The Theism/Atheism Mega-thread Hullabaloo Extravaganza

[jackstar7]

You clearly have no idea what an explanation is. Pro tip: "God did it" isn't one.

That isn't a matter of opinion, either.


Unless you can provide a reliable method for discovering how "God did it," you're simply saying that it can't be explained.

I am guessing this post will be ignored... but shouldn't be.

 

[Retro Rob]

You clearly have no idea what an explanation is. Pro tip: "God did it" isn't one.

That isn't a matter of opinion, either.

God did it, is an explanation -- and you're right, it's not a matter of opinion that you reject that explanation.

So what?

Unless you can provide a reliable method for discovering how "God did it," you're simply saying that it can't be explained.

What can't be explained?

 

[Retro Rob]

Why would a given theist, Christian or otherwise, worship a deity whom they didn't believe existed?

You don't understand the power of influence. King Solomon, heir to the Throne of David, was a wise worshipper of God, ended up being an idolater because his many foreign wives were a bad influence on him.

Anyone, anytime can become a worshipper of other gods if they're not careful no matter their level of piety.

The point of the Ten Commandments were to remind Israel of whom was their God.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

God did it, is an explanation -- and you're right, it's not a matter of opinion that you reject that explanation.

No, it really isn't an explanation. Explanations describe how something happened, not who did them. "David Copperfield did it" doesn't explain how his magic tricks happen for exactly the same reason.

So what?

So you don't have a single clue what you're taking about. You are precisely the reason religious people are stereotyped as morons.

What can't be explained?

How gods allegedly do what they do.

 

[Retro Rob]

No, it really isn't an explanation.

Says who?

something (such as a statement or fact) that explains something

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/explanation

Again, its not an explanation that YOU accept.

So you don't have a single clue what you're taking about. You are precisely the reason religious people are stereotyped as morons.

Stay classless, Taxt.

How gods allegedly do what they do.

I never said I can explain how god(s) do what they do.

Pay attention.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Says who?

People with IQs greater than their shoe size.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/explanation

The apparent fact that you think this tautologous statement says something meaningful speaks volumes.

Know what a mugliflation is? It's a statement that mugliflates something. Obviously. I have totally explained mugliflation.

Again, its not an explanation that YOU accept.

It's not an explanation. Period.

Stay classless, Taxt.

Stay a stereotype, Rob.

I never said I can explain how god(s) do what they do.

Yes you did.

Pay attention.

That's a good one.

 

[sandorski]

Kid 1: These cookies are yummy. How are they made?
Kid 2: Mom did it.
Kid 1: Oh

 

[JEDIYoda]

Kid 1: That flower is such a beautiful color! I wonder who made the flower?
Kid 2: God made the flower.
Kid 1: Oh.........

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Kid 1: These cookies are yummy. How are they made?
Kid 2: Mom did it.
Kid 1: Oh

Now Kid 1 knows all he needs to make the cookies for himself!

 

[SlowSpyder]

Kid 1: That flower is such a beautiful color! I wonder who made the flower?
Kid 2: God made the flower.
Kid 1: Oh.........

Well that settles it.

 

[alzan]

You don't understand the power of influence. King Solomon, heir to the Throne of David, was a wise worshipper of God, ended up being an idolater because his many foreign wives were a bad influence on him.

Anyone, anytime can become a worshipper of other gods if they're not careful no matter their level of piety.

The point of the Ten Commandments were to remind Israel of whom was their God.

Actually I do understand the power of influence. I also understand that you completely avoided answering my question.

So King Solomon's foreign wives were able to convince him to worship their g-ds, even though Solomon believed in the one Christian g-d who created the universe and everything in it and even though the Christian g-d could strike him down dead at any moment? The Christian g-d must not be all that powerful (or all that believable) if one of his worshippers can be influenced so easily by some exotic women.

If someone pious can become a worshipper of other g-ds so easily then it seems pointless to worship any g-d Just follow the golden rule all your life and you'll be fine.

Israelites need to be reminded whom their g-d is, even though he created the universe and everything in it and could strike them all down dead at any moment? The same g-d who (allegedly) plagued Egypt with locusts, pestilence, death of their first born, turning the Nile blood red, etc., held back Pharaohs' armies with a pillar of fire and parted the Red Sea? They needed to be reminded???

Sorry, not buying it.

 

[alzan]

Now Kid 1 knows all he needs to make the cookies for himself!

But when Dad divorces Mom and he gets custody and moves away, who'll make the cookies?

 

[sandorski]

But when Dad divorces Mom and he gets custody and moves away, who'll make the cookies?

There will be no cookies.

 

[witeken]

Kid 1: That flower is such a beautiful color! I wonder who made the flower?
Kid 2: God made the flower.
Kid 1: Oh.........

Wrong question. It must be:

Kid 1: Nice flower. How is it made?
Kid 2: Natural selection.
Kid 1: Makes perfect sense.

 

[alkemyst]

Here is the whole deal bros.

You should all still get along.

If you are religious, most of them teach tolerance.

If you are not, then most won't bring it up if you don't.

The one true religion is just get along and create one mission, one love, one people.

People just want to harm each other today. Kick them with their steel toes, pop off a long shot with their AK/AR rifles, brandish a pistol, etc.

Most of you should focus on becoming the person you should be versus the person you are or want to be.

 

[Retro Rob]

Actually I do understand the power of influence. I also understand that you completely avoided answering my question.

No, you just didn't like the answer I gave, but...

So King Solomon's foreign wives were able to convince him to worship their g-ds, even though Solomon believed in the one Christian g-d who created the universe and everything in it and even though the Christian g-d could strike him down dead at any moment?

Sounds about right. Yep.

The Christian g-d must not be all that powerful (or all that believable) if one of his worshippers can be influenced so easily by some exotic women.

Look at the examples of people who didn't serve other gods, his Father, David, Jesus' apostles, King Josiah, Moses, Joshua...I can go on. So using your criteria, then that means the Chrsitian God is powerful and believable since those guys didn't worship other gods. This is exactly what you're saying.

No, you wouldn't "buy that" because now it's an inconvenience. Bottom line is that bible characters' worship of the Christian God or other gods have much more to do with the individual than God himself, as shown.

If someone pious can become a worshipper of other g-ds so easily then it seems pointless to worship any g-d Just follow the golden rule all your life and you'll be fine.

What if someone never worships another god? I showed you some that didn't, but I expect you to either hand-wave those examples, or find some other means that violates your initial criteria that it's somehow the fault of God (by not being powerful or believable enough).

Israelites need to be reminded whom their g-d is, even though he created the universe and everything in it and could strike them all down dead at any moment? The same g-d who (allegedly) plagued Egypt with locusts, pestilence, death of their first born, turning the Nile blood red, etc., held back Pharaohs' armies with a pillar of fire and parted the Red Sea? They needed to be reminded???

You're helping my point, Alzan. Despite all the alleged evidence they saw, just two weeks after leaving Egypt, they were ready to turn on God, with the exception of Moses and Joshua, and many others. God promised Abraham that Jesus would eventually come through that blood line thousands of years later. He "reminded" them because he wanted to keep his that promise, and that's why he didn't "strike them all down" (though he did strike members down, but not the entire nation).

God had a promise to keep....that's why he didn't "strike them down" but opted to give them reminders to better facilitate that. Many would actually adhere to those commandemnts, despite many rebellions with the Isrealites.

They served their purpose.

Sorry, not buying it.

You have nothing to be sorry about -- you don't have to buy any of this. I really explained some of this for the benefit of those who may be interested.

 

[alzan]

No, you just didn't like the answer I gave, but...



Sounds about right. Yep.



Look at the examples of people who didn't serve other gods, his Father, David, Jesus' apostles, King Josiah, Moses, Joshua...I can go on. So using your criteria, then that means the Chrsitian God is powerful and believable since those guys didn't worship other gods. This is exactly what you're saying.

No, you wouldn't "buy that" because now it's an inconvenience. Bottom line is that bible characters' worship of the Christian God or other gods have much more to do with the individual than God himself, as shown.



What if someone never worships another god? I showed you some that didn't, but I expect you to either hand-wave those examples, or find some other means that violates your initial criteria that it's somehow the fault of God (by not being powerful or believable enough).



You're helping my point, Alzan. Despite all the alleged evidence they saw, just two weeks after leaving Egypt, they were ready to turn on God, with the exception of Moses and Joshua, and many others. God promised Abraham that Jesus would eventually come through that blood line thousands of years later. He "reminded" them because he wanted to keep his that promise, and that's why he didn't "strike them all down" (though he did strike members down, but not the entire nation).

God had a promise to keep....that's why he didn't "strike them down" but opted to give them reminders to better facilitate that. Many would actually adhere to those commandemnts, despite many rebellions with the Isrealites.

They served their purpose.



You have nothing to be sorry about -- you don't have to buy any of this. I really explained some of this for the benefit of those who may be interested.

Then let me clarify. The Bible is focused on a heavily populated but geographically small region and concentrates most of it's stories on the "true" believers. I submit that even after hearing about the alleged life and trials of Jesus that there was a large (greater than 50%) number of peoples of that region who still worshipped other g-ds. I do not doubt that those mentioned had great faith but those mentioned were an incredibly small number of the populace.

Why would I hand-wave examples of non-believers away. The Bible talks quite a bit about the power of G-d; a primitive peoples would be awed by the power of G-d; so much so that some of them would then worship that g-d. It's reasonable to assume that the some of the Egyptians who heard of the pillar of fire or the parting of the Red Sea would worship that g-d as well. But the rest of Egypt would not; they would worship the Egyptian g-ds with as much faith and fervor as they did prior. Even after several hundred years of hearing the tales in the Bible, a good portion of the populace of that region still did not worship as Christians; indeed, a portion of them chose to follow the words of a different prophet and formed Islam.

Still doesn't make sense. A deity who wiped out whole cities because they were "full of bad people and non-believers" decided not to wipe out those who had "lost their faith" in two weeks time; he could've gotten rid of the "faithless" one at a time and reaped a lot more true believers. It also seems counter-intuitive to promise to wait thousands of years just to propagate belief if the end goal is to have faithful believers.

Bottom line: Any holy book or writings is written for several purposes, not the least of which is to convince people to follow the laws of the books particular deity/deities. Various rulers have used those books over the centuries for reasons of keeping control of their citizens, propagating a sense of community and/or purpose, a "us vs. them" mentality, etc.

The books and writings also serve what is their true purpose; to give their adherents peace of mind about what happens when they die. Death is the great unknown and the occurrence that a lot of people fear. I'm sure it's of enormous comfort to have an ancient book or writing give testament to a given person that all they have to do is believe this one thing or call upon this one person and they will not die but will live eternally in peace and joy. But that doesn't make that statement factual, accurate or evidentiary.

 

[JEDIYoda]

teenager 1: That flower is such a beautiful color! I wonder who made the flower?
teenager2: God made the flower.
teenager 1: YES!! I knew God made the flower! Don`t you just love all the proof that exists in nature that God really does exist!!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Then let me clarify. The Bible is focused on a heavily populated but geographically small region and concentrates most of it's stories on the "true" believers. I submit that even after hearing about the alleged life and trials of Jesus that there was a large (greater than 50%) number of peoples of that region who still worshipped other g-ds. I do not doubt that those mentioned had great faith but those mentioned were an incredibly small number of the populace.

Why would I hand-wave examples of non-believers away. The Bible talks quite a bit about the power of G-d; a primitive peoples would be awed by the power of G-d; so much so that some of them would then worship that g-d. It's reasonable to assume that the some of the Egyptians who heard of the pillar of fire or the parting of the Red Sea would worship that g-d as well. But the rest of Egypt would not; they would worship the Egyptian g-ds with as much faith and fervor as they did prior. Even after several hundred years of hearing the tales in the Bible, a good portion of the populace of that region still did not worship as Christians; indeed, a portion of them chose to follow the words of a different prophet and formed Islam.

Still doesn't make sense. A deity who wiped out whole cities because they were "full of bad people and non-believers" decided not to wipe out those who had "lost their faith" in two weeks time; he could've gotten rid of the "faithless" one at a time and reaped a lot more true believers. It also seems counter-intuitive to promise to wait thousands of years just to propagate belief if the end goal is to have faithful believers.

Bottom line: Any holy book or writings is written for several purposes, not the least of which is to convince people to follow the laws of the books particular deity/deities. Various rulers have used those books over the centuries for reasons of keeping control of their citizens, propagating a sense of community and/or purpose, a "us vs. them" mentality, etc.

The books and writings also serve what is their true purpose; to give their adherents peace of mind about what happens when they die. Death is the great unknown and the occurrence that a lot of people fear. I'm sure it's of enormous comfort to have an ancient book or writing give testament to a given person that all they have to do is believe this one thing or call upon this one person and they will not die but will live eternally in peace and joy. But that doesn't make that statement factual, accurate or evidentiary.

Very nice spin......I almost finished my coffee reading your explanat...er....spin on things!!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Here is the whole deal bros.

You should all still get along.

If you are religious, most of them teach tolerance.

If you are not, then most won't bring it up if you don't.

The one true religion is just get along and create one mission, one love, one people.

People just want to harm each other today. Kick them with their steel toes, pop off a long shot with their AK/AR rifles, brandish a pistol, etc.

Most of you should focus on becoming the person you should be versus the person you are or want to be.

You forgot a few things.....such as feed the hungry and take care of the widows and orphans as well as the homeless.....

 

[Retro Rob]

Then let me clarify. The Bible is focused on a heavily populated but geographically small region and concentrates most of it's stories on the "true" believers.

It records the activities of Israel and God's dealing with that people.

I submit that even after hearing about the alleged life and trials of Jesus that there was a large (greater than 50%) number of peoples of that region who still worshipped other g-ds. I do not doubt that those mentioned had great faith but those mentioned were an incredibly small number of the populace.

Ok.

Why would I hand-wave examples of non-believers away

I was specifically talking about the examples that directly counter your point that that God isn't "believable" enough for believers to not worship other gods.

It's reasonable to assume that the some of the Egyptians who heard of the pillar of fire or the parting of the Red Sea would worship that g-d as well. But the rest of Egypt would not; they would worship the Egyptian g-ds with as much faith and fervor as they did prior.

The bible says a "vast mixed company" left Egypt along with Israel, so we do understand that some Egyptians did leave.

Even after several hundred years of hearing the tales in the Bible, a good portion of the populace of that region still did not worship as Christians; indeed, a portion of them chose to follow the words of a different prophet and formed Islam.

Just cut to the chase -- what you're saying is that if my religion is true, then why did people choose to follow "Islam"?

If this reverse argumentum ad populum is your evidence that what's recorded in the Bible didn't happen, just say it.

Still doesn't make sense. A deity who wiped out whole cities because they were "full of bad people and non-believers" decided not to wipe out those who had "lost their faith" in two weeks time; he could've gotten rid of the "faithless" one at a time and reaped a lot more true believers. It also seems counter-intuitive to promise to wait thousands of years just to propagate belief if the end goal is to have faithful believers.

It doesn't make sense to you because you've already reached your conclusion and don't seem willing to challenge it -- you seem more willing to justify it.

Let's just cut it here -- stop inquring about which you don't really want answers to.

It's brutally obvious that you've clearly made your mind up.

 

[Retro Rob]

Very nice spin......I almost finished my coffee reading your explanat...er....spin on things!!

He didn't spin it as much as he went from the point about God not being "believable" enough to 'I guess that means your religion is false because people just didn't flock to Christianity after reading the Bible'.

Clearly, the latter is precisely where he's getting at. The issue is that people ignore evidence - look at how many people think the Earth is 6000 years old.

Does it mean that just because 42% of the US population thinks the Earth is young that 'your science must not be true since 99% of the people aren't flocking to old-earth theories'?

Alzan is simply positing that if the Bible is true, then people should have been flocking to Christianity instead of Islam, but then that means that what Muslims say is true because people chose to follow "another prophet".

He cannot see the logical fallaciousness in that very assumption.

 

[alzan]

It records the activities of Israel and God's dealing with that people.



Ok.



I was specifically talking about the examples that directly counter your point that that God isn't "believable" enough for believers to not worship other gods.



The bible says a "vast mixed company" left Egypt along with Israel, so we do understand that some Egyptians did leave.



Just cut to the chase -- what you're saying is that if my religion is true, then why did people choose to follow "Islam"?

If this reverse argumentum ad populum is your evidence that what's recorded in the Bible didn't happen, just say it.



It doesn't make sense to you because you've already reached your conclusion and don't seem willing to challenge it -- you seem more willing to justify it.

Let's just cut it here -- stop inquring about which you don't really want answers to.

It's brutally obvious that you've clearly made your mind up.

Thanks for not seeing my point. If I were responding to adherents of Islam, Judaism, Mormonism, etc. my posts would be the same, just with references to different peoples and stories. You think I'm hand-waving away the g-d of the Bible because you believe in that deity.

For you and other Christians the Bible is true and the basis of your faith; for Muslims the Quran is true and is the basis of their faith; for Jews the Torah is true and is the basis of their faith; I hope you understand what I'm saying.

Choosing to follow one faith vs. another doesn't make the deity of that particular faith more believable, true or evidentiary.

I don't accept as true or evidentiary the stories or peoples of any religious text; I speak of the Bible only because in this thread and others the overwhelming majority of believers and respondents are Christian. It wouldn't make any sense for me to respond to tales and teachings of the Bible with tales and teachings from the Quran.

No, I'm saying for believers of any religion that the tenets of that religion holds that it and it alone is the one true religion.

I can't reach a conclusion for something that I hold to be unknowable.

I would suggest you do the same. You've said in previous threads concerning religion, science, evolution, etc. that you do want to understand those things and like discussing them. So why then are you saying to not inquire. Either you do want to understand and discuss or you don't.

Choose and live with your choice.

It's brutally obvious that you don't like to have your faith questioned; given your responses to posts in this thread and others.

 

[Retro Rob]

Thanks for not seeing my point.

Ok, then what was your point?

Choosing to follow one faith vs. another doesn't make the deity of that particular faith more believable, true or evidentiary.

Totally agree, and why I need you to show me where I said this. If I didn't say it, then I don't see the relevance.

No, I'm saying for believers of any religion that the tenets of that religion holds that it and it alone is the one true religion.

Right, but believing something to be true doesn't make it true -- never said any different.

I would suggest you do the same

So you're admitting that you're making baseless inquiries?

You've said in previous threads concerning religion, science, evolution, etc. that you do want to understand those things and like discussing them. So why then are you saying to not inquire. Either you do want to understand and discuss or you don't.

But we're not talking about other threads, are we? We are talking about here and now.

It's brutally obvious that you don't like to have your faith questioned; given your responses to posts in this thread and others.

How is that? I've responded to each of your posts, answered your questions. What gave you away is when you referred to the bible as containing "tales". That tells me two things about a person: (1) they made their mind up on scripture long before meeting me, let alone discussing it with me, and (2), by them still referring to them as such during a conversation means they STILL have their minds made up.

I've been doing this a long time, Alzan.

 

[alzan]

Ok, then what was your point?

Totally agree, and why I need you to show me where I said this. If I didn't say it, then I don't see the relevance.

Right, but believing something to be true doesn't make it true -- never said any different.

So you're admitting that you're making baseless inquiries?

But we're not talking about other threads, are we? We are talking about here and now.

How is that? I've responded to each of your posts, answered your questions. What gave you away is when you referred to the bible as containing "tales". That tells me two things about a person: (1) they made their mind up on scripture long before meeting me, let alone discussing it with me, and (2), by them still referring to them as such during a conversation means they STILL have their minds made up.

I've been doing this a long time, Alzan.

I never said you did say it. Damn but you're sensitive.

Does this mean you no longer wish to discuss and/or understand issues and topics and that you choose to ignore things you've posted in the past?

If they're not tales then what are they?