Merged (edited) General thoughts about Christianity and the bible

[Roger Ramjets]

Not necessarily. But that would help. But as I said before I don't believe in the supernatural because nothing supernatural has ever withstood scrutiny.

It's more fundamental than that. Supernatural literally means 'outside nature', ie. not a part of everything that exists. Therefore the supernatural does not exist by definition, and believing in it is delusion by definition.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Exactly. It's so frustrating when religionists say, "If you don't have a God you can't have morality," when I can speak at length about where my morality comes from and why I think it works. I can answer questions about it without having to resort to an invisible, mute being or something like, "It just makes me feel good."

Earlier you mentioned that these religious ideas had saturated society.
Did they not effect your upbringing. I mean... didn't you grow up in Utah?

 

[Roger Ramjets]

I agree partially.
Written by men? Yes.
Men who made up stories? No.

This is objectively wrong. Why do you make such an assertion?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Did Jesus rise from the dead? Did Noah or Adam or Methusalah live past 800 years of age?

Yes and yes, according to the Bible. Assuming...

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Christianity is the largest religion in the world with over 2.3 billion followers, around 30% of the global population - and the Christian Bible is central to it. That arguably makes it the most influential work of fiction in human history, with particular emphasis on the word 'fiction'. For that reason It deserves the attention it gets. Has any other literary work been more brazenly misrepresented by more disingenuous apologists?

That reminds me of a joke.

A person went to the local library and for help finding a Bible.
The librarian asked, "Who is the author?"

 

[JayUtah]

Why would you conclude that a supernatural event would not be shared in writing?

Why would you conclude that a supernatural event is possible or probable?

And why would that discredit it?

Because claiming unevidenced, improbable things in a source trying to present itself as a factual record tends to discredit the source. You just happen to be predisposed to believe these ones.

(awaiting snarky reply)

Bad faith noted.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

It's more fundamental than that. Supernatural literally means 'outside nature', ie. not a part of everything that exists. Therefore the supernatural does not exist by definition, and believing in it is delusion by definition.

Doesn't that assume that there is nothing outside of nature?
Where's the proof?

 

[acbytesla]

Why would you conclude that a supernatural event would not be shared in writing?

I would think it would be shared.

And why would that discredit it?

(awaiting snarky reply)

Because not a single supernatural claim has ever been proven. The track record isn't just poor, it is non-existent.

 

[JayUtah]

Earlier you mentioned that these religious ideas had saturated society.

I don’t recall saying that.

Did they not affect your upbringing. I mean... didn't you grow up in Utah?

No.

Concentrate on answering people’s questions instead of probing for ways to make your critics seem irrationally biased.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Rusty Tyler said:
Why would you conclude that a supernatural event would not be shared in writing?

Why would you conclude that a supernatural event is possible or probable?

Because someone shared their experience with the world.
And they weren't alone.

It's an epidemic. - LOL

 

[Rusty Tyler]

Because not a single supernatural claim has ever been proven. The track record isn't just poor, it is non-existent.

Not true.

Bethel Church | Best Documented Healing Miracle Site

Testimonies from Bethel Church

documentedhealings.com

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Yes and yes, according to the Bible. Assuming...

Dam Brown has a new book out called the Secret of Secrets. The description says:-

But Prague is an old and dangerous city, steeped in folklore and mystery. For over two thousand years, the tides of history have washed back and forth over it

This is what fiction looks like. The city of Prague was named after Prague castle which dates from around 885, making it much less than 2,000 years old. I read one of Dan Brown's other books and while it was OK as a light read I had to constantly remind myself that nothing in it could be assumed factual. The Bible is similar. Even after you strip out the obviously fictitious parts it's still fundamentally unreliable because everything in it was crafted to fit the narrative.

 

[JayUtah]

Because someone shared their experience with the world.

So why aren’t you Mormon?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

This is what fiction looks like. The city of Prague was named after Prague castle which dates from around 885, making it much less than 2,000 years old.

Which is older? The city, or the city name?
Wouldn't the city be influenced by things that happened before it was named?

I think your assumption is the real fiction here.

 

[Rusty Tyler]

So why aren’t you Mormon?

I visited my neighbor's church. (a chili event) I was well-fed.
And they seemed like lots of other Christians I have known over the years.

They have a genealogical library in the lower level around back.
Two of their Elders introduced me to a scripture I hadn't noticed prior.

1 Corinthians 15:29 NIV
Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead?
If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

???

 

[JayUtah]

I'm not arguing for any more special status than it deserves.
In fact I warn Christians against Bibliodolatry. Worship of the book.

That doesn’t address my argument.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Doesn't that assume that there is nothing outside of nature?
Where's the proof?

No proof is needed, it's a category definition. The set of things that exist and those that are supernatural do not overlap, like the sets of odd and even integers.

Now you may ask what does that have to do with the Bible? Nothing actually, except that Christians insist that their god is supernatural. It they didn't do that there wouldn't be a problem. Then they would just have to 'prove' that this god can exist in a way that is compatible with their conception of it. However for some reason they resist reasonable explanations such as that he was an alien with advanced technology or that we are living in a simulation - both vastly more plausible than the supernatural assertion.

 

[The Atheist]

That reminds me of a joke.

A person went to the local library and for help finding a Bible.
The librarian asked, "Who is the author?"

Reminds me of second hand book shops, where bibles are always 50% off.

My question about the Apocrypha too hard?

 

[Rusty Tyler]

That doesn’t address my argument.

It helps if you include the post you want me to address.

 

[JayUtah]

???

Please answer the question. Why aren’t you Mormon? They share their supernatural claims with the world. Yet you reject them.