Contridictions in the Bible - Set 2 - First 5

[kovan]

Contradiction #1
Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?

(a) God did (2 Samuel 24:1)

(b) Satan did (1 Chronicles 21:1).

Contradiction #2

In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?

(a) Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9).

(b) One million, one hundred thousand (1 Chronicles 21:5).



Contradiction #3

How many fighting men were found in Judah?

(a) Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9).

(b) Four hundred and seventy thousand (1 Chronicles 21:5).



Contradiction #4

God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?

(a) Seven (2 Samuel 24:13).

(b) Three (1 Chronicles 21:12).



Contradiction #5

How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

(a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26).

(b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2).


PLEASE VERIFY references and answeres just incase the authoer of these messed up...

[hitcgar]

You been reading Thomas Paine's bull **** or what?

These, once again, are age-old arguments against the bible that have been refuted and adequately answered time after time after time ad infinitum, ad nauseaum.

It's really pathetic.

Ask yourself - why is it that this one book among millions has been the target of anti-God and anti-Christ attacks since millenium?

Why is no one attacking the writings of Homer, Aristotle, the Koran, the Tibetan book of the dead and on and on?

Why is it that Dominitian so hated the book and it's believers that he ordered it and them outlaw on pains of death?

Why the bible? The very question begs suspicion.


It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.
- George Washington (1732-1799)

The Bible is the sheet-anchor of our liberties.
- Ulysses S. Grant

The Bible is no mere book, but a Living Creature, with a power that conquers all that oppose it.
- Napoleon Bonaparte

There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history.
- Sir Isaac Newton

I have known ninety-five of the world's great men in my time, and of these, eighty-seven were followers of the Bible. The Bible is stamped with a Specialty of Origin, and
an immeasurable distance separates it from all competitors.
- William Gladstone (1809-1898), British statesman, Prime Minister four times.

The Bible has been the Magna Charta of the poor and oppressed. The human race is not in a position to dispense with it.
- Thomas Huxley

If there is anything in my thoughts or style to commend, the credit is due to my parents for instilling in me an early love of the Scriptures. If we abide by the principles taught in the Bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; but if we and our posterity neglect its instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us and bury all our glory in profound obscurity.
- Daniel Webster

The existence of the Bible, as a book for the people, is the greatest benefit which the human race has ever experienced. Every attempt to belittle it is a crime against humanity.
- Immanuel Kant

I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man.
- Abraham Lincoln

[kovan]

thats why

[Gen-X]

hitcgar

I didn't think a person could fit BOTH their feet in their mouth... well done!

Yes it does make you wonder why so many people are against the bible....

Ever heard of a saying "Where there is SMOKE there is FIRE".

Something never attracts this much attention and hassle unless the basic foundations upon which it stands are by their very nature both flawed and an affront to nature.


The Bible cops so much flack because people like yourself stand there on your pedistal acting haughty and saying how wonderful and RIGHT the Bible is when any man can plainly see that there is so much contradiction and self-serving affrontary in it that you DESERVE to have the pedistal cut out from underneath you.


Anyone who believes something is ALWAYS RIGHT and can NEVER be wrong deserves to have this sort of punishment.

Thats why when the Greeks made their "Gods" they made them fallably human.

[Edited by Gen-X on 09-21-2000 at 07:58 PM]

[HarryW]

Something never attracts this much attention and hassle unless the basic foundations upon which it stands are by their very nature both flawed and an affront to nature

What else has ever attracted this much 'attention and hassle' and has subsequently had the statement "the basic foundations upon which it stands are by their very nature both flawed and an affront to nature" proven to be true?

I'm sorry but he doesn't strike me as coming across as haughty any more that someone that believes in anything does when they state their beliefs. Like determinism for instance, or deja vu.

[Gen-X]

Harry

Euthenasia, Abortion, Sexism, Racism, Circumcision of females...

Should I go on?

All of these topics cause so much animosity and hassle and all of them end up with someone trying to oppress the other.

Is religion truely any different?

Someone claims something is the right way to do it and then commits abhorrent attrocities in its name thinking themselves justified in doing so.

Yeah I know its harsh and exaggerated but the bottom line is that if God and the Bible was true it would be so glaringly obvious to the world that nobody would need to complain about it...

[kovan]

i think generalizing religion is bad
i got offened by that because you dontk now ANYTHING about islam and yet you generalize it with others that you knwo about

hope you learn about Euthenasia, Abortion, Sexism, Racism, Circumcision of females...
in islam before you say that in general

thanks

[Gen-X]

Kovan

i think generalizing religion is bad
i got offened by that because you dontk now ANYTHING about islam and yet you generalize it with others that you knwo about


Why is it a generalization?

I think you are misunderstanding the point.

Religion has many "flavours", so trying to say "which" is right is already believing that relgion ITSELF is right.

So you go to the CORE of the problem and look at the concept of religion itself. That is not a generalization then as ALL religions have certain principles which MAKE them a religion and NOT a sunday picnic.

Every Religion HAS :

- Definition of how THEIR God created the universe
- What is RIGHT
- What is WRONG
- What happens to you if you OBEY
- What happens to you if you DISOBEY
- Justification for punishing those who don't believe


That your religion has some differences to another religion, or that it might tolerate this custom or that custom, that it supports or renounced Abortion or whatever... it doesn't change the fact that it is a RELIGION

I cannot abide by ANYTHING that says "THIS IS WHAT IS RIGHT.. THEY ARE ALL WRONG" and I am sure you cannot show me ANY religion that does not have these basic principles.

Take as much offense as you like my friend, the only people that ever get offended are those with something to get offended about which is proof of why they refuse to see reason because anything that hurts their beliefs (the source of offense) is to be avoided, destroyed, redirected, ignored.

People call me an Athiest... that doesn't offend me, I tell them I'm not an Athiest but I don't give a **** that they might call me that.. its their limited view from blinded eyes and nothing I say will change it.


hope you learn about Euthenasia, Abortion, Sexism, Racism, Circumcision of females...
in islam before you say that in general


I don't need to... what difference would it make?

I don't need a religion to tell me if something is right or something is wrong, or to JUSTIFY something like cutting out a woman's clitoris as being holy or right... It should be plainly obvious.

Are you going to stand here and justify there is a valid reason to mutilate a woman's body????

I'm all ears?

[HarryW]

Sexism and racism are clearly bad. Don't know much about female circumcision but what I have heard of it is that it's a pretty stupid idea. Now then, euthanasia and abortion are two whole different cans of worms, and I don't think even you would be opinionated enough to stand up and pronounce them to be "by their very nature both flawed and an affront to nature". Or would you?

Is religion any different? Yes. Sexism and racism are ethical issues, ethics is not the reason you would be religious/atheistic unless you were drawing ethics from the religion, in which case it's just a religious way of life, not a religious life.

"Someone claims something is the right way to do it and then commits abhorrent attrocities in its name thinking themselves justified in doing so." - you and others have been over this many times with others. I'm not going to get on that merrigoround again.

if God and the Bible was true it would be so glaringly obvious to the world that nobody would need to complain about it...
This is pure opinion. You are welcome to that opinion of course, but I don't think you can express it as a fact. My opinion is different.

I also think you ought to distinguish between God and the Bible. They are not the same thing. To put it in boolean algebra:

Bible => God
¬(God => Bible)
¬God => ¬Bible

Also these boolean algebra are true:

Koran => God
¬(God => Koran)
¬God => ¬Koran

And so on for many other religious texts.

Though proving the Bible/Koran wrong does eliminate the implication of God by the Bible/Koran, it does not imply that God does not exist.

#1 This supports my belief that God is ultimately responsible for everything (good and evil). There are verses that show that evil happens onlywhen God allows it to happen. Sorry, this one doesn't impress me.

#2 This one makes my faith crumble. Who in their right mind would round 800,000 to 1,100,000? I would have accepted 1,000,000, but that extra 100,000 makes me want to just burn every bible I know and convert to Islam. You might have something here, but I would err on the side of needing more research.

#3 I guess "rounding" isn't allowed in any part of the bible for this to be a contradiction. Superficially, the word "Chronicles" seems that it should be more precise than a more "Managerial" high level view as "Samuel". I wonder if that holds true. I'm not that versed in the Old Testament though. I'm not impressed due to rounding.

#4 Glad you aren't just taking everything as fact that these people are feeding you. Oh, wait, you are. Both references say "three".

#5 Glad you aren't just taking everything as fact that these people are feeding you. Oh, wait, you are. Both references say "twenty-two".

By my count, that's 1 out of 5 in your favor. Honestly, I don't like those odds. But you'd have to do some research before posting this crap to at least get the claims correct and I'd have to do more research to show that your 20% IS crap.

[hitcgar]

Exactly the kind of answer I expected.

"Ever heard of a saying "Where there is SMOKE there is FIRE. Something never attracts this much attention and hassle unless the basic foundations upon which it stands are by their very nature both flawed and an affront to nature."

Now this is simply an error. Your logic is flawed. Assuming that something is inherently wrong because it has been surrounded in controversy.

You might as well say that all controversy implies something corrupt. Don't hold water man.

The truth is that the OTHER explanation for this extreme hatred of that one book (and not the others some of which contain the most obnoxious develtry) is that it in fact IS the truth and the truth it purports is contrary to our self-centered rebellious hearts. It is also true that Lucifer hates this book more than any other and instigates people to hating almost as much.

"Take as much offense as you like my friend, the only people that ever get offended are those with something to get offended about which is proof of why they refuse to see reason because anything that hurts their beliefs (the source of offense) is to be avoided, destroyed, redirected, ignored."

Why are you so offended at the bible then, my friend?

"- Definition of how THEIR God created the universe"
Only one claims that their God created...

"- What is RIGHT
- What is WRONG
- What happens to you if you OBEY
- What happens to you if you DISOBEY
- Justification for punishing those who don't believe"
Every legal system since the begining incorporates these items and indeed could not be true Law if it did not.

Where does law come from? Who defines it? Law is a unit. A universal principal. Justice defined.

"THIS IS WHAT IS RIGHT.. THEY ARE ALL WRONG"
Again isn't that what all legal systems perport?

There is, whether you like it or, a universal moral Law. To deny it you must use it's very principles otherwise you have no grounds for reason except your own brain.

Universal Law implies a universal Law Giver. He must be
the Power that enforces that Law. To do so He must possess
sufficient power, intelligence, wisdom, authority and benevolence (good-willing) to provide for the sanctions of
that law. All law has sanctions. No sanctions implies
no Law but rather mere "advice".

He only has a right to rule in the universal law who
possess these attibutes which are precisely the attributes
of God as portayed in the bible and in no other book.

You can only argue against God using the very mind He gave
you. You of course have also been endowed with free will
with which God will not interfere. (Lucky for you)

The laws of Logic state that no proposition can be both true and false inclusively.

Therefore religions (different from the One defined in previous post) which contradict each other can not all be true. Only one can be true (while admitting that all may have certain "truths").

There cannot be more than one God. There can only be one
Almighty.

Ex. Proposition: I have all the money in the world therefore no one else can have any money.

If it were true that I personally possessed all the money in the world then that conclusion must be true. If I got it all you got none.

Same goes with God. Can't be more than one who has it all.
"Anyone who believes something is ALWAYS RIGHT and can NEVER be wrong deserves to have this sort of punishment. "

Is 2+2=4 ALWAYS right?!

Again, same logic if it's True it ain't False.

Gotta go, luch over - back to work.
I'm leaving this thread - I'll stick with the other one dealing with "why so much effort to prove the bible wrong" where I have already shown more convincing evidence (if you actually take the time to read it through without getting mad) as to the necessity of God's existence through the existence of universal moral Law.
:D

[Mad Compie]

**** the bible.
Give me Spiderman or Superman. There are many drawings in these books. The bible hasn't any.

[HarryW]

Maybe there's a market for you there Compie - an illustrated version :) Maybe with David and Goliath going *WHACK* *KERPOW* *WHOOMPH* *SMACK* at each other :D

[Mad Compie]

That's funny, HarryW!
You brought me to some ideas...
David vs The incredible Hulk or something...

[rv2k]

To Mad Compie:

What's all this nonsense in the title of your post? You may think its all a joke.But when the time of judgement comes , you will regret it.

[Zaphod64831]

You of course have also been endowed with free will
with which God will not interfere.


Why, then, did he take his dislike of how we were going so far as to flood the earth? I'd say that leaving a mere, (what was it, 8?), people left on earth is a fairly large interference.

[HarryW]

Maybe it was like a fatal exception and a full reboot was necessary.

[Gen-X]

Harry

Now then, euthanasia and abortion are two whole different cans of worms


Of course it is... and it is the decision of the person to make and not that of a religion to use "You will go to hell"


Is religion any different? Yes


No its not. Its one big Ethical Juggernaught. Is this right to do? Is that right to do? Will this break a commandment? Can I murder this person and be justified?


This is pure opinion. You are welcome to that opinion of course, but I don't think you can express it as a fact. My opinion is different


Ah of course... your opinion would be that "God works in mysterious ways" and that there is a REASON why it isn't obvious and only the "special" ones know he exists and so on. Don't you find that amazingly convenient to be able to explain away every single thing with just a wave of your hand?


I also think you ought to distinguish between God and the Bible


If God doesn't exist then "religion" is false which means any texts written about it are also by their very definition false as well. So while one might not imply the other, the fact that my own evidence (to myself) suggests there is no God it means all religions are therefor flawed.

VVB

You keep hanging on don't you... Rocking back and forth ;)

hitcgar

Now this is simply an error. Your logic is flawed.


No its not flawed you just misinterpreted it.

The saying "Where there is Smoke there is Fire" implies that something is not 100% pure if there is such a conflict with it. Wherever you got the idea that it meant it was wrong (ie 100% IMpure) I will never know.

What it DOES mean however is that it isn't a pure as you would like to think it is.


You might as well say that all controversy implies something corrupt. Don't hold water man


Considering that wasn't even remotely close to what I said I agree with you completely that your incorrect interpretation doesn't hold water.


The truth is that the OTHER explanation for this extreme hatred of that one book


Hahahha!!!!

You back on that again??? Is that what you were taught to answer this question? Is that what the response was to shut you up and make you tow the line?

I have to admit... the thing that raises the most curiosity with me is how the people in religious power (From the priest right up to God) manage to spin such fascinating stories to coerse people into believing them... If they were trying to sell you a bridge you would be wary but because they are "passing on the words of God" you lap it up like its honeyed milk.


Why are you so offended at the bible then, my friend?


You truely know so very little don't you....

I am not offended at the bible at all... I am offended by those people who would use it and HOW they would use it... that is what I am offended at.

And WHY am I offended? Because people who are that blind and that "holier-than-thou" end up hurting everyone else thinking they have a God-Given-Right to do what they do. They cut the skin of the ***** of an innocent because "God said to do it", they kill abortion doctors because "God said it was wrong"... THAT is what offends me.

While for some people religious is a quiet and personal thing, that is the beginning stages of the biggest EGO trip the world has ever seen and the cause for most of its wars


Only one claims that their God created...


So you have read the Koran? How is it created in Bhudism? Hindu? Did Zeus create it? What about Odin? You truely know the creation tale of over a thousand religions do you?


Every legal system since the begining incorporates these items and indeed could not be true Law if it did not.

Where does law come from? Who defines it? Law is a unit. A universal principal. Justice defined.


Now you have SUNK yourself... BIG TIME.

The legal system is a law for EVERYONE. It applies to everyone and everyone is equal in it. Murder is MURDER and there is no justification.

The Bible however, especially in the Old Testament specifically states that it is ok to keep slaves if they are from your neighbouring countries... Its ok to KILL if its in the name of God, the whole thing is specifically designed so that only ONE people have the law and the rest are damned.


There is, whether you like it or, a universal moral Law


Your right, there is... Part of it however is NOT the justifications of your own actions by religious decree. You say abortion is an abomination simply because your religion tells you so... NOT because of the universal moral LAW which you violate and ignore for a shadow of a cause.


Universal Law implies a universal Law Giver


What gave you that pathetically, stupid idea?

WHY does it imply a Universal Law Giver? Universal laws exist as we exist... they have no "giver", only a narrow-minded person would come to the conclusion that there is any implication in there at all.


You can only argue against God using the very mind He gave
you. You of course have also been endowed with free will
with which God will not interfere. (Lucky for you)


Wow... your even more lost than MickeyCorn.... I'm not going to go over it all again.. go read the other posts, all this stuff was explained over and over again.

I'm nearly nausious at listening to this wrote-learned, verbally-programmed rhetoric... Can't you people come up with some new material?


Only one can be true


And what does even ONE have to be true?


I'm leaving this thread


HAHAHAH!!!!

What is this? Does anyone else other than myself notice a "trend" by the God-Believers in that whenever the kitchen gets too hot and their beliefs get a bit too rattled and they actually have to THINK about why they believe what they do they go scurrying for the corners trying to get away from having to listen?

This is like the 8th person to do exactly this same thing.

"If pushed too hard, if you find you are running out of excuses then get out of there before your faith is lost"

[HarryW]

Okay I think abortion and euthanasia are awkward subjects. Abortion to some extent I agree with, euthanasia I am very sceptical of in the real world. Fine in an ideal world where nothing goes wrong but I'm not confortable with it in this one. Anybody that holds religious view on this is taking that view from their doctrine ie Christians take this view because of their interpretations of the Bible. This is where I think it is important to make the distinction between God and the Bible - Perhaps the Bible is wrong, but perhaps God is not properly represented in the Bible.

Harry:

Is religion any different? Yes

Gen-X:

No its not. Its one big Ethical Juggernaught. Is this right to do? Is that right to do? Will this break a commandment? Can I murder this person and be justified?

This is not addressing the point made (other than the word 'yes'). Religion is an inherantly ethical thing, but when deciding what you think of religion from a non-religious point of view you are not making an ethical decision. Racism is clearly a bad thing, as soon as the concept is perceived in my mind I experience empathy and object to it. Religion doesn't work the same way, the decision of an opinion on it is not made on ethical grounds. Do you see the difference? It is a subtle one I will admit but it is a difference.

Gen-X:
if God and the Bible was true it would be so glaringly obvious to the world that nobody would need to complain about it...
Harry:
This is pure opinion. You are welcome to that opinion of course, but I don't think you can express it as a fact. My opinion is different

As I said I don't agree with this point of view 'it would be obvious if that was the case'. I have not waved my hands and dispelled any other arguments with this. I haven't said 'He works in mysterious ways'. What I have said is that I don't think God need necessarily be obvious in order to exist. That is my opinion, and you are welcome to have your opinion, just don't try to express opinion as fact.

If God doesn't exist then "religion" is false which means any texts written about it are also by their very definition false as well. So while one might not imply the other, the fact that my own evidence (to myself) suggests there is no God it means all religions are therefor flawed

This is perfectly sensible except that I think you have to be careful of circular references. A lot of the evidence you describe is aimed at the Bible, and this cannot be used as evidence against the existence of God, which is then used against the Bible because 'evidence suggests there is no God'. Proving anything about the Bible or any other religious texts having contradictions will prove nothing against the existance of God.

[Michael]

I don't usually bother with religion-oriented postings but I have seen so much crap here that I almost feel forced to comment.

Religion is about faith. Not about fact. This point has been made many times by people far more clever than myself, but the Bible is not to be taken literally but as an allegorical work. It is a collection of books written over a long period of time. When the same story is told more than once, each writer tells a slightly different version of it (Have you ever played "Chinese whispers"? - No offence intended to any Chinese here!)

People have a choice to embrace a particular religion or not. There may be social or family pressures but ultimately everyone makes up their own mind.

My religion? Raised as a Church of England Christian, but when I was able to make up my own mind I was, and still am, agnostic with very strong atheist tendencies - not quite a total atheist. I do, however, embrace a lot of the Christian beliefs, but from an ethical/moral/humanitarian point of view.

My advice to Kovan?

If you are concerned about contradictions, then you do not have faith in the writings of the Bible, and if you do not have faith, then you are not a Christian.

However, if you are worried about these contradictions, then you have a streak of humanity in you. Perhaps you should be studying Humanism.

(Just as a slight aside, you may have noticed that I have used capital letters for words like Christian, Bible etc. This is because I have a respect for other peoples beliefs, even if I don't believe myself.)

In my opening sentence, I said that I don't usually reply to religion-oriented postings but I felt compelled to. Perhaps the feelings aroused by religion (any religion) is what is responsible for the many acts of barbarism committed over the centuries in the name of religion - not that I am suggesting that we all take up the sword and go on a crusade for or against something or other. Its just interesting that feelings are aroused so much by it - whether those feeling are for or against religion in general, or a particular religion.

[HarryW]

Michael - Kovan is Muslim :)

[Gen-X]

Harry

Fine in an ideal world where nothing goes wrong but I'm not confortable with it in this one


But that is the whole point. It doesn't matter if you are comfortable with it or not... its the person DOING it that has the right to choose for themselves. That is why when religious people come along telling someone they CAN or CANT do something I object.

Abortion is the same thing... As long as we can deliniate the line between when something is a construct or parasite and when something is actually conscious and sentient it should be up to the person whose body it belongs to to make that choice.

We don't scream if someone decides to cut their hair, or trim their toe nails, but just because these few cells happen to eventually form a human being the religious nutz of the world are up in arms, forcing their OWN views on other people and carrying on like a bunch of idiots.


you are not making an ethical decision


Can you explain to me why you are not making an ethical decision? (I am serious here)

I thought that because the "ethics" of religion, what it stands for, why it stands for it is the whole reason why what I think about religion is decided. I dislike the "ethics" of all religions in their statements that those not of the faith are different to them, inferior somehow (though the bible does a wonderful job of not coming right out and saying it).

You say Racism is a bad thing and yet the Bible is full of things like "Its ok to have slaves of your neighbours" among other things. I am wondering why you don't condemn the Bible seeing as you are so against racism. They basically say "THEY" are the chosen one and the other 2 billion chinese are all wrong ;)

So I still in essence see the opinion on religion containing among other things an "ethical" reasoning. Please show me a flaw in my reasoning on this.


That is my opinion, and you are welcome to have your opinion, just don't try to express opinion as fact.


I wish you could extrapolate more :(

I'm sorry if what I say always comes across like its a statement of fact.. thats just me. I don't go around having to append "my opinion" or "I think" or "perhaps" on the front of everything I say... If you are unable to understand that because I have said something it means its my opinion there isn't much I can do. If its a 'fact' then I will usually say "Its a fact"...

So perhaps its my fault in not spelling out every last word and prefacing every single sentance I write with whether its my opinion or a fact... Silly me, I thought everyone only stated their opinions... even if those opinions are the reporting of a fact.


This is perfectly sensible except that I think you have to be careful of circular references


The Circular reference only comes into it because the religious texts are based on (what is in my opinion *groan*) a concept that doesn't exist.

I only use the bible as a target because its the easiest to show up in its falsehood (though funny enough the hardest to get through to its denizens).

If we remove ALL relgions and cultures and look simply at a creator (ala Kedaman) I have not yet been provided with even a SINGLE shred of evidence that would suggest its existance or even a NEED for its existance.

The ONE piece of evidence that DENIES its existance (which funny enough people love to overlook) is that fact that if a sentient being created the universe then by all the tenants of sentient life its presence would be known unless of course it had abandoned this universe.

So the only rhetoric againt my own argument here is that IF there was a creator he/she/it certainly isn't taking part in it any longer.

What EXACTLY is your belief then? Spell it out.

Is there a God? Does he take part? Does he "change" things? Is he kind? Does he care? What is our point?

Michael

I agree with you that religion is about faith and that faith is not about evidence or fact...

But try asking a religious person WHY they believe in God and they will tell you a story of what "happened" to them to make them believe. You then tell them that because they were given "evidence" of God's existance they are FAITHLESS and they go balistic.

Of course its specifically the Christian religion that places "faith" as a virtue and I find it very ironic that a religion places virtue in something that is "Believe WITHOUT evidence".

[HarryW]

Faith / 'belief without evidence. These don't always equate, and we've been over it before. Let's not cover that ground again.


Euthanasia - You're misunderstanding my point: In an ideal world it couldn't be abused, but it can in this one. You have to admit there is potential for abuse of it, people may not be making their own choice when they go through with it. Religious people object because it is suicide and that goes against many people's religious doctrines. I'm not saying that's okay, but they are not objecting maliciously. I don't agree with them btw, I think it should be the choice of the individual involved.

Abortion - I am in total agreement, only I wouldn't call them "religious nuts" because they are doing it for reasons that make perfect sense to them. Except when they start becoming violent or threatening, that is nuts.


Ethics of religion - I am relating this to the decision of whether religion is a good or a bad thing, in the same way that you decide racism is a good or bad thing. Hmmm, I think this is another point where we have to seperate God and the Bible. Perhaps you would choose to believe in the Bible because of its content, but if you believe that the Bible is the word of God then it's not an ethical decision. Personally I think of religion as believing in a deity, which is not the same as believing in any specific doctrine, and a deity doesn't need an ethical standing before you believe in it.

Opinion - It's not that I don't know it's just your opinion, that's clear because I pointed it out, it's just that I don't want other people to read what you say as fact. I'm sorry if it's too much like hard work to state when something is just your own opinion, you'll carry on as you always do I expect, and forget I ever mentioned it (again).

Circular references - Exactly, if you assume that God doesn't exist to prove a point in the Bible then you cannot use the resulting proof against the existance of God. Similarly if you assume that the Bible is corrupt then you cannot then use that against the existance of God (in your own head) and then use that to imply that the Bible is wrong. You mustn't get the two mixed up too much.

The ONE piece of evidence that DENIES its existance (which funny enough people love to overlook) is that fact that if a sentient being created the universe then by all the tenants of sentient life its presence would be known unless of course it had abandoned this universe
This is exactly the kind of opinion I hate - opinion expressed as fact. Can you prove this? No of course you can't, it's just a hunch that you have which is fine, but don't say it's a fact beause it plainly isn't.

If we remove ALL relgions and cultures and look simply at a creator (ala Kedaman) I have not yet been provided with even a SINGLE shred of evidence that would suggest its existance or even a NEED for its existance.

You have been shown some evidence but you have dismissed it. That's fine, you don't have to agree with it. For instance, if the open universe theory is correct, why did the Big Bang happen? I expect you would say 'it just happened, there is no need for a cause' because that it all I have ever heard from those who believe there is no God (that's the definition of an Atheist btw). Well either that or 'the universe had no beginning' which is an acceptable response but is not sticking to the assumption made and to me doesn't imply the lack of a creator.


My beliefs... I have a hunch that there is a God. It's not something I'm sure about but I am not convinced as you are that there isn't a God. That's about as far as my belief goes actually, I am not sure of His involvement beyond the creation of the universe. I am not sure that He is moral in any way, or that He's amoral. I am more convinced by the idea that He is (generally) good and kind than the images you and some others put forward of some kind of sadistic carnage-loving being who exists only to torture us all. Our point? Well... if you were an all-powerful deity with the capability to create a universe, and you had the choice whether you would or wouldn't, what would you do? I just don't know what the point is, and I doubt I ever will (while I'm alive anyway) but I have my objectives and ideas about what life means to me, and that's enough. Anything more is a bonus.

[Zaphod64831]

Religion is about faith. Not about fact.

I agree with that, I'm just sick and tired of people all over the place saying one thing to me: "Do what we say, or go to Hell."

If not for that, I wouldn't care what people believed, just so long as they leave me out of it and let me make my own decisions.

[Gen-X]

Harry

Faith / 'belief without evidence. These don't always equate, and we've been over it before. Let's not cover that ground again


And you critisize me for saying things like they are a "statement of fact"!!!!!

The above sounds exactly like the thing you hate.


Euthanasia - You're misunderstanding my point: In an ideal world it couldn't be abused, but it can in this one


No I do understand your point. I wasn't talking about whether it can or cannot be abused but about people thinking its their right to make decisions for other people and not based on the well being of the person themselves but on their beliefs.

They couldn't care less if the person was to live or die... as long as that person doesn't break THEIR law about suicide. THAT is what I object to.


Ethics of religion


I still don't see where you are coming from here. How is religion or even the belief in a deity any different to sexism or racism?

Someone who is sexist believes they are the superior sex, someone who is racist believes they are the superior (chosen or whatever) race... If you believe that a deity exists and that he has "rules" to follow then (I believe) you would consider those who follow the rules to be doing right and those not following them doing wrong.

I pick on the Bible specificially because they are the words of THEIR God and I dismiss THEIR version of a God based on the words he says... Christians (Those of Christ) by their very nature are more racist than most people though they shroud it in theology. Most KKK are devout christians (As I understand it).


Opinion - It's not that I don't know it's just your opinion, that's clear because I pointed it out, it's just that I don't want other people to read what you say as fact


Do you truely believe everyone is stupid enough to believe it just because I phrase it in a certain way? Even if its in a scientific paper touted as absolute fact it still doesn't mean it is. If you are so worried about other people reading this and considering it fact then we shouldn't bother talking at all to anyone if they are that gullible.


Circular references


*Sigh*

I am going to have to explain my brain pattern to you.

- I believe God doesn't exist
- Christians believe he does
- How then do I show them he doesnt?
- Prove their Bible to be false, show them actions that
contradict what their book says their God is like
- When that has been proved it proves their God is false

I am not using the corruption of the Bible as a statement of fact that NO god exists... just THEIR one.

I state my beliefs in WHY no God exists as seperate.


Can you prove this?


Can you prove that your hand exists? YOu can touch it you can feel it and you can see it... but does it "exist"? You can't prove anything... but LOGIC suggests that it does. Just as LOGIC suggests that something with intelligence that created this universe would indicate that its presence is either known or it has abandoned it.

You cannot refute that logic unless you simply WANT to refute it by coming up with excuses.


You have been shown some evidence but you have dismissed it.


Incorrect. I have been shown evidence and provided a point of evidence to contradict it... it was not dismissed but in my own humble and personal opinion shown to be false. There is a difference.


For instance, if the open universe theory is correct, why did the Big Bang happen?


Thats a bit stupid isn't it? The answer is part of the proof that the question is flawed.

Now you are using cyclic references.... using the answer of a theory you haven't proved to say there IS a God when you cannot even prove the question in the first place.

That is like me saying "If the fact a person can fly is correct, what makes him fly?"

You can't come up with an answer when you have no proof the question (which had "is correct" in it) is correct in the slightest.


I expect you would say 'it just happened, there is no need for a cause' because that it all I have ever heard from those who believe there is no God (that's the definition of an Atheist btw)


Actually I would not give you that answer. I would say the question is both false and misleading and to provide an answer based on a question you have already considered FACT is illogical.

In response I would say the universe has always existed and so the use of words such as "start", "end", "creation", "creator" are all complete and totally non-applicable.

Can I prove the universe has always existed? About as much as you can prove it didn't exist before the big bang. Surely the 2nd law of Thermodynamics tells you that as energy is NEVER lost only transferred that the universe must have always existed... but its just a postulation.

Where is your postulation about why the universe did NOT exist before the big bang?


I am more convinced by the idea that He is (generally) good and kind than the images you and some others put forward of some kind of sadistic carnage-loving being who exists only to torture us all


If that is the point you believe we are trying to get across you haven't been listening at all.

The point we are trying to make is that IF God exists... he isn't the loving and caring God that Christians believe he is. In reality he either doesn't care and doesn't interfere with our universe (hence all these attrocities go on) or the creation of the universe was not of consideration and thus we ARE truely insignificant and don't rate a mention (in which case Heaven is a myth, nobody died for our "sins" and everyone is just as alone as they claim the athiests are).

The only reason we use the carnage-loving bit is because there has been so much carnage in his name either he likes it or he doesn't even know about it... The later refuting their claim he has a hand in everything that goes on.

Can't you see this???? All of our discussions relating to the Bible and the Christian God are to show that all of their statements of fact (which I don't see you telling them they cannot do) are flawed in their own actions and the contradictions of those actions.

That is the start and the end of it all... and all we are trying to say to them.. "Open your eyes, Read your own words and listen instead of use FAITH".

[HarryW]

I see, so we're back to the point where you make any point so long as it's patronising are we? *Sigh*

Firstly:
Faith / 'belief without evidence. These don't always equate, and we've been over it before. Let's not cover that ground again
And you critisize me for saying things like they are a "statement of fact"!!!!!

The above sounds exactly like the thing you hate.

What exactly are you on about here? You agreed with me that there seem to be two different definitions of 'faith' being thrown around. I have just said that 'faith' doesn't always mean the first definition. This HAS been covered before and it IS a fact that people see it different ways, and all this was resolved before quite peacefully; what's the problem?

Euthanasia - Then you were just addressing a point I wasn't making. I have no argument with what you just said.

Ethics of religion - a deity doesn't need an ethical standing before you believe in it
If you read what I said maybe you would understand. I am not talking about rules I'm talking about deities. Deities don't necessarily need rules. Rules are part of religious doctrine (eg the Bible). This is why I said we need to seperate the two subjects, God and doctrine.

Opinion - the way you phrase things rarely sounds like opinion even when it is. If someone reads your scribblings without knowing your writing style it may be interpreted differently to how you mean it. I don't think people are stupid (well most of them).

Circular references - Thank you for explaining your train of thought, that makes sense. Just don't get the two gods confused.

Can you prove that your hand exists? YOu can touch it you can feel it and you can see it... but does it "exist"? You can't prove anything... but LOGIC suggests that it does. Just as LOGIC suggests that something with intelligence that created this universe would indicate that its presence is either known or it has abandoned it.

You cannot refute that logic unless you simply WANT to refute it by coming up with excuses
What logic? Why is it impossible that an intelligence which is creator of the universe would not show it's presence? Besides, many individuals would claim that God has show Himself to them, though I doubt you would do anything but dismiss that out of hand. I don't claim these experiences to be genuine, but it is possible.

Theories on creation of the universe - for someone so sure of his logic, you don't seem keen to apply it. Do you know the meaning of the word 'if'? Generally following that word is an assumption. You really ought to know what they are. In any logical expression there are assumptions, you cannot do any kind of logic without them. So, assuming the open universe theory is correct (an assumption in case you missed it) why did the Big Bang happen? I am not proving a God with this statement, I still think it comes down to a hunch, but I am asking you for an alternative. Is there another or is there only 'it just happened'?

I think you're probably going to say that it's an impossible situation anyway, because of the law of conservation of energy and other stuff that makes you believe that the closed universe theory is the only possible answer. Well fair enough, if that's what you believe. There are cosmologists that have answers to your contrary evidence but I have to say that I don't know what they are - my physics goes only a little beyond A-Level anyway so I doubt I would understand it (I have a social life to keep up, I don't have time to learn everything I might want to know). The obvious postulation against the closed universe theory is the mass of the observable universe. Dark matter is the usual reposte to that, can't say I know how the progress is going to find any though.

God's ethics - I am well aware that's not your overall point, you are saying there is no God, that much is clear. This is an attempt at disproof by contradiction. The ethics of God is not something I have strong opinions about as I have already said.

Can't I see this? (Hope you don't mind if I don't use the exaggerated punctuation for dramatic effect) Yes I can, it's pretty clear.

The reason I don't tell people who are assuming God exists to say they are assuming it is because I already established with you that we would assume He exists because you cannot disprove anything when it's not involved in your assumptions.


Finally... This thread has gone quite off-topic and has become a bit of a petty squabble over minor points. It's not big and it's not clever. It's my fault too. Shall we try to be a little more objective?


[Edited by HarryW on 09-26-2000 at 02:47 AM]

[Gen-X]

If you think it is possible.

It seems all of our "discussions" detereorate into a cross-definition of terms, pedantics about minor points and both of us thinking they have the answers and the other is blind.

If you can think of a way we can avoid that, still be able to maintain objectivity and remaining open to ideas and suggestions despite what we may hold to be the truth I am all for it.


There has to be a reason why I constantly misunderstand what you intended and you constantly misunderstand what I intended... And hopefully that reason is not just the medium that is being used to communicate it... if that is the case then we will never get anywhere on anything and might as well go lay on a beach and remain blissfully unaware of everything ;)

[HarryW]

Don't be such a doubting Thomas :D

Well at least we're honing our debating skills :) Comes in handy for me when it comes to family parties/get-togethers, it's always one long massive piss-taking session. Still, at least we all have a good laugh, it's better than real arguing or fighting, I know some families who are like that.

What was the topic again?

[Edited by HarryW on 09-26-2000 at 07:57 AM]

[kedaman]

It seems all of our "discussions" detereorate into a cross-definition of terms, pedantics about minor points and both of us thinking they have the answers and the other is blind.

If you can think of a way we can avoid that, still be able to maintain objectivity and remaining open to ideas and suggestions despite what we may hold to be the truth I am all for it.

I might have have a solution, i just don't know how i could formulate it.
Anyway, what was this topic all about, i just skimmed trought it and now i've forgot what i had to say