Atheists, lets get real

[TypicalRussian]

we are real its the god that seem made up

not what i meant by real

 

[TypicalRussian]

no indication it was made for life

in part because nearly all conditions inside of it are hostile to life

you have not shown its a fact that it was designed

you ave not shown god exists or what it looks like

if you has an all powerful god who wanted life to flourish the universe could be much more life friendly

many indicators shows its for life

the universe doenst need to be 100% suitable for life, there can be some risks

 

[Drowning Man]

philoshipcal arguments such as the ontological argument is sound

Ten Top Biblical Archaeology Discoveries - Biblical Archaeology Society

10 glaring examples

Er...you know that a book isn't necessarily all true or all false, right? I mean, a comic book on Superman has things like phone booths and buildings and planes and things. All of those things are real and exist. And if you were to do an archaeological dig in a 1000 years, you'd probably find evidence of those things. But that doesn't prove the controversial parts of the comic book, like that someone came from another planet, can fly, shoot heat beams from his eyes, etc.

The same is true of the bible.

 

[ataraxia]

nope, both books are internally consistent

Not at all. There are entire books written on the internal contradictions in both books.

And besides, lots of things are internally consistent. Aesop’s fables are internally consistent. Does that mean they are real historical events?

 

[TypicalRussian]

Er...you know that a book isn't necessarily all true or all false, right? I mean, a comic book on Superman has things like phone booths and buildings and planes and things. All of those things are real and exist. And if you were to do an archaeological dig in a 1000 years, you'd probably find evidence of those things. But that doesn't prove the controversial parts of the comic book, like that someone came from another planet, can fly, shoot heat beams from his eyes, etc.

The same is true of the bible.

that is different from what the webiste claims

 

[TypicalRussian]

Not at all. There are entire books written on the internal contradictions in both books.

And besides, lots of things are internally consistent. Aesop’s fables are internally consistent. Does that mean they are real historical events?

well those books are wrong

no contradictions

 

[ataraxia]

while it true that the Bible is the CLAIM.Scientific,philosophical,and archaeological evidence can validate its claims

The ancient fabled city of Troy was found by archeologists based on clues and evidence from Homer’s epic poem The Iliad. And the book is internally consistent. So does that mean then that we should believe the book when it says that the sea god Poseidon was on the side of the Greeks against the Trojans?

 

[TypicalRussian]

The ancient fabled city of Troy was found by archeologists based on clues and evidence from Homer’s epic poem The Iliad. And the book is internally consistent. So does that mean then that we should believe the book when it says that the sea god Poseidon was on the side of the Greeks against the Trojans?

thats not the point

 

[Drowning Man]

its a catchy saying but deeper meaning shows it to be false. Again, what does extraordinary mean?Unexpected,rare,unusual,etc? what does it mean and what constitues rather evidence is extraordinary or not?

OK, show it to be false? Asking questions about trying to quantify the amount of evidence doesn't do it. I can't tell you how many more grains of sand there are around the Pacific Ocean than Lake Michigan, but saying "more" is not unreasonable.

any claim required good evidence, the rest is meaningless. A unicorn? there is no good evidence that it exists, that should be final

Er...the same could be said of your "God".

any claim can be validated or thrown in the trash-there is no need for extroudinary anything

And again.

You should fear God and his consequences, that is very important. Yes, he loves you but you should fear him for his consequences.That is why pascals wager is important. It shows that yes you should be fearful of God and why you should believe, I think God would be very happy if you believed in him to avoid going to hell.

I'm not sure that such a God, who doesn't provide good evidence for its existence, but will send people to hell for not believing, would even deserve worship...

it is true that those arguments only argue for classical theism but it is easy to bridge the gap between thesim and Christianity.The flying spaghetti monster isnt a God.

Well, if it doesn't exist, then it's not a God...that, of course, can be applied to the Christian "God" as well.

many Christians dont live by the Bible

meditation via the Bible works

Opening your heart is living in JESUS ways

RA is a nature god, he is the max solar god, he is a part of nature

The rest of this is just spouting dogma...that I have no reason to believe in.

 

[Drowning Man]

that is different from what the webiste claims

And so? How is what I said wrong?

 

[ataraxia]

well those books are wrong

no contradictions

The New Testament provides two accounts of the genealogy of Jesus, one in the Gospel of Matthew and another in the Gospel of Luke. Matthew starts with Abraham, while Luke begins with Adam. The lists are identical between Abraham and David, but differ completely from that point. Matthew has twenty-seven generations from David to Joseph, whereas Luke has forty-two, with almost no overlap between the names on the two lists.⁠ Notably, the two accounts also disagree on who Joseph's father was: Matthew says he was Jacob, while Luke says he was Heli.

So which one is the real genealogy of Jesus?

 

[TypicalRussian]

And so? How is what I said wrong?

meanng that that wasnt the point

 

[TypicalRussian]

The New Testament provides two accounts of the genealogy of Jesus, one in the Gospel of Matthew and another in the Gospel of Luke. Matthew starts with Abraham, while Luke begins with Adam. The lists are identical between Abraham and David, but differ completely from that point. Matthew has twenty-seven generations from David to Joseph, whereas Luke has forty-two, with almost no overlap between the names on the two lists.⁠ Notably, the two accounts also disagree on who Joseph's father was: Matthew says he was Jacob, while Luke says he was Heli.

So which one is the real genealogy of Jesus?

there both right

everbpdy has two geneaologies

 

[ataraxia]

thats not the point

Why not? It fits all your criteria: internal consistency, and archeological evidence for vindication of its truth. So what else is different? “What’s the point“?

 

[blarg]

conclusions of rational fears are fine

there's an all powerful magical man who doesn't want you to do certain things and or wants you to do certain things because he loves you

who won't tell you he exists unless you already believe in him


and will hurt you endlessly if you don't do the stuff he won't tell you himself that he wants you to do?


that's not rational

allso


pascal's wager is worthless since if any gods existed they could hurt you for any reason or no reason

other humans talk about gods no gods seem to be about the place talking about themselves

 

[ataraxia]

there both right

everbpdy has two geneaologies

So who was Joseph’s dad: Jacob or Heli?

 

[blarg]

so you are

you must be a believer for God to answer

still not seeing how that would stop a god

but i am seeing how it would let you think you got a reply from one without a god

 

[blarg]

no...

then what can you dig up to show an oddly bashful all powerful all knowing god exists?

 

[blarg]

not what i meant by real

something like 1 and 3?

1).adj; The action of being true to one's self as well as being true to others.

2.)adj; being exactly as appears or as claimed

3.)adj. free from any intent to deceive or impress others


everyone's been doing that

 

[TypicalRussian]

something like 1 and 3?

1).adj; The action of being true to one's self as well as being true to others.

2.)adj; being exactly as appears or as claimed

3.)adj. free from any intent to deceive or impress others


everyone's been doing that

nope

getting real in a sense of having a REAL debate

 

[TypicalRussian]

then what can you dig up to show an oddly bashful all powerful all knowing god exists?

what are we "digging up"

 

[TypicalRussian]

still not seeing how that would stop a god

but i am seeing how it would let you think you got a reply from one without a god

while it doesnt stop him, it gives him a choice

he chose to not respond to you

 

[TypicalRussian]

So who was Joseph’s dad: Jacob or Heli?

we have two grandparents therefore two genealogies,no?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

So who was Joseph’s dad: Jacob or Heli?

Joseph's biological father was Jacob and his father in-law was Heli, the biological father of Mary.

 

[TypicalRussian]

there's an all powerful magical man who doesn't want you to do certain things and or wants you to do certain things because he loves you

who won't tell you he exists unless you already believe in him


and will hurt you endlessly if you don't do the stuff he won't tell you himself that he wants you to do?


that's not rantinal

allso


pascal's wager is worthless since if any gods existed they could hurt you for any reason or no reason

other humans talk about gods no gods seem to be about the place talking about themselves

your putting it wrong

theres an all powerful God who wants to be good

he doesnt talk to you if you disrespect him(like most poeple)

and will hurt you endlesslessly becuase you have been extremely bad(not you)

there

much better

pascals wager is not worthless