Acts: 4: 12 the Bible says,
"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Speaking of Jesus)
All of this Scripture is King James by the way.
So if the Father is Jesus, The Son is Jesus and The Holy Ghost is Jesus, I think we can assume that Jesus is Jesus. Right?
King James version.. so.. a bible written in the years between 1604 and 1611 by the Church of England is considered fact about events that many years prior.
Posted: 2010-10-02 01:28:02 Report
i think that is all bullshit. there is no god. god is fake, made up to fill in the gaps in the universe. if god made the earth, explain the moon, the other planets. why has he not done the same there? why do we never see him? why does he not end suffering? COZ HE ISNT REAL! god and religion are the biggest lies i have ever heard!
Posted: 2010-09-30 13:44:06 Report
This comment is below viewing threshold (Show Comment)
It's interesting that you say that the Bible has more factual support than Atheism, because Atheism is the null hypothesis: the default position. Meaning, without ANY factual support, Atheism would win out. This, however, is not the case. For the Bible has no factual support, whereas the entirety of the scientific method is a testament to the empiricist worldview.
Let's see fact #1, sir.
Dannyl, here we go again! : P. Where's Ertrov?!
Let's see fact #1, sir.
Dannyl, here we go again! : P. Where's Ertrov?!
I would say I'll take his place but it doesn't seem right. He'll come around eventually.
This comment is below viewing threshold (Show Comment)
I'm sorry, i must have misunderstood you. How does a book written thousands of years ago, by some very bias sources, constitute a fact in any way, shape or form?
I asked him to provide any facts that support the validity of the teachings within the bible, the bible itself cannot count as a fact that supports itself. Moron.
And don't call me son you patronising, ignorant and idiotic twat.
I asked him to provide any facts that support the validity of the teachings within the bible, the bible itself cannot count as a fact that supports itself. Moron.
And don't call me son you patronising, ignorant and idiotic twat.
Post a response
Related posts
edit this was supposed to go to the bottom