Earth Guide for Aliens [Video]
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Earth Guide for Aliens [Video]
Earth Guide for Aliens [Video]
Quote of the Week: Blaise Pascal | Reflections
Image via WikipediaThank you, Dr Kenneth Samples
Not only do we only know God through Jesus Christ, but we only know ourselves through Jesus Christ; we only know life and death through Jesus Christ. Apart from Jesus Christ we cannot know the meaning of our life or our death, of God or of ourselves.—Blaise Pascal, Pensees, trans. A.J. Krailsheimer, rev. ed. (New York: Penguin, 1995), no. 417/548.
Quote of the Week: Blaise Pascal | Reflections
So-Called "Failed" Biblical Prophecies - Part 1
1. Ezekiel incorrectly predicted that Babylon would conquer Egypt.
2. Ezekiel incorrectly predicted King Nebuchadnezzar would destroy the city of Tyre (or Tyrus).
3. Micah incorrectly predicted the destruction of Jerusalem.
4. Jeremiah incorrectly predicted that the Babylonians would be exiled for 70 years, but it apparently only lasted 59 years.
My friend e-mailed me those four points, as well as his "source":
http://www.goatstar.org/failed-prophecies/#Ezekiel%20predicts%20Babylon%20would%20conquer%20Egypt (it's a semi-article that has very little actual info, so it's difficult to understand).
I decided to split this into 4 posts.This first post will be about Ezekiel and a prophecy given that Egypt would be conquered by Babylon. Ezekiel 29: 10-12 and 30:10-11 are quoted using the NRSV translation. In the NIV the passages read:
8 “‘Therefore this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I will bring a sword against you and kill both man and beast. 9 Egypt will become a desolate wasteland. Then they will know that I am the LORD.
“‘Because you said, “The Nile is mine; I made it,” 10 therefore I am against you and against your streams, and I will make the land of Egypt a ruin and a desolate waste from Migdol to Aswan, as far as the border of Cush. 11 The foot of neither man nor beast will pass through it; no one will live there for forty years. 12 I will make the land of Egypt desolate among devastated lands, and her cities will lie desolate forty years among ruined cities. And I will disperse the Egyptians among the nations and scatter them through the countries.- Ezekiel 29:8-12
10 “‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: “‘I will put an end to the hordes of EgyptWhat does history say? Did Nebuchadnezzar conquer Egypt? The link given above says "No" but it makes no mentions of cuneiform inscriptions that support the Bible. I actually found somel links that help flesh out those early years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign.I don't want to just spit out what the links already say. So here they are.
by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.
11 He and his army—the most ruthless of nations—
will be brought in to destroy the land.
They will draw their swords against Egypt
and fill the land with the slain. Ezekiel 30:10-11
Did Nebuchadnezzar conquer Egypt?
Ezekiel Timeline
What does it mean to be "Regenerate"? Part 2
...atheist-about-Christianity-but-agnostic-about-all-other-religions...
Why must you be wrong about everything? Atheism is a statement of belief, and agnosticism is a statement of knowledge, so as far as I know, I'm atheist about all religions and their supernatural claims.
Interesting ways of defining "agnosticism" and it does not seem that everyone agrees with you: "an intellectual doctrine or attitude affirming the uncertainty of all claims to ultimate knowledge." It can't be a statement of knowledge because uncertainty is not knowledge. It's good that Ryan has made up his mind because he did not say that before. Once he said that he was not sure about other religions but he was sure that Christianity was wrong. It's not really progress, but it is something.
now he thinks the Bible has mistakes in it.
And outright falsehoods!
So Ryan always thought that the Bible has had mistakes in it? He certainly thinks they are now. What was the falsehoods?
Consider this: Anderson is arguing that rest and relaxation and connecting with one's family is the same thing as what
I did no such thing, I am aware that the bible makes wild, unsubstantiated supernatural claims. I asked you to demonstrate that what you perceived to be regeneration in your life, that you (mis)identify as biblical/supernatural regeneration, is any different than the regeneration in my life. What I would argue though is that doing things you love can produce the same results that christians get when they think they are being regenerated by the holy spirit. Since you can't demonstrate that the holy Spirit exists, you'll need to demonstrate that what you actually get from your regeneration is different at all, in any way, from what I get when I'm regenerated by doing things I love. (spoiler alert, you don't do that!)
Here is the problems in communicating with Ryan. Arguing that doing the things you love is no different than the same feelings one has from Biblical regeneration is no different from how I summed up Ryan's argument. He just restated what I said. The reason why Ryan is confused is that he has not realized that comparing his definition of regeneration and what the Bible says about it is like trying to compare a potato chip to a microchip.
...notice that Ryan didn't bother to explain how his idea of regeneration is back up by this scripture.
Um... why would I explain why my idea of regeneration is backed up by your scripture? I'm an atheist, remember? I just don't think your "scripturally backed up" version is any different than my version in practice. That's the key, in practice.
Um, my point was for Ryan back up his understanding of regeneration of what the Bible says about regeneration with scripture. How can we even begin to discuss these issues if we can't agree on what the Bible says, I discussed how this worked out in practice. Remember the discussion about Galatians 5? That's what the Bible's regeneration is in practice!
In order to get the happy feelings he got from enjoying what he owes God for any he has to keep doing it
[In order to get the happy feelings he gets from enjoying the things God gave him, Ryan has to keep doing those things.]
What a messy sentence. But I think I get the gist. You realize I have a memory, right? But either way, I'll keep doing these things or other things until I die and I will have as full a life as I possibly can.
For which you owe God. Everything you have.
But that's really besides the point, except that it demonstrates (twice) that you are not a clear thinker. But let me ask, don't you have to keep going to church and/or keep trying to "not sin" to "get the happy feelings"?
Nope. Going to church and fighting your flesh are consequences of regeneration. It's a gift of God. You don't kick it off. You can't continue it. You can't finish it. You can do nothing without Jesus. I thought that you knew what the Bible says, Ryan?
Now come'on [sic] be honest: you can find yourself some where [sic] in verses 19-21. If you are still in those verses and not in verses 22-26 you need to get saved because you are [sic] regenerate yet.
So we're back to Martin Luther being biblically unregenerate?
Who said Martin Luther's life wasn't in verse 22-26? Can Ryan prove that verses 19-21 apply to Martin Luther? Sure would like to see that.
I don't know about you but I think that I have more than shown how the Bible describes regeneration.
Yes, nice job, and good for you, but I that's not what I asked for. What I asked was that you demonstrate how what you, Marcus McElhaney, perceives to be regeneration in your life is any different than what I perceive to be regeneration in my life. You do see the difference, right? I've never met a Christian who could demonstrate this, so don't beat yourself up too badly about it.
I thought showing how Biblical regeneration is more than just enjoying the life God blessed you with would be enough. But if Ryan wants a more personal example how about this one: The Holy Spirit keeps me from cursing out Ryan and keeps me praying for him and having patience with him no matter what ignorant argument he puts forth. He keeps me from using profanity and outright unfounded rudeness. Being regenerate causes me to treat Ryan better than he treats me. How about that? God is truly good.
What had happen' was.....: What does it mean to be "Regenerate"?
New Atheism, Science & Morality by Glenn Peoples - Apologetics 315
New Atheism, Science & Morality by Glenn Peoples - Apologetics 315
What? Debunking Christianity: It's Ignorant to Say "There is No Evidence for a Historical Jesus"
Okay, having watched James McGrath and Tommy Baker duke it out with the fanatical mythicists (not all are fanatical), I want to put to rest the ignorant claim that “There is no evidence for a historical Jesus.” There most definitely is. It's called "confirming evidence" or evidence of things we would expect to find if there was a historical Jesus, and it is Legion.
Amen. Hallelujah! John Loftus does seem to see something the same way I do.
Let's have done with such an ignorant claim.
Yes, Please. This we can agree on.
The debate is whether there is sufficient evidence.
Here is where we part company. I do think that there is more than sufficient evidence for Jesus' physical existence in time.
My claim in chapter 12 of The Christian Delusion
is that at best the Jesus movement that stemmed from John the Baptist and later reflected in Paul's genuine letters was an apocalyptic doomsday cult, and that this apocalyptic message of theirs can be found in every Jewish religious group or movement from the time of the Maccabees to the Bar Kokhba revolt.And here also is where there is several points of contention. There is far from a consensus on Loftus' theory but at least he doesn't claim Jesus never existed.
I find that the fanatical mythicists are not taking this evidence seriously. This is what is called disconfirming evidence, which is the strongest type of evidence, and it disconfirms the mythicist position.
I agree again. But I doubt John Loftus is going to make a habit of this - following the truth where ever it leads.
These mythicists are not true skeptics for they are making a claim about the historical evidence, that there was no historical Jesus. At best the historical evidence is patchy. At best they should stop behaving like believers, who, when their pet theory is criticized insult and berate the person who says otherwise. If they were really interested in the truth they would assess it dispassionately. The skeptical mythicist, at best, should simply be interested in the discussion and learn from all sides, not claiming more than what the evidence shows, and say "I don't know if there was or if there wasn't a historical Jesus," like my friend Hector Avalos. There is no reason for all of this emotional bluster. That's a mark of fanaticism which is born of faith, like the religionists they reject.
I'd agree with this also although I disagree with Loftus as to how much of the Bible is credible. He agrees with the Bible that Jesus existed, but denies the most important things the Bible says about Jesus. Still it's better than outright denying the historical evidence blindly. It's not fanaticism to accept a position for which you have evidence for. And there is too much evidence to deny Jesus did in fact exist.
Debunking Christianity: It's Ignorant to Say "There is No Evidence for a Historical Jesus"
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
What does it mean to be "Regenerate"?
What had happen' was.....: Debunking Christianity: Dr. Avalos vs. Dr. Weikart: The Rematch
Although the post is about an audio debate between scholars Avalos and Weikart on the Unbelievable? broadcast regarding which best explains the origins of Nazis ideology: "Christian antisemitism" or Darwinism. I think Avalos lost this one, by the way. As he often does, atheist-about-Christianity-but-agnostic-about-all-other-religions Ryan Anderson took issue with the post. He often does. However the discussion has shifted to what it means to be a "Christian". Anderson claims that he used to be a born-again Christian but now he thinks the Bible has mistakes in it and that he was mistaken and all Christians are mistaken. Rather than just send off a quick reply in the comments I think it better to start a new post to explain exactly what the argument is and my response in a clear way. Ryan wrote the following:
Oh I'm regenerate, I regenerated this weekend when kayaking with my Daughter, and this morning when she blew me a kiss walking into school. Before that, I regenerated date night with my Wife and then again watching the two of them play with each others hair, before that I regenerated while mountain biking at dawn, then there was a trip to the mountains and that time on my sailboat...
Can you demonstrate that your regeneratedness is any different than mine? And I mean demonstrate, not just assert.
But I do love the term apostate, I think I'll change my face book status to apostate.
To which I responded:
Use the Biblical definition of the term and I'll answer your question. Nice emotional punt. Totally irrelevant but nice try. Good thing God love you.
Anderson replied:
Says the guy who didn't answer the question. I don't believe the biblical definition (the supernatural one) is valid, so I'll just assume you cannot demonstrate that what you think you've experienced in "biblical regeneration" is any different any other sort of natural regeneration. So there we are.
Said I:
Yeah, I did. you are the one mixing apples and microchips. You prove you understand what "regeneration" is first and then I'll answer your question. Otherwise, you are wasting my time.
To which Anderson replied:
Where?????????
And to be fair, I asked first, but since you are pathological in your avoidance of questions you know you can't answer (and because you are an infant), here's my take on "biblical" regeneration, whoever wrote Ephesians sums up what I think most christian sects agree is the meaning of regeneration, see Ephesians 2:1-10.
Now, demonstrate that what you perceive to be biblical "regeneration" in your life is actually any different in any way than what anyone else senses as any other type of regeneration in their life. You've not been able to demonstrate in any way any sort of supernatural influence, be it an indwelling of the holy spirit or whatever, so I don't hold out much hope for you on this one, but seriously, good luck with that.
Consider this: Anderson is arguing that rest and relaxation and connecting with one's family is the same thing as what th (we Bible says about being regenerated by the Holy Spirit. I'll wait for the snickering to stop....okay now? First let's see what Ephesians 2:1-10 says (in red and notice that Ryan didn't bother to explain how his idea of regeneration is backed up by this scripture.)
1 As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
Before we dive into some exegesis it's important to be clear on what we are talking about. I totally agree that this scripture is a good to explain regeneration. It describes what God does in the life of one who believes.Verses 1-3 lays out exactly what an unregenerate person's situation is before God's grace is applied to that individual. We are dead in our sins and unable to help ourselves. We deserve God's wrath. Notice this describes everyone - your gender, upbringing, intentions, personality, experiences, nor anything about you changes that. I just don't see how spending time with and enjoying your wife, children, or any of your possessions changes any of that or fixes the fact that you deserve God's wrath especially since without God you would have none of that. Verses 4 and 5 tells us how we are saved - by God's grace (unmerited favor) . Verses 6-10 tells us why God saved us. It is a gift and God is making us into masterpieces throught Jesus so that we can do good works that God has predestined us to do! Still not seeing how that has anything to do with Ryan Anderson's definition of "regeneration". The Bible is talking about a lasting regeneration that happens once and is good for all time. In order to get the happy feelings he got from enjoying what he owes God for any he has to keep doing it. One day, our Children grow up and move away. Their companionship is not something you can depend on and it will change. These 10 verses are talking about a relationship that never changes.
It's important to point out that atheists are capable of doing good things. They can be good parents and loving spouses. But notice that this isn't enough to make the jump from being spiritually dead in your sins and being complete. Your niceness or goodness is not the point.
The good things you do are not good enough to make up for the sins that permeate our lives. Sin is anything that goes against the character and nature of God. "Regeneration" is the process that God does that turns your mind from what it was to something better. It's an upgrade. It's a gift. You don't get it because you are smarter or better. God does it for you. To be regenerate is to be born again. And once you are born you can't be unborn.
6 All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep us away.- Isaiah 64:6
Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again." - John 3:3
There are several other scriptures that spring to mind that show more of what I'm talking about. First let's look at scriptures that juxtapose the regenerate and the unregenerate:
5 Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. 6 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.12 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it. 13 For if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live.14 For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God. 15 The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba,Father.” 16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children. 17 Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.- Romans 8:5-17
16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness
23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.- Galatians 5:16-26Now come'on be honest: you can find yourself some where in verses 19-21. If you are still in those verses and not in verses 22-26 you need to get saved because you are regenerate yet. The passage is talking about lifestyle. It's talking about the things that we practice and/or want to practice. Can enjoying family and hobbies move you from verses 19-21 to 22-26? Nope.
It's not just the New Testament that talks about how God has to regenerate us - molding and shaping us into better than what we are. The Old Testament is full of such passages also. Here is one of my favorites:
This was the whole point for God to send the prophet Jeremiah to the potter's house in Jeremiah 18.
I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh. - Ezekiel 11:19
5 Then the word of the LORD came to me. 6 He said, “Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?” declares the LORD. “Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, Israel. 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it. - Jeremiah 18:5-10This was also the point behind God sending Ezekiel to the "Valley of Dry Bones" in Ezekiel 37.
Why is sin and death so connected - almost synonymous?
11 Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the LORD have spoken, and I have done it, declares the LORD.’” - Ezekiel 37:11-14
I don't know about you but I think that I have more than shown how the Bible describes regeneration and what it means to be born-again and that Ryan's definition is way too narrow. If a person is truly born-again I don't know why they would ever want to leave God because there is no way to get what God is offering. The only explanation I can offer is that they didn't really experience what the Bible describes as being regenerate. With the experience you should get at least in inkling (that grows) of what you have been saved from! I have also given scripture that explain how to tell if you have been regenerated but I will conclude with one more passage.The wages of the righteous is life, but the earnings of the wicked are sin and death. - Proverbs 10:16For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. - Romans 6:23
14 For by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.15 The Holy Spirit also testifies to us about this. First he says:16 “This is the covenant I will make with themafter that time, says the Lord.I will put my laws in their hearts,and I will write them on their minds.” - Hebrews 10:14-16
Karmatheism - National Messianic Jewish | Examiner.com
Karmatheism - National Messianic Jewish | Examiner.com
Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: J.M. Reu: Luther's German Bible... now online
Image via WikipediaJames Swan posted a link to a book by JM Reu on Martin Luther's German translation of the Bible.In my opinion, the best book in English on the background of Luther's Bible is J.M. Reu's Luther's German Bible: an historical presentation, together with a collection of sources (The Lutheran book concern, 1934). I've been looking for an affordable copy of this book for a long time. Used copies typically only go as low as $75. The price though can go much higher. I've used library copies of this book for years.
Good there is an online version. You can get the link by visiting James Swan's blog.
Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: J.M. Reu: Luther's German Bible... now online
Science Made Simple [Video]
Science Made Simple from Jacob Slack on Vimeo.
Science Made Simple [Video]
Monday, July 18, 2011
FacePalm of the Day #110 - Debunking Christianity: God and Evolution Don’t Mix, by Dr. John Shook
And here is proof of what logic it was that led to John Shook loosing his debate with William Lane Craig. If God was trying to produce us through evolution, what does that tell us about a God that would use that method? Here’s some suggestions:
I wouldn't argue that theistic evolution is viable. I would also have to point out that not all who support theistic evolution would agree with the conclusions that Shook reaches. The Bible does not line up with Shook at all.
A. God prefers diversity, not heights of intelligence or self-awareness. God does not prioritize creatures that can know God and praise God.
2Through the praise of children and infants5 You have made them[d] a little lower than the angels[e]
you have established a stronghold against your enemies,
to silence the foe and the avenger.
3 When I consider your heavens,
the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars,
which you have set in place,
4 what is mankind that you are mindful of them,
human beings that you care for them?[c]
and crowned them[f] with glory and honor.
6 You made them rulers over the works of your hands;
you put everything under their[g] feet:
7 all flocks and herds,
and the animals of the wild,
8 the birds in the sky,
and the fish in the sea,
all that swim the paths of the seas.- Psalm 8:2-8
B. God is quite comfortable with endless horrible struggle and suffering.
11 For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. - Jeremiah 29:11
C. God is quite comfortable with death – lots of it.
53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.”55 “Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?” - 1 Corinthians 15:53-55
D. God likely has plans for the future evolution of life that don’t involve humanity.
Too many scriptures tells us that God's plans involve humanity
18 I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19 For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.- Romans 8:18-25
E. God probably is just using us to later get whatever kind of life He really wants.
The creation was perfect when God created it. Here is what the Bibles about why God did it.
15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. - Colossians 1:15-20
What is God really up to? Maybe God is slow-breeding angels. Or cyborgs. Or the Singularity. Maybe God doesn’t want worshippers – maybe God is seeing if He/She/It can eventually create another fellow God. Link\
Nope: God has a purpose for His people
28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. - Romans 8:28,29
Debunking Christianity: God and Evolution Don’t Mix, by Dr. John Shook
History Collided When Ruby Bridges Met Barack Obama (Video) - The Snob Blog - Danielle Belton's The Black Snob
History Collided When Ruby Bridges Met Barack Obama (Video) - The Snob Blog - Danielle Belton's The Black Snob
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Answering Muslims: Is Bart Simpson a Racist?
Answering Muslims: Is Bart Simpson a Racist?
FacePalm of the Day #109 - The Atheist Literature Club: Religitics - Aftermeeting Discussion 2 - No, mine!
John Loftus posted the following on his blog: Lots of facepalms here. Here is a debate between Valerie Dennett an atheist, Zakir Deedat a Muslim, Greg Turkel a Christian, Hugh Talmage a Mormon, and Moritz Duam a Jew. This is what I'm talking about!
Here is what he linked to. He thinks that it shows exactly what the Outsider Test for Faith (OTF) would look like if it were put into practice in a real discussion between the major religions of America. It is presented as if it is a real transcript of real people talking about religion. There are a couple of things that make me skeptical. 1. No one makes me believe that anyone of the participates know what themselves or the other participates believe beyond straw men and what anyone can glean from mainstream media. 2. No one offers any serious apologetic for why they believe what they believe beyond ridiculing others. 3. The names of the participants could possibly be made up. I've annotated the post exaplaining where it fails to be convincing and the OTF.
A little while after the meeting, Valerie stepped back into the room. The men were still arguing.
"There is absolutely no truth in the Koran." Turkel was saying. "Only a fool would follow the teachings of Muhammad instead of Jesus."
Anyone who would say this means that they have never read the Qur'an. There is some good in it. Some things that are in it that are true. Unfortunately it is a charge many ignorant Christians make.
"The plain fact is that the bible was corrupted!" Zakir shot at him. "Only the Koran is the real work of God."
Funny, how I've never heard a Muslim disagree with this statement despite the fact that no one can demonstrate it. I can't blame them because the Bible contradicts the Qur'an. Although the Qur'an does not say that the Jewish and Christians scriptures are corrupted but if the Muslim does not believe that then there is much he or she must answer.
"The Koran got everything wrong about Jesus," Turkel replied.
Well, not everything. Sinless. Born of a Virgin. Nope, the Qur'an did not get everything wrong about Jesus. This is one of the reason why I think that this piece is fictitious (doesn't rate the status of "parable"): a real knowledgeable person would never say something so outlandish.
"How do you know?" Zakir asked him, harshly.
He doesn't Turkel was asked about how he knew the Qur'an says nothing correct about Jesus, Notice how Turkel doesn't answer the question. .
"There are four men who wrote about the life of Jesus," Greg Turkel answered him. "All of them agree with each other about what went on in his life."
I agree but that doesn't answer Zakir's question.
"Nonsense!" Zakir shot. "Each of those men were late and disagreed with each other fantastically. There are swarms of contradictions among them! Only the Gospel of Barnabas is the true depiction of the life of Jesus, where he admits that he is not the messiah!"
What happened to the discussion of the Qur'an? Zakir is just as bad as Turkel. No proof is offered that the Gospel of Barnabas was not corrupted and that the New Testament was not corrupted.
"Rubbish!" Turkel snapped, pointing a finger at him. "You know darn well that that 'gospel' is even later than Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John!"
Now that's true.
"That's right, " Hugh Talmage joined. "The New Testament writers are more reliable than Barnabas."
Now that's true.
"Oh, excuse me," Zakir mocked. "And we are also to belief that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri?"
I admit that this is a weakness in Mormon Theology but it doesn't help the conversation
Hugh turned red with rage and was about to respond when Moritz Duam overrode him.
Sure would like to have seen the Mormon respond to that charge, but who ever made up this conversation probably doesn't know what the Mormon Apologetic is.
"Even though Barnabas is late it doesn't help the gospels." He argued. "For they portray a man who was not the messiah."
Oh, another argument people make who don't know better. And no substantiation offered whatsoever.
"He WAS the messiah," Greg replied. "He met the standards of the messianic prophecy!"
Agreed, and it's demonstrably true.
"No he didn't!" Moritz yelled. "The messiah is to reveal himself when all on Earth belief in God. That has never happened!"
Sure would like to know where in Tanak that is written. It's just thrown out there and no reference.
"How do you know such a thing?" Turkel yelled back. "Were YOU there?"
Neither were any of the speakers. Adds nothing to the discussion.
"Of course not," Moritz said hotly. "But I didn't have to be there to know that the Christians just stole from the Hebrews!"
More inflammatory argument. Anyone bother to pick up a book? All of the first Christians were Hebrews.
"Rubbish!" Turkel responded, pounding the table.
"It's the truth." Moritz countered. "Why else would the bible contain the works of the Hebrews? We all know that the old and new testaments don't match. The Christians simply took a man from history and tried to make him fit the prophecy!"
And the proof is...?
"Both are right and wrong," Hugh Talmage spoke up. "Joseph Smith got down and prayed which church to join, and an angel of the lord told him that none of them have it right. Not that all of them, particularly Christianity, but..."
And the proof is...?
"Oh, be quiet," Zakir shot. "Nobody takes your faith seriously, not even some of the other Mormons. You are essentially on par with the church of scientology."
Well...that's no way to change another man's mind. Not that proof or evidence would work, but it's always better to try it.
"You've obviously never read the Book of Mormon," Hugh snapped at him. "It would change your life if you had."
I find that most Atheists think that this is the kind of answer is the only one all theists have. Not true.
"No, it would not."
A better answer would be "It didn't."
"Unlikely,"
"I highly doubt that."
If you haven't tried it, then you haven't applied OTF very well have you. The answers given show that none of the speakers have applied the OTF to any one else's worldview.
All three men answered at the same time. Even Valerie scoffed at the idea. She was resting her chin on her hand, listening to them men argue.
Valerie scoffed for a different reason than the men.
"Why?" Hugh asked, turning red.
Duh. Not much of an apologetic.
"Your ideas are absurd, that's why." Moritz said. "You actually think that ancient Jews sailed to America?"
"Well..." Hugh tried.
Should have let Hugh try to present evidence.
"Not to mention that the Garden of Eden was in Missouri," Zakir sneered.
"All seem very unlikely," Turkel finished.
To dismiss a man on possibility is not enough. Where is the discussion? Facts. Evidence.
"Look, you want to know why I believe," Hugh asked, still red. "You really want to know."
"Not particularly," Mortiz replied.
And that is the problem in discussions like this. No one listens to the other person.
"It's because I asked for the truth," Hugh asked. "I got down on my knees and I asked God himself if it was true. And he told me, I could feel it in my stomach, his precense as he..."
And that's not a good enough reason to follow anything.
He couldn't finish because Zakir and Moritz guffawed in the middle of his speech. Turkel chuckled softly to himself. A smile came onto Valerie's lips.
Of course most Atheists seem to think that this is the only reasoning theists are capable of.
"He says he felt it in his stomach!" Zakir mocked, wiping his eyes. "He does not think that it was just a case of indigestion?"
Oh, yes. That's destructive.
"Perhaps it was the indigestion of the angel, Moroni!" Moritz joined.
Right. Helpful
"That is as ridiculous as the claim that Jesus rose," Zakir laughed.
When you make fun one person, you always open yourself up to the same. Which is it that's ridiculous: the angel's Moroni's indigestion or that the Book of Mormon brings conviction of truth when reading it.
"Now hold on!" Turkel scolded. "That's another bogus claim. If you think Jesus didn't rise then you're as low as Hugh!"
Careful. As a Mormon, Hugh would believe in Jesus' Resurrection.
"Hey!" Talmage cried, outraged.
"How can you believe such nonsense!?" Zakir asked. "The story is so implausible!"
Which story, The Resurrection or Mormon mythology theology?
"Well, how can you explain the fact that Josephus, a secular Jewish historian, confirmed the resurrection?" Turkel asked.
Problem is Josephus didn't, but that doesn't mean the Resurrection did not happen.
"Nonsense!" Moritz countered. "That passage in Josephus was not written by any man of the Jewish faith. He never would have called Jesus the messiah, and he believed a whole different man was the messiah!"
"But he mentioned Jesus twice!" Turkel replied.
Yup, but this comeback is poorly constructed.
"So what?" Moritz asked. "Even if that was true, it wouldn't show that he rose from the dead! Besides, he was talking about a completely different Jesus, which wasn't an uncommon name, you understand."
Now that is not a great comeback. No way to prove it that Josephus was talking about a different man than the New Testament is about.
"Many secular historians mention Jesus and..."
That's true.
"Most of their testamonies are discussing what Christians believe!" Zakir snapped. "They are completely irrelevant to your case!"
And the fact that Christians believed in a man from Galillee was God made flesh, and died from their sins freeing them from sin and death is not irrelevant at all in showing who Jesus is.
"Are you insinuating that Jesus did not exist?" Turkel growled.
Which I thought was Turkel's point.
"Of course not," Moritz said. "There is little history on his existence, though there is some. But there is even less that he was the messiah. Less that he rose from the dead."
Okay, so Mortz is trying to explain what he meant. But he overstates his case.
"You're spewing nonsense!" Turkel snapped at them. "That's almost as wrong as saying that the Gospel of Barnabas was the real account of Jesus!"
Yup, that's wrong. But I doubt that would make anyone see that.
"The bible was corrupted!" Zakir yelled. "We, Muslims, know this. None of your evidence is good enough!"
What evidence is that? How do Muslims know this.
"There is no reason to believe that Muhammad was any more than a fraud!" Turkel countered.
Oh more unsubstantiated accusations follow others.
"Has it occured to any of you that you ALL might be wrong?"
It was Valerie. The men looked at her.
We should all consider that. Even the Atheist.
"What are you talking about?" Zakir snapped.
"I mean, listen to yourselves," Valerie said, pushing up her glasses. "You all accuse each other of being wrong while claiming that your religion is right. You critize every other religion harshly and find it foolish to believe. But, let me ask you something. If you were to examine your own religion like you do for others, do you think that you'd still believe it?"
That's a good question. Does Valerie do the same?
"Oh, so the ATHEIST thinks she knows how the world works?" Zakir growled.
Only God knows how the world works.
"I didn't say that," Valerie replied. "I just think that you should all look at what you believe from my perspective. I wasn't always an non-believer. I was actually a Christian growing up. But I began to question my views and I took the position of an outside and looked at my religion as a skeptic would. I realized that nobody, unless having been brought up to belief it, would buy the stories of religion."
Did John Loftus write this, drivel? It ignores the fact that people convert to other religions all the time.
"Valerie, you failed to do the simplest thing in the world," Hugh Talmage told her. "All you needed to do was pray to God for verification and..."
All she needed to do was open up the Bible and do some research.
"He would answer if I had an open heart," Valerie finished for him. "I've heard that a hundred times, Hugh. The thing is, I did have an open heart and I did pray. But any feeling I got was just me feeling something because I felt I was suppose to feel something. That wasn't enough for me."
It was nothing to do with an open heart. If God doesn't open it, it won't be opened.
"Have you actually read the Bible, Valerie?" Turkel asked. "If you have, you..."
Turkel and Talmage's answes are the same to Valerie. A knowledgeable Christian wouldn't give the same answer.
"Would believe the truth that lies within it," She finished. "I have read the Bible, Greg. I didn't find it very convincing."
And this is how we know what anyone's spiritual state is:
18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”
20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. -1 Corinthians 1:18-25
"How come?" Greg asked.
"Well, I don't believe in talking snakes or donkeys, for one," Valerie told him. "I don't believe that a man can rise from the dead. I don't believe that a man can live in a whale. I don't believe that a man can cause another man to rise from the dead. I also don't believe in unicorns, which are mentioned in the Bible."
Valerie can believe whatever he or she chooses. However that doesn't make it wrong or right. And if "unicorns" in the Bible is offensive then read another translation. Modern translations more correctly translate those passages. Unicorns cannot be found in Hebrew culture. so we know that isn't what was thought to be in original texts.
"Well, I'm not sure why the authors mentioned unicorns," Turkel said. "I'm open minded about it. It could be metaphorical for something, it could be they mistook something for a unicorn. But, my main objection to you is that you are clearly biased in your assesment of miracles. You assume, out of hand, that they never occur. That's completely circular."
Bad answer.
"I never said that I KNOW miracles don't happen," Valerie replied. "I said that I don't believe that they do. There's a difference. Maybe I should have said that I'm very skeptical of claims of miracles.
Oh she misspoked.
I think David Hume was correct in what he said about miracles. I mean, what is more likely? That the laws of nature were suspended so that you might be revived from the dead, or that the person telling you this is gravely mistaken?
So although you don't KNOW miracles cannot happen, she and other choose to believe they didn't. That makes sense.
It's not circular, it's a question of what's more likely. If I told you that I could make a flashlight fly into my hands, you'd probably dismiss me as having imagined the whole thing. And rightly so."
"So you don't believe in God?" Moritz asked. "How can you be so sure? Isn't your atheism just as much as a faith position?"
Good question.
"Not really." Valerie replied. "I would say that I'm more of an atheist against religion. About the notion of God, I am more of an agnostic. I just don't think, if there is a God, that we are able to understand him or what he, or she, or they, or it want us to do."
"Your position is laughable," Zakir growled. "Only a fool would not believe in a divine creator."
"Really, Zakir?" Valerie asked him. "I read a very interesting book once and the author suggested to people of faith that they take a test. He called it the Outsider Test for Faith. Basically, you take the position of a skeptic and you anaylze the claims of your religion like an atheist or an agnostic would. Then, if your religion passes, you have a good faith. Unfortunately, he, nor I, think that any religion passes that test."
She didn't answer his question.
"That's foolish!"
"Rubbish!"
"Absolute nonsense!"
"That's just absurd!"
All men raged at her at the same time.
Give her a second.
"Let me ask you something, Valerie," Greg Turkel said. "Have you subjected your faith to this test that you're talking about. Have you questioned your skepticism as an outsider to it?"
Another good question.
"An outsider to skepticism is a person of faith," Valerie told him. "They already believe and of course they would find it difficult to believe what I do. But atheism isn't a faith. If all religions fail the outsider test then atheism, the lack of belief in religions, is all that is left. Or you can be an agnostic if that suits you better."
So the answer is "No."
"Well, I promise you that the Christian faith passes that test with flying colors." Turkel said. "I was once in your position, Valerie, but I found the truth in God's word through his son."
"Yes, but did you consider anyone else's faith before finding Jesus?" Valerie asked. "Did you see if perhaps Zakir was right? Or maybe Hugh?"
I have. They failed.
"Only a fool would believe the nonsense of the 'Latter Day Saints'," Zakir sneered. "But if anyone who takes such a test were to apply it to the Koran, they would not be able to rationally deny that the Koran is real vessel of truth."
"Nonsense!" Turkel and Moritz both raged.
"I'm tired of your bashing my faith!" Hugh cried, outraged.
They began arguing again. Valerie sighed and buried her face in her hands again. Then she stood up and walked out of the room.
No one not even Valerie was willing to "put up or shut up" Which is the problem in most of these discussions. No one truly really ready to step up. :Loftus has tried to posit that the OTF can be found in the Bible. I agree. Look at the account of Elijah on Mount Carmel. Elijah through down the gauntlet and slapped his opponents with the proverbial glove.
20 So Ahab sent word throughout all Israel and assembled the prophets on Mount Carmel. 21 Elijah went before the people and said, “How long will you waver between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal is God, follow him.”Fair enough. This was the OTF in action. If you ask God to do God stuff in your life and willing to follow the evidence wherever it goes. You will find God!
But the people said nothing.
22 Then Elijah said to them, “I am the only one of the LORD’s prophets left, but Baal has four hundred and fifty prophets. 23 Get two bulls for us. Let Baal’s prophets choose one for themselves, and let them cut it into pieces and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. I will prepare the other bull and put it on the wood but not set fire to it. 24 Then you call on the name of your god, and I will call on the name of the LORD. The god who answers by fire—he is God.”
Then all the people said, “What you say is good.”1 Kings 18:18-24
The Atheist Literature Club: Religitics - Aftermeeting Discussion 2 - No, mine!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)