Page 72 of 106 FirstFirst ... 2262707172737482 ... LastLast
Results 711 to 720 of 1053

Thread: Exposing Atheistic Myths

  1. Top | #711
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,598
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.
    ...
    The Bible doesn't mention the inconvenient fact that Noah built the ark and tended the animals with the help of a bunch of illegal immigrants. That's why they exist today.

  2. Top | #712
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,598
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by James Brown View Post
    It's quite possible that the cattle thinks the rancher loves them.

    "He gives us food, he gives us shelter, he gives us medicine when we're sick. He loves us unconditionally!"

    "I saw him lead Betsy into the trailer last week, and we haven't seen her since. What happened to Betsy?"

    "The rancher needed another angel back at the Big House. Betsy is now sleeping on soft hay and being hand-fed by the Rancher and the Rancher's Wife."

    "I'm so grateful to the Rancher for bringing us into this wonderful world. I can't wait to join him at the Big House!"
    Re: "The Island".

  3. Top | #713
    Veteran Member Treedbear's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    out on a limb
    Posts
    1,598
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Treedbear View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    As to laws, yet again reality does not conform to science, laws are tested mathematical description of reality.o.
    If that is the case then my original point was quite valid. If laws are derived from reality, then it makes no sense to talk about a new phenomenon you haven't previously encountered as the "breaking of physical laws". If a phenomenon happened at all, then it hasn't broken any laws, it just needs to be incorporated into your existing sense of nature and natural laws. Which for a theist is obviously a theistic one. The idea that a theist would see God as a law-breaker, let alone that miracles can only be called such if God has broken some sort of law, is silly and does not correspond with what most theists I have ever met, regardless of tradition, generally think. Rather, most would consider the "law of the universe" to be God's to enact as he or she chooses.
    Let's say a comet is headed for Earth and Jupiter is diverted from the path predicted by the known physical laws so that it intercepts the comet and saves the Earth from certain destruction. It's no different than any other alleged miracle. Energy had to be added to the universe in order for the event to happen. The problem is the same as the one Descartes encountered in explaining how a dualistic self interacted with the physical self. There needs to be a rational explanation.
    There's that "had to be" along with the "laws" and "must" and "fixed" already in play. Even if there are, for unexplained and inexplicable reasons, laws that matter and energy must follow, how can we know what those laws are except by observing what does and does not happen? Unless we know something about the ultimate source of fundamental order in the universe, science can only ever be a descriptive enterprise.
    There still needs to be a rational explanation, even if it contradicts an established theory. And once we discover it the God of the Gaps loses his attraction. For me that's the most convincing argument against God existing. There is strong anthropological evidence that human beings want to believe that they are the purpose of all Creation. And they need an anthropic loving God to substantiate that claim. History provides the repeatable evidence that this is so.

  4. Top | #714
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    5,240
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    18,216
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.

    And of course, the other thing is why would an all powerful, loving god destroy most of its creation? What kind of an asshole would do that?

    If I were capable of believing in a god, it certainly wouldn't be a god that has such a tremendous ego that it punishes people so severely, instead of nurturing them and helping them be better people. It just doesn't make any sense.
    This is a good example of why I think Last Tuesdayism is a much better belief system if someone insists on believing in a god. The tales Christianity gives us are too self contradictory, too subject to refutation by simple observation and reasoning, and generally raises more questions than they answer. Last Tuesdayism has none of those problems - any past memories we have or religious story we believe was just a silly memory that god programmed into our minds last Tuesday.

  5. Top | #715
    Super Moderator Atheos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Heart of the Bible Belt
    Posts
    2,546
    Archived
    5,807
    Total Posts
    8,353
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by skepticalbip View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.

    And of course, the other thing is why would an all powerful, loving god destroy most of its creation? What kind of an asshole would do that?

    If I were capable of believing in a god, it certainly wouldn't be a god that has such a tremendous ego that it punishes people so severely, instead of nurturing them and helping them be better people. It just doesn't make any sense.
    This is a good example of why I think Last Tuesdayism is a much better belief system if someone insists on believing in a god. The tales Christianity gives us are too self contradictory, too subject to refutation by simple observation and reasoning, and generally raises more questions than they answer. Last Tuesdayism has none of those problems - any past memories we have or religious story we believe was just a silly memory that god programmed into our minds last Tuesday.
    HERETIC!!!! Last Thursdayism is the only true religion. Where's my Bic? I have a stake to light.

  6. Top | #716
    Veteran Member Lion IRC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,928
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.
    ...
    I take the Flood account literally.

    Can you "literally" show me where in the "literal" text it says there was an insurmountable problem with animal dung?

    Show me where exactly in the text it literally states (mathematically) the total number of animals.
    Does the text state that they were all ADULT animals? Does it say whether or not the any of the animals were in a state of hibernation? (A confined space. Deep inside the cold and dark hull of the Ark.)

  7. Top | #717
    Contributor skepticalbip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Searching for reality along the long and winding road
    Posts
    5,240
    Archived
    12,976
    Total Posts
    18,216
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.
    ...
    I take the Flood account literally.

    Can you "literally" show me where in the "literal" text it says there was an insurmountable problem with animal dung?

    Show me where exactly in the text it literally states (mathematically) the total number of animals.
    Does the text state that they were all ADULT animals? Does it say whether or not the any of the animals were in a state of hibernation? (A confined space. Deep inside the cold and dark hull of the Ark.)
    I take it then that you believe that none of the characters anywhere in the Bible ever took a shit or pissed? I don't recall the Bible ever stating that any of them ever did.

  8. Top | #718
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    994
    Archived
    2,799
    Total Posts
    3,793
    Rep Power
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.
    ...
    I take the Flood account literally.

    Can you "literally" show me where in the "literal" text it says there was an insurmountable problem with animal dung?

    Show me where exactly in the text it literally states (mathematically) the total number of animals.
    Does the text state that they were all ADULT animals? Does it say whether or not the any of the animals were in a state of hibernation? (A confined space. Deep inside the cold and dark hull of the Ark.)
    I don't have any evidence to support the claim. Moreover, all the evidence we have tells us the Biblical flood
    (1) is logistically impossible, and
    (2) did not happen (based on geological and genetic information available to us).

    I don't want to address these key issues. So let me try to distract people by making up shit and hoping that enough people bite so that the key issues are not discussed.

    Is that a fair summary of your position? If the contention is that god did everything with magic and Noah and the animals were just along for the ride, none of this shit matters anyway. Why can't Christians just be honest about their faith?

  9. Top | #719
    Cyborg with a Tiara
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Recluse
    Posts
    8,327
    Archived
    9,040
    Total Posts
    17,367
    Rep Power
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by atrib View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lion IRC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I still want to know how Noah and his family got rid of all that animal shit! It's really difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can believe some of these Biblical myths as literal truth. Yet, I've known intelligent people who do take all that stuff literally.
    ...
    I take the Flood account literally.

    Can you "literally" show me where in the "literal" text it says there was an insurmountable problem with animal dung?

    Show me where exactly in the text it literally states (mathematically) the total number of animals.
    Does the text state that they were all ADULT animals? Does it say whether or not the any of the animals were in a state of hibernation? (A confined space. Deep inside the cold and dark hull of the Ark.)
    I don't have any evidence to support the claim. Moreover, all the evidence we have tells us the Biblical flood
    (1) is logistically impossible, and
    (2) did not happen (based on geological and genetic information available to us).

    I don't want to address these key issues. So let me try to distract people by making up shit and hoping that enough people bite so that the key issues are not discussed.

    Is that a fair summary of your position? If the contention is that god did everything with magic and Noah and the animals were just along for the ride, none of this shit matters anyway. Why can't Christians just be honest about their faith?

    That’s what I heard...

  10. Top | #720
    Elder Contributor Keith&Co.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Far Western Mass
    Posts
    17,454
    Archived
    24,500
    Total Posts
    41,954
    Rep Power
    77
    So, wait. I take it literally, meaning if there's no problem listed, i can ignore the logical consequences of any event and exploit the loophole assume magic?
    So, Lion's usual game of keep-away.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •