Jump to content

Neon Genesis

Senior Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Neon Genesis

  1. Watch this whole documentary by Stephen Hawking. It'll answer all your questions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chakKbPNI3w If you don't understand basic Christian apologetics 101, that's your problem, not mine. Go read about these arguments on your own and do your own homework because I'm not going to do it for you. I'm not going to explain Christian apologetics to someone who's already a Christian. That would be like the biggest waste of time.
  2. Margee, have you ever read the book, The Meaning of Matthew by Judy Shepard? It's Judy Shepard's memoir about how her son Matthew was murdered for being gay and their lives before and after the event and I think you might find the book interesting.
  3. If only they fired Kirk Cameron instead, maybe nobody would have heard of him today.
  4. They blasphemed the Holy Spirit, obviously! After all, that's what the scriptures say that's the worst sin you could ever do.
  5. This is the standard response that Christian apologists give when atheists ask if everything needs a creator, who created God. They usually respond by arguing God exists outside the laws of logic and nature which he created but if that's true then you can't use the laws of logic and nature to prove the existence of God either. This is an example of a creationist using this argument http://creation.com/if-god-created-the-universe-then-who-created-god
  6. Kirk Cameron's sister is even more disturbing than he is.
  7. I've been reading the book Who Wrote the New Testament? by Burton Mack and he argues that the the Pastoral epistles weren't forged with ill intentions and it was perfectly acceptable and commonly accepted knowledge for students of a teacher in ancient times to write books in the name of the teacher as a dedication to them even though they aren't the teacher themselves. He uses the followers of Pythagoras writing forgeries in his name in honor of him as an example. On the other hand, Bart D Ehrman has argued in Jesus Interrupted that there were people in the ancient world did know it was forgery and didn't accept it. He uses the example of a famous Roman physician named Galen who found a forged copy of one of his works, so he wrote a book on how to tell forgeries of his works apart from the authentic one. So did everyone know that people made forgeries all the time in the ancient world and everyone was accepting of it or did people hate forgeries just like they do in modern times? Did he Pastoral epistles author have shady motives when writing them or did they write them to honor the real Paul?
  8. Isn't this an actual scientific theory? That eventually the universe will stop expanding and then everything will sort of mesh together and the universe will start back up again after everything collapses on itself or something? Christian apologists try to get around these problems by claiming God exists outside the universe and so the same laws and logic of this universe don't apply to God. But if you can't use the laws and logic of this universe to disprove the existence of God, then you can't use the laws and logic of this universe to prove the existence of God either. You can only be agnostic about the existence of God and any further knowledge claim about God is based on faith and not proof. But Christian apologists want it both ways where God is immune to any logic of this universe that makes its existence difficult while at the same time using the logic of this universe to prove its existence.
  9. That's like arguing since a woman has the capability of being pregnant, the woman must therefore be pregnant and if the woman isn't pregnant, she must not have the capability of it.
  10. First of all, I never claimed that they did have life sustaining properties. I said they had the capabilities to have life sustaining properties which is entirely different. Second of all, if there's no ocean under Europa's surface, what else could be under all that ice?
  11. Even the Catholic church thinks the fine tuning argument is utter nonsense: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/13/2742484.htm
  12. This "the uniqueness of Earth's life-sustaining capabilities" argument is contradictory in Christian theology anyway because according to Christian theology, there are in fact other worlds where life exists. There's heaven and hell which are other worlds where Christians claim God and Satan live forever. So either Earth is the only planet capable of sustaining life and heaven and hell don't exist or there are other dimensions where supernatural beings live for eternity and Earth is not a unique home to life in the universe but Christians can't have both.
  13. Whether the new planet can possibly sustain life, we already know that Europa has the capabilities for sustaining life.
  14. Even if you accepted the premises of the design argument, it's still a false dichotomy because the question of design is a different question from the process of how life arose. Even if you accepted the universe was created by a designer, you still have to explain how that designer created the universe and saying "Goddidit" is not an explanation and the Genesis accounts are completely contradictory and irreconcilable with each other. There's no reason why a designer can't have created evolution and even creationists like Micheal Behe admits he believes in evolution when he's not speaking to creationist circles. The other problem is that even accepting the design argument, it doesn't prove who the designer is but Christians automatically assume the designer must be their god. They can't use the bible to prove it because that's circular logic and the bible is too contradictory to be the perfect product of a divine designer. The best the design argument can get you is to deism but anything else beyond that is making unreasonable assumptions. Even if we assume the Christian god is real, that doesn't mean God acts and thinks the way Christians assume it does.
  15. Is this that same guy who keeps going around forums claiming Nostradamus defeated James Randi's million dollar challenge?
  16. This morning at my parents' church, the sermon was about how creation proves the existence of a creator and the preacher tried to use the fine tuning argument to prove the existence of God. He started out quoting the Psalms verse that says the fool says in their heart there is no god while at the same time saying that wasn't meant as an insult. Huh? The whole sermon was full of scientific inaccuracies, logical fallacies, and false dichotomies. He starts out setting up this false dichotomy that either God exists or he doesn't and that's the only two options but it's not really the only two options. There's also the third option of pantheism, that God is the natural universe itself. He uses the same cliched arguments creationists have always used, that you can't have a design without a designer and the Earth is placed in just the right location from the sun because if the Earth was even a little bit further away, we would freeze to death or if the Earth was just a little bit closer, we would all burn up. He then mistakenly claims that Earth is the only known planet in the universe capable of sustaining life but if he was keeping up with science news instead of reading out-dated and long since debunked creationist arguments, he would know we've already discovered an Earth-like planet in another galaxy. Even within our own solar system, we now know that Europa has the potential of sustaining alien life. The preacher used the cliche argument that the eye is too complex to have come about by accident and that the complexity of the eye disproves evolution even though this argument has long since been debunked by Dawkins and other biologists. His whole argument is a false dichotomy between creation and evolution. He didn't seem to understand that evolution and the origins of the universe are two different things and that evolution is about how the process of life arose, not how the universe was created. So even if evolution is disproved, it doesn't prove a creator and a creator doesn't disprove evolution. He then quoted some Christian apologist who said something about how when atheists don't believe in God, they don't believe in nothing, they believe in everything and that you need God to provide morals and meaning. It just drove me nuts he kept spouting out all these scientific inaccuracies and arguments that scientists, both theists and atheists, have already debunked and why do creationists love false dichotomies?
  17. The passage where the Jewish leaders try to stone Jesus for saying he was I Am only appears in John's gospel, which is the latest and least historically accurate of the four canonical gospels. Nowhere in the Synoptic gospels does Jesus ever say he is I Am or that he is God in the flesh. Mark's gospel is the earliest of the canonical gospel accounts and Mark portrays Jesus as a human being who was adopted as the son of God at the point of his baptism. In Paul's letters, which are the earliest Christian writings we have, Jesus doesn't become the son of God until after his resurrection. In Judaism, the son of God doesn't mean that someone is biologically the son of God nor does it mean the person is the messiah but the son of God is just a title for a Jewish leader specifically chosen by God to lead the people. In the Hebrew scriptures, King Saul was also called the son of God but that doesn't mean he is the messiah nor does it mean he is God in the flesh.
  18. Where are all the white Oreo cookies at this year? I've been looking all over the place for them but none of the stores are carrying them and it's one week until Christmas. I love those white Oreo cookies but they just aren't anywhere around here. Is anyone else able to find them anywhere?
  19. That's what I've read before that the Israelites were originally polytheistic pagans from Canaan. Yahweh was just one of many gods in the Canaanite pantheon that the Israelites worshiped along with El and the Israelites believed Asherah was Yahweh's wife. The bible even refers to her as the Queen of Heaven.
  20. I don't think this even so much of a Christian problem as it is an American problem. Americans in general seem to have this center of the universe mentality about their country with that whole American expectionalism nonsense. They have this whole attitude that America is the greatest nation on Earth, America is the moral police of the world so let's go wage pointless invasions in other people's countries, questioning the greatness of America means you're an American hater etc. But if you look at other first world countries, Christians in those countries have no problems accepting evolution and it doesn't bother their faith at all. Even most Jews accept evolution and expect for Ben Stein, I don't know of any Jews trying to force creationism in public schools even though both Jews and Christians believe in Genesis. It's only American evangelicals who seem to have a problem with evolution while the rest of the world has moved on. The only first world nation that has more creationists than the U.S. is Turkey which has their own Muslim version of creationism.
  21. The problem with this argument is that not all Christians, including not all creationists, believe in original sin. The doctrine of original sin is not found anywhere in the bible and was first created by St. Augustine. Augustine himself was no biblical literalist and believed that if science contradicts scripture, science should win over scripture. This is a quote from Augustine's writing, The Literal Interpretation of Genesis:
  22. You can skip Chris Hedges' book on atheism. I like American Fascists but it's best to ignore his ramblings on the New Atheists.
  23. This reminds me of how one time during Sunday school at my parents' church, the teacher talked about how he was reading his kindergarten-aged daughter the bible verses where it says parents should stone disobedient children and she started crying. He asked her why she was crying and she said she felt sorry for all the kids that died. He told it like it was a cutesy memory and everyone thought it was a really cute and adorable story but I thought it was sick. Who reads their kindergarten kids Leviticus passages? Even my parents never did that to me. I believed in the Second Coming when I was a Christian though I didn't believe in all that 1000 year Rapture stuff but one of my fears when I was a Christian was that Jesus would come back when I was naked and everyone would see me naked because of this verse in Revelation where it commands Christians not to sleep naked in case Jesus comes back while you're naked. Like what if Jesus came back while I was masturbating or something?
  24. Another problem with this argument is that James and Paul were not skeptics of any sense of the word. Paul was a devout Pharisee and James was a Jew. They both already accepted the supernatural and believed in God and miracles. A skeptic is someone who demands evidence to accept a fact and relies on the scientific method to determine what is true. Given that the scientific method wasn't formed back then and there were no skeptics in the ancient world, it is silly to assert that James and Paul were "skeptics" just because they believed in a religion different from Christianity and just because Paul actively opposed Christianity doesn't make him a skeptic. They were believers who converted to another form of believers. It would be like arguing that since Osama bin Laden is opposed to Christianity, Osama bin Laden must be a skeptic and if he converted to Christianity, it would somehow miraculously prove the bible is real.
  25. Actually Nathanial is correct that most bible scholars are either liberal Christians who don't believe in biblical inerrancy like the Jesus Seminar or secular scholars. Bart D Ehrman says himself in Jesus Interrupted that the views he endorses in that book are the mainstream view of biblical scholars and aren't really anything new. Ehrman says the problem is that most pastors at church learn this stuff about the Q gospel at bible school but don't tell their churches about it. He relates one story where he taught bible scholarship to one congregation and one Christian woman was upset not because of what Ehrman said but because she never heard it before even though their pastor knew about it. The Q gospel theories are the mainstream biblical scholarship view. It's just not being communicated to churches effectively.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.