Jump to content
  1. Special Announcements & FAQs

    1. Special Announcements

      Moderator announcement area for sharing items of interest.

      4
      posts
    2. Frequently Asked Questions and Topics

      A collection of frequently asked questions and topics that have been already addressed on this site. This section was created with the express intention of assisting newcomers.

      1.6k
      posts
  2. Discussions

    1. Got Questions?

      Got questions about life, leaving the faith or how to use the features on this site? Just ask! 

      6.3k
      posts
    2. Introductions

      Introduce Yourself Here

      4.4k
      posts
    3. Testimonies of Former Christians

      Help encourage someone else who is trying to deprogram themselves from religion - tell them how you did it or are doing it.

      33.1k
      posts
    4. 122.9k
      posts
    5. 211.5k
      posts
    6. Rants and Replies

      Here is where you may take the opportunity to respond to or comment on any of the articles and rants posted on the Main Blog. Or, just start your own topic.

      177.5k
      posts
    7. General Christian Theological Issues

      The Bible calls all those who do not believe in its god a fool.

      61.5k
      posts
    8. Science vs. Religion

      The bulk of science does not support belief in a deity, or does it? This is an open discussion area to hone your skills at supporting and understanding the various positions. Feel free to post any links of value in this important topic.

      41.8k
      posts
    9. Ex-Christian Spirituality

      This area is for those who have left Christianity for another form of theism or spirituality (Deism, Paganism, Wicca, Great Spirit, The Force, Buddhism, etc.).
       

      17.3k
      posts
    10. Podcasts

      Listen to streaming podcasts from a variety of sources.
       

      5.8k
      posts
  • Our picks

    • Here's an interesting episode that breaks down popular fallacies that many theists who are knowledgeable about the arguments prefer to steer clear of: 
       
       
      • 3 replies
    • Fundamentalist Christians tend to say either you are a Christian or you are not a Christian.  That may be true for the irrational tribal identity of their churches, but it does not make sense in terms of philosophy and theology. If you read the Bible as deliberate metaphor, as symbolic allegory, not as literal history, then it is possible to retain the ethical value of the texts while accepting none of the surface claims.  The value of the Bible is enhanced by assuming the original authors did not intend that any of their supernatural poetry should be read as literal fact.
        • Like
      • 39 replies
    • One of the benefits of logic is the ability to test whether a particular proposition is true or not.  It often follows the progession: A=B, B=C, C does not equal D; therefore, the proposition that A=D is not likely to be true.  With this in mind, let's look at a particular proposition and follow the progression to its logical conclusion.  
       
      If logic is the absolute standard for reasoning , then everyone should either agree with the conclusion, or, if disagreeing, be able to point out a flaw in the logic.  Let's begin:
       
       
       
      PROPOSITION: god is both all-loving and all-powerful. 
       
      OBSERVATION: Evil exists
       
      GIVEN:
      A. If god is both able and willing to prevent evil, then evil would not exist.
      B. If god is neither able nor willing to prevent evil, then god is neither all-loving nor all-powerful. 
       
      PROGRESSION:
      1. If god is able to prevent evil, but not willing to, then god is not all-loving. 
      2. If god is willing to prevent evil, but not able to, then god is not all-powerful.
       
      CONCLUSION: The proposition that god is both all-loving and all-powerful is not true.
       
      DISCUSSION: It is possible that god is all-loving but not all-powerful.  It is possible that god is all-powerful but not all-loving.  It is possible that god is neither all-loving nor all-powerful, which raises the question: why worship god?
       
      But it is not possible for god to be both all-loving and all-powerful. 
       
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 85 replies
    • My ex christian beliefs are as follows in 10 simple points, each of which has been the focus of one debate / discussion or another around here: 
       
      1 ) I believe that all religions are man made social constructs geared towards politicizing ancient mythology and folklore. 
      2 ) I believe that no one really knows with certainty the answer to the question of origins or destination. 
      3 ) I believe that the bible is demonstrably false from the outset as a guide to the truth of the universe or the human condition. 
      4 ) I believe that anything basing itself on the assumption that the bible is true is automatically false, as the bible is demonstrably false. 
      5 ) I believe that morality is an evolved concept which continues to evolve and has never been static or handed down from on high. 
      6 ) I believe that the morality of the biblical writings is long since outdated and mostly irrelevant to modern society. 
      7 ) I believe that modern scholarship has revealed the truth about the biblical writings and the evolving theistic concepts contained therein. 
      8 ) I believe that it's both intellectually honest and well intended to expose what truths can be demonstrated about the bible and christianity, through counter apologetics. 
      9 ) I believe that as painful as it may be at times, it's ultimately for the greater good that christianity and similar religions are losing membership and declining into the future under the weight of their own growing lack of relevance. 
      10 ) I believe that humanity doesn't need the fluff and circus show of religion in order for people to do what's right, be decent, and get along. 
       
       
      What do you believe???? 
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 71 replies
    • Is there sufficient evidence to believe complex life could have evolved on its own from non-life without some intelligent creative force?  Is it at all plausible that some intelligent being, perhaps from another universe, could have been the creator of the complex life on our planet (and any other planet in this universe that may have complex life) using evolution as a tool? 
       
      • 67 replies
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 1 Anonymous, 17 Guests (See full list)

  • Forum Statistics

    73.5k
    Total Topics
    1.1m
    Total Posts


  • Thank you for your support.

    Please note: Participation in this forum requires registration. Participation is some areas requires a paid subscription. 

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Recent Posts

    • No Walter you are wrong. They cannot just as easily say I am wrong. When faced with "obvious" misinterpretation of John 1:1 they run for cover. They cannot stand up to any Biblical Linguistics expert. That is why they are the ONLY ONES to use THEIR OWN TRANSLATION. (the New World Translation). No one else will touch it with a ten foot pole.   Yes-- I can say "They are wrong" with deep conviction. They claim to be "Christians" but alter a verse to FIT THEIR DOCTRINE. They are a CULT.   So Walter, you can know who is right. How do you decide between two equal claims? One Biblical translation (THEIRS) is completely discredited by scholars and linguistic experts. Is Jesus "a god"? Absolutely not. Or does the Bible say "the WORD was GOD"? According to hundreds of scholars it does. So can we say the Jehovah's Witnesses are right? No. Absolutely not. So, yes Walter, I can say they are wrong.   But in truth Walter I don't have to "prove" anything to you. It wouldn't matter. You would accept NOTHING I say anyway. You want "objective evidence". Even if I post a photo of myself giving to the poor, or hugging a child in a cancer ward, you could easily say "how do we know you aren't a fake Christian pretending to care about children??"   There really is no way to satisfy your argument. Once you've decided someone is not a Christian because they've failed "the test" it doesn't matter what "proof" they might manifest.
    • The bible also clearly teaches that the sons of god came down from heaven and had sex with the daughters of men and created a race of giants in the land and men of great renown (Gen 6).  It's not clear whether jesus was amongst them or not.  What is clear is that we cannot trust what the bible says about sons of god in general, nor about any son of god in particular.   If we take the passage in Genesis to be metaphorical, mythological, or anything other than literal, then we have no compelling reason to believe that jesus was literally the son of god either.  If, contrariwise, we take Genesis literally, then jesus clearly was not the only begotten son of god.  Either way, nothing the bible says about sons of god can be taken at face value.    Quite a pickle, ain't it?
    • And they can just as easily tell you that you are wrong, Fish.   But that is not the issue here.   The issue is, how are we supposed to know who is right when both of you call each other false?   Stop telling us that you are right and start telling us how we should decide between these two equal claims.   (And NO, they are equal to us.  How you or your JW rival see things is irrelevant to us.)     Yes, if you can only recycle the same claims as others or your earlier claims, then you won't satisfy me.   You probably won't satisfy many others here either.   But you can break the deadlock if you show us some objective evidence to support your claims.   Can you do that?
    • Walter-- I never said anyone needs to prove they are a genuine atheist. I take the man at his word that he is an atheist. I stated that if you use "fruits" alone as your test you might come to the conclusion an atheist is a Christian because they display the fruits of compassion and love.   Your original post was based on people "failing the fruits test". I was just attempting to show that you cannot use "fruits" alone. You need to stay in context and judge what someone believes first, then see if there are any fruits to back that up.   As far as Jehovahs Witnesses go they are the only ones to falsely interpret John 1:1 to read "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was a god". ANY professor of Biblical linguistics will tell you that this is a BLATANT misinterpretation. "a god" is patently false. "and the Word was God" is the true interpretation. So I could care less whether a Jehovah's Witness tries to correct me on who Jesus is. They base their whole premise on falsehood. I can easily tell you "they are wrong".   But I can see this discussion is just going in circles. I've explained all I can explain, but I think nothing will satisfy you. I really have nothing more to add. So I think I'm finished with this discussion. Let's start a new one.   Which is better? Dogs or cats?  
    • Go back to the video, 11:15 forward. Get out the bible.     In John 10:33 "The" is italicized indicating an interpolation. The greek shows it as "A."    Further, when quoting Psalm 82, the context was YHWH referring to the Elohim as "sons of god." It was a plural oriented reference in Psalm 82. Which furthers the argument. And makes sense within the running context. It was a citation to plural sons of god and the question was why then do you seek to stone me for saying that I am a son of god? That's the literal context of how it reads in the Greek. "The" interpolation gives a false impression of meaning and breaks the running context. 
    • Wrong again. I've been researching Idealist Philosophy lately and it came up that the platoic "logos," which filtered through Philo and then was picked up by the gospel writers, actually means "thought," and is more akin to the idea of mentation. Which leads down an entirely different path. One of consciousness creating matter, basically. And more Gnostic in orientation than orthodox.    You've subscribed to a losing argument associated with perversions of ancient mythology. Again, I give you the benefit of assuming that you've done so in ignorance and not intentional malice. 
    • Fish,   You are misreading how things work in this forum if you think that any atheist here is required or even expected to demonstrate that they are a genuine atheist.  In this forum we atheists, agnostics and sceptics expect any and all visitors who call themselves Christians to make good on any of their claims or assertions.  Including their claim to be a genuine Christian.  I'm sorry if you don't like it, but that's the way things work around here.     I'm glad you've mentioned the Jehovah's Witnesses.   A Jehovah's Witness reading your words can claim that you are the one in error about Jesus, but they know the truth about God.   So, how can we know who is right and who is wrong?  To us you are both making evidence-free claims and assertions that neither of you can support.  At times like this we honour the tradition of invoking the Hitchslap.   "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."   So Fish, if you can supply no evidence to support your claims other than making further claims, then most likely we will dismiss your claims.   Including your claim to be a genuine Christian.     Thank you.   Walter.            
    • Josh--- Of course the Bible says that one man, and one man alone is the Son of God. John 1 says that Jesus is the WORD made flesh. There is only ONE of Him.   "That at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow". God in the Old Testament declares that every knee shall bow to HIM. Therefore Jesus is GOD.   I'm not sure where you are getting your information, but the Bible CLEARLY teaches that Jesus is the Son of God. Jesus Himself even declares it many times. "That they might glorify the Son even as they glorify the Father". "I do only those things I see the Father do". "That I may have the glory WE SHARED before the world began (Jesus addressing the Father).
  • Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.