What is with all the "Christianity-Debunking" attempt threads?

Originally posted by moocowman

Henry the 8th got pretty pissed off with the Pope (he of the catholics that invented xtianity) because the pope was collecting more revenue (taxes) than he the king.

No it wasn't, it was due to the fact that the pope wouldn't annul Henry's marriage (Henry wanted a male heir and his wife at the time just wasn't producing them) so Henry decided to use the reformation for his own gains - which did net him large amounts of cash and land and the ability to have as many wives as he liked.


G

reply to post by Ichabod


You're right. Free-will is imaginary. It can't exist.
The only difference between us and "artificial" intelligence is that the variables effecting us are much more complicated and intricate.
But the fact remains that our choices have a source and are bound to it.
Like a train on the tracks, it can only go where the tracks lead.

Anywho, just thought I'd add my 2.5 cents.

Originally posted by moocowman

I would challenge your assertion about God. Of course I would also question your use of "the bibles" There is only one. It has an "Old" Testamanet, and a "New" Testament.

I use the plural bibles because there are many different types, I believe (correct me if I'm mistaken) we have yet another type of bible mentioned as of this week on ATS. I have not had the opportunity to read the post, but I believe it is from cypress ?.

I did once have an oldie worldie type bible out the shed (amazing what's left behind in old churches and chapels that have been abandoned) which had unicorns in it. Yes ther are many different bibles.
Just like the word encyclopedia, changes to a plural as there re different types.

First you say if I am a Christian, you spell it "xtain", you assume I also hate those actions, as I actually do. To assume though is to leave a lot of room to be wrong. As you are when you follow the course of "assuming" You assume I also hate the actions of homosexuals. Did I say that? Why would you assume that? I mentioned muder, child molesters, and drug dealers. How is it you jump from those obvious "wrongs" to a sexual preference?

Room to be wrong or not, it was a pretty good guess so I was obviously right, not as though it makes any difference to me. Yes i spell xtian like that coz it saves time, I assume you don't have a problem with that?

Go back and look at my post. Your are not only wrong, but disregarding nearly everything I posted, and also twisting it. Why dont you use an eraser on my post, that would be much easier than all of the mental gymnastic contortions.

You can not erase my post though, so my words stand as I said them

Since my posts were to draw obvious attention to your use of the word "hate" I think I have acheived my goal.

Originally posted by burntheships
Since my posts were to draw obvious attention to your use of the word "hate" I think I have acheived my goal.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but moocowman never said he/she hates Christians, just their actions. It's the little things that get under your skin...
I must say that I can agree with that.

I hate the:

hypocrisy
judgmental attitude
"high horse" attitude
ignoring of Biblical flaws
ignoring of scientific facts
"I'm always right and you're always wrong" attitude


Now, I'm not going to say that every Christian has these attributes, but surely from what I have seen, it is very common.

Just the little things I see on a daily bases...
For example, I was watching something on TV where they talked about a scripture in the quran which said something to the effect of "Kill those who do not have the same beliefs".
I then saw Christians gasping in awe and disgust.
At this point, the hypocrisy was so sweet and ripe (ripe for the picking ), I just chuckled to myself. Adding insult to injury, it also made it painfully clear that the majority if not all in that room where completely ignorant of that little book in their laps.
A very similar verse is in the Old Testament, saying that if you come across a town which holds a false belief to kill them all (I think I also remember something about it being ok at that point to rape the women as well) - and even worse things than that are in the Bible.
They demonize the very thing that is in their "holy book" - in the real world, but once they find out that it's also in their Bible, they ignore it.
I have seen this sooooo many times...

Do you hate hypocrisy?
I sure as Hell do.
What's wrong with that?

Originally posted by TruthParadox
reply to post by Ichabod

 

You're right. Free-will is imaginary. It can't exist.
The only difference between us and "artificial" intelligence is that the variables effecting us are much more complicated and intricate.
But the fact remains that our choices have a source and are bound to it.
Like a train on the tracks, it can only go where the tracks lead.

Anywho, just thought I'd add my 2.5 cents.

Thanks for this contribution.
This is how it works in what I call "hell", "the universe", "this world".
It works this way because this world represents a combination of opposite attributes that, when yoked together, make a mockery of true creation and the freedom found there. Hell is and expression of freedom...power used to express unfreedom, nonfreedom, slavery, imprisonment ect. In hell there is a concept called "freedom" which we call "choice". Come to find out that it is also slavery, as you have explained so eloquently.
Hell is a place of cruel jokery, paradox, and enigma. It is a place where the free are still slaves, where eyes 'see' nothing.

Christ!

Originally posted by TruthParadox

I hate the:

hypocrisy
judgmental attitude
"high horse" attitude

ignoring of scientific facts
"I'm always right and you're always wrong" attitude

WOW.
Why do I usually see these very things from you about Christians?
Don't you have anyone else to 'help'?

Originally posted by Clearskies

Originally posted by TruthParadox

I hate the:

hypocrisy
judgmental attitude
"high horse" attitude

ignoring of scientific facts
"I'm always right and you're always wrong" attitude

WOW.
Why do I usually see these very things from you about Christians?

If you could refer me to an example, that'd be swell.
I've never said that I'm perfect.
I absolutely can be hypocritical at times.
And I can and have hated myself for it at times.
As for the others, not so much.
I base most of my beliefs on scientific facts (and my beliefs which are not based on scientific facts I do not hold as absolute fact), so I know that one's a miss...
And I do have an ego (as we all do), but I know that I'm not right about everything.

Originally posted by Clearskies
Don't you have anyone else to 'help'?

Help?
I'm not necesarrily trying to 'help' people anymore.
If you're happy with your religious views than that's enough for you and me, and you can ignore my posts and everything will be great.

Or maybe I should not point out the flaws in religion and also pretend they don't exist? Sorry if I don't afford your Holy Book the same lack of scrutiny as you do...

reply to post by TruthParadox

I just mean that I usually ONLY see you criticize Christianity.
Why not go after someone else?

If you need scientific data to believe everything, you may as well FORGET the supernatural and worship computers.

Originally posted by Clearskies
I just mean that I usually ONLY see you criticize Christianity.
Why not go after someone else?

Because that's what I was indoctrinated with.
That's what I see all day in our society.

When a druggie goes through rehab, why is it that he/she is more likely than the average person to want to help others through those problems? (not to compare Christians to druggies, it's just an example)

That's the stage of my life that I'm at right now - not to necessarily 'convert' people, but just to bring certain arguments and flaws to light.
And though I have no problem with a person choosing Christianity, I still think that it's not entirely mentally healthy to come to the point where you're ok that uncle Bob is going to be tortured for eternity just because he's a realist.
I rarely ever argue against Christians who do not believe in Hell - that's my main problem with the whole thing - just as you may have a problem with muslims believing that it's ok to kill others in the name of faith.

I'll continue to point out what I believe is wrong.

Originally posted by Clearskies
If you need scientific data to believe everything, you may as well FORGET the supernatural and worship computers.

I didn't say that I need scientific data to believe everything.
I believe some far out stuff which is not yet supported by science (and may never be). I'm only saying that I do not pass something off as fact unless I know for certain that it is fact.

Originally posted by TruthParadox
reply to post by Ichabod

 

...
The only difference between us and "artificial" intelligence is that the variables effecting us are much more complicated and intricate.
But the fact remains that our choices have a source and are bound to it.
Like a train on the tracks, it can only go where the tracks lead.

Obviously, you've never worked in AI or you're a grad student for somebody getting their funding from some shelfware AI project.

At any rate, what really caught my attention was the "choices have a source" comment.

Care to elaborate?

Do you mean the evaluative element of choice or the alternatives element of choice? Or both? Or something different?

[edit on 12-2-2009 by Ichabod]

How much belief in relation to doubt is the point where one crosses the threshold to salvation is an unanswerable question. There is no use worrying about it.

Each individual has a unique belief system. No two are the same. If it took a particular specific thought to reach heaven, that would be like a magic formula.

Originally posted by shihulud

Originally posted by moocowman

Henry the 8th got pretty pissed off with the Pope (he of the catholics that invented xtianity) because the pope was collecting more revenue (taxes) than he the king.

No it wasn't, it was due to the fact that the pope wouldn't annul Henry's marriage (Henry wanted a male heir and his wife at the time just wasn't producing them) so Henry decided to use the reformation for his own gains - which did net him large amounts of cash and land and the ability to have as many wives as he liked.


G

Although I don't disagree with you, I'm sure historians will be arguing this till the cows come home, perhaps I could have implied Henry was pissed off with the pope for many reasons. One of those reasons being the taxes thing along with the annulment, it would be naive to think that the dude had not considered the incredible wealth and power he would gain from the whole affair.
Thanks for the slap on the wrist Shihulud, but that doesn't really dismiss the point I was making, and would have required a longer post.

reply to post by burntheships


It would appear that this is where I clearly misunderstood you -

Yes hate is a strong word, and to be honest yes I do hate the actions of many of those you quoted, don't you?

I was under the impression this was inclusive of the action of homosexuals and my for apologies for misunderstanding you.

I'm just getting used to the functionality of the quote button so bare with me on that please dude.

The start of our discussion was your comment on my signature, I think by now at least I've I've made it quite clear that I agree with you hate is a strong word.

My claim was that as Yahwe/jesusgod , is alleged by xtianity to be the first cause then this god is directly responsible for the creation of hate.
This god of the bibles (plural as there are many different bibles) is directly quoted as hating, what the god is hating is irrelevant.

Given that I have claimed to hate something (quoted in my sig) then if the Yawehjesusgod if real as claimed, is directly responsible for creating that.

Bearing in mind that my morals are my own and not taken from any god of the bibles and also I've never hated anything in my life. Then clearly when I use the word hate in the same context as xtians do, as in my signature then I have accepted the morals of someone else.

If I'm using the morals of someone else ie "hate" in this instance, and you imply this to be very negative ("very strong word") then clearly I have lowered my morals.

Given that these morals used by xtians and claimed to be those of the Yahwejesusgod, then clearly throughout my life I had higher moral standards than the xtian god.


My apologies to you if I assumed incorrectly that you are an xtian, my apologies also in that as I assumed your an xtian, then you would logically hate what homosexuals do.

It is interesting what the Yahwejesgod actually hates, it is alleged that G__D hates all sin. But what is sin exactly? Well it's everything that god G_d hates, according to believers.
Then one is pointed to a list of things that the Yahwehjesusgod hates, and as he hates these things (actions) they are a sin, they are a sin because he hates them.

It is very interesting to observe what the jesusyahweh god does not hate or consider to be a sin.

Yahwehjesusgod does not appear to hate enslaving another human being so as to be treated as chattel (cattle) this is not a sin.
Neither does g_d consider physical violence against the human being a sin and does not hate that, unless of course this physical violence results in the death of the enslaved human after a set period of time has elapsed in a prescribed manner.

The jesusgod does not either consider the rape of a woman to be a sin (something to be hated) as she is to be considered as chattel with a set monetary value dependent upon her age.

Yhwehjesus does not consider pedophilia (the sexual abuse of a child) to be a sin and has (if the bibles are to believed) has openly encouraged it in certain prescribed circumstances.

Equally so the Yahwejesusgod, openly encourages the physical mutilation of babies ,so logically mutilation of a child is not a sin and not hated.

These actions committed by one human against another I personally find repulsive and have done so since I became aware of them and am unlikely to change my mind, unless of course I could find a way to justify these repulsive actions. Clearly I have a higher moral standard than the G_DS of the bibles or the Yahwejesusgod is imaginary and the bible stories are but tools designed by a few men to control other humans.




[edit on 13-2-2009 by moocowman]

How many times in the worlds history has Christianity invaded other peoples lives? From missionarys only helping people if they listen to the teachings of the "lord" to Pat Robertson on my tv at night with his Christian Broadcasting Network, its obsurd.

You never hear in this country of a jew or a muslam or a buddhist or a wiccan trying to preach or convert people because they know how to mind their own >SNIP< buisness.

If so many Christians want to speak their views then free thinkers will speak back. Especially when it is so easy to pick apart a religion full with more plot holes and contradictions then the movie Independence Day.

[Mod edit for profanity]

[edit on 2/14/2009 by yeahright]

reply to post by Ichabod


Quite right I can agree with your arguement but I don't necessarilly agree that we are indead pre-programmed. I agree that we are within a finite system, where impossibilities are truths, so therefor since I don't fly that governs my free-will not too. I think alot of the preferences you talk about that govern our decision making are formed at an earlier stage of life, I'd say the elementary stage; when you are young and still learning. I may be able to agree because of the system we live in that our free will is limited but I can't fully agree that the free-will is pre-programmed.

reply to post by SumnerKagan



I debate in topics that relate to Christianity and the OT God seperatly. I dont do this to gain attention, kill time, or to control....I do this because I have walked that religious path most of my life and only felt I found the 'light and wisdom' when I stopped accepting a blood sacrafice and started seeing the man Jesus tied into a religious belief that he wasnt meant to be tied to.

I think we are in a time of a evolving of the conciousness...and as soon as I say this....I get hate too....I get called new age and get told I follow a false God. But yet this change of path for me has shown me things no book could show me, and in my spiritual time wiht prayer and meditation and my new claim to Thee that I didnt accept certain things brought my soul to new places and I learned of a loving God that I couldnt know if I took the Bible as literal.

Its still my fav. book I use for my studies, but I made a agreement with Thee that my life now is for Thee's will....its only right of me to share my experience and view, just as others do and feel they should if they found a belief that brought them peace or enlightened them in some way.

If I feel very strongly that the world is making a dire mistake by thinking God needs blood shed for our sins....then I am going to tell everyone that this is what I think and this is why I think God will tell many, you do not know me. I dont tell them to just believe me, I give them the reasons I came to these conclusions and leave the searching up to them.

Christianity accepts a blood letting and believes it was the only way because we are fallen. But what if that is what is keeping souls intrapped here??? What if that little belief is what takes divinity away from God and is the road block to 'knowing the nature of God'.

So I will continue to tell people, God needed no blood letting....God needed no man to kill man for any reason...God neede no ONE land.....God is not going to come 'fix' the world for us.....God expects more then that of us and its more like God is waiting on us. Jesus is not going to come with force and fight against man. The next human embodiment of the divine will be just the same as its alwasy been....a man will come, and the world will decide if they are ready for unity, and if not we will kill him. Prophecies arent hard to prophecise when a people think that God is telling them to take a land and claim it for your own in Gods name.....its easy to see where that will lead the world and wars for thousands of yrs. to come.

Some actually debate the Christianity concept because they feel that this is the trick of a controling God...not the true infinate creator. Some feel the need to warn others that Yahweh is not the Most High and that Jesus was a divine embodiment that wasnt meant to be tied to the OT and the OT God.

People do this because we have the freedom to discuss and some do it because they have been there....tried that....but didnt find enlightenment from it....through their own path with Thee...they find a peace and loving GOd....then feel the need to share that with others....just as others share with me that I follow a false God and I am too new age. At least Im not following the crowds......I find that the most unwise thing anyone could be doing in these times.

Just thoughts,
LV

reply to post by TNT13


By breaking down 'will', one can see that there is data model that explains what drives decisions. You can actually do plenty of experiments and find out exactly how people value things and make trade offs. We all do it for non-autonomic functions every day, many times a day.

I'm not saying that these things are all pre-programmed but I would suggest that some people and organizations have learned how to program them. For instance, take Madison Ave. Think they haven't learned how to tweak your preferences? How about politicians? Remember, I'm talking about how we value things and make trade offs. We're absolutely subject to this.

Can we change our preferences by ourselves by deciding for instance that, I don't like the way I value money, I'm going to change my utility function. This is the issue I had with the meta-preference concept that Annee introduced.

Many Christians, myself included, have apparently been preference reprogrammed at some point. I don't know how it happened but the fact remains that I make different decisions than I used to. Many Christian friends talk about the same experience. I think it's legitimate to acknowledge this as their circumstantial, albeit unseen, evidence for something else being out there. It's their testimony if you will.

So, beyond the fact that I don't see will as 'free' in any sense, I see us as slaves to our will whatever that may be. As a Christian, if my will is driven by the world, then I'm a slave to the world, e.g. the cravings of Madison Ave. If I'm a slave to Jesus, then I'm not a slave to the world. In either situation, I'm a slave and I acknowledge that.

Saying I'm not and proclaiming 'free' will is simply jarring to me, rings untrue, and ignores the fact that we have underlying data that really causes us to do the things we do.

reply to post by Ichabod


Yes, but we have the free-will to choose our 'Master'.
That is the difference.

Originally posted by Ichabod
Obviously, you've never worked in AI or you're a grad student for somebody getting their funding from some shelfware AI project.

I'm not going to say that I understand everything about AI, but I understand enough about how it works (I use to be an unofficial programmer).
Basically, what makes artificial intelligence seem artificial is that we can predict and know what is going to be said or done. This is because a limited amount of variables effect the programming, and though it may be intricate at times, it is no where near our level of intricacy.
Every "choice" the AI carries out can be predicted by its creator if given the full information - as no choice is independent of the variables that effect it.

Originally posted by Ichabod
At any rate, what really caught my attention was the "choices have a source" comment.

Care to elaborate?

Our choices are based on so many different variables that they can appear "random". There is no such thing as a completely random thought, because every thought has a source. From prior experiences to room temperature, there are a huge number of variables that effect our thought process, and thus the choices we make.

So, if you look at our universe without time, you see that all of the combined variables equal an equation. Though from our perspective it seems that "we" are making the choices, in reality, it's just the equation playing itself out, as things could not be any other way given the circumstances of our universe (like a domino effect).

There is no such thing as "free-will", because our will can not be free of these variables or sources. We can not do something unpredicted (just as our AI can not do something unpredicted). If a greater being were to look down upon us, he would see this, and we would appear to be "artificial intelligence" simply because every choice we made would be obvious and predictable to him as the result of an equation.

Now, at the same time, I'm not necessarily saying that we can't make a choice. In a sense, that choice has already been made, we have simply not seen it as we have not come to that point of the domino effect yet.


Now, this is why I believe any religion which deals with "judgment" is flawed.
Because any 'greater' being would be able to see this.
God would know that a person born in China is far less likely to become a Christian (for example), and so should not judge him because of that variable. But what about every other variable that we are a result of?
Would you punish "5+5=10" for being "5+5=10"? If you dislike the result of "10", then you would not write the initial equation, as you would already know the result. If you're aiming for a "15", then you have no one to blame but yourself for writing the equation which you knew beforehand would end in a 10.
And this is why Christianity does not work - because an omniscient being can not cover his eyes and pretend he does not know that he would have known what he created before he created it - and is therefor directly responsible for the equation and the result.

reply to post by Clearskies


Hi there - I like that name - very cheery!

I guess that is a deep question about choosing our master. Plenty of Christians I know struggle each day with their 'old man'. Paul even expresses his regrets over it. It would seem that the unsaved can choose but then upon consideration of the concept of election I've lately become fairly uncertain of an unsaved person's ability to choose, or to put it another way, self-reprogram. Can a Jew choose not to be a Jew? I don't mean that in a worldly sense, I mean from a birth sense. Everyone is born into their varying circumstances. The Jews had a very public election - we can know who they are so to speak. Christians on the other hand seem to have a very private election. Jesus even talks about those the Father has given him and there are many other references to an elect few. It's not everybody.

So, a fair question for the day is whether a non-elect person can, when confronted with the world, make a choice to choose his master? Or is it just a done deal? Or is the only choice that is necessary acknowledgment of the authority of God? Certainly they are given the opportunity but will they make the selection, that's the question. Is election something determined in the council of the trinity from eternity past?