Wow, it's been almost a month since I last posted. I'm still here and doing alright. Currently I'm working on debunking my first apologist book: "Why I Believe the Bible is the Word of God" by Phyllis Robinson. It's turning out to be an extremely long process, so I'll probably split my posts up in chapters when it's finally done.
I'm becoming disappointed with the public school here in my town. While claiming to be a secular system, unfortunately it's completely saturated by the xtians. Despite my best efforts of keeping my children away from religion in general until they reach an age when they can make an informed decision on their own, I'm finding them coming home and asking me what a teacher(!!) meant when she was talking about heaven and hell in class(!!!!!). I could understand if a kid came up to them and started talking about stuff like that, since religion advocates brainwashing, but this is a spokesperson for the school (a teacher) essentially teaching (in class) xtianity. Completely unacceptible! My modest income prohibits me from taking legal action, but I'm seriously considering enrolling the kids in a virtual school next year.
On a lighter note, I'm working on trying to get a couple people signed up so they can start posting here as well. Maybe then it won't be so long until there's another post :).
Friday, February 6, 2009
Saturday, January 10, 2009
50 "Proofs"
I happened upon this letter in PZ Meyer's blog the other day, and I decided to dissect it with my own arguments. I did need to look up a few things which I provided addies to. All in all, I think it went fairly well. My responses are in bold.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is easy to prove to yourself that God is real. .the evidence is all around you. Here are 50 simple proofs:
1.Whilst agreeing that random patterns occur naturally by chance, DNA however, consists of code, which requires a designer.
If the "code" in DNA was "programmed" by a designer, then why are we not exact copies of one another? Why are there flaws/mutations and why are there unused chromosomes in the DNA sequence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA)? This only "proves" that the imaginary designer made mistakes and therefore was/is incompetent and should be fired.
2.How do you explain the paranormal, such as people witnessing positive or negative sightings, like ghosts or angels? I saw a ghost with a friend of mine - I am not a liar, an attention seeker. Neither was I overtired when this happened.
Many paranormal experiences can be explained by tricks of lighting, over-hyped excitement and pareidolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia). Others can be explained as a misinterpretation of data through the senses. Still others can be explained by toxic fumes (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/
fullpage.html?res=9A06E0D81438F93AA25750C0A9649C8B63). If the paranormal were real and happening all the time like some claim, then why is it that science can't test it and why are so many claims hoaxes?
3.Try praying. What good is it when a mind is set to coincidence & disbelief regarding the positive outcome?
Praying for anything except personal peace of mind has been proven false(http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870305006496/abstract). Praying for someone can be interpreted as a cop-out, so be careful who you tell that "you're praying for them." As for the second part: If any of your "proofs" were backed up with evidence, then I think it would be safe to assume that atheists wouldn't be atheists in the first place. Seems to me that people such as yourself are closed minded towards anything that isn't contained in your one "holy book".
4.The law of cause & effect - in order to have an effect, there has to be a cause. Everything is caused by something.
If a god creates something complex, then that god must be complex and by YOUR OWN REASONING demands a creator who in turn demands a creator and so on for infinity.
5.Mindless nothing cannot be responsible for complex something.
Science never stated that something comes from nothing, and I believe your definition of "nothing" is faulty. (See number 4)
6.Science can only be the detector of certain things. You cannot scientifically detect emotion, memory, thoughts etc., though scientifically we must.. These things which do not consist of matter are beyond the detection of science.
By this statement, science couldn't detect gravity. Human emotion has been studied, it's a little known field called psychology.
7.Evolution has never been proved, which is why we call it the 'theory of evolution'. It's a fairy tale for grown ups!
In science when a hypothesis is essentially "proved" then it becomes a theory. Check your definitions.
8.Atheism is a faith in that which has not been proved. The disbelievers have not witnessed anything to not believe in, whereas the believers believe because they have witnessed. There is no 'good news' to preach in atheism.
Atheism = lack of belief in a god or gods. No faith is involved. "Disbelievers" witness people believing in stuff that is pretty crazy, so the "disbelievers" ask for evidence for the crazy stuff. Remember that "believers" must be taught to believe, they aren't born that way.
9.How much of the atheist's faith relies on anger with God as opposed to genuine disbelief in God?
See number 8. And your statement in 43 seems to indicate the opposite.
10.Why do many atheists shake their fists & spend so much time ranting & raving about something they don't believe in? If they are no more than a fizzled out battery at the end of the day, then why don't they spend their lives partying, or getting a hobby?! Why don't they leave this 'God nonsense' alone?
There's many times more evangelical christians than there are vocal atheists. Seems to me that you're seeking reason and rationality if you're paying attention to atheists so much. Many atheists see the "god nonsense" as harmful to the progress of civilization and choose to be vocal about it.
11.What created God? What came first, the chicken or the egg? I am not going to deny the existence of the chicken or the egg, merely because I don't understand or know what came first. I don't care - they both exist!
Nice contradiction: see your number 4 and my number 4.
12.Improbability is not the same as impossibility. You only have to look at life itself for that backup of proof.
I agree.
13.How could the complexity of human life possibly evolve on its own accord out of mindless cells?
Quit putting your hands in front of your eyes and using your fingers to plug your ears. http://toarchive.org/origins/faqs-qa.html If you really want to learn then you MUST stop being lazy and do the work! See your number 12.
14.How could the complexity of the human mind possibly evolve on its own accord out of mindless cells? Where does our consciousness come from?
See number 13 and your number 12.
15.What/who knew that our hunger & thirst had to be catered for by the food & drink which we're supplied with?
We evolved into what we are because of planetary conditions. A puddle doesn't say, "I fit perfectly into this hole in the ground so it must have been created deliberately just for me."
16.Most of us are born with the five senses to detect our surroundings, which we're provided with.
Yes, we are born with five senses, so are the majority of species on earth. Do you think a god did it? If a god gave us senses, why did it stop at five? Why not have a "god sense" that we could use to speak directly to it? This is also an admission that your statement in number 2 is false by not including the paranormal "sixth" sense.
17.What/who knew that had Earth been set nearer to the sun, we would burn up?
See number 15.
18.What/who knew that had Earth been set any further from the sun, we would freeze up?
See number 15.
19.What/who knew that had Earth been built larger or smaller, its atmosphere would be one where it would not be possible for us to breathe?
What's the evidence for this statement? See number 15.
20.What/who knew that we require the oxygen of plants, just as plants require the carbon dioxide of us?
Did you know that before creatures crawled out of the oceans, plants had already existed for a very long time? See number 13.
21.The concept that life came about through sheer chance is as absurd & improbable as a tornado blowing through a junk yard, consequently assembling a Boeing 747!
Would it be easier for you to accept that the 747 had always existed, had infinite power and had no creator? http://www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/200001/0179.html
22.We are willing to believe in physically unseen waves that exist through the air, operating physical forces & appliances to work, yet not supernatural God forces being responsible for the same.
Is this statement about light? It appears that you equate remote controllers to be mystical devices that surely no human could ever dream up. See number 4 again.
23.Matter cannot organise itself. An uneaten tomato will not progress on its own accord to form a perfect pineapple. It will transform into mould, into disorganisation. The laws of evolution fall flat.
I'm beginning to realize that you don't actually have 50 points, you're only rewording a few over and over. See numbers 15, 14, and 13.
24.Our 'inventor' of evolution, Mr. Charles Darwin had this to say to Lady Hope when he was almost bedridden for 3 months before he died; "I was a young man with unfathomed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions. wondering all the time over everything, and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire - people made a religion of them." Darwin then asked Lady Hope to speak to neighbours the next day. "What shall I speak about?" She asked. He replied; "Christ Jesus and his salvation. Is that not the best theme?"
This is an urban legend and has been proven to be false. http://toarchive.org/faqs/hope.html
25.Where do our moral values held within our conscience come from? If the atheist is right, why then would we care about what we did?! If there is no God, then we've no-one to be accountable to.
People like you scare me. If your belief in God suddenly disappeared then you would run around killing everyone because of your false moral value system. Now let me ask you: Did a god say that killing is bad just because it felt like it or did it say killing is bad because it was already a good idea in human culture and it just decided to pass it along? If it just made it up, it could have also said that killing is good and there would be no human race left UNLESS people developed their own moral values. If it was just passing it along then you have to agree that humans have a moral structure without a god. Morals have developed through time and evolution to give us an idea of what's right and wrong when living within social structures. Think about it!
26.If man has evolved from an animal, why doesn't he behave like an animal? Yet man is civilised.
See number 25.
27.'Chance' isn't the cause of something. It just describes what we can't find a reason for.
Substitute 'god' for 'chance' in your statement and you get the "god of the gaps" argument, an easy strawman to knock down. Nice try. See your number 12.
28.Science & logic do not hold all the answers - many people are aware of forces at work which we have no understanding of & no control over.
I don't fully understand electricity but I use it everyday just like you and science has plenty of understanding in that subject so your statement here holds no value unless you can come up with some examples.
29.Look at the date/year on our calender - 2000 years ago since what? Our historical records (other than the Bible) record evidence of Jesus' existence.
A measurement of time doesn't equal a god. If it did then there would be no atheists. Some religious leaders way back when decided to start a calender. Do you know if it's supposed to be Jesus' birth or death that is the starting year? Do you not know that the gospels don't agree on when Jesus was born? Basically you have no point in this statement.
30.Many people have died for their faith. Would they be prepared to do this for a lie?!
Many people died for Hitler's ideas. Does that make him right?
31.Much of the Bible deals with eyewitness accounts, written only 40 years after Jesus died. When the books in the New Testament were first around, there would have been confusion & anger if the books were not true.
Your timeline might be a little off there, but that's irrelevant if you consider that if Jesus was a fabrication and no one had heard of him, then who at that time could disprove it? More likely, Jesus was a corner preacher way way before the gospels were written, he had a few good sayings that got written down and those got horrendously embellished over time.
32.From as early as 2000 BC, there is archaological evidence to confirm many details we're provided with in the Bible.
Yes, Egypt exists and Jerusalem exists. Did you know that there is absolutely no evidence for the "exodus" from Egypt?
33.Not one single Biblical prediction can be shown as false, and the Bible contains hundreds.
I got one that's false. Mark 13:30 = Jesus is telling the disciples about the apocalypse and he says: "I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."
34.The evidence from liturature & historical studies claim that Biblical statements are reliable details of genuine events.
If you're referring to the ONE and ONLY external bible source that says that Jesus existed, Josephus, the line of text in question has been proven to be an insertion by a christian copyist. Other than that one source, what else is there?
35.From the birth of science through to today, there is no evidence to claim that Christianity & science are in opposition. Many first scientists were Christians; Francis Bacon, Issaac Newton, Robert Boyle, to name a few, along with the many who stand by their work & faith today.
If there is no opposition then why do you oppose evolution? Yet another contradiction.
36.Science can explain 'how' something works, but not 'why' something works.
Science does explain why things work. If it didn't then I don't think that you'd have your computer that you're using right now. See number 13.
37.Science is constantly recorrecting its findings. Past theories contradict certain beliefs which are held today. Our present 'discoveries' may change again in the future to rediscover how we originally came into existence.
I'll agree to the statement that "science is self-correcting." As our understanding grows, theories may be changed or scrapped. The problem with your side is that you CAN'T change your dogma even in the light of overwhelming lack of evidence to prove your point. Who is really being close minded here?
38.Evolution describes the way life possibly started, yet doesn't explain what made life start & why. Scientific questions fail to do that. Even if evolution were proved, it would still not disprove God.
Evolution has NEVER EVER explained how life started. Life must be in existence first and must be self-replicating BEFORE the evolution theory kicks in. What you are referring to is abiogenesis That particular theory along with some others try to explain how and why life got started are still a little shaky. They are good ideas, but they don't explain everything. Your continued attacks on evolution only belittles yourself because you don't really know what theory you are trying to disprove. On the second point, no, evolution doesn't disprove a god, it merely takes away one more hiding place.
39.The two people who discovered Jesus' empty tomb were women. Women were so low on the social scale in first century Palestine, so in order to make the story fit, it would have made far more sense to claim that it were male disciples who had entered the tomb. But it wasn't - we're left with the historical & Biblical truth.
Are you forgetting all the other gospels? In Mark it was Mary, Mary and Salome; In Luke it says "the women who followed Jesus from Galilee"; John just says Mary; it was only in Matthew that it says that it was the two Marys. Without a consistent story, it's impossible to know which version is correct or even if any of them are correct.
40.Think about Near Death Experiences. It's naive to believe that they all are induced by chemicals or drugs. How do we account for a blind person having this experience, coming back to describe what they had never before seen, a person telling the Doctor that there is a blue paperclip on top of the high cabinet, which they couldn't have otherwise known, an african man being dead in his coffin for 3 days, coming back to life to tell of much the same events which took place as those of many others? We never hear of the witnesses describing "a dream". We're not silly - we know the difference between even the most vivid of dreams to that of reality.
As your brain begins to shut down from a lack of blood or oxygen, it's still trying to perform some of its functions. This explains how conversations can still be heard. People aren't really "seeing" however: there was an experiment where patients that were expected to have the experience was asked to read a sign that was placed face up on a high shelf. Nobody could read it. It was then decided that the experience was based from the last visual memory the patient had and that the floating sensation was actually the movement trigger in the brain being set off, much like in dreams. Of course it's not going to feel like a dream because it's not a dream, your brain is still attempting to interpret information before shutting down.
41.There are many skeptics who didn't believe in Jesus before his crucifixion, and who were opposed to Christianity, yet turned to the Christian faith after the death of Jesus. Just as the many who continue to do so today.
You're assuming that the resurrection is true. With every gospel contradicting with all the other gospels, how do you know any of those accounts are even close to being truthful? You do realize that when Paul wrote the epistles, he wasn't writing about the earthly Jesus, don't you? Read them sometime.
42.Albert Einstein said; "A legitimate conflict between science & religion cannot exist. Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind".
Einstein also said: "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." Your quote here is pointless.
43.A speaker in Hyde Park who was attacking belief in God, claimed that the world just happened. As he spoke, a soft tomato was thrown at him. "Who threw that?" He said angrily. A cockney from the back of the crowd replied; "No-one threw it - it threw itself!"
This statement is merely more evidence that some christians regularly attack educators and scientists for their "heretical" beliefs.
44.It is easier to believe that God created something out of nothing than it is to believe that nothing created something out of nothing.
It is, in fact, easier to say that the universe has always existed in some natural state than to say that an infinitely powerful and complex god thing created it. What created your god and what created that thing and so on. Logically your argument is false.
45.Stephen Hawkins has admitted; "Science may solve the problem of how the universe began, but it cannot answer the question: why does the universe bother to exist?"
That's a philosophical question that isn't even remotely close to science. I'll give you a similar quote: "Why do people bother to believe in lies?"
46.We cannot confuse God with man. With God in the equation, all things, including miracles are possible. If God is God, he is Creator of all, inclusive of scientific law. He is Creator of matter & spirit.
Correct. Don't confuse god with man. Man creates and makes stuff all the time. Do other creatures in the natural world create stuff? No. Just because we can make stuff doesn't mean that the stuff we can't make was created by a god thing that was made in man's image.
47.If we are the product of evolution - by sheer accident, chance, then we are still evolving. Does it just so happen that we exist here today with everything so finely tuned for our living. as we now have it?
Another puddle point. See number 15.
48.Could it possibly be that the missing link does not exist?!
There are "missing links" being discovered and verified all the time. Try googling "transitional fossils".
49.God has proved himself to us in numerous ways, all around us. The atheist needs to put his glasses on. What more can God possibly do if man has shut his eyes to him?
If anyone needs "god glasses" to "see" the "proof" of god, then it's quite apparent that there is no real evidence at all. Its people like you that are in fact close minded, your dogma forces you to be.
50.Jesus Christ is either who he says he is, or he is the biggest con man history has ever known.
Occam's Razor seems to indicate the con man here. He could have also been a simple preacher, or not even exist at all. If you can't believe that someone can do the miracles Jesus supposedly did in the present day, what makes you believe that they happened around 2000 years ago?
YOU DECIDE!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is easy to prove to yourself that God is real. .the evidence is all around you. Here are 50 simple proofs:
1.Whilst agreeing that random patterns occur naturally by chance, DNA however, consists of code, which requires a designer.
If the "code" in DNA was "programmed" by a designer, then why are we not exact copies of one another? Why are there flaws/mutations and why are there unused chromosomes in the DNA sequence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA)? This only "proves" that the imaginary designer made mistakes and therefore was/is incompetent and should be fired.
2.How do you explain the paranormal, such as people witnessing positive or negative sightings, like ghosts or angels? I saw a ghost with a friend of mine - I am not a liar, an attention seeker. Neither was I overtired when this happened.
Many paranormal experiences can be explained by tricks of lighting, over-hyped excitement and pareidolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia). Others can be explained as a misinterpretation of data through the senses. Still others can be explained by toxic fumes (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/
fullpage.html?res=9A06E0D81438F93AA25750C0A9649C8B63). If the paranormal were real and happening all the time like some claim, then why is it that science can't test it and why are so many claims hoaxes?
3.Try praying. What good is it when a mind is set to coincidence & disbelief regarding the positive outcome?
Praying for anything except personal peace of mind has been proven false(http://www.ahjonline.com/article/PIIS0002870305006496/abstract). Praying for someone can be interpreted as a cop-out, so be careful who you tell that "you're praying for them." As for the second part: If any of your "proofs" were backed up with evidence, then I think it would be safe to assume that atheists wouldn't be atheists in the first place. Seems to me that people such as yourself are closed minded towards anything that isn't contained in your one "holy book".
4.The law of cause & effect - in order to have an effect, there has to be a cause. Everything is caused by something.
If a god creates something complex, then that god must be complex and by YOUR OWN REASONING demands a creator who in turn demands a creator and so on for infinity.
5.Mindless nothing cannot be responsible for complex something.
Science never stated that something comes from nothing, and I believe your definition of "nothing" is faulty. (See number 4)
6.Science can only be the detector of certain things. You cannot scientifically detect emotion, memory, thoughts etc., though scientifically we must.. These things which do not consist of matter are beyond the detection of science.
By this statement, science couldn't detect gravity. Human emotion has been studied, it's a little known field called psychology.
7.Evolution has never been proved, which is why we call it the 'theory of evolution'. It's a fairy tale for grown ups!
In science when a hypothesis is essentially "proved" then it becomes a theory. Check your definitions.
8.Atheism is a faith in that which has not been proved. The disbelievers have not witnessed anything to not believe in, whereas the believers believe because they have witnessed. There is no 'good news' to preach in atheism.
Atheism = lack of belief in a god or gods. No faith is involved. "Disbelievers" witness people believing in stuff that is pretty crazy, so the "disbelievers" ask for evidence for the crazy stuff. Remember that "believers" must be taught to believe, they aren't born that way.
9.How much of the atheist's faith relies on anger with God as opposed to genuine disbelief in God?
See number 8. And your statement in 43 seems to indicate the opposite.
10.Why do many atheists shake their fists & spend so much time ranting & raving about something they don't believe in? If they are no more than a fizzled out battery at the end of the day, then why don't they spend their lives partying, or getting a hobby?! Why don't they leave this 'God nonsense' alone?
There's many times more evangelical christians than there are vocal atheists. Seems to me that you're seeking reason and rationality if you're paying attention to atheists so much. Many atheists see the "god nonsense" as harmful to the progress of civilization and choose to be vocal about it.
11.What created God? What came first, the chicken or the egg? I am not going to deny the existence of the chicken or the egg, merely because I don't understand or know what came first. I don't care - they both exist!
Nice contradiction: see your number 4 and my number 4.
12.Improbability is not the same as impossibility. You only have to look at life itself for that backup of proof.
I agree.
13.How could the complexity of human life possibly evolve on its own accord out of mindless cells?
Quit putting your hands in front of your eyes and using your fingers to plug your ears. http://toarchive.org/origins/faqs-qa.html If you really want to learn then you MUST stop being lazy and do the work! See your number 12.
14.How could the complexity of the human mind possibly evolve on its own accord out of mindless cells? Where does our consciousness come from?
See number 13 and your number 12.
15.What/who knew that our hunger & thirst had to be catered for by the food & drink which we're supplied with?
We evolved into what we are because of planetary conditions. A puddle doesn't say, "I fit perfectly into this hole in the ground so it must have been created deliberately just for me."
16.Most of us are born with the five senses to detect our surroundings, which we're provided with.
Yes, we are born with five senses, so are the majority of species on earth. Do you think a god did it? If a god gave us senses, why did it stop at five? Why not have a "god sense" that we could use to speak directly to it? This is also an admission that your statement in number 2 is false by not including the paranormal "sixth" sense.
17.What/who knew that had Earth been set nearer to the sun, we would burn up?
See number 15.
18.What/who knew that had Earth been set any further from the sun, we would freeze up?
See number 15.
19.What/who knew that had Earth been built larger or smaller, its atmosphere would be one where it would not be possible for us to breathe?
What's the evidence for this statement? See number 15.
20.What/who knew that we require the oxygen of plants, just as plants require the carbon dioxide of us?
Did you know that before creatures crawled out of the oceans, plants had already existed for a very long time? See number 13.
21.The concept that life came about through sheer chance is as absurd & improbable as a tornado blowing through a junk yard, consequently assembling a Boeing 747!
Would it be easier for you to accept that the 747 had always existed, had infinite power and had no creator? http://www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/200001/0179.html
22.We are willing to believe in physically unseen waves that exist through the air, operating physical forces & appliances to work, yet not supernatural God forces being responsible for the same.
Is this statement about light? It appears that you equate remote controllers to be mystical devices that surely no human could ever dream up. See number 4 again.
23.Matter cannot organise itself. An uneaten tomato will not progress on its own accord to form a perfect pineapple. It will transform into mould, into disorganisation. The laws of evolution fall flat.
I'm beginning to realize that you don't actually have 50 points, you're only rewording a few over and over. See numbers 15, 14, and 13.
24.Our 'inventor' of evolution, Mr. Charles Darwin had this to say to Lady Hope when he was almost bedridden for 3 months before he died; "I was a young man with unfathomed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions. wondering all the time over everything, and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire - people made a religion of them." Darwin then asked Lady Hope to speak to neighbours the next day. "What shall I speak about?" She asked. He replied; "Christ Jesus and his salvation. Is that not the best theme?"
This is an urban legend and has been proven to be false. http://toarchive.org/faqs/hope.html
25.Where do our moral values held within our conscience come from? If the atheist is right, why then would we care about what we did?! If there is no God, then we've no-one to be accountable to.
People like you scare me. If your belief in God suddenly disappeared then you would run around killing everyone because of your false moral value system. Now let me ask you: Did a god say that killing is bad just because it felt like it or did it say killing is bad because it was already a good idea in human culture and it just decided to pass it along? If it just made it up, it could have also said that killing is good and there would be no human race left UNLESS people developed their own moral values. If it was just passing it along then you have to agree that humans have a moral structure without a god. Morals have developed through time and evolution to give us an idea of what's right and wrong when living within social structures. Think about it!
26.If man has evolved from an animal, why doesn't he behave like an animal? Yet man is civilised.
See number 25.
27.'Chance' isn't the cause of something. It just describes what we can't find a reason for.
Substitute 'god' for 'chance' in your statement and you get the "god of the gaps" argument, an easy strawman to knock down. Nice try. See your number 12.
28.Science & logic do not hold all the answers - many people are aware of forces at work which we have no understanding of & no control over.
I don't fully understand electricity but I use it everyday just like you and science has plenty of understanding in that subject so your statement here holds no value unless you can come up with some examples.
29.Look at the date/year on our calender - 2000 years ago since what? Our historical records (other than the Bible) record evidence of Jesus' existence.
A measurement of time doesn't equal a god. If it did then there would be no atheists. Some religious leaders way back when decided to start a calender. Do you know if it's supposed to be Jesus' birth or death that is the starting year? Do you not know that the gospels don't agree on when Jesus was born? Basically you have no point in this statement.
30.Many people have died for their faith. Would they be prepared to do this for a lie?!
Many people died for Hitler's ideas. Does that make him right?
31.Much of the Bible deals with eyewitness accounts, written only 40 years after Jesus died. When the books in the New Testament were first around, there would have been confusion & anger if the books were not true.
Your timeline might be a little off there, but that's irrelevant if you consider that if Jesus was a fabrication and no one had heard of him, then who at that time could disprove it? More likely, Jesus was a corner preacher way way before the gospels were written, he had a few good sayings that got written down and those got horrendously embellished over time.
32.From as early as 2000 BC, there is archaological evidence to confirm many details we're provided with in the Bible.
Yes, Egypt exists and Jerusalem exists. Did you know that there is absolutely no evidence for the "exodus" from Egypt?
33.Not one single Biblical prediction can be shown as false, and the Bible contains hundreds.
I got one that's false. Mark 13:30 = Jesus is telling the disciples about the apocalypse and he says: "I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."
34.The evidence from liturature & historical studies claim that Biblical statements are reliable details of genuine events.
If you're referring to the ONE and ONLY external bible source that says that Jesus existed, Josephus, the line of text in question has been proven to be an insertion by a christian copyist. Other than that one source, what else is there?
35.From the birth of science through to today, there is no evidence to claim that Christianity & science are in opposition. Many first scientists were Christians; Francis Bacon, Issaac Newton, Robert Boyle, to name a few, along with the many who stand by their work & faith today.
If there is no opposition then why do you oppose evolution? Yet another contradiction.
36.Science can explain 'how' something works, but not 'why' something works.
Science does explain why things work. If it didn't then I don't think that you'd have your computer that you're using right now. See number 13.
37.Science is constantly recorrecting its findings. Past theories contradict certain beliefs which are held today. Our present 'discoveries' may change again in the future to rediscover how we originally came into existence.
I'll agree to the statement that "science is self-correcting." As our understanding grows, theories may be changed or scrapped. The problem with your side is that you CAN'T change your dogma even in the light of overwhelming lack of evidence to prove your point. Who is really being close minded here?
38.Evolution describes the way life possibly started, yet doesn't explain what made life start & why. Scientific questions fail to do that. Even if evolution were proved, it would still not disprove God.
Evolution has NEVER EVER explained how life started. Life must be in existence first and must be self-replicating BEFORE the evolution theory kicks in. What you are referring to is abiogenesis That particular theory along with some others try to explain how and why life got started are still a little shaky. They are good ideas, but they don't explain everything. Your continued attacks on evolution only belittles yourself because you don't really know what theory you are trying to disprove. On the second point, no, evolution doesn't disprove a god, it merely takes away one more hiding place.
39.The two people who discovered Jesus' empty tomb were women. Women were so low on the social scale in first century Palestine, so in order to make the story fit, it would have made far more sense to claim that it were male disciples who had entered the tomb. But it wasn't - we're left with the historical & Biblical truth.
Are you forgetting all the other gospels? In Mark it was Mary, Mary and Salome; In Luke it says "the women who followed Jesus from Galilee"; John just says Mary; it was only in Matthew that it says that it was the two Marys. Without a consistent story, it's impossible to know which version is correct or even if any of them are correct.
40.Think about Near Death Experiences. It's naive to believe that they all are induced by chemicals or drugs. How do we account for a blind person having this experience, coming back to describe what they had never before seen, a person telling the Doctor that there is a blue paperclip on top of the high cabinet, which they couldn't have otherwise known, an african man being dead in his coffin for 3 days, coming back to life to tell of much the same events which took place as those of many others? We never hear of the witnesses describing "a dream". We're not silly - we know the difference between even the most vivid of dreams to that of reality.
As your brain begins to shut down from a lack of blood or oxygen, it's still trying to perform some of its functions. This explains how conversations can still be heard. People aren't really "seeing" however: there was an experiment where patients that were expected to have the experience was asked to read a sign that was placed face up on a high shelf. Nobody could read it. It was then decided that the experience was based from the last visual memory the patient had and that the floating sensation was actually the movement trigger in the brain being set off, much like in dreams. Of course it's not going to feel like a dream because it's not a dream, your brain is still attempting to interpret information before shutting down.
41.There are many skeptics who didn't believe in Jesus before his crucifixion, and who were opposed to Christianity, yet turned to the Christian faith after the death of Jesus. Just as the many who continue to do so today.
You're assuming that the resurrection is true. With every gospel contradicting with all the other gospels, how do you know any of those accounts are even close to being truthful? You do realize that when Paul wrote the epistles, he wasn't writing about the earthly Jesus, don't you? Read them sometime.
42.Albert Einstein said; "A legitimate conflict between science & religion cannot exist. Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind".
Einstein also said: "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." Your quote here is pointless.
43.A speaker in Hyde Park who was attacking belief in God, claimed that the world just happened. As he spoke, a soft tomato was thrown at him. "Who threw that?" He said angrily. A cockney from the back of the crowd replied; "No-one threw it - it threw itself!"
This statement is merely more evidence that some christians regularly attack educators and scientists for their "heretical" beliefs.
44.It is easier to believe that God created something out of nothing than it is to believe that nothing created something out of nothing.
It is, in fact, easier to say that the universe has always existed in some natural state than to say that an infinitely powerful and complex god thing created it. What created your god and what created that thing and so on. Logically your argument is false.
45.Stephen Hawkins has admitted; "Science may solve the problem of how the universe began, but it cannot answer the question: why does the universe bother to exist?"
That's a philosophical question that isn't even remotely close to science. I'll give you a similar quote: "Why do people bother to believe in lies?"
46.We cannot confuse God with man. With God in the equation, all things, including miracles are possible. If God is God, he is Creator of all, inclusive of scientific law. He is Creator of matter & spirit.
Correct. Don't confuse god with man. Man creates and makes stuff all the time. Do other creatures in the natural world create stuff? No. Just because we can make stuff doesn't mean that the stuff we can't make was created by a god thing that was made in man's image.
47.If we are the product of evolution - by sheer accident, chance, then we are still evolving. Does it just so happen that we exist here today with everything so finely tuned for our living. as we now have it?
Another puddle point. See number 15.
48.Could it possibly be that the missing link does not exist?!
There are "missing links" being discovered and verified all the time. Try googling "transitional fossils".
49.God has proved himself to us in numerous ways, all around us. The atheist needs to put his glasses on. What more can God possibly do if man has shut his eyes to him?
If anyone needs "god glasses" to "see" the "proof" of god, then it's quite apparent that there is no real evidence at all. Its people like you that are in fact close minded, your dogma forces you to be.
50.Jesus Christ is either who he says he is, or he is the biggest con man history has ever known.
Occam's Razor seems to indicate the con man here. He could have also been a simple preacher, or not even exist at all. If you can't believe that someone can do the miracles Jesus supposedly did in the present day, what makes you believe that they happened around 2000 years ago?
YOU DECIDE!!!
Sunday, December 28, 2008
New Blog
I've been debating this for awhile, and I've finally decided to move my blog from Myspace to Blogger. The reason for doing this is because Myspace has extremely long loading times and it just gets to the point where it's more of a hassle getting the page to load than it should be.
My old blog is:
http://www.myspace.com/gar_syver
I haven't decided whether I need to copy/paste my old posts here for congruity. Presently I don't think there's a need, but who knows.
I'll probably still go to Myspace around once a week or so, just to check up on it.
My old blog is:
http://www.myspace.com/gar_syver
I haven't decided whether I need to copy/paste my old posts here for congruity. Presently I don't think there's a need, but who knows.
I'll probably still go to Myspace around once a week or so, just to check up on it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)