Of all of those Big Questions principal to philosophical principles surrounding life, the Universe, and the entirety, the geographical regions of theology and religions and the character of deities remain to fascinate. Opinions proliferate in books, articles, videos, conversations in bars and pubs, and reality, anywhere and everywhere people are nearby. There’s the seasoned aspect; there’s the anti-aspect. There are not too many fence-sitters. As the subsequent bits and pieces illustrate, I’m still inside the anti-camp.
Regarding Religion
*The large diversity of spiritual faiths is a primary argument against spiritual religion.
*Religions of necessity create an “us-and-them” mentality.
*Christians favor freedom of faith as long as it’s their faith.
*If you ever need to recognize what is wrong with your religion, ask any person from an opportunity religion. They’ll be very pleased to inform you.
*Teach a child one religion, and also, you imbue them. Teach them many faiths, and also, you inoculate them.
Regarding Religion vs. Science
*If the Bible is so scientifically spot-on, Galileo and Copernicus would never have gotten into the theological hot water to talk. Even the Pope, John Paul II, in the end, needed to confess centuries later, in October 1992, that Copernicus and (especially) Galileo got it right and that the Church had become wrong and had executed these scientists for an excessive disservice and injustice.
*When examining some of my science records, what do I discover?
The Ancient Greeks were acknowledged for their mathematics, observations of natural records, and physics. They additionally came up with the idea of an educational institution of higher learning and admittedly no science; they may be, in reality, associated with the concept of the Olympic Games.
The Arabs excelled at arithmetic and astronomy.
The Polynesians have been masters at maritime and celestial navigation.
The Ancient Egyptians are associated with large achievements in engineering and also mummification.
The Mayans were fantastic observational astronomers, even with no instrumentation.
The Incas are renowned for their engineering production and metallurgy.
The Chinese are regarded for their chemistry, geophysics, astronomy, and medical discoveries.
The Vikings have been grasping seafarers.
Several ancient cultures independently developed the aerodynamic concepts governing the discovery of the boomerang, which is no longer related to the Bible of the Path.
The first step is to locate the exceptional MacBook provided on the net. It is not simply the MacBook that comes free of price; many greater gadgets can be had online, free of fee. At present, there are two promotions for the MacBook. The first advertising is for simple but adorable silver seasoned. The second provision is for the superior, black MacBook Air.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Alas, the Bible and Biblical characters no longer charge any point out. Historians of science do not make renowned contributions to science from the Bible or via the characters related to the Bible. If whatever, the ‘technology’ within the Bible receives a big thumbs down.
Regarding Faith & Belief
*A perception device that hasn’t changed in 2000 years and isn’t always self-correcting is not worth squatting because it cannot learn something new.
*as a substitute, I’d not realize the answer other than making stuff up.
*Now, I recognize that the world is a terrifying place. Therefore, you feel very insecure, and on my own and small within this sea of humanity, it is bloodless, indifferent, and uncaring about you. So, it is no wonder you choose to stay as muscling as possible. A.-la-land wonderland inhabited by an invisible magic guy within the sky, a Big Brother figure who will look at you.
*Christian theists constitute simply one religion amongst many numerous faiths. I have no greater purpose for believing in that religion and accepting that faith than you, and I do with appreciation to any of the opposite faiths. The most effective tiny difference between us is that you an atheist’s when it comes to all religions but one; I’m an atheist regarding all faiths, full stop. So, to recap, I disagree with your religion in the same manner that you don’t accept as true within all of the others who have their faith tied up in all of the different faiths that are not your religion.
*You can also declare to have a real ‘understanding’ that God exists in preference to just a diploma of personal religion or the notion that God exists, but irrespective of the period used, you cannot deliver that ‘knowledge’ to me in this type of manner or shape that I can independently confirm that ‘expertise’ for myself. Therefore, your ‘knowledge’ is useless to me until you do that. Your incapacity and lack of offering me ‘information’ that I can independently verify speaks volumes.
*But, speaking of ‘know-how,’ I’ll provide you with a possible reason why you believe you’ve got an ‘understanding’ of God’s life, the (near) infallibility of the Bible, and the fact of a supernatural Jesus. It’s all because that becomes the theology taught in the tradition/society/network/family you have been born and raised into, even though indoctrinated/brainwashed is probably extra to the point and an additional suitable term(s). I recognize that had you been born and raised repeatedly, your theological indoctrination could have been considered unique in some other area. You’d guess the family farm on Ra, The Book of the Dead, and Horus. You’d have a notion to your ‘information’ of the theology component and parcel of historical Egypt, and you understand this to be real.
*So just because you declare to have some ‘expertise’ of something (i.e., God & Jesus) does no longer, in and of itself, of necessity, make that alleged ‘knowledge’ accurate. Many someones have had the understanding that later proved incorrect.
*Faith is not skepticism.
*Assuming that Satan and God are real, how did you point out that God is the good guy and Satan is the horrific guy? What mechanism did you operate to discern that? It would help if you used your self-generated morality to determine the issue. If you use God’s morality, it is imposed on you; then you aren’t going so that you can use your independent judgment. God is manifestly going to be biased in favor of God.
Regarding Prayer & Miracles
*Hands that assist are ways more essential than arms that pray.
*It does not count while you pray for rain nowadays. When the day goes by, the weather forecast says the next day it will rain!
Regarding the Bible
*Anyone can write words in an ebook like the Bible. But is there any independent verification for the Bible’s alleged supernatural happenings? Just because I read an ebook on quantum physics does not make quantum physics real, but I might consider the writer. But I can exit and do the experiments/observations (or watch the experiments being finished) and persuade myself that quantum physics is certainly true because the ebook and authorship said. That’s independent verification.
*Here’s a Biblical analogy: I very lately watched the 15-episode TV miniseries on DVD “North & South” – before, at some point of, and after the American Civil War. Now, nearly all the locations where the tales occur certainly exist. Many occasions (i.e., Civil War battles, Lincoln’s assassination, Harper’s Ferry, etc.) occurred. Some supporting solid played virtually real historical characters like General Lee, General Grant, and President Lincoln. However, some of the events and the fundamental characters had been entirely made up among the places. Thus, “North & South” is a piece of historical fiction, so just due to the fact one vicinity/occasion/person changed into real would not translate into the complete miniseries being something an excessive faculty pupil ought to watch in preparation for an American records exam.
*Consider Genesis 2: 24 (King James Version)
“Therefore shall a person leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”
The best two people present and accounted for at this point were Adam and Eve, and they did not have a mum and a dad (inside the conventional experience). Soy, did this concept of parenthood come from all of a sudden and unexpected? Well, that is just proof that Genesis changed into all the fabrications from human authorship, authorship that knew flawlessly and properly that people come from people and that human beings have mums and dads. Said authors had to clarify that when their resourceful rendering of the first of all humanly discern-much less advent fable of Adam and Eve.
*I have neither the time nor the inclination to undergo over six hundred Biblical contradictions separately. I will point out one, but. There are separate and aside Ten Commandments which are not complementary; they no longer agree with the alternative (apart from the very first commandment) – examine and evaluate Exodus 20: three-17 and Exodus 34: eleven-28 (and take especially careful awareness of the final three words in Exodus 34: 28). Suffice or not, it’s to mention that I am satisfied the Bible is chock-a-block complete of inner contradictions. That’s further to all the different nonsense I’ve already touched on and have long gone through.
*Who stated that the Bible turned into God’s phrase? A human noted that!
Regarding that Biblical Talking Snake:
*I’ll also be aware that it is simple to attempt to discover Satan with the speakme snake looking back because Genesis and Revelation are eons aside, as long way aside as it is feasible to get. The revelation was written lots later and might be twisted to conform to previous Biblical chapters and verses.
Faced with an Ockham’s Razor preference among the Genesis speak snake surely being a supernatural entity (i.e., i.e., Satan) for which there is no real unbiased evidence that he even exists, or the talking snake being the product of pure human creativeness, that is a greater rational choice?
Regarding the Exodus
We all know the tall story of how God commanded Moses (and later Aaron—Exodus 4) to go to the Egyptian Pharaoh (interestingly unnamed inside the Bible) with a request, well,l call for clearly, to allow God’s Chosen People (the Israelites / Hebrews)to depart their alleged enslavement in Egypt so they could tour to the Promised Land—the Burning Bush myth of The Exodus (Exodus three).
God tells Moses that Pharaoh will not notice him when he requests. Demands are extra living proof that the Pharaoh permitted the Hebrew ‘slaves’ to leave Egypt, even after God had given the Egyptian kingdom (notice, no longer Pharaoh) 9 plagues to cope with.
Despite giving Moses and Aaron a bag full of magic hints with which to convince the Egyptian establishment in their holy venture bona-fides, God additionally advised Moses (and Aaron) that thatPharaohh wouldn’t listen to them (Exodus 7: four; eleven: nine) and permit His humans to go (Exodus three: 19; eleven: 9). In truth, God knew earlier than the reality that He might have to get downright nasty with Egypt (the Egyptians is well known instead of the Pharaoh mainly) as a way to achieve His objectives (Exodus 3: 20). So an immediate issue arises, why bother sending Moses (and Aaron) to chin-wag withPharaohh within the first vicinity? It changed into doomed from the get-move.
God intentionally and on several events, hardenedPharaoh’ss coronary heart to make certain Moses and Aaron would not be listened to[#] and to make surePharaohh wouldn’t permit His Chosen People pass (Exodus 4: 21; 7: 3; 7: 13-14; 7: 22; eight: 15; eight: 19; eight: 32; nine: 7; 9: 12; nine: 34-35; 10: 1; 10: 20; 10: 27; 11: 10; 14: 4; 14: 8; and additionally all Egyptians in addition Exodus 14: 17). What was the factor of askingPharaohh to permit His human beings to pass, after which hardeningPharaoh’ss heart to make sure the complete opposite result? Perhaps that just then offers God the sadistic satisfaction of causing cruel and unusual punishments on the Egyptian human beings through the ones ten plagues – be aware, no longer simply onPharaohh, the best person to which He had an initial beef. Numerous times, Pharaohh became inclined to permit His people to pass and essentially told the Hebrews to piss off (Exodus 9: 28; 10: 10; 10: 24; 12: 31-33); however, no, God hardened Pharaoh’s heart as a substitute.
What God should have completed, what God needs to have advised god-to-man (face-to-face) immediately, assuming God changed into going to be truthful-dinkum about His one and simplest one proper objective which became gettingPharaohh to let His Chosen People go away Egypt (in preference to seeking to show Himself to all Egyptians as an all-spherical sadistic tyrant by inflicting the ten plagues), might have been that untilPharaohh allow His humans move, Pharaoh became going to take a long walk off the pinnacle of a tall and steep stone pyramid. End of dialogue; quit of trouble.
[#] AndPharaohh failed to listen to (or hearken unto) Moses or Aaron (Exodus 7: 13; 7: 22; 8: 15; eight: 19; and nine: 12).
Issues Arising 1: What became the point of sending Moses and Aaron to talk to the Pharaoh while God knew the Pharaoh wouldn’t listen and allow the Israelites / Hebrews to leave Egypt? God Himself would ensure this on several occasions by hardening the Pharaoh’s heart. It was all an exercise in absolute futility if you were Moses and Aaron.
Issues Arising 2: What changed into the point of God inflicting punishment on the Egyptian people and farm animals (i.e., the ten plagues) when it turned into Pharaoh and Pharaoh on my own who was the impediment – an impediment God wished to be an obstacle so God may want to strut His stuff and make damn sure that anybody knew surely that He was a study terrible-ass.
Regarding God
*If there certainly is an exceptional argument for the real existence of God, why are not theists using it?
*Even if God virtually exists, that during and of itself does not imply that this God is worthy of being worshiped.
*By the manner, an incorrect international implies a mistaken author.
*If you’re seeking to prove the lifestyles of God, which God are you seeking to show and why? Can you provide me any real proof that helps your God that does not also support another god(s)?
*God stated it; I trust it; that settles it.
*If you are worthy of worship, you wouldn’t call to be worshiped. And simply because God (might also have) created you doesn’t imply of necessity that you are obliged to worship Him.
*If God created a lady to be a companion to the male species, why didn’t God create a girl deity to be a companion to Him?
Regarding God’s Creation & the First Cause Argument
*I propose that God is a paranormal, flying red elephant who farted the Universe into lifestyles. Justification? We recognize that farting exists, even inside the animal state (my cats skip the wind, for instance); we realize that flying exists, from insects to pterosaurs to birds to bats to airplanes; we know that crimson exists (pretty other than the entertainer); we know that elephants exist too. So a flying red elephant that farted the Universe into life is way extra-rational that presupposing any invisible magic guy inside the sky did the deed on account that we don’t have any real know-how that this kind of author deity surely even exists.
*Maybe God induced the Big Bang occasion; however, in doing so, he blew Himself up – oops.
Regarding God’s Omniscience
*If God is all-knowing, then how can He be disappointed in you for sinning when He knew even before you had been born that you would sin?
*Some say there’s no contradiction between being all-understanding and having free will. But if you realize for sure, and you are certain with the aid of that know-how, what you’ll have for breakfast the day after this morning, then of necessity, you must have that breakfast. Otherwise, you failed to understand for absolute positive what became too manifest before the fact, and you weren’t all-understanding. If you understand, you don’t have any free will if you do what you know for absolute positive what you would do. Both deities have free will, or else it’s far from all-knowing. The deity can not be both because that might be a logical fallacy or contradiction. The God in question could be neither all-knowing nor have no unfastened will, suggesting that there may not even be a deity gift accounted for. Further, if God is NOT all-understanding, I’ll recommend that He not understand how to create an absolute something from absolute nothingness.
Rebuttal: Omniscience (knowing all) does not consist of understanding destiny because the future does now not exist (by using the very grammar of the sentence, it’d make no feel to mention that the future exists). So, simply as an omniscient being would not want to know the number of hairs on Harry Potter’s head (there is no such quantity, so there may be nothing to understand), likewise He could not understand the future (since there may be no such aspect).”
Rebutting the rebuttal: Here are some dictionary definitions for “Omni.” Omni approach “suggests all,”; “denoting all,”; “an element of Latin starting the place that means ‘all.'” If you are ALL-knowing, the word ALL approaches simply that – ALL. ALL encompasses ALL that is past; ALL this is present; ALL this is destiny; ALL is ALL that there may be to realize about life, the Universe, and the entirety. The word is “all-knowing,” NOT “all (except for the future)-knowing. Argue with using the word “all,” now not with me. And through this manner, destiny is deterministic, given the laws, ideas, and relationships that rule the roost. For instance, the sun and lunar eclipses may be anticipated with reality thousands of years into destiny. You should write a list of future activities and events that should appear.
Rebuttal 2: Omni does certainly suggest “all.” However, the future does not exist, and so it isn’t a part of “all” any more than the number of hairs on Santa Clause beard is a part of “all.” There is no such range, so even an omniscient individual isn’t required to be aware of it.
Rebutting the rebuttal 2: Again, the word is “all-understanding,” NOT “all (besides for the destiny)-understanding.” Further, given theist’s perception that the Bible is the phrase of God, the Book of Revelation is all about destiny. Further, what about all of those Biblical prophets who had the absolute expertise of the future? Finally, I have satisfied myself via rational idea tactics that loose will and omniscience are incompatible and contradictory terms.
Regarding God’s Will
*Since we were not allowed to eat from the Tree of Knowledge, that might advise that God wished to keep us in a kingdom of natural and perpetual lack of understanding. Methinks knowledge, even expertise of exact and evil, is ideal for lacking knowledge, so the talking snake, Even, and Adam did the right factor.
*Now, why could God, as all human beings, have unfastened will if He would not allow said humans to exercise their free will without punishing them for it? That’s all of the extra cases. While exercising, one loses weight; exercising that loses weight will harm no other people. There are many “thou shall not” within the Bible, and if you do any of those “not,” God will get you for that even though no character was harmed or inconvenienced most slightly.
Regarding God’s ‘Morality
*If you watched God is Mr. Morality personified, please permit me to read positive adult-handiest Biblical testimonies in your young youngsters!
For instance (one among many):
1 Samuel 15:2-three (King James Version)
2 “Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I understand what Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, while he got up from Egypt.”
3 “Now cross and smite Amalek, and wholly ruin all that they’ve, and spare them no longer; however slay both man and woman, little one and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.”
Now, how will you provide an explanation for your younger baby as to why God ordered infants and infants to be slaughtered? And what turned into the factor of killing all of the cattle? God’s insane!
*More about God’s crimes? God says, “do now not kill”; God kills. Enough said! For elaboration, I advise you to watch on YouTube DarkMatter2525’s clip-on “God goes on a mass homicide spree.” He offers forty-one Biblical references to return his claims.
*We do no longer, or we truly ought to no longer, get our morality from God because He’s very plenty a ‘do as I say, no longer as I do’ kind of dude. Any high-quality association between God and morality is a first-rate oxymoronic affiliation. I’m geared up, willing, and capable of pin-skipping judgment on God and God’s alleged ‘morality,’ particularly because God, ultimately, becomes created inside the photo of people. So I’m in the long run in the judgment of fellow human beings, albeit humans who wrote the Bible and, therefore, described God’s morality – lengthy since became to dust and ashes.
*If you take delivery of God’s version of morality unreservedly, then you are passing judgment upon God. If you no longer take delivery of God’s version of morality unreservedly, both in part or in its entirety, then you also are passing on God. In both cases, you are using your own internally derived standards of morality to either agree or disagree with God’s morality.
*Morality has to come from some authority. We (the human beings) ARE that authority.
Regarding Jesus
*Can Christian theists cite for me at least one inscription or record – NOT the Bible – that has been dated and authenticated to the technology between 1 AD and, say, 50 AD, an inscription or document that mentions Jesus, mainly a supernatural Jesus, one who carried out miracles and who become resurrected from the useless? Can you do that? If now not, please hold quiet about the life of current evidence for the real life of Jesus.
Because right here’s the point. Did any of the alleged (500 or so) witnesses (1 Corinthians 15: 6) to the resurrected Jesus, or any of the ladies or any of the disciples who noticed an animated version of him submit-crucifixion ever pen their own first individual account of this miracle? The solution is an absolute “no.”
And historical historian Josephus wasn’t born till after the truth (37 AD – 100 AD). He makes no point out of Jesus until around ninety-three-94 AD in his “Antiquities of the Jews,” failing to say Jesus in advance works, after which he gives best two short mentions that have merited a whole lot of scholarly debate (i.e., not anybody is satisfied with the authenticity of what Josephus allegedly wrote. Further, there aren’t any originals – of direction. The earliest copies date to the 11th Century, so we are dealing with copies of copies of copies and translations of translations. Who can, in reality, say what changes have been or might have been made by the one’s Christian clergy members into whose care turned into located the applicable Josephus manuscript?
Even if all the copies, translations, and possibilities for those with vested hobbies feature and subtract from what Josephus wrote, what Josephus wrote simplest gives historical credibility to Jesus, the mortal individual, no longer Jesus, the supernatural being.
*Christian theists do pass on, and on, and on, and on, and on approximately all of this evidence for the life of a supernatural Jesus and a resurrected Jesus (and an invisible Jesus, however, never thoughts that). Yet two of the three principal monotheistic religions provide the concept of a supernatural / resurrected Jesus with the absolute thumbs down. So why doesn’t their alleged evidence for Jesus reduce any ice with the True Believers of those other primary faiths? Methinks something is downright screwy with theist’s alleged proof – like it does not exist virtually.
*Regarding the alleged resurrection of Jesus, can you believe the debacle that would get up if modern primary information testimonies inside the here-and-now were not suggested anywhere till 50 years after the fact? What degree of accuracy ought you to anticipate if the whole thing was reported through phrase-of-mouth? Fifty years after the reality? Talk about alternative statistics rising and utterly faux information.
*Hercules is the actual new resurrection tale, and Jesus is the fake news tale. The resurrection of Jesus turned into a barely transformed plagiarism of Hercules’s resurrection. Now show me the answer!
*The alleged “empty tomb” isn’t an argument for the resurrection of Jesus. Just because my cookie jar is empty doesn’t mean I haven’t any cookies. Or, just because I have empty pockets does not suggest that I’m broke.
*Sexual abstinence did not assist the Virgin Mary now.
*knock, knock
–“Who is it?”
-“It’s me, Jesus. Let me in.”
–“Why do you need in?”
-“I want to save you.”…
–“Save me from what?”
-“From what I’ll do to you if you do not permit me in
Regarding Atheists & Atheism
*Theists might benefit by watching on YouTube the call-in TV show “The Atheist Experience” (out of Austin, Texas), designed for theists to name in and deliver their theism their best shot. I’d love to peer theists cross up again Matt Dillahunty, who almost became a Christian minister (before he saw the light) and thus, in all likelihood, is aware of greater approximately Christian theology and the Bible higher than maximum theists do. I wouldn’t want to move up in opposition to him in a theological debate! So, due to caution, Dillahunty holds nothing returned, pulls no punches, and takes no prisoners.
