Are you an atheist?

[Galaxiom]

You have never heard me proclaim Jesus Christ as God. He is the Son of God!. God, his father proclaimed that the only way to heaven for man would be through his son, Jesus Christ

The only way to His heaven perhaps.

I wouldn't want to be in the same place as Abraham or his God anyway. Abraham was a schizophrenic sociopath obsessed by killing and death. The Old Testament reveals God to be a hideous, misanthropist, monster.

I'll choose somewhere more convivial for my eternal future.

 

[Mihail]

@believers
You always say that the Bible should not be understand by reading mot-a-mot.
You said that the Bible is a parable. OK. I take notes.

On the other hand you always say that Jesus is the son of God because Jesus itself address to God with the word "father". So, this time, are no dubs: the Bible should be interpreted as it was write. (?!?!?)

In Romanian language we address to a priest with the word "parinte" (= parent in English).
Is that priest one of my parents ??????
As far as I know, in English, you address to a priest with the exactly word "father".
Is that priest yours father ?

What about if Jesus has used the word "father" not in the very real sense (as His natural father).
What about if Jesus think that the God is just the "father" of all things (of course, including Him, but including as well His mother, Mary, including me and my dog) ?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Galaxiom...

Earlier in this thread, you said

The machine you are typing on now is a monument to the scientific understanding of these laws. The world is now full of Quantum devices that never would have been imaginable in classical mechanics. Exotic materials have been found by manipulating substances into the shapes predicted by the theory.

For quite some time, I've been convinced that computers are magical (in the sense of supernatural) devices. Why? Because of a little-appreciated fact. The circuits of a computer, regardless of being found on a chip, are merely miniaturizations of traditional components such as resistors, capacitors, inductors, and transistors. These circuit elements, when first created an analyzed, worked with currents measured in amps or milliamps or sometimes microamps. Given the number of electrons in a coulomb, which is part of the definition of an ampere, we are dealing with circuit theory based on statistical behavior of literally trillions of electrons. Statistics LOVES large numbers, so it became possible to use statistical analysis to talk about circuit properties and to derive the equations for the behavior of each component.

However, modern circuits that STILL use the resistor, capacitor, inductor, transistor design technology - but operate on picoamps and lower. I've seen articles that claim that some ULSI chip-based circuits can switch states based as few as 50 electrons.

That's too small to operate correctly with respect to the law of large numbers that is the basis for statistical treatments of circuit elements. In essence, computers must be magic because they operation on statistically insignificant amounts of current.



Yeah, I know it's off topic, but your comment caught my eye and I had to toss in my 2 cents worth on this issue.

 

[Galaxiom]

That's too small to operate correctly with respect to the law of large numbers that is the basis for statistical treatments of circuit elements. In essence, computers must be magic because they operation on statistically insignificant amounts of current.

An interesting perspective but the number of electrons, as few as they are, would still need to be statistically significant in the context of the information being handled. Otherwise they really could not work.

What really does my head in is quantum computing where the qbits are simultaneously both true and false allowing all the possible outcomes to be calculated at the same time. Now that really is magic.

 

[Galaxiom]

Our science is not puny to you or ME but it would be beside God!

Of course this must be qualified because you are assuming there is a god. As I have already pointed out, no supernatural influence has been found to be necessary for any of what we have in reality.

Science models the development of the Universe in incredible detail. The current frontier is quibbling over tiny discrepancies between the observed amounts of each element in the Universe and the amounts calculated by the models.

If your God does have advanced science he certainly doesn't show it. All we have is empty promises of how great it will all be later.

Man's science has tangible outcomes that we can see right now.

 

[nanscombe]

Even if people believe that there is some all powerful being out there that created everything thousands, or even millions, of years ago why should it necessarily follow that they should be worshiped and / or obeyed as a god?

People are supposed to have free will and a conscience of their own without the need for outside influence.

 

[Galaxiom]

Where did all those versions of man come from. I could take the first version ok... made out of primordial ooze but (9) versions over what 4.0 million years, all suddenly appearing at different time dates and simply disappearing.[/quote]

The history of humans goes back so much further. Genetic evidence suggests a split between human ancestors and chimp ancestors about seven million years ago followed by interbreeding between them again at about five million years ago.

The any versions of hominins came from diversification of the common ancestors usually driven by geographical separation. The repeated migrations from Africa provided exactly the kind of geographical separation and environmental change required.

Remember, Neanderthalis and Sapiens did not separate in Europe. Their ancestors left Africa in separate migrations a long time apart. There were probably many more migrations than those so far located in the fossil record.

We recently found the Denisovans in China. They have been revealed as contributing part of the genome of modern humans. More will be found.

Recent evidence also suggests that Europeans diverged from those who migrated into the Americas somewhere in central Asia. It expalins why genes shared by Europeans and Americans did not have to be the result of Europeans crossing the Atlantic.

That is except for the last one which showed up about 10-12,000 years ago. Guess we had been waiting in the ooze long enough! lol. We are still going.r

Most paleoanthropologists place the beginning of modern humans much earlier. Either way it is such a short time. Many of our ancestral species, rather than being gone in the blink of an eye like us, were around for many hundreds of thousands of years.

 

[Bladerunner]

@believers
You always say that the Bible should not be understand by reading mot-a-mot.
You said that the Bible is a parable. OK. I take notes.

There are all kind of stories in the old testament from Abraham and his son, How Israel lead themselves into bondage, etc. The New Testament is not so much mainly because of the time period of only 2000 years or so.

On the other hand you always say that Jesus is the son of God because Jesus itself address to God with the word "father". So, this time, are no dubs: the Bible should be interpreted as it was write. (?!?!?). As far as I know, in English, you address to a priest with the exactly word "father".
Is that priest yours father ?

That is only used in Catholic Church that I know of. WE protestants address our pastors, ministers, preachers, etc. by their name. They are a friend to the family and help comfort them when hard time fall. No, he is not my Father!

What about if Jesus has used the word "father" not in the very real sense (as His natural father).

In this case, God is both, his real father and his father in heaven.


Have a nice day :>)

Bladerunner

 

[Bladerunner]

The relish with which believers eagerly await Armageddon is a good reason to work hard at discouraging the young from taking up this horrible death cult.

Death Cult - NO The bible speaks of a a final conflict between good and evil. The other definition is "A decisive or catastrophic conflict". WWIII? maybe... it looks like we are headed that way. In this final conflict whenever it happens
everyone will be forced to chose sides. Choose carefully my friend!

The believers see Armageddon as the ultimate fulfillment of their faith. It is common to all the Abrahmic faiths with the small difference being that the selection criteria for those chosen to live is slightly different. They will all tell you they are the only ones who are right.

The believers that Armageddon will happen look forward to that one-thousand years of peace that will take place after the world is rid of evil. Look what science could do in a thousand years of peace. If you are right then there is no final conflict, evil stays amongst us forever.

We have every reason to be nervous about those who seek the destruction of life as we know it. They certainly should never be allowed to hold positions where they control public policy because they seek the opportunity to play a part in fulfillment of that prophecy.

Did you not read a previous post that it is people that believe any-thing goes, there is no God thus morality is out the window. They these liberals pacifist isolationist bring on Armageddon as surely as they get up in the morning. To forget the past is to repeat it.


have a nice day:>)

Bladerunner

 

[Bladerunner]

The only way to His heaven perhaps.

I wouldn't want to be in the same place as Abraham or his God anyway. Abraham was a schizophrenic sociopath obsessed by killing and death. The Old Testament reveals God to be a hideous, misanthropist, monster.

I'll choose somewhere more convivial for my eternal future.

Then it is sad day my friend that we might not meet in this lifetime but it is even a sadder day that we will never meet in the hear-after.

Have a nice day :>)

Bladerunner

 

[nanscombe]

The day I decided that I did not actually believe that the Bible was the word of God was the day I decided I was probably not a Christian.

Since I did not believe the Bible why would I believe any of the holy texts hence I declared myself an atheist.

If one rejects the Bible does one's sense of morality go with it? Even if you don't believe the words doesn't mean that the sentiment behind it isn't reasonable.

Has my outlook on life changed, I certainly don't look upon things like taking the life of another human as always being wrong.

It doesn't mean I'm going to go out and kill someone just because I want something they've got or they simply annoy me.

 

[Mihail]

Then it is sad day my friend that we might not meet in this lifetime but it is even a sadder day that we will never meet in the hear-after.
Bladerunner

May I ask why you think that Galaxiom will leave forever but you have not this chance ?

 

[Brianwarnock]

Why only a thousand years of peace and not an eternity?

Brian

 

[Mihail]

Why only a thousand years of peace and not an eternity?

Because a sentence like this eliminate the fear.
And what is the Bible without the fear ?

 

[Galaxiom]

Did you not read a previous post that it is people that believe any-thing goes, there is no God thus morality is out the window.

This ludicrous claim is often repeated by theists. It is an insult and shows the profound ignorance embodied in what in theists passes for thinking.

I have seen the supposed morality as defined by the Bible. It is nothing more than the arbitrary prejudices and bigotry of ancient ignorant misogynists repackaged as divine will.

They arrogantly presumed that their every thought was driven by a supreme being.

Unsurprisingly these men placed women in a submissive role. Genuine enlightened morality shows that this premise cannot be sustained by any rational means.

Likewise the attitude to homosexuality and beating children into submission.

Religion has nothing to contribute to any sense morality.

 

[Libre]

This ludicrous claim is often repeated by theists. It is an insult and shows the profound ignorance embodied in what in theists passes for thinking.

I have seen the supposed morality as defined by the Bible. It is nothing more than the arbitrary prejudices and bigotry of ancient ignorant misogynists repackaged as divine will.

They arrogantly presumed that their every thought was driven by a supreme being.

Unsurprisingly these men placed women in a submissive role. Genuine enlightened morality shows that this premise cannot be sustained by any rational means.

Likewise the attitude to homosexuality and beating children into submission.

Religion has nothing to contribute to any sense morality.

I mostly agree, but it goes a little deeper.
The real question is, are people essentially moral beings, immoral, or amoral?
If they're immoral then they will do immoral things, regardless of what the bible prescribes.
I think we people are a mixture of the above: there is a touch of immorality in us all, a large slice of amorality, and a sliver of morality. For one thing, it depends on what the perceived consequences are of an immoral act. If it's a penal code, and the perp thinks he won't get caught, then he will act anyway. But if he thinks that God is watching, and God knows all - that might stop him form the immoral act.
You are right when you say that organized religion has often blown it when it comes to identifying what is actually immoral, and the less powerful (usually women, minorities, the poor, etc) are often screwed.
I said we are mostly amoral, because in general we act according to our needs without really considering if it is *right* or *wrong*, (as though there were a real *right* and *wrong*, which is open to debate). But without any penalties or repercussions, people are going to act in their own self interests most of the time.
That's why laws and enforcement are needed, although sometimes they blow that as well. But at least in a democracy, the less powerful have SOME influence on the outcomes of elections, and have swayed them often, if they can get organized and exert their influence - to wit, gay marriage, woman's rights, civil rights for minorities, to name a few.

 

[Galaxiom]

But at least in a democracy, the less powerful have SOME influence on the outcomes of elections, and have swayed them often, if they can get organized and exert their influence - to wit, gay marriage, woman's rights, civil rights for minorities, to name a few.

These minorities didn't get get rights through overwhelming an election.

These "new" moralities came from millions of people who had no personal gain from the change agreeing that such prejudices are fundamentally wrong.

Ending slavery took away the "needs" of many to have access to a cheap workforce yet still it ended (where it has ended because it still goes on in many places).

Gays are a tiny minority yet ordinary people have supported their cause.

Unmarried mothers were in small numbers compared to conventional families yet society changed its attitudes and agreed to help pay to support these women and their children.

Slavery is condoned by the Bible. The Bible also tells us that sex before marriage, homosexuality and even disobedient children are reasons to be be stoned to death.

Just what drove us, almost invariably led by secular people, to replace the entrenched "morality" of the Bible with modern values?

According to BladeRunner the secular have no capacity for morality. Are we to presume that he thinks all these changes are expressions of immorality? Sadly, I suspect so.

 

[Dick7Access]

disobedient children are reasons to be be stoned to death.

Grandchildren is the reward God gives you for not killing your own kids.

 

[Libre]

These minorities didn't get get rights through overwhelming an election.

These "new" moralities came from millions of people who had no personal gain from the change agreeing that such prejudices are fundamentally wrong.

Ending slavery took away the "needs" of many to have access to a cheap workforce yet still it ended (where it has ended because it still goes on in many places).

Gays are a tiny minority yet ordinary people have supported their cause.

Unmarried mothers were in small numbers compared to conventional families yet society changed its attitudes and agreed to help pay to support these women and their children.

Slavery is condoned by the Bible. The Bible also tells us that sex before marriage, homosexuality and even disobedient children are reasons to be be stoned to death.

Just what drove us, almost invariably led by secular people, to replace the entrenched "morality" of the Bible with modern values?

According to BladeRunner the secular have no capacity for morality. Are we to presume that he thinks all these changes are expressions of immorality? Sadly, I suspect so.

You really think slavery was abolished when the southern states just came to their senses and realized it was wrong - after fighting a war to protect their right to have their slaves?
Women's rights, gay rights, minorities civil rights were also bitterly opposed, until the opposition was worn away by a nucleus of determined activists, and the general population just accepted it because they were too busy worrying about their own problems to do much about it.
If you saw the movie Lincoln - a seemingly authentic portrayal - slavery was abolished in the US by wheeling and dealing - which is pretty much how anything gets done in congress to this day.
But I still say that the way to change someone's mind - once it
is made up - is to show them it's to their own benefit, not to convince them what is really *right*. Some will listen but many won't and history shows these battles were hard fought and took intense pressure to bring about change.

 

[Galaxiom]

But I still say that the way to change someone's mind - once it is made up - is to show them it's to their own benefit, not to convince them what is really *right*.

What are the benefits suggested for for others by allowing people to have same sex partners?

I think it is more a case of the prevailing attitudes literally dying out and being replaced by more enlightened attitudes not rooted in Biblical nonsense.

Some walk a strange path retaining their faith while they pretend that the Bible has been misunderstood and didn't really say that homosexuality is an abomination.

Similarly with women's rights.