Has your life gotten better as an athiest/agnostic? (page 15)

Oxnard Hamster

So? I'm supposed to admit that something that popped out of thin air is just as believable as a book that's been around for years, used by several people, etc? I don't see how that's a fallacy. I call that, common sense.

JT

But the thought of not having any life after our short existence on Earth scares the heck outta me

another fine person i am sure - only problem is just like the jw he too still leaves in FEAR- FALSE- EVIDENENCE- APPEARING- REAL

JT

It's ridiculous in the sense that no matter which choice I pick, I'm giving you atheists a huge opening to attack my beliefs. Sorry, not going to happen. Therefore, I refuse to answer

SOUNDS LIKE A JW BEING asked to explain the difference between

"Spirit Directed" and "Directed by Spirit" aka inspired by god

JT

If you people want these questions answered so bad, then ask a minister.

We all were ministers

rem

So? I'm supposed to admit that something that popped out of thin air is just as believable as a book that's been around for years, used by several people, etc? I don't see how that's a fallacy. I call that, common sense.

I know it seems like common sense... that's why logical fallacies are so easy to fall into.

The reason it is fallacious reasoning is that the age of' something is not necessarily a good indicator of its 'rightness'. Other factors have to be looked at to determine which one (if any) is correct. Remember, Christianity was new once too. What if all the Jews in the first century had said, "I'm not going to have anything to do with this brand new religion. The traditions of our forefathers are much older."? You'd have no Christianity today.

Also, if oldness is an important criteria for you, then you really need to study Hinduism, the Jewish faith, and some of the other more ancient religions.

rem

Oxnard Hamster

JT, I only studied with the JWs for about a year. I was a Christian long before I met one. I'm not as influenced by JW doctrine as you might think.

Yes, age doesn't necessarily mean it is right, but it is a factor to consider.

gumby

I just don't like the negative tone directed at those of us who do believe

. Do you feel it is a ....."negative tone"......to say all who do not repent and accept Christ will be killed by him and made to suffer eternal punishment? You might as well just tell many here......."gods going to kill you soon because your wicked. To me......thats a negative tone.....yet that is the Christian message to all non-believers.

Gumby

Abaddon

Oxnard;

Re. the Flood.

The Flood cannot have been global; there were trees standing before during or after the flood that would not have survived the flood. This is provable via a science known as dendrochronogy, which is basically counting tree rings and seeing how old they are. I can provide details.

So, anyone who thinks the Biblical flood was global is going against firm scientific evidence. It may have covered the world that the writer knew, but that's different from the entire world. There are dozens of other reasons why the Flood cannot be Global. If the Bible is innacurate or cannot be taken literally, then it needs to be viewed differently from how it should be viewed if it is accurate or literal.

You said;

But if propheces haven't been fulfilled, the only thing I can come up with is when text is translated from one language to the next, it's impossible to achieve 100% accuracy. Besides, for a long time, the Catholics dominated the Bible, wouldn't let the common person have a copy, and twisted it to serve their own needs. For all we know, the versions today could be screwed because of what they did. Speaking of which, there are no less than about umpteen jillion versions and translations of the Bible. Which one is right? How can anyone possibly know?

So, first you say all the prophecies have come true. When this is pointed out to be an error, your presupposition that the Bible is true is so strong that you immediately blame the translation. This is partially reasonable, but is again a supposition on your part, as you don't know, you are reaching for straws that will allow you to retain your belief structure unchanged; cognotive dissonance. Why not find out? Do some research. If you don;t want to, then learn to admit that you believe because you want to, not because you have evidence that your beliefs are externally true.

Then there are superstitions like not writing God's name. And it's not just a JW thing; I heard about this when I took Modern English Grammar. Besides, if I remember right, a reference to God's name was made in Indiana Jones and The Last Crusade. I don't think George Lucas is a JW.

YHWH refers to the tradition Israelite god. This was probably pronounced something like Yahweh, Yahweha, Yehwah or Yehwahe; the language didn't use the vowls when writing things down as thy prssmd tht ppl wld knw hw th wds wr prncd. Non-Biblical supersticion lead the pronunciation of YHWH to die out, and its original pronunciation is lost. A mistake by a translator in the 15th Century lead to Jehovah being developed as a pronouciation of the divine name. The personal name of the JudaeoChristian god is no secret.

Oh, you said;

I'm supposed to admit that something that popped out of thin air

... you DO believe something popped out of thin air; where did God come from?

And why does it matter? Well, if you believed in David Koresh, you'd want someone to tell you you were misplacing your belief, wouldn;t you? Surely if you are misplacing your belief it is the responsibility of others to at least try and warn you? If you're happy despite the warning, good luck to you! But, despite the fact many of us are wicked evil (yawn) atheists with a god dishonouring agenda (patent pending), we care about people. Think of it as a DEvangelism.

Myxomatosis

Hi realist

realist: hmmmm i am not sure if i understand this right. you mean we have to prove that there is no god?

Myx: I'm saying that I think that trying to prove that there is no God, and in the case of Christianity, that Christ is not who He claimed, nor what His followers claimed is probably not too bad of an idea. :)

realist: what about jesus? he exists only in the bible so how can he serve as valid proof?

Myx: Quatsch! Are you KIDDING me? Perhaps you should check it out a bit more thoroughly before you say something like that... :) Also, ummm, what is it you think about the NT then,,,,Jesus was a figment of the Apostles imaginations??,,,,,he really never lived but was created by religious persons 200 A.D??.,,,,He is a myth constructed from various pagan myths of earlier times??,,,which one?

realist: i am really in and from austria

Myx: Oh cool! You speak english perfectly! I'm impressed. Why is it that Europeans are so much better than Americans when it comes to speaking other languages?

realist: where are you from???

Myx: Ich komme aus den USA (dummer esel Amerikaner :) *yes, I know what I'm saying...i think*

ciao

Myxomatosis

Realist

hello Myxo!

I'm saying that I think that trying to prove that there is no God, and in the case of Christianity, that Christ is not who He claimed, nor what His followers claimed is probably not too bad of an idea. :)

ahh ok now i understand! to disprove the existance of god is impossible at the moment and might remain impossible for all times. its just a matter of probability whetehr the exists or not. no conclusive evidenec can be produced for or against his existance.

to disprove the bible on the other hand is feasible.

Quatsch! Are you KIDDING me? Perhaps you should check it out a bit more thoroughly before you say something like that... :) Also, ummm, what is it you think about the NT then,,,,Jesus was a figment of the Apostles imaginations??,,,,,he really never lived but was created by religious persons 200 A.D??.,,,,He is a myth constructed from various pagan myths of earlier times??,,,which one?

Quatsch LOL!!! that was funny!!!

as far as i know there is no writing about christ that stems from during his lifetime. the new testament was written some 30 or 50 years after he died. secular evidence only stems from even later times. josephus was born 100 ad i believe so his writings (if they actually refer to christ) are not valid as evidence.

i view it as possible that a preacher existet who was used as basis for the figure Christ. but that this person had supernatural abilities is extremely unlikely.

Oh cool! You speak english perfectly! I'm impressed. Why is it that Europeans are so much better than Americans when it comes to speaking other languages?

thank you very much!! but you are a little too kind!! i always form these looong sentences which make sense in german but i think are confusing in english.

the reason why europeans usually speak more than one language is the size of their countries. most countries are pretty small so you need at least english to survive

Ich komme aus den USA (dummer esel Amerikaner :)

Ich glaube nicht, dass Du ein dummer Esel bist!!!

Die USA gefallen mir übrigens sehr gut!!!

Schöne Grüsse!

Realist

Has your life gotten better as an athiest/agnostic?

Share this