"I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off." -- Emo Philips
"I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said "Stop! don't do it!" "Why shouldn't I?" he said. I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!" He said, "Like what?" I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?" He said, "Religious." I said, "Me too! Are you christian or buddhist?" He said, "Christian." I said, "Me too! Are you catholic or protestant?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me too! Are you episcopalian or baptist?" He said, "Baptist!" I said,"Wow! Me too! Are you baptist church of god or baptist church of the lord?" He said, "Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you original baptist church of god, or are you reformed baptist church of god?" He said,"Reformed Baptist church of god!" I said, "Me too! Are you reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1879, or reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915?" He said, "Reformed baptist church of god, reformation of 1915!" I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off." -- Emo Philips
What a great point. Only religious people commit suicide. So true. But, where were the Jews?
Hmmm....Nope. I think you might have missed it.
Only religious people (particularly christians) see every belief other than their own as heretical. And you might as well push the heretic off the bridge because lord knows they're going to hell anyways.
The joke also illustrates the endless schisms that have occurred within christianity which only further demonstrates how fundamentally divisive this particular religion is. This is why there are over 38,000 denominations within christianity alone. Apparently, the only thing that christians can agree on, is that they can't agree on a fuckin' thing.
But as every Reformed Baptist Church of God (Reformation of 1879) member knows, everyone else is wrong! God have mercy upon their wicked souls!
Only religious people (particularly christians) see every belief other than their own as heretical. .....
The joke also illustrates the endless schisms...
True, beyond that, a main thing that I see in this is a great prime illustration of the lunacy that springs forth almost like a fractal, from fallacy. Its like fallacy is mildew and just the craziest lunacy can, will and does grow out of it.
No I meant agnostic. The flippancy and the begging of the question and all the other stuff rolled up in to the notions expressed in the quote just express those things, flippancy, question begging, non sequiturs, etc... They arent a disproof of the notion of a flying spaghetti monster or a god, a brains in vats, multiverse, many worlds, hologram, illusion, dream, planted by aliens, or any of a number of things that we cant even fathom in our limited capacities here in this seemingly infinite sea of mystery of which we are only a speck, with still even limited understanding and capability to understand with in even just that speck.
nice! My atheist dad laughed so hard he wants me to forward it to him to show all his Unitarian Universalist friends, of which, most, are at least agnostic!
What a great point. Only religious people commit suicide. So true. But, where were the Jews?
Hmmm....Nope. I think you might have missed it.
Only religious people (particularly christians) see every belief other than their own as heretical. And you might as well push the heretic off the bridge because lord knows they're going to hell anyways.
The joke also illustrates the endless schisms that have occurred within christianity which only further demonstrates how fundamentally divisive this particular religion is. This is why there are over 38,000 denominations within christianity alone. Apparently, the only thing that christians can agree on, is that they can't agree on a fuckin' thing.
But as every Reformed Baptist Church of God (Reformation of 1879) member knows, everyone else is wrong! God have mercy upon their wicked souls!
So you think I am wrong? Tell that to the Atheists I have been talking to who would eradicate theists from the earth. I do not know who is going to hell but you seem to know. Anyway, I know of no Christian who would push him off the bridge. I don’t think you do either.
Most Christian Churches are ethnic and represent a melting pot of people who come from every part of the world. Historical struggles such as the Civil war also doubled the number of Christian Churches in many areas. The Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox, Anglican and many others have different orders within the Church that represent different styles and works. Protestants tend to have different approaches built around separate congregations. Your claim is built on a misunderstanding and the fact they share an Orthodoxy between them all. http://www.amazon.co...85187994&sr=1-1
What a great point. Only religious people commit suicide. So true. But, where were the Jews?
Hmmm....Nope. I think you might have missed it.
Only religious people (particularly christians) see every belief other than their own as heretical. And you might as well push the heretic off the bridge because lord knows they're going to hell anyways.
The joke also illustrates the endless schisms that have occurred within christianity which only further demonstrates how fundamentally divisive this particular religion is. This is why there are over 38,000 denominations within christianity alone. Apparently, the only thing that christians can agree on, is that they can't agree on a fuckin' thing.
But as every Reformed Baptist Church of God (Reformation of 1879) member knows, everyone else is wrong! God have mercy upon their wicked souls!
So you think I am wrong? Tell that to the Atheists I have been talking to who would eradicate theists from the earth. I do not know who is going to hell but you seem to know. Anyway, I know of no Christian who would push him off the bridge. I don’t think you do either.
Most Christian Churches are ethnic and represent a melting pot of people who come from every part of the world. Historical struggles such as the Civil war also doubled the number of Christian Churches in many areas. The Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox, Anglican and many others have different orders within the Church that represent different styles and works. Protestants tend to have different approaches built around separate congregations. Your claim is built on a misunderstanding and the fact they share an Orthodoxy between them all. http://www.amazon.co...85187994&sr=1-1
They can’t agree on anything except all theists are wrong..
You're a nice person, and you argue well, but how do you escape the idea that there are 38,000 different Christian denominations, according to that poster, and one major point of that joke is, how can they all be right? You MUST question, from time to time, yourself, how there are so many different religions in the world, and so many sub parts of those religions...tell me, if they are all right, then wouldn't the only answer be a formation of just one religion? And if we conclude that there can only be ONE religion, what makes you so sure you practice that particular one yourself?
On top of that have you ever questioned your or anyone else's "faith" as being just wishful thinking? Sure you can say science does not explain everything, or the scientific method. But, how can anyone just choose to believe in something that makes them feel nice, just because it's possible too? Sure you can cite the bible as some kind of factual book, but where is there ANY proof?
Protestants tend to have different approaches built around separate congregations. Your claim is built on a misunderstanding and the fact they share an Orthodoxy between them all. I do not consider most Churches heretical and see them working together all the time.
Boy, someone should have told that to the catholics and the protestants in Ireland.
True, beyond that, a main thing that I see in this is a great prime illustration of the lunacy that springs forth almost like a fractal, from fallacy. Its like fallacy is mildew and just the craziest lunacy can, will and does grow out of it.
Right, but literalist religion doesn't even have the guise of sophism. It doesn't even have the mere appearance of soundness or validity.
Since this fallacy lacks all plausibility, some degree of initial "lunacy" is necessary for one to to even embrace these beliefs. This "lunacy" may be thorough and pervasive childhood indoctrination (most common), self-deception, severe insecurity, an inordinately impressionable mind, depressive and/or other personality disorders, etc.
Right, but literalist religion doesn't even have the guise of sophism. It doesn't even have the mere appearance of soundness or validity.
To many people, like us, but to a person whos thinking process is riddled with fallacy it appears sound and valid.
Since this fallacy lacks all plausibility, some degree of initial "lunacy" is necessary for one to to even embrace these beliefs.
Lacking all plausibility is one way of looking at part of the very definition of fallacy. The initial lunacy rests in the reality that we are all born ignorant and filled to the gills with a non understanding of fallacy.
This "lunacy" may be thorough and pervasive childhood indoctrination (most common), self-deception, severe insecurity, an inordinately impressionable mind, depressive and/or other personality disorders, etc.
Lunacy begets lunacy.
Right, aka, fallacy begets fallacy. Unless an understanding, a lesson, a teaching, an example, an experience with coming to know how to spot the fallacy is injected in to the persons thinking process, then its going to remain pretty easy for the fallacy to continue begetting itself.
I probably shouldnt have used the word lunacy to begin with here. Its an illustration of my impatience with people whos thoughts and decisions are riddled with fallacy, this impatience of which is a fallacy itself. It would be like being impatient with a stream that is flowing down to your house and flooding your foundation. It is a fallacy to be impatient with a stream that can not help but follow the banks and boundaries, or lack there of that it is given. The solution is not this impatience, it is taking action in helping to divert the stream.
What a great point. Only religious people commit suicide. So true. But, where were the Jews?
Hmmm....Nope. I think you might have missed it.
Only religious people (particularly christians) see every belief other than their own as heretical. And you might as well push the heretic off the bridge because lord knows they're going to hell anyways.
The joke also illustrates the endless schisms that have occurred within christianity which only further demonstrates how fundamentally divisive this particular religion is. This is why there are over 38,000 denominations within christianity alone. Apparently, the only thing that christians can agree on, is that they can't agree on a fuckin' thing.
But as every Reformed Baptist Church of God (Reformation of 1879) member knows, everyone else is wrong! God have mercy upon their wicked souls!
So you think I am wrong? Tell that to the Atheists I have been talking to who would eradicate theists from the earth. I do not know who is going to hell but you seem to know. Anyway, I know of no Christian who would push him off the bridge. I don't think you do either.
Most Christian Churches are ethnic and represent a melting pot of people who come from every part of the world. Historical struggles such as the Civil war also doubled the number of Christian Churches in many areas. The Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox, Anglican and many others have different orders within the Church that represent different styles and works. Protestants tend to have different approaches built around separate congregations. Your claim is built on a misunderstanding and the fact they share an Orthodoxy between them all. http://www.amazon.co...85187994&sr=1-1
They can't agree on anything except all theists are wrong..
You're a nice person, and you argue well, but how do you escape the idea that there are 38,000 different Christian denominations, according to that poster, and one major point of that joke is, how can they all be right? You MUST question, from time to time, yourself, how there are so many different religions in the world, and so many sub parts of those religions...tell me, if they are all right, then wouldn't the only answer be a formation of just one religion? And if we conclude that there can only be ONE religion, what makes you so sure you practice that particular one yourself?
On top of that have you ever questioned your or anyone else's "faith" as being just wishful thinking? Sure you can say science does not explain everything, or the scientific method. But, how can anyone just choose to believe in something that makes them feel nice, just because it's possible too? Sure you can cite the bible as some kind of factual book, but where is there ANY proof?
I have already answered this question above. Most demonstrations are the result of ethnic and cultural differences. Others are the result of historical issues that divided nations and regions. Why are there so many countries in the world? Why are there so many political parties? Why are there so many different scientific views among scientists? Because there are different views does that mean no one is right? Are you arguing there is no truth, including the viewpoints you are expressing. Are you right and everyone else wrong? Are you wrong and believe what you do even if it is in error? Christians are just like everyone else and though we believe we are right, we question ourselves all the time. I suspect we are no different than you.
I grew up an atheist and question everything. I have no problem with the scientific method. Science is not Atheism. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-mqejYWyuQ&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C5lwBt11b4&feature=related
Is your question whether the Bible is as good a historical document as any other or is it rather a statement that you are treating it differently. What do you accept as proof? Where is your proof?
Thanks for the compliment and I find you a good person also.
Edited by shadowhawk, 25 September 2010 - 01:25 AM.
Is your question whether the Bible is as good a historical document as any other or is it rather a statement that you are treating it differently.
How is it that a book that contains stories of talking donkeys, talking serpents, a talking bush, a character who lost his strength when his hair was cut, a woman that turned into a pillar of salt, etc a historical document?
Do you consider the bhagavad gita a historical document? What about the upanishads or the vedas?
Do you consider The Iliad and The Odyssey historical documents?
What about the Hopi and Navajo creation stories?
Are all of these "as good a historical document as any other"?
Is your question whether the Bible is as good a historical document as any other or is it rather a statement that you are treating it differently.
How is it that a book that contains stories of talking donkeys, talking serpents, a talking bush, a character who lost his strength when his hair was cut, a woman that turned into a pillar of salt, etc a historical document?
Do you consider the bhagavad gita a historical document? What about the upanishads or the vedas?
Do you consider The Iliad and The Odyssey historical documents?
What about the Hopi and Navajo creation stories?
Are all of these "as good a historical document as any other"?
C.S. Lewis noted that one cannot believe a miracle occurred if one had already drawn a conclusion in one's mind that miracles are not possible at all. C.S. Lewis, Norman Geisler, William Lane Craig, and other Christians have argued that miracles are reasonable and plausible. For example, C.S. Lewis says that a miracle is something that comes totally out of the blue. If for thousands of years a woman can become pregnant only by sexual intercourse with a man, then if she were to become pregnant without a man, it would be a miracle. Aquinas (Summa Contra Gentiles, III) says “those things are properly called miracles which are done by divine agency beyond the order commonly observed in nature.
Miracles usually happen but once and if they happened all the time we would not be able to recognize them as unusual. Therefore we can’t get at them to study them. I do not know how a donkey could talk and whether or not the miracle was in the talking or the hearing. There are other possibilities of how it was done and scholars have considered many of them. It amazes \me that you know as if you have answered all questions and want to find fault with believing in something miraculous. I suspect Lewis is right and you have already made up your mind miracles are impossible and even eye witnesses do not convince you.
Indeed the other ancient documents you mention are historical. The stories they contain may or may not be meant to be real. It is not as simple as rejecting them all just because I am not a believer. There are many things we don’t know or see.
one possibility is that occasionally donkey's talk, people live inside fish, goddesses burst out of someone's head, and the 203,352th person the roman's nailed to a cross apparently saved all our souls in the process.
The other possibility that could explain these things is that 1% of the population is schizophrenic, and many more are liars.
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
Edited by eternaltraveler, 26 September 2010 - 10:00 AM.
I suspect Lewis is right and you have already made up your mind miracles are impossible and even eye witnesses do not convince you.
What eye witnesses?
Of course the christians C.S. Lewis and Thomas Aquinas are going to argue in support of the occurrence of biblical miracles. The entire edifice of mainstream christianity rests upon that. How do their unsubstantiated apologetics give creedence to the literal intepretation/historicity of these clearly mythological stories?
These christian scholars said it did, therefore it did.
If that's the case, then what about what the christian scholar and author Bishop John Shelby Spong has to say about miracles:
"The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ’s divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible."
"The miracle stories of the Bible can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by a deity."
I say we crucify Shadowhawk in the name of atheism and agnosticism.. Or just for fun and to end headache pointless debates which lead nowhere. (If we take the second reason then everyone who participated has to put themselves on the cross too :P)
... to end headache pointless debates which lead nowhere.
Ahem..I believe you've participated in your fair share of pointless religious debates with shadowhawk on this forum...LOL
But yes, I agree. Discussions with religious folks inevitably lead nowhere and are thus, completely pointless.
It's kind of entertaining sometimes, though. You'd have to admit it.
If we take the second reason then everyone who participated has to put themselves on the cross too.
I'll be first in line. I'm ready to be nailed to the cross!
And if you believe in me, I'll forgive all of your sins! And then you can come to the amusement park in the sky to live with me and my pop (you might know him as Jehovah) for all eternity.
But yes, I agree. Discussions with religious folks inevitably lead nowhere and are thus, completely pointless.
not completely pointless. Some more open minded people read these discussions like this, and when they see the best apologetics can come up with to explain the ridiculous things their religions are based on (well, they happened and that's all their is too it, see, C.S. Lewis said so) some of these readers do indeed begin to open their eyes. I'm sure many of us have been there. I have.
I suspect Lewis is right and you have already made up your mind miracles are impossible and even eye witnesses do not convince you.
What eye witnesses?
Of course the christians C.S. Lewis and Thomas Aquinas are going to argue in support of the occurrence of biblical miracles. The entire edifice of mainstream christianity rests upon that. How do their unsubstantiated apologetics give creedence to the literal intepretation/historicity of these clearly mythological stories?
These christian scholars said it did, therefore it did.
If that's the case, then what about what the christian scholar and author Bishop John Shelby Spong has to say about miracles:
"The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ's divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible."
"The miracle stories of the Bible can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by a deity."
The eye witnesses were the writers of the bible themselves and the people mentioned. There were other witnessers beside who speak of events in the bible. Do you believe other ancient documents record historically true events?
Craig says it well. Beside this here is my argument for miracles.
The Biblical miracles are imbedded in history and the truth of Christianity stands or falls with the validity and historicity of the supernatural events, especially the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.
THREE TYPICAL ANSWERS to the QUESTION OF MIRACLES
NO: Miracles have not and can not occur in natural history. (Your position) MAYBE: God could do some Miracles, but that doesn't mean that He has, or will do miracles in history. YES: God has intervened in history in a miraculous way, and can intervene now.
A RESPONSE to the NO ARGUMENT
The Position: Those who hold this position suggest that the miracles described in the Bible have not and can not occur. They are called anti-supernaturalists or naturalists. Some Atheists take this position.
Most Naturalists suggest two arguments in their case against miracles:
* Philosophical Argument: The laws of nature are unchanging and can not be broken by unnatural miracles. Not proven by science. * Scientific Argument: Miracles are outside nature and not repeatable, thus they can not be verified or tested. They can not be explained by the natural process, thus are myths. The last part of this does not necessarily follow. All things that are true cannot be repeated or proven by science. Science is a process not a position.
Most naturalists are Atheistic, so it may be necessary to discuss the existence of God before discussing miracles which is Crag’s position..
Once someone can acknowledge the existence of an all powerful, eternal, personal God, then you can discuss whether or not God can act miraculously in History.
IF GOD EXISTS THEN MIRACLES ARE POSSIBLE
An all powerful God who has the ability to do anything, could possibly act in history in a supernatural manner. Thus by affirming the existence of God we at least must leave open the possibility of miracles.
Once one can affirm the possibility of miracles then the concept of miracles can be discussed. The miracles of the Bible are historical events. Thus, to affirm these supernatural events one must define and determine the marks of a true miracle, determine whether or not God can and does act in history in a miraculous way, understand history, and recognize the Historicity and reliability of the Biblical manuscripts.
A RESPONSE to the MAYBE ARGUMENT
The question asked by one holding this position is, "Does an All Powerful God act miraculously in human history?"
To address this question one must first develop a workable definition of a miracle.
Definition of a MIRACLE
A Miracle is a Phenomenon that occurs in time-space history, that is radically different from ordinary operations of nature, that its observers are justified in attributing to the direct intervention of a supernatural agent or God.
A Miracle is a Phenomenon that occurs in time-space history, that is radically different from ordinary operations of nature, that its observers are justified in attributing to the direct intervention of a supernatural agent or God.
Whether or not the observers are justified in attributing it to a supernatural agent is open to question. A miracle might be an example of technology that is not understood by the observers. If we could load up a time machine with a variety of examples of modern technology and go back a couple hundred years, we could probably convince a lot of people that we were gods of some sort.
...the truth of Christianity stands or falls with the validity and historicity of the supernatural events...
Exactly right. Which is why the "truth" of traditional mainstream christianity (and other literalist/fundamentalist religions) has fallen (although, as far as validity is concerned, it never stood at all).
A Miracle is a Phenomenon that occurs in time-space history, that is radically different from ordinary operations of nature, that its observers are justified in attributing to the direct intervention of a supernatural agent or God.
Whether or not the observers are justified in attributing it to a supernatural agent is open to question. A miracle might be an example of technology that is not understood by the observers. If we could load up a time machine with a variety of examples of modern technology and go back a couple hundred years, we could probably convince a lot of people that we were gods of some sort.
Hi Niner I have no problem with asking all kinds of questions about things that seen Supernatural or difficult to explain. So I agree with you as opposed to someone who makes the statement, “miracles are impossible, end of discussion.” I used to think UFO’s were not real. I had never seen one and had several arguments against them. I didn’t even like many pf the kooks I saw hanging around UFO groups. None of this had anything to do with their existence.
Now after considering it longer I’m open to the possibility based on eyewitness accounts.
If we had time machines we could re-examine miracles which happen but once, usually, in effect making them repeatable. Science may then explain some things about them. ??? The reasons for believing we are not Gods would not change but I suppose your point has more to do with the ancients ignorance of just how human we are. This situation has not changed for us today.
...the truth of Christianity stands or falls with the validity and historicity of the supernatural events...
Exactly right. Which is why the "truth" of traditional mainstream christianity (and other literalist/fundamentalist religions) has fallen (although, as far as validity is concerned, it never stood at all).
Exactly wrong conclusion. The Biblical documents are reliable and your rejection is not rational. Based upon your skepticism, I doubt you have seriously considered the evidence . http://www.leaderu.c...s/bib-docu.html
To be skeptical of the 27 documents in the New Testament, and to say they are unreliable is to allow all of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no documents of the ancient period are as well attested bibliographically as these in the New Testament. On top of this there is quite a lot historical evidence for Jesus outside the New Testament. It is rational to consider it.
You Are Using Ad Block Plus or some other advert blocking software. More info here: "https://www.longecity.org/forum/topic/84454-please-disable-adblockers/
LongeCity
