Jump to content

Recommended Posts

count up to activate the  bible bot regurgitation

 

1.

 

Will it be New or Old Testament? You make the call.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 325
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Can I start quoting Lord of the Rings to start proving it now?

I would like you to respond to HA, in your own words: "Hi Ben,   I’m usually hesitant to engage in a thread that’s already 10 pages long, especially when one individual is having to respond to near

You've got to be kidding, Ben!  Did you not develop empathy at some point during your upbringing?  If not, I'll explain it to you:   Empathy is a mental state wherein one can imagine what another be

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. BarnacleBen's splinter group of radicals has discovered the One True Doctrine of Christ...just like every other denomination claims.

2. All other denominations are false... just like each denomination will tell you.

3. People who don't believe in Jesus need saving...just like every denomination will say.

4. Jesus is the imaginary being assigned to this task....which pretty much every major denomination will agree with.

 

Nothing new here. :-)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ben, your god couldn't find two people in a fucking garden, and can't forgive unless you smear blood all over something.  It's far, far too stupid to make anything more complicated than a mudpie.

 

Florduh, My vote is to show this obstinate troll the door -- If he can't even follow some painfully simple moderator instructions and STFU with the Bible verses, I doubt very much that he's capable of quality dialogue with the rest of us.

I'm curious about the "Lion's Den". I posted here because the forum rules implied I would be able confess what I believe without restraint. I haven't intentionally given offense, even though that's allowed. I don't understand why my posts are controversial?

 

Based on the fact that your previous thread was mostly cut-and-pasted bible quotes with a few token attempts to answer questions, I concluded you were just an atheist troll pretending to be a Christian.  I imagined you sitting in your bedroom chuckling at how many people were wasting their time posting to your nonsense thread.

 

Now I'm beginning to wonder if you really are a Christian.  Why don't you try leaving out the bible verses and state your views clearly?  The bible can be interpreted in many ways, so quoting the bible doesn't state your views.  That's my suggestion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

To start with, here is something I believe:

Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?”Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” (Jn6)

 

 

Baltar: I'm a scientist. And as a scientist, I believe if God exists, our knowledge of him is imperfect. Why? Because the stories and myths we have are the products of men, the passage of time. The religion you practice is based on a theory, impossible to prove. Yet you bestow it with absolutes like, "There is no such thing as coincidence."

D'Anna/Number Three: It's called faith.

Baltar: Absolute belief in God's will means there's a reason for everything. Everything! And yet you can't help ask yourself how God can allow death and destruction. And then despise yourself for asking. But the truth is, if we knew God's will, we'd all be gods, wouldn't we??

 

Battlestar Galactica Season 3, episode 7, "A Measure of Salvation"  

Link to post
Share on other sites

It rhymes with "douchelord"

 

Oh wait, that's it

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious about the "Lion's Den". I posted here because the forum rules implied I would be able confess what I believe without restraint. I haven't intentionally given offense, even though that's allowed. I don't understand why my posts are controversial?

 

Not so much controversial as obtuse, Ben.  Instead of talking to us, asking and responding, you posted a bunch of Bible verses.  We've read the Bible. We don't believe what the Bible says.  You were told not to do it by a moderator, and you didn't listen.

 

Your style of posting -is- offensive to Me.  If we want to read the Bible, we open the Bibles in our own libraries or pop over to a site like Bible Gateway. Repeatedly shoving scriptures in the faces of people who don't believe them is extremely rude.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are looking for proof, there is none. God’s word makes it clear that no one is persuaded to believe through their own reason. It is possible for anyone to hypothesize an alternative to the evidence. Even a simple “I choose to believe there is some other explanation” is sufficient rational grounds to deny the resurrection.

 

Scripture teaches that belief comes in the mystery of hearing the word through the operation of the Holy Spirit, and that unbelief comes through our nature, sin, and false teaching which turn us away from hope in Christ and toward the self-righteous justification of our sinful desires.

Ben, this is an interesting view you have.  Not surprising to me, since it's precisely the point of view that I had as a Christian (I had joined up with the Reformed Baptist tradition), but interesting nonetheless.  You seem to be saying that belief is an act of the will.  However, in post #101 of the "What is the Gospel?" thread you said the following:

 

...if you were to produce Jesus' bones, then I would walk away and be done with the whole thing. Even something like an early textual referrence to Jesus' burial shrine, or his magical knucklebone would make the case for the resurrection much less compelling.

 

Now, I'm sure you derive this belief from 1 Corinthians 15, where it says that if Jesus is not raised from the dead then your faith is in vain.  I know you went further to say that Paul invites readers to question the apostles about Jesus' resurrection.  But let's be honest with the text, it doesn't actually make such an invitation (1 Corinthians 15:6 comes close, but not quite).  On the contrary, in earlier posts I've made an invitation for you to interview the children of eyewitnesses to a certain Hindu saint's miracles, who could still be alive today as of July 19, 2013 when I write these words, and you haven't yet provided any response to this.

 

This all suggests to me that your claims about the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus aren't genuine.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you're lying.  What I'm suggesting is that your faith may not actually be based on objective facts, but rather may be arbitrary.  So you're saying on purely arbitrary grounds that we will all go to an eternal hell if we don't convert to a religion centered on the worship of a certain white man from the 1st century.

 

See why I'm not willing to upend my entire way of life to do as you suggest by converting to Christianity?  I understand you have a lot of posts to respond to, but I'd at least appreciate an acknowledgement that you read this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you are looking for proof, there is none. God’s word makes it clear that no one is persuaded to believe through their own reason. It is possible for anyone to hypothesize an alternative to the evidence. Even a simple “I choose to believe there is some other explanation” is sufficient rational grounds to deny the resurrection.

 

Scripture teaches that belief comes in the mystery of hearing the word through the operation of the Holy Spirit, and that unbelief comes through our nature, sin, and false teaching which turn us away from hope in Christ and toward the self-righteous justification of our sinful desires.

(I had joined up with the Reformed Baptist tradition), 

 

Reformed BAPTIST?!  Bhim, did you ever come across Al Martin?  Maybe that goes back too far in time.  I used to listen to his cassette tapes (! dates me) in the car when I was in college.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Even so, you seem surprisingly aloof to what a huge piece of evidence the texts are. It is not an attitude I've encounterrd much of in recent critical scholarship. If you go back hundreds of years, you will find many bold claims about the lack of historicity in the new testament texts, but most of those claims have fallen in the piecemeal discovery of corroborating evidence over the centuries.

 

 

First, you really need some sources to corroborate the New Testament...

 

The text is continually corroborated, and constantly validated to be free from anachronism. Just a few years ago, higher critics were insisting Pontius Pilate was a mythical invention of the Christians. Now they are insisting the Christians got his title wrong? How much corroboration is needed? I will tell you.

Since you are an unbeliever, there will never be enough for you to trust in Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins.

 

But there is enough that scholars, including unbelieving ones, accept much of the general historicity of the accounts.

 

 

Barnacleben, I first thought your handle was pronounced "Barnac Leben," and that you were incorporating the German word for "life" into it.  Now I'm guessing that it's "Barnacle Ben."  Oh well.  Leben is still pretty good.

 

It will help this discussion, since few here are specialists in 1st century history, to provide citations as one would do in a scholarly paper.  From what I've seen, for example, higher critics generally were not insisting just a few years ago that Pilate is a figure of myth, since Pilate is known from an inscription that's been around for some time.  If you can provide references to show that  non-Christian scholars who are not employed by seminaries accept much of the historicity of the NT, that would be useful.

 

I'm not sure whether you're a biblical inerrantist, but if you are, there's the further problem that even one false statement in the NT invalidates inerrancy.  You might hold that some passages are not meant to be historical accounts but are theological meditations/midrashim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm curious about the "Lion's Den". I posted here because the forum rules implied I would be able confess what I believe without restraint. I haven't intentionally given offense, even though that's allowed. I don't understand why my posts are controversial?

 

Not so much controversial as obtuse, Ben.  Instead of talking to us, asking and responding, you posted a bunch of Bible verses.  We've read the Bible. We don't believe what the Bible says.  You were told not to do it by a moderator, and you didn't listen.

 

Your style of posting -is- offensive to Me.  If we want to read the Bible, we open the Bibles in our own libraries or pop over to a site like Bible Gateway. Repeatedly shoving scriptures in the faces of people who don't believe them is extremely rude.

 

 

I was under the impression that being rude was acceptable in the Lion's Den. I thought that it was just repeated personal attacks that weren't allowed. It's understandable that his style of posting would be offensive to people, but at the point in which he failed to listen to the instructions he was given, that is when it's time to laugh at him, show him the door, and keep laughing until he gives up and decides we're not going to go back to his cult and decides to leave.

 

You really can' take what he says seriously. Either he's downright delusional or he's just trolling us for our reactions. Either way, it's best to treat him like a troll and humor him until he gets bored and leaves.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The lion's den is just that.  We will tear into you.   The only things that really get slapped down is personal attacks.  

 

 

If you want restraint then you need to go to the other two debate forums. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

but he is just an innocent Christian filled with the loOOOOVE* of Christ cant you understand that!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*cannibalistic hate filled  human sacrificed war mongering love.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You might find it interesting to go through some of the older topics and witness the responses to other Christians that wanted to make points using the Bible.

I might.

 

While I have no problem with you believing whatever makes you feel good, you're not going to be able to dialog with most Ex-Christians very well if you rely on the Bible to affirm that your beliefs are somehow superior to the beliefs of others.

It is universal for people to believe that they are correct, if they didn't they would alter their beliefs. Mutually exclusive ideas cannot both be true. Either Jesus died on the cross for the forgiveness of your sins and rose from the dead or He did not. One is true, the other is false. If what you believe is true, then what I believe is false. I don't feel morally superior to you, but I believe you are wrong. Likewise, I expect that you believe I am wrong.

 

My personal experience that led my out of Christianity was when I realized that Christainity was revisionist theology.

I thank the many Jewish writers that opened my eyes to how badly the New Testament distorts and misuses the Hebrew scriptures.

That first came as a terrible shock because it wrecked everything I was brought up to believe in.

It is sad that you were taught so badly, so many of us are. I was taught badly too. I remember how painfully disorienting it was to me when I discovered that most of the things I believed weren't true around 14.

 

Humpty Dumpty was smashed and no apologist or preacher can put it back together again.

It might be helpful to keep in mind that the phrase "been there, done that" is a fairly good description of the people here and that's why it will be difficult for you to dialog using tools that are not accepted as meaningful.

You should keep in mind that as an Ex-ex-Christian I have "been there,done that" as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is universal for people to believe that they are correct, if they didn't they would alter their beliefs. Mutually exclusive ideas cannot both be true. Either Jesus died on the cross for the forgiveness of your sins and rose from the dead or He did not. One is true, the other is false. If what you believe is true, then what I believe is false. I don't feel morally superior to you, but I believe you are wrong. Likewise, I expect that you believe I am wrong.

What are the ramifications of my being wrong?

If there are some, would you please elaborate on exactly what they are?

 

 

My personal experience that led my out of Christianity was when I realized that Christainity was revisionist theology.

 

I thank the many Jewish writers that opened my eyes to how badly the New Testament distorts and misuses the Hebrew scriptures.

That first came as a terrible shock because it wrecked everything I was brought up to believe in.

 

barnacleben:

It is sad that you were taught so badly, so many of us are. I was taught badly too. I remember how painfully disorienting it was to me when I discovered that most of the things I believed weren't true around 14.

It was a matter of being told things by pastors that were advertised as "facts" and as things that must be believed in order to escape eternal damnation.

Eventually they were exposed as nothing more than subjective and dishonest attempts at mind control, but it took years to identify it and root it out.

 

Humpty Dumpty was smashed and no apologist or preacher can put it back together again.

 

It might be helpful to keep in mind that the phrase "been there, done that" is a fairly good description of the people here and that's why it will be difficult for you to dialog using tools that are not accepted as meaningful.

 

barnacleben:

You should keep in mind that as an Ex-ex-Christian I have "been there,done that" as well.

If you've been there as well, there really isn't much point in relying on scripture to make points.

You're already aware that as Ex-Christians, these writings are not "holy" nor do they represent the infallible word of a celestial higher being.

Theology is like debating which flavor of ice cream is the one true ice cream.

It's interesting parlor room chat but not much more than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Bhim, really, what can he say?  If he were Reformed he might pull out B.B. Warfield's trusty old Counterfeit Miracles.  No true Scotsman around here.

 

 

 

True, he might.  As a former Reformed Christian myself, I can relate to this point of view.  Reformed apologists have an answer to everything. I even heard a pastor talk about how he was able to give the eulogy at his deceased, unbelieving brother's funeral, whilst believing the man was in eternal hell.  But most Christians will repeat these claims only half believing them (because they violate their common sense), and ultimately come to a realization that the argument they're making goes against their own conscience.  That's why I'm curious what Ben thinks about all of this.

 

We are not trying to convince you to abandon you faith in Jesus. Believe what you want.  But we have left that faith because we finally realized it is a myth used for two thousand years for the accumulation of power and wealth. This was no knee jerk reaction. We all (or virtually all), independent of each other, did extensive research because we did NOT want to give up a virtually life long faith through which we saw the world. 

 

You see, we don't threaten people with horrible punishment for not agreeing with us. You have that right. But don't insult us by saying or implying the we just don't understand the faith we worshiped for many years. We quoted the same bible that you are quoting now. But we each separately had a reverse road to Damascus experience, so to speak. Not with visions or the like. We had a "Wait a minute, does this make any sense?" experience. And that was the beginning of our "awakening" to the truth. 

 

But I don't think you want the truth. You want your security blanket. Have a nice sleep.  bill

 

I concur and am not trying to get Ben to stop believing in Jesus.  I would, however, like for him to cease convering others to his religion.  That's another reason I see some value in this discussion.

 

Bhim, I looked for your post, but cannot find the other thread, it may have been deleted.

 

I agree that many Christians do not have an understanding of Christian teaching.

 

As for conversion, scripture teaches that Christians do not convert, God converts. Christians proclaim, and Christians baptize, but God, the Holy Spirit brings those spiritually dead in unbelief, alive. You are, no doubt, aware of some of the sowing parables. Christians are called to sow, not to force plants to grow.

 

So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. (1Cor3)

Link to post
Share on other sites
We don't have slaves in our country. That was outlawed in the 1800s. You may have noticed a lack of slavery where you live.

We may not still be called slaves, but we still have masters.

 

Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution.... American Atheists is an institution... http://www.atheists.org/  .... be subject to that as it says in the bible.

To call something an institution by redefining a word, does not make it an institution. In additions Christians are called to respectfully speak the truth to power, even as they submit to suffering, persecution, and death. Paul did not resist his chains, but used his rights as a Roman citizen to gain a forum to proclaim the gospel.

 

 

Honor everyone ... like Richard Dawkins, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Ricky Gervais, Satan, etc.....

I think its a stretch to include Satan in the list. But yes, scripture calls us to treat people respectfully, but it also calls us to sharply rebuke those introducing false doctrine into the church.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that his "ex-Christian" status was similar to mine before I deconverted in that he could not trust any denominations he grew up or was surrounded by as they were not extreme enough or adherent to scripture enough. He found one that fit his beliefs and relabeled himself a Christian I doubt he actually understands real criticisms of Christianity.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Just cuz something is written down and a large number of people believe it does not mean it is true..." (2MR25)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As for conversion, scripture teaches that Christians do not convert, God converts. Christians proclaim, and Christians baptize, but God, the Holy Spirit brings those spiritually dead in unbelief, alive. You are, no doubt, aware of some of the sowing parables. Christians are called to sow, not to force plants to grow.

 

So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. (1Cor3)

 

 

Who cares what scripture teaches?  Really.  Nobody here cares what you fairy tale book says.

 

 

 

But yes, scripture calls us to treat people respectfully, but it also calls us to sharply rebuke those introducing false doctrine into the church.

 

What incredible hypocrisy given that every single doctrine in Christianity is false.  Every last one.

 

 

 

Biblical Revelation:   There is no God.

 

Biblical Authority:  There is no God.

 

Biblical Cannon:  Created by Rome to serve the needs of Rome.

 

Atributes of God:  There is no God.

 

Monotheism:  There is no God.

 

Trinity:  There is no God.

 

Divinity of Christ:  There is no God.  Christ is a fictional character invented by Paul of Tarsus.

 

Persecution of Christ:  Christ is a fictional character invented by Paul of Tarsus.

 

Pneumatology:  There is no God.

 

Creationism:  Our universe came from the Big Bang, life from abiogenesis and diversity from evolution.

 

Heaven:  There is no afterlife.

 

Hell:  There is no afterlife.

 

Sin:  There are no gods to offend.  Sin is just an idea churches and religious leaders use to control people.

 

Fall of Man:  Humans have been around for at least a 100,000 years.  Before they were human our ancestors were animals.  The Garden of Eden was built by a Bronze Age king of Tyrus.

 

Original Sin:  Never happened.

 

Atonement:  There was no Christ, there is no God and sin is imaginary.

 

Eucharist:  Pagan cannibalism ritual that was incorporated into Christianity.

 

Resurrection:  Never happened.

 

Death on the Cross:  Never happened.  Even from the beginning Christians had to calculate based on the sun and moon when they would celebrate Easter.  Originally Easter celebrates the sun conquering winter.

 

 

It's all a pack of lies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really care.. but some new people here can see how all Ben can do is quote verses. He is a demonstration of the uselessness of Christianity.

Christianity is not a pragmatic religion, particularly in the present. It is a call to believe something unrealized in this life. Not only do we hope and trust in someone unseen who seems foolish to others, but we put aside our own pleasures in light of that hope and live a life of suffering and discomfort for the sake of our neighbors.

 

In the wisdom of the world, it is not merely useless, it is tragic folly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't really care.. but some new people here can see how all Ben can do is quote verses. He is a demonstration of the uselessness of Christianity.

Christianity is not a pragmatic religion, particularly in the present. It is a call to believe something unrealized in this life. Not only do we hope and trust in someone unseen who seems foolish to others, but we put aside our own pleasures in light of that hope and live a life of suffering and discomfort for the sake of our neighbors.

 

In the wisdom of the world, it is not merely useless, it is tragic folly.

 

 

You may see it as a call to believe in something unrealized in this life. I see Christianity as a cult that has survived through the years because of effective marketing, requiring people to believe the claims contained within the Bible, based on no evidence outside of the Bible, under the threat of torture after death, in Hell.

 

You hope and trust in a god that can't be proven to exist without the Bible, who is corrupt, manipulative, narcissistic, and very likely sadistic. How could you trust something like that whether it is real or not? How could you put your faith in that? I do see your belief as tragic folly. It is a religion that survives on people's fear of the unknown. Christianity is terrorism of the mind and nothing more than that. You can go ahead and believe differently about Christianity, that's fine, I don't care what you believe, but you have no reason to think that Biblical "wisdom" is anything more than "wisdom of the world". That is precisely what it is. Christianity was put together by arrogant, self-righteous people, who needed to be right and they used the religion they built to control people, relying on their own wisdom to do it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We don't have slaves in our country. That was outlawed in the 1800s. You may have noticed a lack of slavery where you live.

We may not still be called slaves, but we still have masters.

 

Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution.... American Atheists is an institution... http://www.atheists.org/  .... be subject to that as it says in the bible.

To call something an institution by redefining a word, does not make it an institution. In additions Christians are called to respectfully speak the truth to power, even as they submit to suffering, persecution, and death. Paul did not resist his chains, but used his rights as a Roman citizen to gain a forum to proclaim the gospel.

 

 

Honor everyone ... like Richard Dawkins, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Ricky Gervais, Satan, etc.....

I think its a stretch to include Satan in the list. But yes, scripture calls us to treat people respectfully, but it also calls us to sharply rebuke those introducing false doctrine into the church.

 

 

I sharply rebuke the bible and christianity as a bunch of baloney.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

You only believe the bible is true because you were never a True Ex-Christian.

 

How's that for irony folks?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator

The question isn't what you or I may believe, but why do we believe it? Reasons can range from "so many others believe it" to "it just feels right" to "that's what my family always believed" to "evidence and logic lead me to believe x is true." 

 

Once you state that you have faith in something and concede that there is no evidence, there can be no further discussion. Faith always trumps reason, so enjoy your beliefs but don't expect others to hop on board just because you think it's a good idea. You may believe something without a reason, but many others need for things to make a bit more sense and present some evidence before they adopt the belief.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.