Is the bible a fairy tale?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1106 May 11, 2013
People that cannot accept the definition of atheism suffer from the mental illness of faith.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1107 May 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we do NOT know there is a God. If anything, it seems an extremely unlikely scenario.
OK, so here's your assignment: Universe A is created by an intelligent deity. Universe B is not, but follow the laws of physics. Find some observation that is public and unambiguous that shows we are not in universe B. Notice that in both universes, there are trees, life, water, stars, etc.
Your question is nonsense, and illogically constructed.

Your "Universe B" assumes the antecedent - as in, universe with life and tress, etc. exists without a creating intelligence.

It offers, therefore, an impossible task - to show that one universe requires an intelligent creator when you already built the negation of that point into the question.
KJV

United States

#1108 May 11, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
And therein lies the problem. Jews say their interpretation is correct. Catholics say their interpretation is correct. Protestants say their interpretation is correct. Mormons say their interpretation is correct. Muslims say their interpretation is correct. You say your interpretation is correct.
Unfortunately none of you can prove it any more than the Hindu can prove Vishnu is the big daddy. When that's taken into account, what's left?
Ego.
Massive.
Monumental.
Human.
Ego.
So big it causes the Earth's axial tilt.
----------

No, your conclusion is not logical.

Even if ALL interpretations are INCORRECT, it does not necessarily and logically follow that no god exists.

If 12 people who have never met you give 12 different descriptions, they might all be wrong, but you still exist.

You, of course, will not take advantage of another opportunity I offer you to learn from me.

So you will remain ignorant.

Why?

Massive.

Monumental.

Human.

Ego.
Nice
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

#1109 May 11, 2013
Snevaeh legna wrote:
<quoted text>
So you are a Jew as well? I am a Jew, but converted to Christianity.
You say your practices though are not identical to those of the Jews, but if you abide by 613 laws, you must follow them all.
Christians aren't part of the covenant between G-d and Jews.
*You are very different. It's like you have your own set of rules... Hhhmmm
I am not a Christian and have been told by Jews that I'm not Jewish either. I practice the truth as defined by the OT. "...and it cast down the truth to the ground, and it practiced and prospered" Daniel 8:12.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1110 May 11, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
The only one.
Dumb question.
You mean the one with no evidence? Dumb belief.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#1111 May 11, 2013
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
You don't know?
Here is a English lesson for you then.
If the word God is capitalized then it is referring to the God of the Bible.
And here are those RULES:
http://www.libraryonline.com/default.asp...
"Capitalization Rules
There are many rules to capitalization. Most people know the basics of capitalization such as capitalizing the first letter of the first word at the beginning of a new sentence, but when is capitalization appropriate in other situations? Outlined below is a comprehensive guide providing rules and examples to proper capitalization.
Holy Bible
- Names for the Bible Capitalize all names for the Bible, for parts and versions of the Bible and all names of other sacred books.
Examples:
Bible -Scriptures -Word of God -Holy Bible -Old Testament -New Testament
-Gospels -Ten Commandments -Lord’s Prayer -Gospels -Gospel of Luke
-King James Version
- Creeds and Confessions Capitalize all names of creeds and confessions of faith and general Biblical terms.
Examples:
-Lord Supper - the Apostles Creed
-the Westminster Catechism -Nicene Creed
- Deity - Capitalize all names for Deity
Examples:
-Father -Almighty -God -Lord -Holy Spirit -Son of Man
-Messiah - Lord of Hosts -Redeemer -Savior - Holy Trinity
"Indeed, it would be rather juvenile to misspell God simply in order to insult theists. If such an atheist had so little respect for another person, why even waste the time writing to them in the first place, much less deliberately trying to hurt them at the same time? While that may actually be the case with some atheists who write the word 'god' with a lowercase 'g,' "
http://atheism.about.com/od/doesgodexist/a/ca...
"The use of capitalization, as for a proper noun, has persisted to disambiguate the concept of a singular God, specifically the Christian God, from pagan deities for which lower case god has continued to be applied, mirroring the use of Latin deus. Pronouns referring to God are also often capitalized and are traditionally in the masculine gender, i.e. "He", "Him", "His" etc. However, some people have referred to God in feminine terms, such as "She" and "Her". "
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_ (word)
"god- Lowercase this when used as a prefix. Examples: godchild, goddaughter, godfather, godlike, godliness, godmother, godsend, godson, godspeed. Do not hyphenate
gods and goddesses
Capitalize God and similar names of the deity of a monotheistic religion: Allah, God, God the Father, Holy Ghost, Holy Spirit, Jehovah, Jesus Christ, the Redeemer, the Son of God, the Son of Man, Yahweh.
http://www.gcsu.edu/communications/g.htm
Purdue OWLWriting LabOWL
NewsEngagementResearchContactS ite Map
General Writing Research and Citation Teaching and Tutoring Subject-Specific Writing Job Search Writing ESL
OWL Family of Sites > OWL > General Writing > Mechanics > Capital Letters
"The names of God, specific deities, religious figures, and holy books"
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/59...
Capitalization
Sacred Writings/God/Religions:
ex.: Bible, Qur'an, Book of Job (not underlined)
God, Allah. The rules about pronouns referring to the deity vary; some reference works state that "He" or"His" or "Thee" are capitalized whenever "God" is capitalized. Some writers always put the pronouns in lower case. Check with your professors about their requirements.
Proper names of gods are capitalized: Krishna, Hera, Odin.
http://writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/cap... [/QUOTE]

I'm unable to capitalise god - it's not real after all so there no need.
KJV

United States

#1112 May 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Sure. You tell me what public test would convince you of the non-existence of God, and I will do it. I can give you several tests that would convince me that the universe was created by an intelligence. Here's a couple:

1. A collection of millisecond pulsars at varying distances, but that appear to be synchronized at Earth that spell out YHWH in the sky.

2. A copy of the Hebrew version of Genesis encoded in the DNA of all humans.

See? Both of those would be unambiguous signals that the Biblical God created either the universe or life on Earth.

Now, it is your turn: what observation would convince you that you are wrong?
Watch the DVD "The Star of Bethlehem". God spells it out for all men to see.

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1113 May 11, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
No, if any of the regular theistic contributors had proof of any of the many religious claims bandies about, one of them would have surely posted it here in the atheism forum. That no one has is pretty strong evidence that no such proof is known to anyone who posts here.
Do you understand the distinction between "proof" and "evidence"?

Do you understand that most natural theory is not based on "proof"?

Have you heard of the concept of a conclusion by "inductive or deductive reasoning"?

Do you understand that such is not "proof"?

Buck Crick

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1114 May 11, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
People that cannot accept the definition of atheism suffer from the mental illness of faith.
That includes you.

In fact, you are worse than "mentally ill", by your own standard.

Not only do you not accept the definition of atheism (making you mentally ill), you attempt to lie to change it.
----------

"Atheism: a + theos, denying god" (Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology).

"Atheism, from the Greek a-theos ("no-god"), is the philosophical position that God doesn't exist. It is distinguished from agnosticism, the argument that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not" (Academic American Encyclopedia).

"Atheism, system of thought developed around the denial of God's existence. Atheism, so defined, first appeared during the Enlightenment, the age of reason" (Random House Encyclopedia).

"Atheism (from the Greek a-, not, and theos, god) is the view that there are no gods. A widely used sense denotes merely not believing in God and is consistent with agnosticism. A stricter sense denotes a belief that there is no God, the use has become the standard one" (Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy).

"Atheism is the doctrine that there is no God. Some atheists support this claim by arguments, but these arguments are usually directed against the Christian concept of God, and are largely irrelevant to other possible gods" (Oxford Companion to Philosophy).

"Atheism is disbelief in God" (Introduction to Philosophy, Perry and Bratman, Oxford University Press).

"Atheism from the Greek a (not) plus theos (god). The doctrine of disbelief in a supreme being" (Dictionary of Philosophy and Religion, William Reese, HumanitiesPress).

"Atheism (Greek, a-[private prefix]+ theos, god) is the view that there is no divine being, no God" (Dictionary of Philosophy, Thomas Mautner, Editor).

"Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist" (The World Book Encyclopedia).

"Atheism, Greek atheos-Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of God" (Oxford English Dictionary)

"Atheism, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. Atheism is to be distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open whether there is a god or not, professing to find the question unanswerable, for the atheist, the non-existence of god is a certainty" (The New Encyclopedia Britannia).

"According to the most usual definition, an atheist is a person who maintains that there is no god…(rejects eccentric definitions of the word)" (The Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

"Atheism is the doctrine that God does not exist, that belief in the existence of God is a false belief. The word God here refers to a divine being regarded as the independent creator of the world, a being superlatively powerful, wise and good" (Encyclopedia of Religion).

"Atheism (Greek and Roman): Atheism is a dogmatic creed, consisting in the denial of every kind of supernatural power"(Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics-Vol II).

"Atheism denies the existence of deity" (Funk and Wagnall's New Encyclopedia-Vol I).
KJV

United States

#1115 May 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>No, we do NOT know there is a God. If anything, it seems an extremely unlikely scenario.

OK, so here's your assignment: Universe A is created by an intelligent deity. Universe B is not, but follow the laws of physics. Find some observation that is public and unambiguous that shows we are not in universe B. Notice that in both universes, there are trees, life, water, stars, etc.
"No, we do NOT know there is a God. If anything, it seems an extremely unlikely scenario."

And the better scenario? Nothing exploding to create everything? Ya that's a good one. Oh ya how about rain falling on rocks for millions and millions of years to create life. I like that one too.
Of course there is always plants evolving in to plant eating animals to fall back on.

I know how badly you want to be an ape so ill let you drift back into your dream world now.
KJV

United States

#1116 May 11, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
We got the proof Septic. "

No, if any of the regular theistic contributors had proof of any of the many religious claims bandies about, one of them would have surely posted it here in the atheism forum. That no one has is pretty strong evidence that no such proof is known to anyone who posts here.
It's been posted in code.
KJV

United States

#1117 May 11, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
You don't need to be a scientist to know that bucks beliefs are stupid and wrong.
Didn't you say you would be leaving us?

“In God we trust”

Since: Dec 12

Cape Town, South Africa

#1118 May 11, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, we do NOT know there is a God. If anything, it seems an extremely unlikely scenario.
OK, so here's your assignment: Universe A is created by an intelligent deity. Universe B is not, but follow the laws of physics. Find some observation that is public and unambiguous that shows we are not in universe B. Notice that in both universes, there are trees, life, water, stars, etc.
Also notice that a universe cannot create itself and it could only be god to create it.
KJV

United States

#1119 May 11, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Khatru:
"Atheists believe there are no gods."
Bingo!!
A positive belief!!
As in Religion!
A positive assertion in a belief put the burden of proof on "you" that there is no gods!
This is a perfect example of an Atheist that DOES believe there is no God.
Not an atheist that has an absence of all beliefs.
Merriam-Webster
athe·ist\ˈā-thē-is t\
noun
: one who believes that there is no deity
Point proven!
To easy.
LOL"

If you choose to hallucinate a god AND talk about it, it is your responsibility to PROVE.

If you cannot. You are LiAR.

It's very simple, but most theists have low intelligence and show cowardice when it comes t being honest and truthful.
"It's very simple, but most theists have low intelligence and show cowardice when it comes t being honest and truthful."

While 90%+ of adult atheist are very highly educated when compared to the worlds population their IQ is only a a couple of point higher. Just a bit higher then that of goat herders and camel jockeys. Now there something to hang your hat on. When atheist IQ's are compared to Theist IQ's of the same back ground and education the Theist IQ is just a faction higher however with the plus and minus error possibility the IQ would have to be considered the same.
KJV

United States

#1120 May 11, 2013
"The best evidence for design can be seen in the nature of the universe and how it came to be. The process of discovery continues, since one of the fundamental properties of the universe, dark energy (or the cosmological constant), was discovered late in the last century. New studies continue to add to our knowledge about the universe and its extremely unlikely makeup.

The Big Bang
The Big Bang theory states that the universe arose from a singularity of virtually no size, which gave rise to the dimensions of space and time, in addition to all matter and energy. At the beginning of the Big Bang, the four fundamental forces began to separate from each other. Early in its history (10^-36 to 10^-32 seconds), the universe underwent a period of short, but dramatic, hyper-inflationary expansion. The cause of this inflation is unknown, but was required for life to be possible in the universe.

Excess quarks
Quarks and antiquarks combined to annihilate each other. Originally, it was expected that the ratio of quarks and antiquarks to be exactly equal to one, since neither would be expected to have been produced in preference to the other. If the ratio were exactly equal to one, the universe would have consisted solely of energy - not very conducive to the existence of life. However, recent research showed that the charge ½parity violation could have resulted naturally given the three known masses of quark families.1 However, this just pushes fine tuning a level down to ask why quarks display the masses they have. Those masses must be fine tuned in order to achieve a universe that contains any matter at all.

Large, just right-sized universe
Even so, the universe is enormous compared to the size of our Solar System. Isn't the immense size of the universe evidence that humans are really insignificant, contradicting the idea that a God concerned with humanity created the universe? It turns out that the universe could not have been much smaller than it is in order for nuclear fusion to have occurred during the first 3 minutes after the Big Bang. Without this brief period of nucleosynthesis, the early universe would have consisted entirely of hydrogen.2 Likewise, the universe could not have been much larger than it is, or life would not have been possible. If the universe were just one part in 10^59 larger,3 the universe would have collapsed before life was possible. Since there are only 10^80 baryons in the universe, this means that an addition of just 10^21 baryons (about the mass of a grain of sand) would have made life impossible. The universe is exactly the size it must be for life to exist at all.

Early evolution of the universe
Cosmologists assume that the universe could have evolved in any of a number of ways, and that the process is entirely random. Based upon this assumption, nearly all possible universes would consist solely of thermal radiation (no matter). Of the tiny subset of universes that would contain matter, a small subset would be similar to ours. A very small subset of those would have originated through inflationary conditions. Therefore, universes that are conducive to life "are almost always created by fluctuations into these 'miraculous' states," according to atheist cosmologist Dr. L. Dyson.4

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_g...

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#1121 May 11, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you understand the distinction between "proof" and "evidence"?
Do you understand that most natural theory is not based on "proof"?
Have you heard of the concept of a conclusion by "inductive or deductive reasoning"?
Do you understand that such is not "proof"?
I do. I was responding to a post from KJV in which he claimed to have proof. Note how carefully I used "evidence" when referring to everything except KJV's assertion.
KJV

United States

#1122 May 11, 2013
Part 2

"Just right laws of physics
The laws of physics must have values very close to those observed or the universe does not work "well enough" to support life. What happens when we vary the constants? The strong nuclear force (which holds atoms together) has a value such that when the two hydrogen atoms fuse, 0.7% of the mass is converted into energy. If the value were 0.6% then a proton could not bond to a neutron, and the universe would consist only of hydrogen. If the value were 0.8%, then fusion would happen so readily that no hydrogen would have survived from the Big Bang. Other constants must be fine-tuned to an even more stringent degree. The cosmic microwave background varies by one part in 100,000. If this factor were slightly smaller, the universe would exist only as a collection of diffuse gas, since no stars or galaxies could ever form. If this factor were slightly larger, the universe would consist solely of large black holes. Likewise, the ratio of electrons to protons cannot vary by more than 1 part in 10^37 or else electromagnetic interactions would prevent chemical reactions. In addition, if the ratio of the electromagnetic force constant to the gravitational constant were greater by more than 1 part in 10^40, then electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing the formation of stars and galaxies. If the expansion rate of universe were 1 part in 10^55 less than what it is, then the universe would have already collapsed. The most recently discovered physical law, the cosmological constant or dark energy, is the closest to zero of all the physical constants. In fact, a change of only 1 part in 10^120 would completely negate the effect.

Universal probability bounds
"Unlikely things happen all the time." This is the mantra of the anti-design movement. However, there is an absolute physical limit for improbable events to happen in our universe. The universe contains only 10^80 baryons and has only been around for 13.7 billion years (10^18 sec). Since the smallest unit of time is Planck time (10^-45 sec),5 the lowest probability event that can ever happen in the history of the universe is:

1/1080 x 1/1018 x 1/1045 =1/10143"
KJV

United States

#1123 May 11, 2013
Part 3

"So, although it would be possible that one or two constants might require unusual fine-tuning by chance, it would be virtually impossible that all of them would require such fine-tuning. Some physicists have indicated that any of a number of different physical laws would be compatible with our present universe. However, it is not just the current state of the universe that must be compatible with the physical laws. Even more stringent are the initial conditions of the universe, since even minor deviations would have completely disrupted the process. For example, adding a grain of sand to the weight of the universe now would have no effect. However, adding even this small amount of weight at the beginning of the universe would have resulted in its collapse early in its history.

What do cosmologists say?
Even though many atheists would like to dismiss such evidence of design, cosmologists know better, and have made statements such as the following, which reveal the depth of the problem for the atheistic worldview:

"This type of universe, however, seems to require a degree of fine-tuning of the initial conditions that is in apparent conflict with 'common wisdom'."
"Polarization is predicted. It's been detected and it's in line with theoretical predictions. We're stuck with this preposterous universe."
"In all of these worlds statistically miraculous (but not impossible) events would be necessary to assemble and preserve the fragile nuclei that would ordinarily be destroyed by the higher temperatures. However, although each of the corresponding histories is extremely unlikely, there are so many more of them than those that evolve without "miracles," that they would vastly dominate the livable universes that would be created by Poincare recurrences. We are forced to conclude that in a recurrent world like de Sitter space our universe would be extraordinarily unlikely"

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/is_g...

“ IT'S A CHOICE !!!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#1124 May 11, 2013
[QUOTE who="KJV
"]<quoted text>
Snevaeh legna
If you've not watched it you should check out the DVD call "The Star of Bethlehem". Pretty assume.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you, I will...:)

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#1125 May 11, 2013
Carchar king wrote:
<quoted text>
Also notice that a universe cannot create itself and it could only be god to create it.
That's a non sequitur. Those are NOT the only two possibilities.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 26 min Science 78,701
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 33 min Science 32,440
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 3 hr Science 1,410
News Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... Aug 12 Eagle 12 - 1,152
what science will NEVER be able to prove Aug 11 Eagle 12 - 5
News What Ever Happened to the New Atheists?by Ellio... Aug 7 nanoanomaly 1
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) Aug 5 yehoshooah adam 4,381
More from around the web