The Christian Myth Is Based on Pagan Myths

[aitm]

of course...we usually just call them stupid, ignorant, brainwashed, twits, tardos and generally uneducated.

If you want to believe everything exists for no reason or purpose at all, that we're some kind of freak unintentional accident,  there's no freewill, basis for morality/ethics, consciousness is created by stacking atoms together you can say that if you like. But that's only what you personally want to believe for no real reason.

yeah but it beats believing something stupid, ignorant and I might add, proven conclusively to be bull-shit! But hey, it you want to be a brainwashed twit, tardo and generally uneducated mutt you are free to do so.

[Passion of Christ]

yeah but it beats believing something stupid, ignorant and I might add, proven conclusively to be bull-shit! But hey, it you want to be a brainwashed twit, tardo and generally uneducated mutt you are free to do so.

Feel free to explain how science conclusively proves that God doesn't exist and I will refute you.

[aitm]

A: God says the universe was created in 7 days. Goodbye.

[Passion of Christ]

A: God says the universe was created in 7 days. Goodbye.

It doesn't say how long a day is from Gods perspective though I don't read Genesis as a scientific account therefore we can agree that the universe is 13.7 billion years old give or take. Even the Pope believes in the age of the universe being the age it is and I'm pretty sure he believes in God.

[Hydra009]

If you want to believe everything exists for no reason or purpose at all, that we're some kind of freak unintentional accident,  there's no freewill, basis for morality/ethics, consciousness is created by stacking atoms together you can say that if you like.

You forgot baby-eating and nihilistic.  Oh wait, no, you got nihilism.

Psst...it helps to read up on your audience before slandering (technically, libel) them.

[aitm]

A: God says the universe was created in 7 days. Goodbye.

It doesn't say how long a day is from Gods perspective though I don't read Genesis as a scientific account therefore we can agree that the universe is 13.7 billion years old give or take. Even the Pope believes in the age of the universe being the age it is and I'm pretty sure he believes in God.

ah, back pedaling, how typical, not even sure enough of your own god to back him up eh? Pussy. Because following "your" logic then Moses may have lived 950 billion years. Yeah, you're an idiot.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

I don't see why I need to do the research for you

Because you're the one making a claim, you dolt.

[goodwithoutgod]

A: God says the universe was created in 7 days. Goodbye.

It doesn't say how long a day is from Gods perspective though I don't read Genesis as a scientific account therefore we can agree that the universe is 13.7 billion years old give or take. Even the Pope believes in the age of the universe being the age it is and I'm pretty sure he believes in God.

Wrong, actually explains that if you read the fictional book called the bible.


Those who argue that the word "day" means "long age," point out that the Hebrew word, yom, can have a number of meanings, only one of which is "day of 24 hours."1 They further seek to strengthen their position with the use of Psalm 90:4 and II Peter 3:8, comparing a day to a thousand years. Both of these verses, however, are simply using figures of speech (similes) to show that God is not constrained by the same time parameters as are humans. These verses are really irrelevant to the discussion of the meaning of "day," in Genesis 1.

It is recognized, of course, that the word "day" can be used with a number of variations. It can have any of five meanings:

1) a period of light
2) a period of 24 hours
3) a general, vague time
4) a point of time
5) a year

The context determines which of these is intended by the writer. The English language also can have up to 14 definitions for the word "day."3 The reader should be reminded that the purpose of language is to communicate. Moses wrote in a language that was meant to communicate to his readers. Words must be defined by their relationship to one another.4 Word meaning must be determined from within its context. It will be shown how the context defines the word in Genesis 1.

The use of a number with the word "day" is very illuminating. This combination occurs 357 times outside of Genesis 1. The combination is used in four different ways, but each time it is used, it must mean 24-hour periods of time. If the combinations had been intended to mean long periods of time, both the texts and contexts then become meaningless. A typical verse is Genesis 30:36: "And he (Laban) set three days journey betwixt himself and Jacob." God frequently issued commands that the people were to do or not to do certain things on a given day. This use occurs 162 times. A good example is Exodus 24:16: "And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days, and on the seventh day He called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud." These are the most typical uses of the word "day" with a number. Four times the terms are used to show a starting point. Ezra 3:6 says, "From the first day of the seventh month they began to offer burnt offerings unto the Lord." A number may also be used with "day" to convey an ending point. An example is Leviticus 19:6: "It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow: and if ought remain until the third day, it shall be burnt in the fire." It would appear, then, that whenever the Old Testament uses a number with the word "day," it means a 24-hour period of time without any demonstrable exception.

If the meaning of the word "day" with a number always means a 24-hour period of time outside of Genesis 1, then it should also mean a 24-hour period of time inside Genesis 1. The words that Moses used to communicate what God did during creation are very significant. If Moses had meant to signify that the "days" were more than 24 hours in length, he could easily have done so. If we are to understand what Moses wrote, then the language he used must be understood in its normal meaning. The normal meaning is that of 24-hour periods of time.

[aitm]

First the xians brag about how powerful their god is because he can create the universe in seven days and then after finding out that that is wrong, scuttle around like roaches making up shit to satisfy the erection sitting within their bowels.

[Passion of Christ]

*snip*

It's not a scientific text it goes into the details of God as creator of the universe and Gods relationship to humanity, this is all stuff science doesn't and can't cover. However there was a point of creation (the big bang) and there was an orderly process of cosmological, geological and organic formation over distinct time periods. The Bible states that the universe was intentionally created by God for a purpose this was no accident of blind chance or luck.

[Plu]

The Bible states that the universe was intentionally created by God for a purpose this was no accident of blind chance or luck.

The Bible states a lot of things. Many of those things would get you thrown into jail if you tried to actually do them. I wouldn't be so quick to take it as a good source of advice.

But if you believe in God and the supernatural

If you believe in either of those two, you can believe anything, but it won't make a difference as to what is actually real.

If you want to believe everything exists for no reason or purpose at all, that we're some kind of freak unintentional accident, there's no freewill, basis for morality/ethics, consciousness is created by stacking atoms together you can say that if you like.

You could do that, and it would still make no difference to what is actually real. That's the big thing religious folks seem to be missing... the only thing that's real is reality. Any explanations or stuff we make up is just that; stuff we make up. The only purpose that stuff has, is if it allows us to predict what will become real in the future, because the past is behind us. Religion has a notouriously poor record for predicting what will become real. Science has an incredibly good record for predicting what will become real.

Where we come from is ultimately irrelevant, unless our origins let us predict where we're going. Which in the case of science, tends to work pretty well, and in the case of religion tends to work not at all.

[Passion of Christ]

The Bible states a lot of things. Many of those things would get you thrown into jail if you tried to actually do them. I wouldn't be so quick to take it as a good source of advice.

It does represent the cultural values of a bronze age people in places sure the point is they had a covenant with God and that's what the Bible is based upon. You will find much of dearly held Western moral, ethical values, values of individual freedom and human equality derive their inspiration from the Bible. We are influenced by pagan classical civilization as well to some degree of course but they weren't overly concerned with human rights, equality and pacifism.

If you believe in either of those two, you can believe anything, but it won't make a difference as to what is actually real.

God is actually real though that's the point where theists and atheists seem to disagree on. You won't believe anything once you an established creed, revelation, doctrine and some official dogma. You can end up believing anything when you believe literally nothing at all. I don't think atheists are literally believing nothing however they have their own set of established principals so they don't go off to psychic mediums or mess around with the healing energies of crystals or homeopathy and all that kind of bunkum. Everything is matter or the product of matter and nothing else in any other form exists anywhere just what we see, something is only true it is scientifically demonstrated with observable evidence and no other form of evidence, subjective experience, philosophy or revelation is allowed and faith amounts to "pretending to know things you don't know to be true".

You could do that, and it would still make no difference to what is actually real.

I didn't say it would, if God is real then God is real it doesn't matter if you think he's a figment of the human imagination you ultimately won't get to have the final say. Even if you're right the implication is you won't ever find out seeing as consciousness existence ends at death if naturalist/materialist philosophy is true but I would very strongly disagree that it is for what I consider to be good justifiable reasons not a blind faith.



 

the big thing religious folks seem to be missing... the only thing that's real is reality.

God is the ultimate basis for reality if by reality you mean the universe, this is what God created, sustains and has an active relationship with.

Any explanations or stuff we make up is just that; stuff we make up.

Atheism/naturalism is made up then, certainly someone made something up it will depend who is right.

The only purpose that stuff has, is if it allows us to predict what will become real in the future, because the past is behind us. Religion has a notouriously poor record for predicting what will become real.

Religion isn't science it explains the why while science gives you the details of the how. Atheists seem to believe the question of why is irrelevant but that's their opinion.

Science has an incredibly good record for predicting what will become real.

Science observes the natural processes of the observable natural order created intentionally by God with a purpose in mind. Science works as well as it does because the universe is contingent.

Where we come from is ultimately irrelevant

It's hugely relevant both to the individual and civilization as a whole.

[youtube:3290do47]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv3TFg9SJb4[/youtube:3290do47]

You also have Communism, fascism and other products of ideologies/idols humans have revered over the years when belief in (the true) God and the ethical principals based around this belief in God were pushed aside. You have social and economic degeneration, discrimination, war and genocide and millions of people dead as a result. You don't argue with the history. Even if you want to bring up the things supposed followers of Jesus did such as the Crusades, witch hunters and the Inquisition these were relatively small in scale and the result of deviation/corruption from the central message/s of the Bible and Christ.

, unless our origins let us predict where we're going. Which in the case of science, tends to work pretty well, and in the case of religion tends to work not at all.

Science without God or any moral grounding that is based on God can lead to a literal hell on Earth history has demonstrated this. By it's fruits you will judge. A non-belief in God does not yield good fruits it leads to downward spiral of decay and the Bible warns against this repeatedly.

[Plu]

You will find much of dearly held Western moral, ethical values, values of individual freedom and human equality derive their inspiration from the Bible.

You'll find them in the Tao Tse Tjing and other eastern philosophies as well. And in a bunch of ancient greek philosophies. And probably in some other obscure religions as well. That's because these moral and ethical values don't come from the bible, they are merely in the bible. They are a part of all worthwhile systems because they simply work really well.

God is actually real though that's the point where theists and atheists seem to disagree on.

You mean the question whether or not god is real. If god were actually real there'd be no disagreement, because atheists believe in things that are real. The problem is theists can't show their god to be real, that's where the disagreement happens.

I don't think atheists are literally believing nothing however they have their own set of established principals so they don't go off to psychic mediums or mess around with the healing energies of crystals or homeopathy and all that kind of bunkum. Everything is matter or the product of matter and nothing else in any other form exists anywhere just what we see, something is only true it is scientifically demonstrated with observable evidence and no other form of evidence, subjective experience, philosophy or revelation is allowed and faith amounts to "pretending to know things you don't know to be true".

You confuse naturalism and atheism. While many people ascribe to both, atheism doesn't say anything about evidence or science or "where we came from", it merely says we don't believe in gods. This is a common issue with many people who don't understand the concept of people having multiple descriptors.

God is the ultimate basis for reality if by reality you mean the universe, this is what God created, sustains and has an active relationship with.

This is merely a claim, that seems to have no effect on how your life plays out. And as such is qualified as "irrelevant".

Atheism/naturalism is made up then, certainly someone made something up it will depend who is right.

Exactly. They're just made up. Atheism doesn't say anything about what is real or not. Naturalism does make a bunch of claims, and the cool thing about naturalism is that their claims are useful in making predictions. Those of religion aren't.

Religion isn't science it explains the why while science gives you the details of the how. Atheists seem to believe the question of why is irrelevant but that's their opinion.

Religion claims to give you the why. The problem is, that why cannot be independently verified, which makes it useless. Also atheists don't believe the why is irrelevant, atheists just generally (it's not a requirement) don't believe in giving answers that cannot be verified. They'd rather say "I don't know for sure" over "my religion claims X".

Science observes the natural processes of the observable natural order created intentionally by God with a purpose in mind. Science works as well as it does because the universe is contingent.

The addition of god in the above is superfluous. It doesn't make a difference if any god made the universe, science works because the universe is contingent.

Science without God or any moral grounding that is based on God can lead to a literal hell on Earth history has demonstrated this. By it's fruits you will judge. A non-belief in God does not yield good fruits it leads to downward spiral of decay and the Bible warns against this repeatedly.

You realise that the US, Russia and Nazi Germany each fought "with god on their side", right? All of those countries were predominantly Christian, and still are.

[Passion of Christ]

You'll find them in the Tao Tse Tjing and other eastern philosophies as well.

I didn't say you wouldn't there's plenty of compatibility between what Jesus taught and Eastern religion. When something is fundamentally true you would expect this.

And in a bunch of ancient greek philosophies.

You had a polytheistic culture there who with special revelation came to a knowledge of God. It all helps to confirm the fundamental truth of the gospel. I can't guarantee that Christianity is the 100% correct religion but I think it's the best bet of the alternatives, particularly as it is the only religion that offers grace that's the big difference there.

And probably in some other obscure religions as well. That's because these moral and ethical values don't come from the bible, they are merely in the bible.

They come from God not the Bible. God predates the Bible the Bible just gives you some good guidance, the teachings and understanding you sorely need as a flawed sinful human stewing in your ignorance of the Lord. That's what the Bible is all about.

They are a part of all worthwhile systems because they simply work really well.

They work well because it's from God. What doesn't work well is human sin.

 

You mean the question whether or not god is real. If god were actually real there'd be no disagreement

The universe would look the same as it is right now if God is real, this is the universe God created as it is. Therefore it would still be possible to deny that God exists, which is good because what you have then is the freedom to choose a relationship with God.

, because atheists believe in things that are real.

So do theists though there is some acceptance that you can't know certain things for certain therefore belief in God is a faith, you can't say just something you know like the Earth orbits the Sun as it doesn't work that way.

The problem is theists can't show their god to be real, that's where the disagreement happens.

How would you show the existence of something that doesn't physically exist?  :-k

You confuse naturalism and atheism.

What do you think you're left with when you remove God and/or the supernatural from the equation?  :-k

While many people ascribe to both, atheism doesn't say anything about evidence or science or "where we came from", it merely says we don't believe in gods.

I don't believe in gods either the Bible knocks those things on the head. If you mean powerful immortal spiritual beings you do kind of have those but the idea is you don't worship them as gods. Anything you have in place of God is idolatry so that's something to avoid.

This is merely a claim

Atheism is merely a counter claim. What matters if the claim can be backed with reason and God holds up nicely, particularly the Biblical definition.

that seems to have no effect on how your life plays out. And as such is qualified as "irrelevant".

You don't believe God has the power to utterly transform lives for the better? What happens or is meant to happen is that you become "born again" not of the flesh but of Spirit and all that business. And do you have any comprehension of the impact religion has had on the world and human society as a whole and achievements that stemmed from it? Modern science included of course.

Exactly. They're just made up. Atheism doesn't say anything about what is real or not.

You're rejecting the existence of God which is quite a big thing to be rejecting. You will of course have something in Gods place in order to reject that which you don't believe in, else you wouldn't have a reason to not believe in it. What you have in Gods place in your case isn't Brahma or the Tao or whatever but scientific materialism.

Naturalism does make a bunch of claims, and the cool thing about naturalism is that their claims are useful in making predictions. Those of religion aren't.

The Bible establishes that God has created a self contained functional and understandable natural order. From this understanding of the universe modern science developed. Therefore you can accept methodological and God at the same time as the two aren't incompatible.

Religion claims to give you the why. The problem is, that why cannot be independently verified, which makes it useless.

You can use the universality of independently developed human spiritual belief as your verification if you like. You already mentioned how Christianity has certain elements in common with Eastern faiths and the ancient Greek philosophers and all that business. I don't how how much independent verification you would want, you've got plenty to get stuck into there.

Also atheists don't believe the why is irrelevant, atheists just generally (it's not a requirement) don't believe in giving answers that cannot be verified.

They can be verified with the universality of shared human spiritual faith and experience and within yourself through prayer. Seek and you will find, knock and the door will open and all that business

They'd rather say "I don't know for sure" over "my religion claims X".

If we knew for sure it wouldn't be faith? Who said anything about knowing anything for sure and why is that a requirement for religious belief/s?

The addition of god in the above is superfluous.

Only because you removed God and replaced him with materialism, God would be superfluous if matter and byproduct of matter and space is the totality of existence as you are suggesting it is.

It doesn't make a difference if any god made the universe, science works because the universe is contingent.

It's contingent because it is a purposefully made natural order that is the creation of an eternal God and the universe can be understood rationally, therefore you have science.

You realise that the US, Russia and Nazi Germany each fought "with god on their side", right? All of those countries were predominantly Christian, and still are.

If you think Nazi Germany were following the teachings of Jesus Christ I would very slowly and carefully try to explain why you're mistaken. The Soviet Union was technically atheistic and I'm not sure why you mentioned the US. Do you know what kind of state the world would be in if the US didn't save our asses in two world wars? If they weren't there to fight Communism and Islamic extremists?

[aitm]

The bullshit is strong in this one. Not much else though.