You say you do not feel a need for a god so there for he does not exist? Athiesm is the belief that there is no higher being, not the choice to abandon him. so you belve that this world created itself, it re****ed from the creation of an almighty god, it is theresult of a colaberation of panthiestic beings or it is an illusion? (I just listed most of the worlds beliefs about spiritual stuff) Can anyone really say that there is no higer power at all? I believe the evidence is quite conclusinve that there is a God, but if you disagree, please let us know. i would love to hear about it. -DeadWarm
The logic to atheism is that, well I, do not feel the need for a higher bein in my life nor feel "hole" in my life that I do ot believe in ahigher power. If one wats or feels they need religion in their life then they can believe what they want as long as they do not try to force it upon me.
proudconservative, i like you, you have come to the conclusion that i was hoping to lead some of you to. Using history or science is not conclusive to proving or disproving the existance of GOD. We could literally argue forever, let's get back to the question that Dr. Strangelove asked us, what logic is there in atheism? are there any athiests out there, or is everyone on this site just fond of bashing Christians?
So if carbon dating is only accurate up to 30 thousand years old how old does the bible say the earth is? Maybe coral dies and gets washed away after a certain number of years or was a plant on land that EVOLVED as the oceans changed and lived underwater after that. No time for more arguments but I hope everyone sees that no one is going to "win" as no one on the earth knows the truth.
I have a question. How come scientist say that there is only a few thousand years of growth evident in coral found in the ocean. Coral grows at a steady rate, and if the earth is millions of years old, wouldn't there be coral that is older than those thousands of years? Just curious.
another question. why do you belive that dinsaours are millions of years old? contrary to popular beleif, dinasaur bones are not dated using carbon dating. Carbon dating is extremely accurate, but only on objects said to be 30,000 years old or younger. When dinsaur bones are carbon dated, the results are inconclusive. Dinosaur bones are dated by the age of the rock they are found in, which cannot be carbon dated either.
Now, a lot of people have said that it takes millions of years for something to be fossilized, but how do we know this? Have you ever watched something for millions of years to see what happens? What may perplex you is that a boot was found in America with a fossilized human foot inside. The boot couldn't have been more than 100 years old, and probably more like 50 years old.
To top it off, wathces and small modern trinkets have been discovered in coal, which supposedly takes millions of years to form. hmmm, this does not fit science at all, maybe our science is wrong. I remember reading stories about living frogs that were found in coal deposits, which led many to believe that frogs could live forever or some such nonsense. I think it makes more sense to say that maybe we don't know everything about coal rather than to assume that frogs are immortal beings.
Please don't get me wrong, i embrace truth, even scienctific truth, I believe any truth is GOD's truth, but if one truth contradicts another, one of them must be wrong.
btw, Dante, the board is about athiesm, do you belive in GOD? it is a simple question.
Actually, if I was a theist, arguing reliigon instead of science would be the place to take it. Call fossils the work of the devil. When there are fundamental differences there can be no argument. To try and base religion on science is antithetical to religion. What is the point of faith if you have proof or desire proof? No, I'm not necessarily a physicist or a evolutionist. I believe in the mysticism of the unknown. But I dont think that just becasue someone believes something you should just let them have thier way. Logic is a powerful force. If anyone can stand up to it, they are strong. I don't pretend ot promote an ideology other than freedom, and freedom from ideology. I dream. And I remain a skeptic. I cannot, and therefore will not answer teh questions. I simpy don't have the knowledge. I'm sur tehre are plenty of proto-scientists here would would love to argue quantum physics all day, but it ain't me. I will callenge you, you wil challenge me, that is our agreement. Set up an idea, have someone else knock it down and we will all be better off. This is the way we work.
I have stated my arguements which you guys side stepped aroud such as the moths and dinosaurs, as well as others arguments such as carbon dating. I will no longer waste my time to argue with those whom refuse to see through their beliefs to understand the other side. I will no longer be posting on this board. Thanks for your thoughts.
Watchman- Dantes style of argument is one of the reasons I've stopped using the Bible as a referece in these discussions. It's much easier to use science and take the fight to thier side of the court than defend what you beleive in.
Maybe I'll repost my entire system of belief, but for now I'll just pose these questions to Dante. These are not rehtorical, I would like an answer:
1.) Do you beleive that it is probable that replicating DNA was formed spontaneously?
2.) In accordance with the Law of Conservation of Mass, and the Law of Conservation of Engery, how did matter and energy come to be?
3.) Everything science is based on revolves around the observed laws of physics. Where did the laws of physics come from?
I await your response. I'd ask you to not post the counter argument reffering to superstition. Just please answer them based on what you know and think.
But we can always deal with those later...for now, your post:
quote: Why would it warrant more explination? The Bible(which is what we're arguing over) doesn't go into any depth on any animals, period. Why would dinos be different?
It does indeed. Naming specific species like sheep, goat, lion, snake. "Big lizard with gnashing teeth, towering over man an building" just wasn't thought to be important?
quote: So, the dating is accurate, only if we have a preconcieved notion that what we're trying to date is ANCIENT? So, hypothetically, if what you're trying to date is actually younger than this preconception, it'd make the object look TONS older than it really is, right?
Not really. If you were to date things in the time capsue oyu buried 10 years ago the dating would register as no age or within a range of a hundred years, not millions. You don't even usually carbon date things that are verifyable accurately through other methods. Anthropology and written record helps often. Like the boat they found in the Sea of Galilee was buried at the same level as other artifacts of a time period from 40 BCE to 40 CE. Being not of a scientific mind myself i loath to explain the specifics, but to use carbon dating in place of logic is silly. We can tell the doll is recent because of the fact that the dirt around it has been mixed and disturbed which is conducive to digging a hole. It will also be buried shallow compared to say, the tomb of King Tutenkhamen. We can establish human settlements in the Americas even prior to the Biblical creation of the Earth (approx. 10,000 years) due to the nature of the civilization and the various dating techniques which I'm sure your teacher or professor would be glad to share with you (unless of course you go to a parochial school).
quote: Not to argue, but why? Shakespeare is a WELL-KNOWN historical figure. EVeryone's heard of him, and maybe even read some of his plays. It would seem difficult to doubt that Shakespeare does not exist.
Well, you're making the wrong assumptions from the information. The questions regarding Shakespeare are many because frankly, he barely wrote a origial thing in his life. The works credited to him very well may have been the work of a nobleman writing under a penname because theater was not repectable work for the gentry. The plays were written, maybe by a collective working under an assumed name for whatever reason. We know a man named Shakespeare existed. However, it is often hard to believe the man we know was capable of such talent and historical knowledge as to say that William Shakespeare actually wrote the plays attributed to him.
quote: That said, since there is more evidence for the existance of Jesus, why is it so difficult to believe Jesus existed and did the things the Bible says?
Here is the conclusion: No one has (yet) attacked the veracity that there once was a man caled Jesus who was a rabbi in Judea during the Roman occupation. Like Shakespeare however, other than that, it is hard to ascertain whether the accounts of his actions are literally true or symbolic (exorcising "ills and leprosy" of disbelief rather than true disease), or purely fictional. His birth, life, and death are all unknown to us. Beyond his mere existence, like Shakespeare, there is not much we can say for certain.
quote: I think what you're pointing at is the fact that the supernatural is so foreign to us, on the very basis that we're in a NATURAL world, and it is SUPER-NATURAL. Unfortunately for the Bunny, he hasn't given his book to mankind, so that they would know about him.
Actually he did leave a book. It's got a few typos and errors, but he's gaining beleivers. His cute and cuddly status is a real good selling point. Pink might not be the best color to win teh guys, but the girls like the stuffed animal effigy they get when they join. We've even got commandments set up. We will soon rival Christianity for the dominant logical religion in the world.
quote: I know I've said it before, but the Bible is a VERY UNIQUE book. In the about 4,000 years it took to write, and over 50 authors, the book has NEVER been proven wrong when compared to history, science, etc.
Funny you mention history and science...
quote: Also, it NEVER contradicts itself. If this book were anything but from God, this would not be the case.
Well actually, any book that has a decent editor will try not to contradict itself. That's really not a unique quality to bank your eternal soul on. However, the Bible doesn't even meet those standards. It does in fact contradict itself many a time (likely due to all those different authors). NOt to mention the hundred or so books that didnt make it into the Bible. I've made a habit or collecting these forgotten texts and it's really interesting how many "divinely inspired" people there must have been. Check out http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/contra.html for contradictions; here is a quick sample: Shall we keep the sabbath?
* Exodus 20:8 "Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy." * Exodus 31:15 "Whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." * Numbers 15:32,36 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. . . . And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses."
vs.
* Isaiah 1:13 "The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity." * John 5:16 "And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day." * Colossians 2:16 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days."
Don't feel too bad, a book that big is bound to contradict itself. Do a quick net search for "Bible Contradictions" and you'll find a lot of helpful sites. One in particular I find useful is the Skeptics Annotated Bible at (strangely enough) http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ It's won many awards and is really easy to use and search. It covers the evil to the downright funny everywhere in the Good Book.
quote: Dante, you sound well read, compare the Bible's historical accuracy against the accuracy of secular writings from the same time. Man alone cannot write a book like this.
Thank you, I must say you've exceeded my expectations already so we're off to a good start. However, as noted in the 'Conflicts with Science and History' (found at: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/science.html) There is a great deal, including the location and timing of events and peoples that just don't fit. Now I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I've seen only garuntees of truth, no real evidence.
Oh, and you're right on the Pascal's Wager. It seems nihilistic, but true, as far as what to believe in.
Since we're only debating Christianity I will stick to Genesis and the New Testament (for some reason the OT doesn't get a lot of play beyond Genesis, and the NT barely refrences the OT, especially creation.
Conflicts with Science and History:
Genesis The Genesis 1 account also conflicts with the order of events that are known to science. In this account the earth is created before light and stars, birds and whales before reptiles and insects, and flowering plants before any animals. From science, we know the true order of events was just the opposite. 1:1-2:3 God creates light and separates light from darkness, and day from night, on the first day. Yet he didn't make the light producing objects (the sun and the stars) until the fourth day (1:14-19). 1:3-5 God spends one-sixth of his entire creative effort (the second day) working on a solid firmament. This strange structure, which God calls heaven, is intended to separate the higher waters from the lower waters. This firmament, if it existed, would have been quite an obstacle to our space program. 1:6-8 Plants are made on the third day before there was a sun to drive their photosynthetic processes (1:14-19). 1:11 God makes two lights: "the greater light [the sun] to rule the day, and the lesser light [the moon] to rule the night." But if God made the moon to "rule the night", then why does it spend half of its time moving through the daytime sky? "He made the stars also." God spends a day making light (before making the stars) and separating light from darkness; then, at the end of a hard day's work, and almost as an afterthought, he makes the trillions of stars. 1:16 "And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth." Really? Then why are only a tiny fraction of stars visible from earth? Under the best conditions, no more than five thousand stars are visible from earth with the unaided eye, yet there are hundreds of billions of stars in our galaxy and a hundred billion or so galaxies. Yet this verse says that God put the stars in the firmament "to give light" to the earth. 1:17 All animals were originally herbivores. Tapeworms, vampire bats, mosquitoes, and barracudas -- all were strict vegetarians, as they were created by God. But, of course, we now know that there were carnivorous animals millions of years before humans existed. 1:30 In Genesis 1 the entire creation takes 6 days, but we know from modern science that the universe is at least 15 billion years old. 1:31 Humans were not created instantaneously from dust and breath as in the Gen.2:7, but evolved over millions of years from simpler life forms. 2:7 God makes the animals and parades them before Adam to see if any would strike his fancy. But none seem to have what it takes to please him. (Although he was tempted to go for the sheep.) Note that in these verses, God makes the animals after making Adam, whereas in the first creation story (1:25-27) the order is reversed. After making the animals, God has Adam name them all. The naming of several million species must have kept Adam busy for a while. But we know that the animals were not created instantaneously from the ground, but rather that they evolved over millions of years. And we still don't have names for all of them. Ten thousand new species of insects are discovered and named each year. 2:18-22 God curses the serpent. From now on the serpent will crawl on his belly and eat dust. One wonders how he got around before -- by hopping on his tail, perhaps? But snakes don't eat dust, do they? 3:14 Where are the cherubims, flaming sword moving back and forth, and the tree of life? Surely if they existed, we would have found them. 3:24
Matthew Herod kills all boys in and around Bethlehem that are two years old and under. Such a massacre would certainly have been noted by contemporary historians. Yet not even Josephus, who documented Herod's life in detail, mentioned this event. 2:16 The devil kidnaps Jesus and takes him up to the top of the temple, and then to the top of "an exceedingly high mountain," high enough to see "all the kingdoms of the world." I guess the earth was flat in those days. 4:8 According to Matthew, people who cannot speak are possessed by the devil. 9:32-33 Jesus casts out a devil from a man who was blind and dumb (blind and dumb people are possessed by devils). 12:22 Jesus is incorrect when he says that the mustard seed is the smallest seed. And since there are no trees in the mustard family, mustard seeds do not grow into "the greatest of all trees." 13:31-32 Jesus cures an epileptic "lunatic" by "rebuking the devil." (Epilepsy is caused by devils.) 17:15-18 "The moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven." Apparently, Jesus believed that the moon produces its own light, and that the stars are lights held in place by a firmament only a few miles above our heads. 24:29
Mark Jesus is incorrect when he says that the mustard seed is the smallest seed. 4:31 Jesus heals a boy with "a dumb spirit" by saying, "Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him and enter no more into him." (Sounds like a script from Monty Python, doesn't it?) But how could a deaf spirit hear the words spoken to it? And how could a dumb spirit cry out? 9:17, 25 "In those days ... the moon shall not give her light, and the stars of heaven shall fall." Of course this is nonsense. The billions of stars will never fall to earth and the moon does not produce its own light. 13:24-25
Luke The devil takes Jesus to the top of a mountain and shows him "all the kingdoms of the world." I guess the world was flat in those days. Lk.4:5
John "These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." Jn.1:28 But no such site is known in history. Some translations (ASV, NAB, NIV, RSV, NRSV) rename Bethabara as Bethany, but Bethany is a suburb of Jerusalem and, therefore, not "beyond the Jordan."
Hey there Dante. I don't think I've seen you before. Welcome to the discussion.
"Massive beasts of the number and variety of dinosaurs woud warrant a little more than a passing refrence."
Why would it warrant more explination? The Bible(which is what we're arguing over) doesn't go into any depth on any animals, period. Why would dinos be different?
"Given what we factually know about the periods of development on earth and the space of millions of years between the earliest dinos and the most recent 65 million years ago. Based on this distinction in time and the relative recency of human remains (along various stages of evolution nonetheless) establishes a visible timeline even beyond carbon dating - which, I assure you is accurate when we're talking thousands and millions of years (you can't carbon date a buried barbie doll, but a fossil whose carbon has had time to decay can be relatively accurately dated)."
So, the dating is accurate, only if we have a preconcieved notion that what we're trying to date is ANCIENT? So, hypothetically, if what you're trying to date is actually younger than this preconception, it'd make the object look TONS older than it really is, right? Also, I may just not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but how can Carbon dating give an accurate age for something if you don't know how much Carbon you started with?
"Anecdotal evidence about Shakespeare (only one historical figure) does not an argument make. You're going to need to provide a little more than that at least if anyone but those of your ilk take you seriously.
Not to argue, but why? Shakespeare is a WELL-KNOWN historical figure. EVeryone's heard of him, and maybe even read some of his plays. It would seem difficult to doubt that Shakespeare does not exist. That said, since there is more evidence for the existance of Jesus, why is it so difficult to believe Jesus existed and did the things the Bible says?
"Secondly, there is a philosophical principle (whose name I have convieniently forgotten) which, in layman's terms, basically says: Why don't you believe in the big pink bunny in the sky? If there is equal odds of this being the correct thing to worship and you risk eternal suffering for not believing in Bunny why don't you start worshiping it?"
I think what you're pointing at is the fact that the supernatural is so foreign to us, on the very basis that we're in a NATURAL world, and it is SUPER-NATURAL. Unfortunately for the Bunny, he hasn't given his book to mankind, so that they would know about him. I know I've said it before, but the Bible is a VERY UNIQUE book. In the about 4,000 years it took to write, and over 50 authors, the book has NEVER been proven wrong when compared to history, science, etc. Also, it [b]NEVER contradicts itself. {/b] If this book were anything but from God, this would not be the case. Dante, you sound well read, compare the Bible's historical accuracy against the accuracy of secular writings from the same time. Man alone cannot write a book like this.
BTW-I think the Philisophical principle is "Pascal's Wager," but he used God as his example, not a Bunny Rabbit.
This inevitably becomes a cration vs. evolution debate, not really religious. There arent really too many Hindus here defending Brahmin creation or reincarnation. All the theists would have to do is prove one religion right and win over the atheists. However, given the current situation, I will say my piece: Massive beasts of the number and variety of dinosaurs woud warrant a little more than a passing refrence. Given what e factually know about the periods of development on earth and the space of millions of years between teh earliest dinos and the most recent 65 million years ago. Based on this distinction in time and the relative recency of human remains (along various stages of evolution nonetheless) establishes a visible timeline even beyond carbon dating - which, I assure you is accurate when we're talking thousands and millions of years (you can't carbon date a buried barbie doll, but a fossil whose carbon has had time to decay can be relatively accurately dated). Anecdotal evidence about Shakespeare (only one historical figure) does not an argument make. You're going to need to provide a little more than that at least if anyone but those of your ilk take you seriously.
Secondly, there is a philosophical principle (whose name I have convieniently forgotten) which, in layman's terms, basically says: Why don't you believe in the big pink bunny in the sky? If there is equal odds of this being the correct thing to worship and you risk eternal suffering for not believing in Bunny why don't you start worshiping it?
"So if god created the world did he create dinosaurs millions of years ago before man? If so why is none of this in the bible which he inspired. Did he feel that these millions of years were not important? You have to believe in dinosaurs but the world is not that old right? So are allllll of the EVIDENCE and PROOF of dinosaurs a conspiracy against god? I think it must be. God wouldn't just forget these millions of years before man would he."
First off, I see two questions here, so I'm gonna try to answer one at a time.
1) How do you know the Bible doesn't talk about dinosaurs??? In the book of Job (chap. 40-41), it talks about two creatures: The Behemoth, whose "tail sways like a cedar." and the leviathan, as water-dwelling creature. First off why can't these be records of what we now call dinosaurs???
2) Who says the world is millions of years old? Just because our teachers tell us that doesn't mean that they're right. The dating techniques that scientists aren't as acurate as they'd like you to believe. And as for fossils, and other things that take millions of years to make, how do we know this is the truth? Why can't it be something like 200 years? It would take longer than a person's lifetime, both ways, so why is one more valid than the other?
"how do you know it is "Truth"? Have you talked to god and talked to the other religions of the world and all agreed that you are right? If you have talked to god I would like to know what he said to you."
Do you believe in William Shakespeare? Did you know that there is a controversy whether or not Shakespeare ever existed? Did you know that there is more evidence that Jesus walked this earth, died and rose again, than there is evidence for the existance of Shakespeare. The info on Jesus is documented by a Jewish historian known as Josephus. How's that for proof?
On all of these issues, I encourage you to check it out for yourself. Don't just believe what other people tell you; you obviously don't believe me. Check it out. Look at the facts.
" How can you not realize that there are many religious beliefs and that you most probably are wrong."
Why am I probably wrong? All things being equall, don't I have just as much of a chance of being right as any of the other religions? OR are you trying to politely point out nothing more than the odds?
Penmagic: What are the shades of grey that you see. Explain a bit more of what you mean, and I'll try to answer your question.
I agree somewhat about the dinosaur comment. I definitely do not believe everything the Bible says. I totally believe in evolution. But I think I have to believe in some kind of greater being, or God. If not, I find life totally hopeless. Why are we here? There has to be a reason. We aren't just some little insignificant thing created for nothing. Without these beliefs, I don't think I would enjoy livig. There's a reason we're here. I hate those super religious people that take everything in the Bible as the law of life. Like my uncle still believes that women are inferior and need to follow their husband's every word and command. Those people drive me nuts! But I still believe in God and basic concepts in the Bible.
So if one commits murder, rape any violent crime such as this but is really sorry and means it they get into heaven? Why? How can you commit these horrible acts but get into heaven?
Ok so what arguments are there to my dinosaur statements? I would like to hear what the bible says in dealing with diosaurs. Islamic extremists while wrong view killing some as a good thing and believe their god is ok with this. How can you not realize that there are many religious beliefs and that you most probably are wrong.
Topics 
