Are There Any Errors in the Bible?
By Norman L. Geisler
The Bible cannot err, since it is God's Word, and God cannot err. This does not mean there are no difficulties in the Bible. But the difficulties are not due to God's perfect revelation, but to our imperfect understanding of it. The history of Bible criticism reveals that the Bible has no errors, but the critics do. Most problems fall into one of the following categories.
Check the rest out at: http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbbible.aspx?pageid=8589952771
The Bible cannot err, since it is God's Word, and God cannot err. This does not mean there are no difficulties in the Bible. But the difficulties are not due to God's perfect revelation, but to our imperfect understanding of it. The history of Bible criticism reveals that the Bible has no errors, but the critics do. Most problems fall into one of the following categories.
Check the rest out at: http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbbible.aspx?pageid=8589952771
Hey, I got your comment on my blog where you said, "I would love to have some discussions with you." What did you have in mind? Also, I read your testimony at the bottom of your blog. Good stuff. Did you read mine? You can find it here: http://phatcatholic.blogspot.com/p/my-conversion-story.html
ReplyDeleteYes I did read your testimony. Thank you for commenting on here. As a former Catholic, I know the areas of doctrine that we agree on. But what I had in mind, would be "your" position on salvation. We could discuss a lot of stuff, but to me, salvation is the most important.
ReplyDeleteI think I know what your answer is going to be regarding salvation as you are Catholic, but I want you to tell me: "how does one get into heaven?" We can start from there.
"The Bible cannot err, since it is God's Word, and God cannot err."
ReplyDeleteIsaiah 40:22.
Anyone who denies errors in the bible is a complete moron, or a liar. Take Noah's ark--if the human race were ever reduced to less than a dozen individuals, it would go extinct. The only way humanity could have replenished itself after the flood would be through inbreeding, and it wouldn't work. Or how about Samson? The bible says that he was famous among his enemies, yet we never see any historical mention of him by the Philistines. And it doesn't matter how strong he supposedly was, one unarmored man with a bone could not kill five thousand soldiers with armor, shields, bows, spears, swords, and javelins. It is physically impossible, and I seriously doubt the intelligence and sanity of any person above the age of eight who thinks he actually did this. God Mode cheat codes, despite being prevalent in video games, don't exist in real life.
I would have to agree with B.R. One other thing that is the biggest sticking point for me on the article linked above is that it's intellectually dishonest to start out with your conclusion. I mean, the very first line in it sets the basis. The author does not even try to give the illusion of objectivity; this is the very same thing that creationists do in an attempt to discredit science. They start out not with a mind open to evidence, but with the conclusion in hand. They then take said conclusion and search desperately for anything that backs up their claims, ignoring/dismissing all evidence that shows their predrawn conclusion wrong.
ReplyDeleteThe article above is guilty of this in spades. That is by no means a pathway to truth. It's merely a pathway to reinforcing already held ideas, trying to shore up the faith of those who may be thinking critically about the absolute idiocy in the bible.
This method could be applied to ANY holy text, and it is. Replace certain bible references with koran references, change a few words, and that article becomes an argument for islam. It's intellectual dishonesty on a scale that's sad to see, and it certainly wont convince anybody that doesnt already believe.
One other thing: I noticed that you haven't responded to the numerous requests on the Atheist Experience blog for an explanation about why that video isn't representative of Christianity. Why could that be?
Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteIf you are convinced of this...Can you show me any errors in the Bible?
The reason I haven't responded on the Atheist blog is because it will go no where if I do respond.
B.R.
ReplyDeleteYou said: "Anyone who denies errors in the bible is a complete moron, or a liar." What kind of evidence do you have that this is true?
"The only way humanity could have replenished itself after the flood would be through inbreeding, and it wouldn't work." You must have not done your homework....
Genesis 7:7 clearly says: "And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood." How could Noah's sons and their wives be inbreeding?
"despite being prevalent in video games, don't exist in real life. " God does things in the Bible called miracles...we take this on faith. If God is God...He can show himself to be God by doing these things.
"What kind of evidence do you have that this is true?"
ReplyDeleteRead my comment, and use your brain. The evidence is obvious. I raised
"You must have not done your homework....
Genesis 7:7 clearly says: "And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood." How could Noah's sons and their wives be inbreeding?"
Clearly, you have horrible reading comprehension. Let me repeat myself one more time; if the human race is ever reduced to less than say, one thousand people(give or take), then it will go extinct. Period. Do you actually know what genes are? What inbreeding is? Please pull yourself out of the primitive Stone Age of biblical thinking and read a science book. Also, I know that Noah's sons had wives and that they could not replenish the species. Perhaps making the puerile assumption that I have never read the bible makes you feel confidant, but I find it absurd and insulting.
"God does things in the Bible called miracles...we take this on faith. If God is God...He can show himself to be God by doing these things."
Translation; you place more value on the archaic myths and superstitious mutterings of Bronze Age goat-herders than you do on modern science and rational thought. Typical.
Ripster:
ReplyDeleteAll you have to do to find errors in the bible is read the first book. It starts off w/ 2 different accounts of creation; not to mention the differing accounts of the death and resurrection of christ. The most important thing in your religion, and it's not even agreed upon in the books. Aside from that, how about the fact that Matthew, Mark, Luke & john are not the authors of their books? Any biblcal scholar will tell you that the books are anonymous, written decades after jesus. Those are just a FEW of the problems.
And I suspect you refuse to answer the very straight forward questions because you know that you have nothing we havent heard to offer. That is clear by your posts; you regurgitate poor apologetics, obfuscate responsibility for the burden of proof, and make assertions which are totally baseless. Thats ALL you do.
If you really have truth on your side, showing us the error of our ways would be easy; you have run away from the discussion you started. Your jesus would be so proud.
And in response to :"How could Noah's sons and their wives be inbreeding?" I can only say that you demonstrate a vast ignorance of genetics with that question. It is a simple fact that 12 people could not produce the genetic diversity we have today, & if the flood story were true, the species would have died out long ago.
One final point: I notice you didnt even try to refute the point that the article isnt worth the space it consumes on the net. This is because my point is valid, and I suspect you know that article wouldn't convince anyone to convert. Simply put, it's a waste of bandwidth.
There is always this assumption with Atheists: "You place more value on the Bible than you do on modern science and rational thought."
ReplyDeleteThat is not true at all! In fact, the Bible is very rational to us Christians and makes even more sense when we begin to live it out in our lives! We have no problem with science. ONLY, when theories like evolution claim to be science when they are not. Unfortunately, modern science has strayed from "real" science in producing unscientific theories that suit atheistic agenda's.
You removed my comment back to you? Why...I didnt cuss.
ReplyDeleteAnd dont even try that "we value science' bull while denying evolution. Dont like evolution, stop using it's benefits, like modern medicine; hypocrite.
Who are you going to get your car repaired by, a mechanic or a grocer? Now, who are you going to get your info on evolution from, a biologist or a pastor? If you answer the latter, you are a cretin. If you answer the former, you CANT deny evolution.
And reposting the idea from my previous comment, that article is tripe. They start out with the idea that the bible cant be wrong. With their intellectually dishonest conclusion already in hand, they search desperately for anything to validate it. Anything that doesnt must be wrong, godlees 'atheistic' science, and is dismissed. That's NOT the way to truth, it's the path to reinforcing delusion, which is the ONLY purpose of that article. It's the same thing you creationists do; you start out not understanding evolution [this ignorance is obvious to a high schooler] and assume the creation claims are right, ignoring the abundance of evidence that demonstrate evolution to be true.
ReplyDelete"ONLY, when theories like evolution claim to be science when they are not. Unfortunately, modern science has strayed from "real" science in producing unscientific theories that suit atheistic agenda's."
ReplyDelete-You immediately contradict yourself when you say you accept science, yet deny evolution. Evolution is a fact. The only part of it that's a theory is the mechanism behind it, which is natural selection. There is the fact of evolution.(Change over time), then there is the theory of evolution by means of natural selection. It's no different than the fact of gravity, and Einstein's theory of relativity explaining how gravity works. You are basically saying that you don't believe in Einstein's theory of relativity when you say you don't accept evolutionary theory. Your lack of knowledge on the subject is evidence of your willful ignorance Rippy.
Also calling modern science "unscientific" just because it doesn't suite your beliefs doesn't make your assertion true or justified. You need to actually explain yourself. You just accept things when they agree with your presupposed belief system, and deny them when they conflict with it. You never explain why you deny them, you just assert and willfully ignore them, then make up false assertions and misrepresentations about them, for example, evolution.
ReplyDeleteApostulous,
ReplyDeleteCan you show me this?: "the abundance of evidence that demonstrate evolution to be true." Using "real" science. Thank you.
Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteI didn't remove your comment..it showed up in my spam for some reason.
Mamba24,
ReplyDeleteYou said: "You never explain why you deny them..." I will do that for you now.
When I refer to evolution being "unscientific" I'm referring to the general theory of evolution which believes these events took place without God:
1. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
2. Planets and stars formed from space dust.\
3. Matter created life by itself.
4. Earthly life forms learned to reproduce themselves.
5. Major changes occurred b/w these diverse life forms ( fish changed to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, and reptiles to birds or mammals).
The missing evidence for evolution: No evolution at present, No new species, No known mechanism of evolution, No fossil evidence,etc.
The only evolution that can be observed is micro evolution ( variations within kinds)
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"And dont even try that "we value science' bull while denying evolution. Dont like evolution, stop using it's benefits, like modern medicine; hypocrite."
Do you realize that all major branches of science were started by creationists. There has never been one advancement in any field of science that the evolution theory has helped. The theory is useless. There has never been any evidence that any kind of plant or animal has ever been able to create itself or produce any other kind of plant or animal. We have seen thousands of changes within the created kinds but that is not evolution.
The wrongness is overwhelming.
ReplyDeleteThere has never been one advancement in any field of science that the evolution theory has helped.
It's at the very core of biology. Ask a biologist sometime.
Evolution is why we need new flu shots every year. Evolution is how we breed plants and animals. All the thousands of different types of tomatoes people have established over the years did so through evolution.
There has never been any evidence that any kind of plant or animal has ever been able to create itself
Evolution doesn't even say that. Please learn the theory before you start spouting off.
Plants and animals, do, however, create offspring, with modification.
or produce any other kind of plant or animal.
Unless offspring are 100% identical to their parents, evolution has happened.
The fossil record and genetics overwhelmingly support common ancestry.
For instance, evolution predicts that we should find a transitional form between sea and land creatures, and at a particular area. In 2005 we found to correct place to look, and found Tiktaalik. Theory tested, and passed, once again.
We have seen thousands of changes within the created kinds but that is not evolution.
Yes, it is. But you wouldn't know that, since you're utterly ignorant of the theory.
Oh my god, I should have read the prior post.
ReplyDeleteMamba24,
o the general theory of evolution which believes these events took place without God:
1. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
Please PLEASE tell me where you get your information. You are so incredibly pathetically wrong here, it's not even funny.
That's the Big Bang theory you're talking about.
2. Planets and stars formed from space dust.\
This is cosmology you're talking about.
3. Matter created life by itself.
This is abiogenesis you're talking about.
4. Earthly life forms learned to reproduce themselves.
"Learned"? Binary fission in single cellular life is more chemistry driven, than anything else. And keep in mind that the single-cellular period of life lasted something like a billion years, across the entire Earth's oceans, with thousands of lifeforms per gallon, reproducing many times per hour. There's a lot of testing/chance opportunity there... incomprehensible amounts.
5. Major changes occurred b/w these diverse life forms ( fish changed to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, and reptiles to birds or mammals).
NOW you're gotten to the theory of evolution.
The missing evidence for evolution: No evolution at present, No new species, No known mechanism of evolution, No fossil evidence,etc.
The only evolution that can be observed is micro evolution ( variations within kinds)
Besides the fact that the evidence is plenty available, as well as here... just the fact that the fossil record exists, and falls 100% in line with evolutionary theory, IS evidence.
Unless you weren't aware of a thing called the fossil record, you're a bald faced liar.
JT,
ReplyDelete"and found Tiktaalik. Theory tested, and passed, once again." I don't think so: Check out: http://creation.com/tiktaalik-roseae-a-fishy-missing-link
Besides this example...Can you show me some more "overwhelming" evidence in the fossil record for evolution?
I think we have a common "Designer" not ancestry.
JT,
ReplyDeleteCould it be....that the fossil record exists due to a global flood? Rapid fossilization easily explains the existence of fossils. This event allowed ample time for the remains of many plants, animals, and humans to be buried quickly and fossilized. It answers scientifically the questions as to how fossils are formed.
Where do you see millions of transitional fossils if the earth is millions and millions of years old and evolution is true?
Ahh, silly spam filters.
ReplyDeleteIn response to "Can you show me this?:
"the abundance of evidence that
demonstrate evolution to be true." Using
"real" science. Thank you. "
First, I'd love to know your definition
of 'real' science. I suspect it is
anything that doesnt go against your
dogma. Second, no, I wont do your
homework for you. I despise people who
expect everyone else to do that.
Learning about evolution is like
anything else; it's hard work that
requires effort, which YOU must do.
Knowledge is earned, not bestowed by
god.
You have access to the net, ergo you
have all the tools you need to
understand evolution. There are many
places you can go to get this
information. You can go to the HHMI
website and order DVDs of lectures by
evolutionary biologists that give, in
excrutiating detail, evidence for the
topic. You can go onto MIT's website
and use their online coursework to study
the topic. You could even call or email
actual professors who teach the topic
and use it every day in their research labs.
Cont>>
The bottom line is that you have the
ReplyDeletetools, and there is NO excuse for
ignorance on that level. Evolution is
the backbone of all modern biology; you
would know this if you bothered to look
critically at the subject w/o biblical
blinders on. The vast majority of
biologists agree that evolution happens.
It's FACT. And this is the point at which you'll say 'there's a list of people who dont agree with evolution!', but I am well aware of that list. It's filled with names of people who arent biologists [this goes back to my question of whom you go to for car repairs], and alot of the people on that list have requested that their names be removed, only to be ignored by the dishonest cretins that publish it. You can deny evolution all day
long because it's against god, and not
'real science', but I doubt you have
ever even been in a lab, since you have
the gall to say such drivel.
You may notice that I didnt include any sources that you would cite [ICR, DI, etc]. That is because they arent objective, unbiased sources. They are to science as the above article is to intellectual honesty. My sources are the people who are doing the hard work of science, getting peer reviewed, good science published. If creationists had ANYTHING on their side, they would publish their ideas that demolish the scientific establishment and win the Nobel. They dont. Instead they try to obfuscate the scientific method by getting ignorant creationist filled school boards to back their tripe. That is evidence enough that they have nothing valid to add to science.
And reading your other posts makes it blindingly clear that you are getting your information from morons. Evolution is simply change in allele frequencies over time. You are spouting stupidity that people like Hovind & Comfort spout. People who understand science will look at you and pity you for buying into their lies. These people that you are getting your information on science from have no basis to talk about evolution, but they do have a vested interest in keeping you ignorant of the reality of evolution.
ReplyDeleteSeriously, go onto the HHMI website and order their lectures on evolution. Its free, so you have no reason not to. These DVDs are made by people who understand the science, and are reliant on you to remain w/ your head in the intellectual sand. What you have done is essentially taken your car to the grocer to get a new engine. You shouldnt be surprised when you wind up with carrots in your radiator [the point of the analogy is that you get info on science from pastors who are dependant on you remaining as ignorant as them, and you its not surprising that you think the formation of the cosmos is something that evolution covers. Seriously...you are doing yourself a massive disservice by listening to cretins whose claims are debunked easily and swiftly by knowledgable people.
"These DVDs are made by people who understand the science, and are reliant on you to remain w/ your head in the intellectual sand. "
ReplyDeleteTypo. I meant that your sources rely on you keeping your head in the sand.
Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteThe reason I'm asking "YOU" to defend your belief in evolution is because your the one making the claim that it is true over God making everything. If evolution is so easy and reasonable to believe, you can surely explain why.
I think it's funny how evolution can only be understood by the "experts." Whereas God makes his message easy enough that even a small child can understand it.
You have yet to answer my question: "Where do you see millions of transitional fossils if the earth is millions and millions of years old and evolution is true?" If this is true...give me a quick answer...if not...admit it.
"Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteThe reason I'm asking "YOU" to defend your belief in evolution is because your the one making the claim that it is true over God making everything. If evolution is so easy and reasonable to believe, you can surely explain why."
First of all, I don't 'believe' in evolution. I accept it as scientific fact. Nobody 'believes in' gravity; it's accepted as fact. Second, I havent claimed anything about god not making anything. I am saying that creationism, specifically the denial of evolution that you espouse, IS wrong. Third, you are asking a layman to explain evolutionary theory. If you *really* want to understand evolution, check out the two sources I gave you earlier [MIT & HHMI]. The only reason you would ignore these is that you want to remain willfully ignorant to protect your particular dogma. And no, calling you ignorant is NOT an insult, it's fact. You have equated cosmology and abiogenesis to evolution; that is evidence enough of your lack of informed opinion on the subject, and it's because you get your information about it from people who ARE NOT biologists.
"I think it's funny how evolution can only be understood by the "experts." Whereas God makes his message easy enough that even a small child can understand it."
In fact, evolution IS simple enough to be grasped by anyone whose mind isnt clouded by dogma and biblically based stupidity. I first learned of it in my youth, and had a working grasp of it by 6th grade. All it takes is intellectual curiosity. God is simple because it's intended to be simple. *Magic poof, done*, is simple; that doesnt make it TRUE. The math that it takes to put a satellite into orbit is not simple, but that doesnt mean that god is holding up all of the objects in orbit. Your argument is severly flawed.
"You have yet to answer my question: "Where do you see millions of transitional fossils if the earth is millions and millions of years old and evolution is true?" If this is true...give me a quick answer...if not...admit it. "
ReplyDeleteI will restate a point made earlier. Evolutionary theory made the prediction that if we look in a certain strata of rock that corresponds to a specific time frame, we should find a creature that is a transition between land and sea creatures. This prediction was validated with the discovery of Tiktaalik. You can make whatever excuses you want, but it's a fact that evolutionary theory proved itself there. Thats what good scientific theories do; they make testable predictions that are verifiable. Creationism has no such demonstrability. *Goddunit* is not even a hypothesis. And I could list off transitional fossils, but once again I wont do your homework for you. You have the net; google 'transitional fossils' and you will find a ton. Not that they matter; you'll find some way to ignore them. But that doesnt even matter. The genetic record is proof enough of common ancestry. Again, this is something you can verify by going to the places I told you earlier.
For your brain's sake, stop listening to hovind & comfort. They are both inane morons who spout ignorance so that people like you will buy their crap. Dont buy into it.
Rippy said.."1. Time, space, and matter came into existence by themselves.
ReplyDelete2. Planets and stars formed from space dust.\
3. Matter created life by itself.
4. Earthly life forms learned to reproduce themselves.
5. Major changes occurred b/w these diverse life forms ( fish changed to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, and reptiles to birds or mammals).
The missing evidence for evolution: No evolution at present, No new species, No known mechanism of evolution, No fossil evidence,etc.
The only evolution that can be observed is micro evolution ( variations within kinds)"
-LOL I love how he thinks he is putting forth legit questions about evolution. First of all, the first 3 have absolutely nothing to do with evolution. Those pertain to cosmology and physics, not biological evolution. The forth one has more to do with abiogenesis than evolution.
As for the fifth point, yes we do have a known mechanism, it's called natural selection. Look up genetic drift and genetic change due to allopatric speciation. There is all kinds of fossil evidence, from the burgess shale fossils of the Cambrian explosion, to the humanoid fossils that include the Australopithecus line. In reality, every fossil is a transitional form...The creationists just blatantly ignore all explanations made by I don't know, people who know what they're actually talking about. But it doesn't matter, because genetic evidence is alone enough evidence to prove common descent from a common ancestor. Rippy, I would like to know what you think a transitional fossil would look like? The answer to this question is important to how you understand basic evolution.
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"And I could list off transitional fossils, but...." but I don't know of a whole handful of examples off the top of my head????? Again, there were "millions" of examples, which there isn't...Google (which I did) should have websites drowning in evidence!! Not so.
Also: "The genetic record is proof enough of common ancestry." I would say closer to a common "Designer"...no a process of natural selection or survival of the fittest! God gets it right the first time!!!
I checked out HHMI website. I don't see anything they are doing wrong. "Ideas born in Hughes laboratories are also increasing our understanding of some of society’s most vexing health problems—including AIDS, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes—with the ultimate aim of improving the lives of people everywhere."
But when they interject natural selection into explanations for things.....they are just leaning on their own limited human knowledge. They do not want to let a "divine foothold" in the door. That would probably hurt their pride.
GOD has given these scientists their talents....but often times, they exalt themselves instead of God's creation!
Mamba 24.
ReplyDelete"First of all, the first 3 have absolutely nothing to do with evolution."
What I'm referring to in these 5 points is the "general theory" of evolution which believes these 5 major events took place without God.
"In reality, every fossil is a transitional form.." What do you mean by (in reality)?....
You also said: "yes we do have a known mechanism, it's called natural selection." Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"Evolutionary theory made the prediction that if we look in a certain strata of rock that corresponds to a specific time frame, we should find a creature that is a transition between land and sea creatures."
I believe you are referring to the geologic column here? When you look at the geologic column in the textbook you will notice that is mainly a statement of vertebrate evolution, it has very little to say about the other fossil types. As it turns out, 95% of all fossils are shallow marine invertebrates, mostly shellfish. For instance, clams are found in the bottom layer, the top layer, and every layer in between. There are many different varieties of clams, but clams are in every layer and are still alive today. There is no evolution, just clams!
Before I waste anymore time calling you on your ignorant blather, I want a few answers.
ReplyDelete1] Do you accept that biology and cosmology are not the same, and study different things?
2] Do you admit that this is the same tripe that Hovind spouts?
3] Do you understand why science is, by it's very nature, 'godless'? Explain.
4] Do you understand that the people who study evolution [scientists, not preachers whom you obviously get your info from] do not accept the creationist idea of evolution that you try to spout, and insted define evolution as 'change in allele frequency over time'?
5] Do you accept that the prediction of finding Tiktaalik was right [which it obviously was, since they did find what they were looking for], and that it was solely based on evolutionary theory?
6] Explain what you think a transitional fossil is.
7] Do you think that it is possible for a person to walk 10 feet, yet impossible to walk 1 mile?
8] Do you accept that 99% of people who study & work w/ evolution every day accept it, and the only way you could be right is a massive conspiracy?
One other thing: I didnt say to just go to HHMI's site and look for 5 minutes. I told you to order their lectures on evolution; that includes watching them after they get to you. The only reason you would fail to do this would be that you want to protect a dogma that you have. If you are so sure you have truth on your side, you should be able to destroy all of those 'evil evolutionists' claims [even though they study this for a living, and you are blindingly ignorant of it].
1). Agreed
ReplyDelete2). Hovind includes cosmology because the general theory of evolution uses it to try and explain formation of stars. Something that has never been observed.
3). Science was never intended to be 'godless'. Modern science has become that. In fact: Do you realize that all major branches of science were started by creationists?
4)I understand they use "change over time" (variation within the kinds). This happens. But to say it took "millions" of years...and natural selection caused this....NO...Example: Dogs and wolves have common ancestor...
5) I still have my doubts on your confident evidence of Tiktaalik...
6) Transitional fossil should be something in between of a fish turning into a amphibian...etc. Not completely half fish/reptile....but lots of fossils showing this process....
7) That question doesn't prove anything..lol
8) Yes..there is a massive conspiracy that anything but (Microevolution) exists!!!!! Using observed minor changes within species to explain the major changes over millions of years or natural selection is hogwash and the lie from Satan Himself...that many are believing!!
Now call me out!!!
4] "I understand they use "change over time" (variation within the kinds). This happens. But to say it took "millions" of years...and natural selection caused this....NO...Example: Dogs and wolves have common ancestor..." In fact we know that dogs and wolves have evolved over time and have a common ancestor because we have bred them as such. This is an example of artificial selection, as humans have done with many species such as bananas, corn and cows. Natural selection has been observed as well, and the earth has been dated at billions of years old; these are facts. You can deny them all you want, but you are doing so based on bronze age texts which are horridly flawed. Your assertions about evolution and dating are not backed up by the facts, which are freely available to you. You obviously do not understand the methodology that goes into the science behind all of this. Again, I plead with you to order the DVDs from HHMI and watch them. Your only reason for not doing this would be to protect your dogma. If you have truth on your side, you have nothing to fear.
ReplyDelete5] You can doubt all you want, but this is because you have not studied the topic. I know this based on all of your previous statements. The simple fact is that in 2006, based on predictions drawn solely from evolutionary theory, scientists from the University of Chicago found what they were looking for. The website of the team that did this is here:
http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/
Thanks for answering them.
ReplyDelete2] There is no 'general theory of evolution' that is recognized by science that includes stellar formation. That is cosmology, not biology. Evolution is strictly biology, dealing only with the diversity of life on the planet AFTER the formation of life. The idea that the formation of stars or cosmology of any kind is in ANY way included in the theory of evolution as it is accepted by the scientific community is simply creationist propaganda. Creationists are the only people who say that cosmology is involved in evolution as it is understood. Creationist conflation of the two totally different fields of study is an asinine attempt to dupe people who are ignorant of the actual science. Just because we may have not observed the formation of stars does not give way to the idea that "magic man dun it. I dont know how, but he dun it"; thats a god of the gaps argument that, even if it wasn't horribly flawed, would only lead to a deistic god, not yahweh.
3] I am well aware of the fact that many branches of science were started by men of religious nature. This does not change the fact that naturalism is the methodology they used to obtain their results. Science can only test that which is natural; god, being supernatural; is out of the realm of testing and demonstrability. Claims about a gods intervention in reality CAN be tested, but the idea of a god cant be demonstrated as the cause behind actions. Science works within the natural world perfectly fine without any divine intervention because it's results are testable, repeatable and demonstrable; god is NONE of those. Any time you stop and say 'well, I cant figure out X, so it simply must be a god' is the point at which learning stops. You think you have an answer when, in fact, you only have a stopgap that is a nonanswer with no explanatory value. It stops rational inquiry. If people acted like that, we would still be in caves.
ReplyDelete6] "Transitional fossil should be something in between of a fish turning into a amphibian...etc. Not completely half fish/reptile....but lots of fossils showing this process...."
ReplyDeleteIm not sure you understand even the most basic ideas of evolution. Each time a creature reproduces, the genes they pass onto their offspring change very slightly. With each passing generation, genetic changes accumulate; many small changes build, causing larger changes. Transitional fossils arent something like a lizard with a fish head, or a crocoduck; these are absolutely ignorant ideas put forth as what is expected from evolution. The fact that we have any fossils whatsoever is astounding, considering how hard it is for something to fossilize. The fact that the fossil record that we do have is exactly what evolutionary theory predicts, and that it can make predictions that turn out to be verified [tiktaalik] is further validation if it.
7] It's a demonstration of evolution. The tired creationist cry of 'micro not macro!' is akin to saying that a person CAN walk ten feet, yet it is impossible for that same person to walk a mile.
ReplyDelete8] "Yes..there is a massive conspiracy that anything but (Microevolution) exists!!!!! Using observed minor changes within species to explain the major changes over millions of years or natural selection is hogwash and the lie from Satan Himself...that many are believing!!
Now call me out!!!"
Wow. Just....wow. That is nothing but a baseless assertion, the same thing you did on the Axp blog. Your merely stating it to be so doesn't make it true. I could go on and express my astonishment at your statement, but I want you to demonstrate your claim to be true; because right now, all it is is assertion. The burden of proof is on you, and what a mighty big burden you have set for yourself.
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"The burden of proof is on you, and what a mighty big burden you have set for yourself."
Honestly, I don't feel I have a burden. I'm confident in my God (Jesus Christ). I'm only trying to meet you where you are at (evolution) and reason with you.
"I plead with you to order the DVDs from HHMI and watch them. Your only reason for not doing this would be to protect your dogma."
I don't need to watch those dvds. Sorry. I'm fully convinced that evolution is not how this world originated. I spent some years in my early twenties and since...going over the information. My decision has been made. I'm not trying to protect my dogma. I have a set of fundamental beliefs.....which I can defend..but Truth is truth. Watching those Dvds would not convince me...I've been strengthened in my faith in the Bible. Which is why I have this blog.
Now, my agreements and logic may not be acceptable to you....but I try my best to persuade others to know the true and living God!!!
Oi freaking vey... did you read anything I typed? First, yes you do have the burden of proof. You made the insane claim that 'macroevolution is a giant conspiracy created by satan.' To say the burden of proof is not on you only demonstrates you further lack of understanding. Your ignorance of epistemology is not my problem. Second, I am informing you of the claims made by the people who study this; they have the burden of proof for their claims, which has been met. You obviously DO need to watch those dvd's since you think hovind is anything other than laughable.
ReplyDeleteAgain, NOBODY but ignorant, brain washed creationists claim that evolution is how the world started. If you say that to a person that understands reality, you will be rightly laughed at. Evolution ONLY deals with the diversity of life...period. The point of watching those DVD's would be to point out your obvious ignorance. You want to remain wilfully ignorant.
ReplyDeleteYou claim that you can defend your beliefs, but you have yet to put forth an argument that isnt absolutely atrocious. You will not convince anybody with a basic education. And you saying that you cant be swayed is evidence enough that you ARE trying to protect dogma. You have your creationist tripe from morons, and it must be right cause the bible said so! Wrong. You are not open to evidence, and show yourself to be nothing more than a propagandist tool.
Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry you feel that way. Just remember: One of us is right...and one of us is wrong. If your right...Then when you die...you get recycled in the dirt and that is the end of you. The discussions we've had on this blog now become meaningless. Because it served no purpose but for the sake of discussion.
If I'm right, You are held accountable to God for your sin and must give an account to Him. Whether or not you have received His free gift of salvation results in where you will spend eternity. Our discussion in this life has "HUGE" ramifications and is very purposeful.
Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteAs a Bible believing Christian, I think with eternity in mind. I believe man has a soul that will live forever. You being an evolutionist, I assume you believe we are only chemicals and matter. Products of natural selection. There can be no soul that lives forever...and there is no god we are accountable to.
I'm trying to reason with you...that the very fact that we are making important decisions and having this discussion right now...shows we have a soul that makes conscious choices and will be held accountable to our Creator. Evolution could not explain this in my opinion. And if evolution can explain this...how so?
Have I been brainwashed? YES I HAVE!!! I've been brain washed by Jesus Himself!!! I've been washed in the blood of the Lamb! My mind has been washed cleaned from all my filthiness and old ways of thinking! My mind is being renewed day by day! (Romans 12:2) My sins are washed away and removed as far as the east is from the west!!!
ReplyDeleteYou can be brainwashed too! :)
Oooh, tossing out hell; the last desperate attempt by the person with no argument. Pascal's wager fail. The soul is an archaic construct of ignorant people to explain what people did not know about neuroscience that we know now. The fact that we can talk is by no means proof of a soul; the sheer idiocy of that is unfathomable.
ReplyDeleteOf course you think evolution cant explain neurobiology; you get your info about it from morons who spout tripe such as the idea that star formation is connected to it. Sadly, you have bought it hook, line & sinker. If you really want to understand evolution, look at sources OTHER THAN your creationist drivel. Look to the people who actually study it. You wouldnt get info on calculus from a plumber, but thats what you have done. Its no wonder you spout stupidity like a fountain.
And that last comment is just so utterly sad. Being proud of being brainwashed in the blood of a sacrificial lamb...your religion has corrupted you. You actually think that vicarious redemption is just. I am more moral than your god, jesus, and apparently you. I would never accept the bile you think is moral.
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"I am more moral than your god, jesus, and apparently you. I would never accept the bile you think is moral."
Really? You are more moral than the sinless Son of God (Jesus Christ)....that is a mighty claim!!! How did you come to that conclusion and what kind of evidence do you have that this is true? Seeing that the God of the Bible gave the moral law (10 commandments) which we are all guilty of breaking! You can't deny that bro.
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"The soul is an archaic construct of ignorant people to explain what people did not know about neuroscience that we know now."
Our brains make us very intelligent, so we imagine, seperating us from all other creatures. But our brains are just matter-and matter cannot think. The truth is that something other than the brain makes the difference, something that is not in our genes and that couldn't possibly be the product of evolution and natural selection. The intangible, nonphysical part of man is not shared by lower creatures.
Ponder this: If thoughts do not arise from the matter of which our bodies are made, who or what is forming conceptual ideas and expressing them in speech? Who is this thinker inside each of us? If it isn't part of the physical body, does "it" survive death? Could that be the person I really am, living temporarily in a physical body?
Apostulous,
ReplyDeleteI want to strongly suggest that you watch the youtube videos I've posted on the side of my blog: Incredible Creatures that Defy Evolution and God of Wonders.
How much weaker can your rebuttal be? The decalogue is by no means the 'moral law'. For the only thing supposedly directly dictated by god, it is astoundingly like what you would expect from the ignorant, illiterate nomads who wrote the rest of that book. The first 3~4 [depending on your version] are about nothing other than worshiping a jealous, petty god who demands compulsory fear and love. There is nothing moral about that. The few good bits are not the result of divine inspiration, but were law long before christianity; look to Confucius for that. And the best god could come up with equates women with chattel...property. That's repugnant. Not to mention the same commandment that equates women with the beasts of the field punishes thought crimes. Again...how is that moral in ANY way? I can think of a far better top ten for humanity that would include not owning other people & not forcing yourself on another against their will.
ReplyDeleteNow, Jesus [that sinless guy] actually endorsed slavery. He told slaves to obey their masters. For the epitome of morality, you think he could have said something about NOT owning other humans, but instead he endorses that very immoral act. He also tells his followers to give no heed for the morrow. How is not caring about your future in any way moral or sane? Aside from those very obvious points, I see that, once again, you think that your mere assertion that the decalogue is given by god is valid. I can assert that the Pastafarian commandments [the 8 I'd rather you didn'ts] are from god just as you do [IE, with no evidence whatsoever], but I wouldn't do so because I know that assertion does not equal truth....even though the Pastafarian 8 are far more moral than yahweh's. Seriously...how many times have you been told that assertion doesnt equal truth? Will that ever sink in? I doubt it. With that in mind, I can, and will, deny all day long that Im guilty of breaking the rules of your god...just as you would deny that you are guilty of sins against the thousands of other man made gods.
ReplyDeleteAgain, you think that asserting your position makes it true. It doesnt. The simple fact is that we are animals, just with more complex brains. The brain has things called neurons, which use electricity to preform actions. Your ignorance of modern neurobiology and evolutionary psychology only makes your assertions that much sadder. If you havent understood by now that you merely saying 'god gave us X' is not convincing, I pity you more than I already did. I doubt you know this [because it is actual work done by real scientists] but when a specific part of the human brain is stimulated, it produces something that test subjects have almost universally described as a highly spiritual experience. It's called brain chemistry. Animals think too; thinking is not limited to humans. They also feel emotions; elephants and some apes mourn the dead. Morals show up in social species. This is something widely known by people not blinded by creationist propaganda.
ReplyDeleteTrue, the brain is an incredibly complex organ; my AP biology teacher used to say that the brain is an organ that doesnt understand itself. Just because we cant explain something is not a reason to stick in untestable, non-demonstrable ideas that are the result of humanities intellectual infancy. That is all you are doing. The simple fact is that you only get your information from creationist cretins, not the people doing peer reviewed, testable work. It is no wonder you spout this blather. There is remarkable work being done by actual scientists, unlocking vast and complex wonders of this NATURAL world; all of this is lost on the people who ignore it. There is more wonder to behold in Pi than there is in all of the god concepts ever dreamed up by men. Your question about pondering is useless. I'd rather study HOW the brain works, to unlock those mysteries, as opposed to giving up and crediting an untestable mythical idea that stops the search for truth. Herein lies the difference between us: scientific literacy and intellectual curiosity.
ReplyDeleteAnd I may watch those videos [in fact I think I have seen the first]. If observation holds true, they will either be riddled with fallacious logic, scientific ignorance, or mere assertions of truth. You will note that you have committed all of these acts here. Creationist videos are so pathetically backward that i can only weep at the demise of honest curiosity and the search for truth. I wouldnt be surprised if next you refer me to a video by nephilimfree or ppsimmons. Sorry, I get my information about science from scientists; I CARE about truth. You get your information from people who may as well tell you that fixing a computer involves dropping it in the bath. I can only wonder what your next blind assertion will be, and how much of my rebuttal you will have ignored outright.
ReplyDeleteOne last point: I doubt you have ever heard of ring species. It's a phenomenon that is predicted and confirmed [just like Tiktaalik] by evolutionary theory, yet leaves creationism baffled. It is just another piece of evidence in favor of the demonstrable explanatory power of evolution. One more nail in the coffin of your scientifically demonstrably false ideas [you did say you care about science...well, maybe not THAT much]. You wont find ring species on the creationist sites. Thats because creationism cant explain it. Sorry, but its one more fail in the long list of demonstrable errors in your position.
ReplyDeleteApostulous,
ReplyDelete"If observation holds true, they will either be riddled with fallacious logic, scientific ignorance, or mere assertions of truth."
I suspect because you are already hostile to these videos before seeing them...you will be blind to the truth presented in them. Question is...are you really seeking the truth about things....or looking to find any flaws to sooth your conscience towards the accountability to your Creator? I pray you humble yourself and "hear" what is being said.
Apostulous,
On a side note, it is my upmost desire for you to come to realize that God exists, He loves you, and He died for you in the person of Jesus Christ. I may come off sometimes in "attack" mode....but I feel I'm in a battle to reason and show you the truth God has shown me. Jesus said:
"He is the way, the truth, and the life. And no man goes to the Father but by Him."
You will never get to God through your intelligence. God doesn't need to "prove" himself to people who are full of pride and demand their own ways of evidence for God. He is God.... and He has revealed Himself through the Bible and His Son Jesus Christ. If you reject this...which you have..there is no hope for you.
We all must come to realize our spiritual bankruptcy before Almighty God and that we are indeed depraved sinners in need of a Savior. If you never come to this point....there can be no way of you understanding my views. Until then..I will pray most earnestly that you do out of love.
And there you go, ignoring everything I have said previously and asserting bull. The simple fact is that flaws in creationist videos are there, and when those flaws are so blatant, they cant be ignored. Im done with you. You show yourself to ignore major points made and stick to ignorant bible bashing. Trust me, I understand christianity all too well. You do not understand anything I have said, as is demonstrated by every comment you make. Reread the exchange here. Google ring species and tiktaalik. Read your vile bible and your god's despicable misogynistic nature. If you think thats moral, I pity you. I dont know why I tried so hard...you have ignored half of what was said, just like on Axp's blog.
ReplyDeleteYou are a willfully ignorant fool.
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"ignoring everything I have said previously and asserting bull"
I haven't ignored it...I read every bit of what you had to say...I just strongly disagree. That's all.
"The simple fact is that flaws in creationist videos are there" Can you show me some specific examples on those videos?
I pray you stop putting your hope and trust in evolution...and put your hope and trust in Jesus Christ, who alone has the power to give you life!!!!
Remember this:
"For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved." -John 3:17
"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." -Romans 5:8
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"Ring species are species with a geographic distribution that forms a ring and overlaps at the ends. The many subspecies of Ensatina salamanders in California exhibit subtle morphological and genetic differences all along their range. They all interbreed with their immediate neighbors with one exception: where the extreme ends of the range overlap in Southern California, E. klauberi and E. eschscholtzii do not interbreed. So where do we mark the point of speciation?"
SUBTLE morphological and genetic differences...I see this as variations with the kind. Same kind (salamanders) just different variations. Again...micro evolution...not any new origin of species.
You are in violation of the great 8. I pray His Noodly Appendage doesnt send you to hell; sadly, you ARE bound for hell if you fail to obey. You can NOT deny this, it is written fact.
ReplyDeleteRepent, sinner!!!
Lol. :)
ReplyDeleteI understand why you laughed, but what I did there is essentially what you have done in most comments here. You take some idea with no evidence and you assert it with the same confidence that an algebra teacher demonstrates the Pythagorean theorem. When you understand why you dismiss my assertion so easily [along with the assertions of all other religions], you may understand why I dismiss your unfounded assertions.
ReplyDelete"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
— Christopher Hitchens
Apostulous,
ReplyDelete"You take some idea with no evidence..." My ideas or beliefs do have evidence...they come from the Word of God (the Bible). That's where all my authority comes from. All the evidence I need comes from the one who know it all: God Himself.
I know already you will scoff at this...but that is okay. I'm perfectly fine with that...knowing that the Bible even tells us about people who scoff at the Bible (2 Peter 3).
I have to agree with Hitchens...""That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." That which can be asserted (evolution, non-existence of God, etc) without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
The bible is not evidence. Evolution does have evidence...LOTS. You refuse to see this. There are many places you could go to see this evidence, but you have no concern for truth, hence the reason you ignore the people who study evolution and get your info on it from unqualified cretins.
ReplyDeleteSadly, I doubt you have even read the bible cover to cover. I doubt you know how it came into being. I doubt you know that the gospels were written anonymously. To place your faith in the bible, citing it as evidence and dismissing the evidence for science shows your true lack of knowledge in the subjects you speak on. The reason Im an atheist is because I have studied this. You are a YEC because you buy into tripe w/o critically thinking about it.
Sorry, but you will never convince people with your pathetic apologetics.
I don't have to convince people...God brings people to Himself..I'm simply His ambassador presenting the truth of His Word and allowing God's Spirit to do the converting.
ReplyDeleteRipp, give it up; this whole thread, and blog, is epic fail. You mindlessly denied, in your last response to me, that Christians value the bible over science, and then turned right around in that comment and proved me right. You then spent half of this thread demanding evidence for evolution, and when it was offered, you denied it. All you've done is mindlessly assert that your cult is true without offering any logic or evidence whatsoever, and ignoring/denying all proof to the contrary. You are living proof that Christianity is a vile, stupid cult that churns out idiots on an assembly line.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, you can't use the bible for proof; if the historical claims made in the bible don't have any proof, then they are false, period. Dem's the breaks. If you don't like it(and every word on this site proves you don't) then feel free to lobotomize yourself so you can spend the rest of your life in some magical imaginary fantasy land, like the one you live in now, only you'll be isolated from those mean old rational people and their inconvenient questions. If this is your idea of defending your faith, then you should consider a new profession, because those of us who have actually done their homework are not impressed. Show us some historical proof for the bible; go ahead. I anticipate it and who knows? I may stop by later this week. Doubtful, since I know you won't have any good arguments, but who knows?
Ciao.
B.R.
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to waste any more of my time arguing with you. It is very clear that you are not open to the offer of Jesus Christ.
I'm sorry you don't like me using the Bible for evidence...but I'm not going to stop using it just because people don't like it. If if ticks you off that much...move along!!
"It is very clear that you are not open to the offer of Jesus Christ."
ReplyDeleteLet's see... I directly challenged you to provide evidence for the bible, and you don't attempt to do so. How weak.
"I'm sorry you don't like me using the Bible for evidence...but I'm not going to stop using it just because people don't like it."
I didn't say that you should stop doing that because I don't like it; you should stop doing it because it's retarded. Any fool from any religion can use their holy book as proof. "Duh, the bible says it, and I've been told my whole life that everything in the bible is true, so that settles it, durp!"
There's nothing impressive about this. If your bible does not have any evidence(and it doesn't), than the miracles and divine events depicted within are myths, no better than the myths in the Iliad or the Odyssey, or the Norse sagas. I'm through wasting time here; every word you've posted shows that you are willfully ignorant, and you have no desire to educate yourself about thing grounded in reality. You use debate tactics that would be laughed out of a grade school, and are too biased and delusional to ever question or think about anything you believe in. Just another Christ-tard, making his religion more stupid every time he tries to defend it. I'm going to go find a more productive way to spend my time, like playing video games.
B.R.
ReplyDelete"I'm going to go find a more productive way to spend my time, like playing video games."
You do that bro! Your in my prayers
B.R.
ReplyDelete"I directly challenged you to provide evidence for the bible, and you don't attempt to do so. How weak."
I'm not going to share any evidence with you because you are not interested in evidence...but to glean through it and find anything that soothes your conscience about the truth of the Bible. Here is proof why I think this:
"If your bible does not have any evidence(and it doesn't), than the miracles and divine events depicted within are myths, no better than the myths in the Iliad or the Odyssey, or the Norse sagas.
You clearly show here that you are biased towards the Bible and "will not" except no matter how much evidence it put forth. It grieves me.
B.R
ReplyDeleteI understand what you are saying. I'm telling you...you are blind to the truth! God will not reveal Himself to you nor give you the evidence with your proud spirit! He opposes the proud and gives grace to the humble. You will never find God that way.
I suggest you take a look at my recent post and see if you can see any logic or reasoning in this: http://rippster4christ.blogspot.com/2011/06/eternal-dilemma-cosmos-creator-and.html
B.R
ReplyDeleteOr check out this link: http://rippster4christ.blogspot.com/2011/06/amazing-evidence-for-trustworthiness-of.html
Yet another outdated cop-out. I seek the truth, not comforting dogma. If being a free-thinking, intelligent person makes me "proud", then it's better than being stupid. This is just a throw-back to the old, "you can't understand the bible unless you have faith in it". You know what would be a genuine miracle? If Christians like yourself would employ their brains and research "confirmation bias". If your cult can not withstand scrutiny, then it's false, just like Islam, Mormonism, and any other cult you care to think of. Your kind of "logic" is like claiming that you perfected cold fusion in your basement, and then saying you won't provide any evidence to skeptics because they're too proud. If a Muslim used the same tactics in a debate with you that you're using with me, you would accuse him of cop-outs.
ReplyDeleteAlso, your link does not work.
Your second link did not work either.
ReplyDeleteB.R.
ReplyDeleteBoth of the links work...you just have to highlight the entire link, right click, and click on "Open Link." I highly suggest you check them out!
A Second option is that you just look at my Blog Archive and you will see them under June: "Amazing Evidence for the Trustworthiness of the Bible and Cosmos, Creator, and Human Destiny."
I think both of them present good logic and reason for where I'm coming from. Let me know what you think specifically on the Cosmos quotes.
B.R.
ReplyDeleteQuestion for you: "How is it that being an intelligent, free-thinker..you went from Christianity to Buddhism? ( I realize your an atheist now)
The writings of Buddhism have been contaminated with numerous legends and mythological embellishments (as even Buddhist authors and scholars admit).
In Christianity, the writings of the Old and New Testaments have been preserved by the God who inspired the original writings.
2. Buddhism prescribes striving and personal effort to achieve it’s end.
Christianity is all about God’s work, His grace and the life changing power of the Holy Spirit.
The Bible says…
Jeremiah 17:5:
“Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart departs from the LORD.” NKJV
3. Buddhism offers nirvana (a state of nothingness)
Christianity offers eternal life in heaven, in the presence of God, family, friends, and angels, etc.
4. In Buddhism God is not important.
Christianity says there is a God, who can be known and enjoyed.
5. Buddhism offers no forgiveness of sins, only suffering in future lives for our moral failures.
Christianity offers not only the forgiveness of sins, but total and complete justification before God through faith in Christ.
6. The founder of Buddhism (the Buddha) never claimed to do miracles or be God.
The founder of Christianity (Jesus) did both.
"Both of the links work...you just have to highlight the entire link, right click, and click on "Open Link." I highly suggest you check them out!"
ReplyDeleteI already know how to highlight links, thank you; I've been doing it for a long time. Coincidentally, I happened upon your "Trustworthiness" post on my way here, and the link is one of the most contemptible pieces of propaganda I've ever seen. Every single time on that page when the liar wrote, "the skeptic says...", he was not even presenting actual atheist arguments, but the same stupid straw-men that I've seen apologetic hacks regurgitate thousands of times. The arguments he presents are outdated, and have been refuted literally countless times, This is a site for people who have never encountered any atheist arguments, and know little about theology and basic historical research. I will post a refutation of this site on my blog this weekend and post it here(the link, that is).
"Question for you: "How is it that being an intelligent, free-thinker..you went from Christianity to Buddhism? ( I realize your an atheist now)"
ReplyDeleteBecause I was under the delusion that I still needed some kind of "belief", and the tactless stereotypes about atheists and atheism that had been drilled into me since childhood were still strong.
"The writings of Buddhism have been contaminated with numerous legends and mythological embellishments (as even Buddhist authors and scholars admit)."
Many of these were intentional metaphors and parables; a discerning person can easily sort these out. Buddha may have literally taught that gods were real, but lots of Buddhist scholars interpret this as metaphors for enlightenment, wisdom, and the transitory nature of the universe.
"In Christianity, the writings of the Old and New Testaments have been preserved by the God who inspired the original writings."
Drivel. The OT is not the same as the Torah; it's been changed too many times. And the NT is a mess of anonymous works that has the names of authors slapped onto to them centuries later by church councils. For example, many of the letters attributed to Paul were actually written by some other person.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Did+Paul+write+all+his+letters%3F-a0201711237
"2. Buddhism prescribes striving and personal effort to achieve it’s end."
Everything humans have ever accomplished has been through striving and personal effort. Prayer is just a good way to do nothing and yet still feel like you're helping.
"Christianity is all about God’s work, His grace and the life changing power of the Holy Spirit."
Considering the tens of millions butchered by Christians throughout history, and their long-term perversions of justice, liberty, and human rights, I'd say that the Holy Spirit has been laying down on the job.
'“Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart departs from the LORD.” NKJV'
Of course it says something like that; any cult worth it's salt will have pre-set doctrines on people who don't mindlessly adhere to their beliefs. It's funny how the bible says this, yet Christians are just as prone to depression, sickness, injury, and mental illness as the rest of us. Us "cursed" folks do just as well if not better.
"3. Buddhism offers nirvana (a state of nothingness)"
There are different interpretations, but dissolution is one of them, yes. Your point?
"Christianity offers eternal life in heaven, in the presence of God, family, friends, and angels, etc."
It also promises that believers will get to look down from heaven into hell to watch their non-Christian friends, family, and colleagues burn in unimaginable torment for not enslaving themselves to an evil blood god.
Sick.
If that's what Christians get their kicks out of, I'll take the place with decent people like myself--Hell. That way, I won't spend any time with Crusaders, witch-hunters, and mass murderers like Torquemada. And a state of nothingness is only bad for those who are delusional and attached to their own existence. The rest of us, Buddhists and atheists, have matured beyond that stage.
"4. In Buddhism God is not important."
And until you provide real proof for his existence, he never will be. Not to Buddhists, not to Wiccans, not to Jainists, and not to people who've done their homework.
Continued…
ReplyDelete"Christianity says there is a God, who can be known and enjoyed."
Christianity says lots of things. It's the question of backing them up that is important.
"5. Buddhism offers no forgiveness of sins, only suffering in future lives for our moral failures."
"Sin" is a delusion of the Abrahamic religions. There is no proof that it even exists, and Buddhism evolved in a completely different culture with different beliefs and ideas. This comparison is as puerile as a Buddhist saying that Christianity offers no solution for our bad Karma; it's based on the confirmation bias that this "force", sin or otherwise is a real thing.
"Christianity offers not only the forgiveness of sins, but total and complete justification before God through faith in Christ."
This neatly explains the oppression, torture and massacres committed in the name of God.
"6. The founder of Buddhism (the Buddha) never claimed to do miracles or be God."
This would make him out as a more reasonable person. This also shows that the writings of Buddhism were not as heavily "corrupted" as you wish they were. Otherwise, he would be portrayed as the king of the gods with mighty, earth-shaking powers and a bunch of other crap.
"The founder of Christianity (Jesus) did both."
This is only if you're ignorant enough to assume that his teachings are correctly represented in the synoptic gospels, which are now the official canon of Christianity. They were written decades after his death by anonymous authors with unknown agendas. Not the most convincing accounts (especially once you factor in the contradictions and lack of corroboration).
Now answer me this; why have you not responded to the arguments I posted last time? Where did this sudden rhetorical blitz against Buddhism come from? Eh?
ReplyDeleteB.R.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comments. Have a nice day!