Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 255565 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Patrick

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#232375 Jul 12, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Noah's pier ,bait and tackle shop.
Membership sold in pairs.
Come rain or shine!
LOL
CunningLinguist

Howey In The Hills, FL

#232376 Jul 12, 2014
Patrick wrote:
<quoted text>
Noah's ark was made by an individual,
the Titanic was made by experts
No, Noah's Ark was not made by an individual; according to Christian mythology - his family (eight incestuous people)managed and built the ark.

They also managed to create different species of Homo sapiens, repopulating the entire planet!

Think of it... eight family members create black; yellow; red; brown; and white humans.

Some have diseases relative to their color such as sickle cell anemia.

< Thanks for sharing your mythology>

Fact: Titanic hit iceberg, sunk, we found the wreckage - proof the Titanic existed.

Fact: noah's Ark has never been found.
The entire story is impossible.

Observation:
The "true believers" who want to share their religious views with you practically never want you to share your irrreligious views with them.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#232377 Jul 12, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
As impossible as we might find it, the universe is beyond comprehension.
It's funny you can't grasp this concept, that the speed of expansion is faster than light, making it impossible to traverse the distance. It's the very same thing as running 100 mph trying to catch something going 105 mph. You will never catch it, it will recede into infinity.
Bwahahahaaaa...

So if a car goes 105mph, it will "recede into infinty".

But a car going 120mph would be looking back at the car receding into infinity.

What happens to the 120mph car? Double infinity? Super-Duper Infinity? Uber Infinity?

Bwahahahahahahhahahahahaaa...

I learn so much on Topix.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#232378 Jul 12, 2014
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Quite a few of us made a most similar intellectual journey.
Reading the bible is one of the surest paths to unbelief - but what do I think willl finally kill off religion?
Google.
I really don't think religion will ever completely die off, but it will take some huge hits. One, people are already starting to demand that churches pay taxes. Most people are quite confident that the world in billions of years old and that man evolve from a lower life form. 100 years ago, damn few would dare say that! 100 years from now, only the truly indoctrinated and the people who prey on the truly indoctrinated will deny the evidence.

Here is a fun little test: As a religious person about something they know a lot about, say automotive mechanics. Listen to them talk all about how the engine works, how the gas is mixed with air, how the exhaust is removed and all. Then ask them about something which they know little about.

What you will find is: When talking about a subject they know a lot about, they will never mention god or the supernatural. But when they talk about a subject they know very little about, they go right to "god did it".

If we can get them to see how they keep their god in the gaps of their knowledge and how he does not get mentioned when they are confident in their knowledge, church attendance will drop. Churches will go up for sale and the new owners will pay taxes.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#232379 Jul 12, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
As impossible as we might find it, the universe is beyond comprehension.
It's funny you can't grasp this concept, that the speed of expansion is faster than light, making it impossible to traverse the distance. It's the very same thing as running 100 mph trying to catch something going 105 mph. You will never catch it, it will recede into infinity.
How long does it take to reach infinite distance traveling at X miles per hour?

What is the distance that immediately precedes that distance?

Since the immediate preceding distance is finite, how come the next distance is not finite?

No infinities possible in physical reality.

Sorry, I know it fucks up your science fiction for you.

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#232380 Jul 12, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
As you deny the existence of a god, you believe there is no god.
Since you cannot know for certain there is no god, your belief is a belief, just as theism is a belief.
Both are projections of belief beyond known data.
The lie we are peddled recently is that the belief that there is no god is not a belief, but simply an objective position, or the objective default position.
It is a rhetorical trick and a lie.
I don't deny the possible existence of a god. I deny that there is any evidence to believe in one. I am without belief.

Do you believe that there is no Tooth Fairy? Yeah, it is that stupid. If there is no evidence for somethings existence, there is no reason to have any belief about that something.

It really comes down to, the believers what to make the non-believers sound as stupid as they are. Faith is a believers game, not mine.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#232382 Jul 12, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely wrong. You couldn't be more wrong if you set out to be wrong.
The 100mph traveler would never catch the 105mph traveler.
But the 105mph traveler would never travel anything but a finite distance, even though the slower traveler could not see him.
He would travel 105 miles for each hour he traveled - which is a finite distance, and will always be a finite distance, no matter how long he travels. If he speeds up to 120mph, or even 1000mph, he will never travel anything but a finite distance.
You are proving my point.
__________
It cannot be "impossible to traverse the distance" of the expansion because, according to you, the universe expansion DID traverse the distance.
Traversing the distance requires it to be FINITE.
If it cannot be traversed, the universe expansion did not traverse it, and it is thus a FINITE UNIVERSE.
Either way, you have a finite universe. An infinite universe is impossible.

The distance is already infinite Buck we are talking faster than light not 100 vs 105 mph.
The same effect but different scales. Since nothing can move faster than light its the same as a black hole. Time dilation and length contraction at c makes the distance zero and the time 0 , if light cannot escape then the distance become infinite.
CunningLinguist

Howey In The Hills, FL

#232383 Jul 12, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Noah's pier ,bait and tackle shop.
Membership sold in pairs.
Come rain or shine!
Noah says "No Shiite Sherlock"

Christianity simplified...
< children's explanations >

In the first book of the Bible, Guinesses, God got tired of creating the world, so he took the Sabbath off. Adam and Eve were created from an apple tree. Noah's wife was called Joan of Ark because Noah built the ark, which the animals came to in pears. Lot's wife was a pillar of salt by day, but a ball of fire by night. The Jews were a proud people and throughout history they had trouble with unsympathetic Genitals.

Samson was a strong man who let himself be led astray by a Jezebel like Delilah.

Samson slew the Philistines with the axe of the Apostles.

Moses led the Hebrews to the Red Sea, where they made unleavened bread, which is bread without any ingredients.

The Egyptians were all drowned in the dessert.

Afterwards, Moses went up to Mount Cyanide to find the ten commendments.The first commandment was when Eve told Adam to eat the apple.The seventh commandment is "Thou shalt not admit adultery".

Moses died before he ever reached Canada.

Then Joshua led the Hebrews in the battle of Geritol.

The greatest miracle in the Bible is when Joshua told his son to stand still and he obeyed him.

David was a Hebrew king skilled at playing the liar. He fought with the Finkelsteins, a race of people who lived in Biblical times.

Solomon, one of David's sons, had 300 wives and 700 porcupines.

When Mary heard that she was the mother of Jesus, she sang the Magna Carta.

Then the three Wise Guys from the east arrived and found Jesus in the manager.

Jesus was born because Mary had an Immaculate Contraption.

St. John, the blacksmith, dumped water on his head.Jesus enunciated the Golden Rule, which says do one to others before they do one to you.He also explained that "Man does not live by sweat alone".

It was a miricle when Jesus rose from the dead and managed to get the tombstone off the entrance.

The people who followed Jesus were called the 12 decibles.

The epistles were the wives of the apostles.One of the opossums was St. Matthew who was also a taximan.St. Paul cavorted to Christianity. He preached the holy acrimony, which is another name for marriage. A Christian should have only one.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#232384 Jul 12, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
"The reason for introducing the concept of actual infinity into a cosmological theory is usually when, in the thought process of a scientific logic, an unresolvable problem (a ‘gap’) appears that has to be filled in. It is also used when the word infinity sounds mysterious enough to simply become a part of an elegant solution. Nevertheless, cosmologists seem blissfully unaware that by using this concept they inadvertently create a big problem for themselves.
The nature of the problem is that, whenever the concept of actual infinity is introduced into a cosmological theory, they simultaneously have to make an unavoidable reference to its identifiable and finite physical properties. This is because it is a fact of reality that dictates: without such a reference nobody would know what you are talking about. The above described illogical thought process creates the biggest stumbling block for modern cosmologists – as further described in the following contradictions. These contradictions are, however, almost impossible to recognise by a non-critical reader and include:
The First Contradiction: When, in a theory, a physical ‘magnitude’ of an entity or event that has finite and measurable properties is described or implied as either ‘infinitely’ small or ‘infinitely’ large, it is against the logic of the ‘Principle of Contradiction’, which says that ‘What is now measurable and finite, cannot be at once, and simultaneously, immeasurable and infinite.’
The Second Contradiction: When, in a theory, a physical ‘magnitude’ of an entity or event that has finite and measurable properties is described or implied and those properties are also the attributes of ‘actual infinity’, it is against the logic of the ‘Principle of Identity’, which says that ‘If ‘infinity’ would possess ‘finite properties’, it could no longer be identifiable as being infinite."
Why do religious people - deists and theists - always hate infinity?

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#232385 Jul 12, 2014
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know what you mean. Belief is easy for the indoctrinated, the abused, the lonely and a recovering addict, If you have not suffered from one of these, you most likely will not fall for a religion.
Why did you, if you are, pick christianity? Would you have picked christianity, if you lived in Iran and your parents would muslim? The chances are very slim that you would have.
If you were raise on one of the Pacific islands, 600 years ago, would you have picked christainity? No.
So, you had to have been born into the right family, at the right time and in the right place to be a christian, the odds decrease drastically if just one of these elements are missing.
Now, how did I escape christianity when all the elements were intact. Everyone in my family, all that were known to me, attended a christian church nearly every Sunday. All said a blessing before meals. I attended Sunday school, all the youth programs, and meetings I could. How did I escape?
I made a terrible mistake! When I was about 10, I had my doubts. When I was 12, I was pretty sure, but I thought, my family all believed and they were not idiots, it must be me! Maybe I missed a part of the bible that would make it clear for me. Once I turned 16, I skipped church as often as I could. At 18, I left home and only attended church when the Drill Sargents made me. When my first child came along, I let the fear from my indoctrination kick in and thought, to save his soul, I had better get him to church. I did put it off until he was 9 or so. I still did not believe, but indoctrination overrode my intellect. After taking him for a few years, I asked him what he thought. He said something like, "No, I don't believe all that but I like the kids." While sitting in church, the preacher did his normal bit of cherry picking the bible. but when he was done reading from the OT reading, I kept reading. I often wondered why they read only a few or two and then said, "Shut your bibles and let us pray." It was because they don't want you to read the rest and what christian would, when the preacher is saying a prayer?
When I got to the part of slavery and the part of that tells what happens when the male slave decides to leave. I knew I was right in not believing. What god would make a law that states a man can own another man's wife and children and pass those people down to their heirs like cattle?
Then I read about forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist and how the father was to be given the 'virgin bride' price for her! No supreme being would ever come up with this crap! This is 500 BCE and before man coming up with this crap!
Well said! Well said.

“A sentient umbrella speaks”

Since: Mar 11

Some stable somewhere

#232386 Jul 12, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Impossibility of Actual Infinities
Two hypothetical possibilities:
"(1) It acquired actual infinity by some process of successive finite addition, in all systems involved. This is impossible, because we can never arrive at infinity by successive addition, and with specific coordination of all systems, i.e. there is no physical process whereby we could achieve such an in-completable state of an entity in space or an event in time.
"(2) It was produced as an actual infinity all at once. This assumed process is also impossible because it demands ‘all at once’ simultaneity, which is again totally coordinate-dependent as the above alternative, with respect to all other infinite systems involved."
William R. Stoeger, Ph.D. in astrophysics; specializing in high-energy astrophsics and cosmology.
Dr. Stoeger is a theologian, too, who worked for the Vatican before he retired. You didn't mention that.

His point no.1 is a tautology. He's just saying "infinity can never be reached. Therefore it's infinite" then adding "that's impossible." The definition of infinity is that it can never be reached. He has to demonstrate his conclusion.

Sorry, that's not logic. That's like saying "black isn't white, therefore it's black. And impossible."

I don't really know what he's talking about w/regards to point no. 2.

And, I apologize, I kind of think you're wrong about pi. It seems to me that's a knowable value (expressed as fraction) plus an infinite value at the same time. It's not like you can actually perfectly quantize it. You only get closer and closer to its actual value.

So what's the deal with theologians hating on infinity? Lots of other physicists argue infinities exist and use them in their theorems. Do theologians, and deists such as yourself, require no actual infinities to exist so that your belief systems remain intact? By that I mean, if the universe were shown to never have a beginning, nor an end, that would cancel out creator-deities, right? So that's what I think you guys are all upset about.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#232387 Jul 12, 2014
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't deny the possible existence of a god. I deny that there is any evidence to believe in one. I am without belief.
Do you believe that there is no Tooth Fairy? Yeah, it is that stupid. If there is no evidence for somethings existence, there is no reason to have any belief about that something.
It really comes down to, the believers what to make the non-believers sound as stupid as they are. Faith is a believers game, not mine.
No, you are not without belief.

You believe there is no god. You are confronted with the proposition of a god, and you reject the proposition, but you do not know if you are correct.

The theist rejects the proposition that there is no god, but he does not know if he is correct.

You have a belief, same as the theist has a belief.



Since: May 10

Location hidden

#232388 Jul 12, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The distance is already infinite Buck we are talking faster than light not 100 vs 105 mph.
The same effect but different scales. Since nothing can move faster than light its the same as a black hole. Time dilation and length contraction at c makes the distance zero and the time 0 , if light cannot escape then the distance become infinite.
Horse pucky. The scale does not matter. You are still talking about finite speed and distance.

You are contradicting the logical Law of Identity - saying something is two contradictory things at once.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#232389 Jul 12, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Dr. Stoeger is a theologian, too, who worked for the Vatican before he retired. You didn't mention that.
His point no.1 is a tautology. He's just saying "infinity can never be reached. Therefore it's infinite" then adding "that's impossible." The definition of infinity is that it can never be reached. He has to demonstrate his conclusion.
Sorry, that's not logic. That's like saying "black isn't white, therefore it's black. And impossible."
I don't really know what he's talking about w/regards to point no. 2.
And, I apologize, I kind of think you're wrong about pi. It seems to me that's a knowable value (expressed as fraction) plus an infinite value at the same time. It's not like you can actually perfectly quantize it. You only get closer and closer to its actual value.
So what's the deal with theologians hating on infinity? Lots of other physicists argue infinities exist and use them in their theorems. Do theologians, and deists such as yourself, require no actual infinities to exist so that your belief systems remain intact? By that I mean, if the universe were shown to never have a beginning, nor an end, that would cancel out creator-deities, right? So that's what I think you guys are all upset about.
Right. Infinity cannot be reached. That's why it is not a realizable value - A PHYSICAL INFINITY WOULD MEAN INFINITY IS REACHED. It is a blatant contradiction.

Stoeger points out the contradiction, and he is correct. Whether Stoeger is a theologian is of exactly no relevance.

Even George Cantor, the most famous author of transfinite math, said it has no application in physical reality.

The ONLY legitimate application of "infinity" is in theoretical mathematics.

Aura Mythra, Polymath, etc. do not know the difference in transfinite math theory and physical reality.

Physicists are becoming more and more prone to using the term in cosmology, which is erroneous, and the critical reader should take notice of the fallacy.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#232390 Jul 12, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Horse pucky. The scale does not matter. You are still talking about finite speed and distance.
You are contradicting the logical Law of Identity - saying something is two contradictory things at once.
I'm not contradicting anything, the evidence is contradictory.
Faster than light travel is impossible, but space itself is expanding faster than light.
It presents the same problem as black holes do when space becomes infinitly curved and gravity becomes infinite.
The difference is things are receding away at the horizon faster than light and distance becomes infinite between the particle barrier and the event horizon.
There are plenty of papers on this subject, though we can't really make sense of it or understand how it can be , we can only say that we see that it is.
To which we answer with dark energy is the cause.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#232391 Jul 12, 2014
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The distance is already infinite Buck we are talking faster than light not 100 vs 105 mph.
The same effect but different scales. Since nothing can move faster than light its the same as a black hole. Time dilation and length contraction at c makes the distance zero and the time 0 , if light cannot escape then the distance become infinite.
Infinity cannot be reached - by definition.

When you say the physical universe is infinite, you are saying...

"The extent of the universe reaches an unreachable magnitude".

Do you see the contradiction?

You are violating universal logic - The Law of Identity, and The Law of Non-Contradiction.

"A" is A; "A" is also not "A", and

"A" cannot be reached and "X" reaches "A".

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#232392 Jul 12, 2014
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Dr. Stoeger is a theologian, too, who worked for the Vatican before he retired. You didn't mention that.
His point no.1 is a tautology. He's just saying "infinity can never be reached. Therefore it's infinite" then adding "that's impossible." The definition of infinity is that it can never be reached. He has to demonstrate his conclusion.
Sorry, that's not logic. That's like saying "black isn't white, therefore it's black. And impossible."
I don't really know what he's talking about w/regards to point no. 2.
And, I apologize, I kind of think you're wrong about pi. It seems to me that's a knowable value (expressed as fraction) plus an infinite value at the same time. It's not like you can actually perfectly quantize it. You only get closer and closer to its actual value.
So what's the deal with theologians hating on infinity? Lots of other physicists argue infinities exist and use them in their theorems. Do theologians, and deists such as yourself, require no actual infinities to exist so that your belief systems remain intact? By that I mean, if the universe were shown to never have a beginning, nor an end, that would cancel out creator-deities, right? So that's what I think you guys are all upset about.
Infinity in calculations are a problem, the world in logic and reason has no use in finding one, as we want to make sense of everything and infinite sum makes no sense.
Even when calculating black holes where space is infinitly curved and gravity becomes infinite is a problem. We want to think there is something missing in Einsteins GR,
because it isn't supposed to be . The same with the volume of space, and it makes no sense to us logically that it maybe infinite. Buck is right about that part,
and to know for sure whether space is actually is infinite and by that I mean that to know whether it is truly boundless is impossible to ever find because of the phenomena
I have been explaining.

The math that adds up to an infinite length is time dependent on the travel toward the event horizon. But we know that the farther away the faster the universe is accelerating
away so it appears the distance past the horizon has already moved into infinity. All the measurements done by WMAP and The Sloan Digital Sky Survey support the idea that the
universe actually is infinite, which basically means , there are some things beyond human comprehension and human ability, or rather beyond the physical ability to be overcome ever
as far as this universe is concerned. This isn't good news for us and makes it hard to understand how the universe came to be and what exactly is going on here.
But even worse it makes it impossible to even find out, but then thats why NASA and all who study this usually end it with, space is flat and probably infinite.
We just dont want to accept that it is, while admitting it's what the data is showing.
Lab28

Anaheim, CA

#232393 Jul 12, 2014
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
When I got to the part of slavery and the part of that tells what happens when the male slave decides to leave. I knew I was right in not believing. What god would make a law that states a man can own another man's wife and children and pass those people down to their heirs like cattle?
Then I read about forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist and how the father was to be given the 'virgin bride' price for her! No supreme being would ever come up with this crap! This is 500 BCE and before man coming up with this crap!
Now you're being real. I knew you had a better reason than what you said about Matthew 5.

Doubt, is not an absence of belief. Doubt is actually an opposing belief. So, build upon the doubt, and see where it leads you.

Of course we're not going to open up that can of worms about slavery, the rights of women, all that other stuff in the bible that in our culture today is reprehensible in the middle of a message about the transformative power of salvation or whatever the message is on that particular Sunday.

This is what it is hardest for our culture to accept in Christianity, submission to God. I have found that at the end of a lot of arguments for the nonexistence of God is an idea that "if I were God, I would have done things better."

In the face of these issues the question becomes, was owning slaves and having multiple wives morally right back then, and is it wrong now? I can say yes, here's why:

Jesus replied,“Moses permitted divorce only as a concession to your hard hearts, but it was not what God had originally intended.-Matthew 19:8

Now I'm taking somewhat of interpretative liberties with this, but it promotes the idea that Mosaic law made concessions for wickedness. Which is made clear in the sermon on the mount when Jesus set a much higher standard in terms of some of the laws of the time.

Something also to keep in mind is that many of the first Christians that Paul wrote to were slaves owned by Romans. And it was "slaves, obey your masters." For the indoctrinated, such as myself, when faced with challenging questions, things that give me real pause, the answer is to put Jesus in front of it and see where it takes you.

Of course I'm not going to be placed in a situation where I'm a slave. But in the face of unjust circumstances, maybe unfair working conditions, I need to work out how salvation applies to that situation, starting from "I am holy and blameless in the sight of God, based on nothing that I've done, how could I not ___" The blank line being the next action I should take.

I think now would be a good time to mention that women's suffrage and abolitionism were social movements constructed by Christians. I don't think it's possible to take information like, "God has no favorites", "man and woman were created in the image of God", "Christ is all and He is in all" and interpret it in any other way but that people should be treated as equal regardless of who they are.

Is it inconsistent that these things are progressive and not sudden and absolute. I don't think so, just as salvation in Christ works through us and starts the long road of sanctification on an individual level, I believe the world we live in slowly moves towards God's will.

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.-Philippians 1:6

As for taking verses at face value, there isn't anything in Mosaic law that demands I own a slave or have multiple wives. Thank God for that.

This is exciting, this is challenging, I would encourage you to go back to that church and really have it out about these things. Ask the questions, be real, and see what your pastor has to say.
Lab28

Anaheim, CA

#232394 Jul 12, 2014
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
When I got to the part of slavery and the part of that tells what happens when the male slave decides to leave. I knew I was right in not believing. What god would make a law that states a man can own another man's wife and children and pass those people down to their heirs like cattle?
Then I read about forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist and how the father was to be given the 'virgin bride' price for her! No supreme being would ever come up with this crap! This is 500 BCE and before man coming up with this crap!
Now you're being real. I knew you had a better reason than what you said about Matthew 5.

Doubt, is not an absence of belief. Doubt is actually an opposing belief. So, build upon the doubt, and see where it leads you.

Of course we're not going to open up that can of worms about slavery, the rights of women, all that other stuff in the bible that in our culture today is reprehensible in the middle of a message about the transformative power of salvation or whatever the message is on that particular Sunday.

This is what it is hardest for our culture to accept in Christianity, submission to God. I have found that at the end of a lot of arguments for the nonexistence of God is an idea that "if I were God, I would have done things better."

In the face of these issues the question becomes, was owning slaves and having multiple wives morally right back then, and is it wrong now? I can say yes, here's why:

Jesus replied,“Moses permitted divorce only as a concession to your hard hearts, but it was not what God had originally intended.-Matthew 19:8

Now I'm taking somewhat of interpretative liberties with this, but it promotes the idea that Mosaic law made concessions for wickedness. Which is made clear in the sermon on the mount when Jesus set a much higher standard in terms of some of the laws of the time.

Something also to keep in mind is that many of the first Christians that Paul wrote to were slaves owned by Romans. And it was "slaves, obey your masters." For the indoctrinated, such as myself, when faced with challenging questions, things that give me real pause, the answer is to put Jesus in front of it and see where it takes you.

Of course I'm not going to be placed in a situation where I'm a slave. But in the face of unjust circumstances, maybe unfair working conditions, I need to work out how salvation applies to that situation, starting from "I am holy and blameless in the sight of God, based on nothing that I've done, how could I not ___" The blank line being the next action I should take.

I think now would be a good time to mention that women's suffrage and abolitionism were social movements constructed by Christians. I don't think it's possible to take information like, "God has no favorites", "man and woman were created in the image of God", "Christ is all and He is in all" and interpret it in any other way but that people should be treated as equal regardless of who they are.

Is it inconsistent that these things are progressive and not sudden and absolute. I don't think so, just as salvation in Christ works through us and starts the long road of sanctification on an individual level, the world we live in slowly moves towards God's will.

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.-Philippians 1:6

As for taking verses at face value, there isn't anything in Mosaic law that demands I own a slave or have multiple wives. Thank God for that.

This is exciting, this is challenging, I would encourage you to go back to that church and really have it out about these things. Ask the questions, be real, and see what your pastor has to say.

“Seventh son”

Since: Dec 10

Will Prevail

#232395 Jul 12, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Infinity cannot be reached - by definition.
When you say the physical universe is infinite, you are saying...
"The extent of the universe reaches an unreachable magnitude".
Do you see the contradiction?
You are violating universal logic - The Law of Identity, and The Law of Non-Contradiction.
"A" is A; "A" is also not "A", and
"A" cannot be reached and "X" reaches "A".
I'm not contradicting anything, the evidence shows what is beyond human comprehension.
Deal with it.

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) 8 min DanFromSmithville 35,584
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 22 min Amused 4,509
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 22 min ChristineM 20,202
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr ChristineM 15,025
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 10 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 45
News Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 11 hr ChristineM 23,879
News "Being an atheist does not mean being anti-Chri... (Dec '14) 14 hr thetruth 26
More from around the web