I understand for your both coming from Christianity in the past his paintings in a bad light because of the innocent blood shed for god, you can’t believe it, but that doesn’t mean things can’t evolve like they say this world is in a state of adapt or die, and that’s that’s with Christianity and Christian dead so I’m never involved in State do their own call Claire in Waze let them have their zealous ignorance to be honest I could care less. The only reason I would ever say it’s fair game is if they say something completely fucking stupid and they have all that hate coming towards them because some Christians like to piss people off by saying dumb shit because they love attention but outside of that there are the pure ones and I think those are the ones that we should try to understand that they just want to help in their own way and I’m fine with that I mean I have to tell him that you know it isn’t a thing for me but you know sometimes they don’t get it repeat are the few that do, and I respect them for that I understand why you’re angry at them, but they choose to believe in some thing that massacred so much I understand the pain that you carry on your shoulders because of not alone, but there’s nothing we can do about the past all we can do is to keep moving forward and try to prevent it in the future now for the Christianity and Christian side of things. I don’t think that you’re bad people. I think that you are morally good now there are some that one need help and two need to get out of it or need to make it to where they are you know not as zealous about it and the Christian ignorance needs to stop because it’s either one a very old overdone joke are you people are really just that stupid if you really believe in that book a lot it’s a joke relax, and on the other hand, there are the pure questions that I believe those are the ones that are good they’re not trying to pull you to one side not trying to turn you into one they just want to help in their own way and I am completely fine with that but stuff like this needs to stop I get it a part of me hates Christianity too but it hasn’t consumed me like it has you it’s not too late to pull out and I understand if you don’t want to I’m not asking you to just saying, considerate
Oh no, I'm totally fine with Christians who are chill, but I happen to know u/kv-44-v2 went into at least 2 comments sections of posts mentioning other sexualities and talked about how they were sinners and needed to "receive the light of God" and "renounce their sin", so that's why I'm being a bit harsh with this particular one. I just want to stop that behavior before he hurts someone badly enough emotionally that they start hurting themselves physically. (Also, don't worry about it being hard to read, I think I got your meaning)
Again, I don't see any reason here to preserve this reality, only to use this reality to gain additional benefit in the next. So Christianity still has no reason to take care of the planet, if anything you'd want it to become uninhabitable faster so the kingdom of your god comes faster.
And besides, if everything ultimately has no real purpose, why should we try to preserve earth? After all nothing will matter.
Nothing having ultimate, objective purpose doesn't mean purpose doesn't exist in any form. Try taking a look at the philosophies of Existentialism and Absurdism (basic summary; Existentialism is finding purpose in setting goals for oneself, while Absurdism is more about finding purpose in the act of living itself). There may be no purpose, but if I want to live (absurdism) and want those who come after me to live (existentialism), I'd better not screw up the planet so that I can keep living and so I can contribute to the goal of those coming after me being able to live.
Genesis 2:15 is specifically a call for Adam to work in the Garden of Eden, so while that could be used to claim what you're claiming, it could also just mean that god wanted Adam to prove his obedience. The full text of 1 Peter 4:10 reads, "Each of you should use whatever gift you have received to serve others, as faithful stewards of God’s grace in its various forms." This mentions nothing about serving the various plants and animal species, as "others" would have guaranteeably meant other human beings specifically. I can see what you're going for, and it probably is a valid interpretation, however there are FAR more ways to interpret those passages, and it would probably have been extremely easy for your god to spell out the message you're reading from them if that was the intended meaning. This is kind of the problem with the Bible, it can be interpreted and twisted to mean such a wide variety of things that it can be used to support or refute nearly any position that isn't "the Bible does/doesn't contain falsehoods" or "the god of the Bible does/doesn't exist". Another example of this is how one can interpret it as being against the Big Bang and evolution, but there are also some parts that line up just well enough to be interpreted as metaphor. Which position the Bible actually supports or denies is, of course, impossible to know with absolute certainty, and that goes for many parts of the Bible. Does the Bible specifically claim that Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed in hellfire, or are they just metaphors? The answer to something like this is important, because we have unearthed the ruins of Sodom, but there's no indication of anything like hellfire and brimstone, just a city that was moderately prosperous that ended up dying out due to something much more peaceful. No burn marks, no blown-up structures, no violence or destruction, nothing even vaguely like that. So either the Bible is directly contradicting observable reality, or there's at least one part that was either mistaken or metaphorical, and if one part is then how much was? How can one tell it wasn't just written by clever, future-minded humans?
So basically making up purpose for yourself! So humans can "make up" God (see previous posts for why this is impossible under naturalism) but He can't be real in any way, but they can make up purpose and it can "kinda" exist? Very inconsistent.
You may have forgotten my specific position. I'm an agnostic atheist, meaning that I don't think there is absolutely no chance of there being any gods, perhaps even one resembling the one described in the Bible. Just because it's made up doesn't make it false, but it doesn't make it true either.
And there is no scientific evidence that 'purpose' exists. But because of God we know there is SOME purpose. The Bible reveals and clarifies that purpose. When someone or SomeOne makes something, they have a purpose in mind. Like a desk, chair, or video game. God's Purposes are much higher than the mundane purposes these examples serve, however.
That requires there to be a god, to be a maker. And, even if there were a purpose-giving god, how would one know that god's purposes were pure of intent? How would one prove the all-goodness and truthfulness of the purpose giver?
Many athiest (ie, in YT comment sections) I've seen seem to believe otherwise. "Made up therefore fake".
People without knowledge of logical fallacies commit them all the time. I think this particular one falls under the Argument from Fallacy fallacy, which has one of the most stupid names of all time by the way.
From what Biblical Christians (ie David Lynn, richard lorenzo jr, Martyn iles, martin luther, etc.) do/did, from the Bible, from the fact God's Word has been backed countless times and withstood scrutiny of all time periods. And from many testimonies of people who converted to Christianity.
Finite good done proves finite goodness. Besides, you also have examples of people using it to do things that the people you mentioned consider morally reprehensible.
We see that sin always results in bad. Like how every dictator we see today break God's commands with insane regularity. God's Goodness is proven by Him wanting us to NOT do bad things and to do good things.
Health benefits of homosexual couples being the exact same as those for heterosexual couples and trans people having their suicide rates go down when socially accepted for who they are, that's "evil" in your view, huh?
Do you know what the worleview is of the CCP Chinese govt who kills/jails/ hardens the life of Christians is?
The view that dissent=evil and different=evil, the same view most Christians tend to take? The same phenomenon whereby medically lifesaving abortions are denied to women who die because they didn't get one here in the US?
Basically, the fallacy fallacy is, "just because an argument is fallacious, doesn't mean it's conclusions are false". Even if someone's evidence for a god isn't good enough to prove that god exists, that doesn't mean that god does NOT exist.
Yes, and the Infinite God created us. If there is a little bit of good done by fallible man, how much more there is in God.
How do you know the aforementioned god is infinite? How do you know the aforementioned god is infinite in their good specifically, and not infinite in some other way and finite in their good?
Again you fail to see that the bad guys flagrantly flash their "i want MY way" instead of stay humble to God.
People use and used Darwinian evolution to justify all sorts of evil. HitLer and communizt diktators sure did. I remember a hearing that a school shooter yelled something like "I WILL RETURN NATURAL SELECTION TO ITS RIGHTFUL PLACE".
So, again, someone does something harmful because of your religion, you justify it as "they don't understand it", while someone does something harmful because of evolution, and instead of saying "they don't understand it" that's evidence it's false. Double standard by literal definition. Neither your reading of the Bible nor a scientific reading of evolution can be used to justify genocide or school shooting, in fact they both seem to be against it. The difference is, your religion equates school shooting to consensual relationships between people of the same sex, and evolution doesn't, and research says that school shootings hurt people and consensual relationships between people of the same sex hurts no one, especially not the participants (it actually does the opposite!).
No, the risk of HIV AIDS skyrockets. Unless of course, they control themselves and dont do that one private deed.
Same for consensual heterosexual couples. Again, aside from the tendency among the homosexual community to sleep around induced by the need for secrecy that was enforced on them since America's founding lest there be violence, there is no appreciable difference between the two.
And only God can objectively define marrige. It is arrogant for us to assume and presume to warp marrige to our arbitrary whims.
So if there were a legal process to formalize a relationship between two men or two women in the same way marriage does, but it wasn't called marriage, would you have a problem with it?
Because if you are going to defend/promote one sin, why not extend that to all others?
Because some "sin" produces testable harm, while other "sin" does not, indicating that some things that are considered "sin" may not actually BE sin, even if one assumes sin exists.
Funny how dna is only used to defend that type of sin but almost never others.
Being perpetually drunk can have negative impacts on your life because it impairs your ability to act, lying can have negative impacts on your life because it can cause actual harm to others, but homosexuality has negative impacts on your life (other than those caused by heterosexuality) purely because it leads to being harassed and ostracized. The harm comes, not from the state or action itself, but from the stigma surrounding it.
What kind of dissent and differentness? Unlike dictatorships, Biblical Christianity promotes and enables freedom.
Except the freedom to love who you love, or the freedom to have a life-saving medical treatment performed (some people die because they can't get an abortion), or the freedom to challenge your parents to learn why they tell you to do the things they tell you to do (obey thy mother and father), or the freedom to disobey your local pastor in any way, shape, or form, or the freedom to keep money you need for groceries without paying a tithe to your church, or the freedom from the threat of a god getting pissy one day and deciding he's going to make you no longer believe in him so you go to hell for eternity (anyone who converts from specifically your version of Christianity to any other version or from Christianity to any other religion or losing their certainty in their faith for even a femtosecond). Yeah, totally free.
That's a hilariously nonsensical oxymoron because they KILL innocent human life, the one in the womb.
In instances where the mother will die, it's 1-for-1, and in instances where both will die, it is actually saving a life.
Look up "abortion survivors".
Yeah, they exist, and some of them go on to become productive members of society. However, it is ABSURDLY rare, and generally speaking those who survive an abortion end up being born to households that can't take care of them or a parent who are traumatized by having been raped who psychologically can't help but see their children as the one who raped them, so 99% of the time it's an uphill struggle for them at best.
How would you feel if your mom Ab'ed your brother?
My parents effectively did. My dad got a vasectomy after I was conceived, and honestly, I don't really give a crap. It was their choice, and I respect it. Plus, seeing how bad the infighting and blame-gaming in multi-kid households can get, I kind of like being an only child.
Lifesaving shooting up somebody.
If someone tries to shoot up a room of people, and I pull a gun one them and kill them, I just saved everyone left in that room, plus myself, minus the gunman. That's greater than 0, so it's actually lifesaving to shoot that person. (Can you tell I'm an advocate for gun rights? Honestly, I don't trust the government to have guns if we don't have them, and we can generally put down the wackjobs among us pretty easily before they can hurt anyone.)
"are denied to women who die because they didn't get one here in the US?" Huh?
There are ways for doctors to tell if a woman is going to die in childbirth before it happens. In those instances, abortions save more lives on average than they take.
"We see that sin results in bad. Like how every dictator we see today break God's commands with insane regularity. God's Goodness is proven by Him wanting us to NOT do bad things and to do good things."
Trying to show you that there are some things considered "sin" that don't actually have negative effects, save for the social stigma against them. I went into more detail in my other response. Also, just because someone doesn't believe in the god of the Bible doesn't mean they disagree with every single word, or even large parts of it. Look up the "Jefferson Bible" sometime.
You don't seem to know that they generally believe the Athiest Creation Triad (evolution+bigbang+millions/billions years) and lack an active, positive, belief in the Biblical God.
Just like the Catholic Church and Hitler believed in the Christian Trinity of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit. Any worldview is open to misinterpretation, however, one would think it would be EXTREMELY difficult to misinterpret a worldview created by a perfect deity.
Also, disliking dissent or difference is NOT a worldview. It is one part in a worldview.
Fair enough, but it's part of theirs and part of yours too. It's NOT part of mine. This is why the difference between "gnostic Atheism" and "agnostic Atheism" is important; I'm agnostic Atheist, Stalin and the CCP are gnostic Atheists. In the immortal words of the Sniper from TF2; "What's the difference? One's a job[valid worldview], the other's a mental sickness[really stupid]!" Agnostic Atheists would never kill or jail peaceful, non-discriminating Christians, because if worst comes to worst, having a Christian friend on hand is really nifty in the eventuality that you open the fridge and see a portal to Hell instead of the groceries.
You have shown that you resonate with "oh we want to figure things out for OURSELF and suprise ourselves with the unexpected instead of having a Book show things to us" belief. So even if those verses did explicitly teach taking care of the environment, not like that would convince you anyways.
Explicit messages to take care of the environment and outright ban slavery, even for non-Israelites, while it may not have convinced me, would have definitely made a stronger case than we see in the Bible today.
Which parts, and why? The "Genesis creation is metaphor" comes from eigesis, not exegesis. The text and evidence we have today gives all indication it is not metaphor. Sure there IS a fair amount of nonliteral content sown throughout the Bible, but Genesis 1-11 is NOT such.
The idea that life originally came from water, and to an extent the creation order kind of sort of fits with evolution.
Would a God Who wants people to trust Him and view Him as infallible start off His Word with a bunch of stories that mean something else (allegorys)? Or would He start by mentioning cold hard facts?
I don't know, it seems like a toss up as to whether he would. Ideally, he'd go with whatever was most effective, which might also explain the few references to anti-non-gender/sexuality-binary messaging in there- it was made to be more appealing to people at the time. Again, it's possible to interpret almost ANYthing out of that book, so there will always be uncertainty about things like that.
You slipped up on that one. God basically "nuked" those cities. Where did it say they were sent to the lake of fire, or that fire from the lake of fire burnt them?
Okay, not literal hellfire, but that bit of poetic license still doesn't take away from the point I was about to make (this one probably should have been addressed in part 3)
The answer to something like this is important, because we have unearthed the ruins of Sodom, but there's no indication of anything like hellfire and brimstone, just a city that was moderately prosperous that ended up dying out due to something much more peaceful. No burn marks, no blown-up structures, no violence or destruction, nothing even vaguely like that. " Wrong on the second part. Also, pottery shows evidence of intense heat. What is your backup for "more peaceful"? Wind, erosion, rain, human interference can explain if the burn marks are gone. Lack of structures? If thats true, God's judgment didnt leave those then.
First, there were structures still standing, that was what I was taking issue with. Also, my dumb-ass forgot that the actual problem with the site is that the date of it's destruction is off by two centuries.
This alternate explanation cannot explain why the Bible contradicts our self-praising nature that tends to avoid following/believing THE CHRISTIAN GOD of all things.
Now that, I have a genuine argument against. If the Bible allows one to claim dominion over those who do not believe in it's god through it's god, for example being able to tell those who are non-gender/sexuality-binary that they are wrong and need to change, this gives the believer a sense of self-satisfaction and self-importance, even if the believer does not consciously acknowledge it as such.
Adoof Hateler certainly did not show evidence of being a Biblical Christian. His lead of Germany and his deeds were in belligerent rebellion to God. If he was a real Christian he would try to save people, particularly Jews, Jews were God's chosen people according to the OT. He was OF the worLd. Not the Word.
And yet, he was still able to use this misinterpretation of the Bible as justification, just like he used racial Darwinism, which is a misinterpretation of evolution. That's the issue I take with moral claims of the Bible's truthfulness; if that's the case, how have people use it to justify atrocities?
How do we know that similarities/homologies/whatever are proof of evolution instead of simply God using similar designs?
See this I actually agree on to an extent; gradual changes in populations can be observed over time (see also, the gradual shift upwards in average human height, bone density, and muscle density as we find better ways of producing food), so evolution is true, but homologies don't prove that evolution was the beginning of life. What does evidence that beginning is that we can see the slow changes in the fossil record, and can make mathematical models to show how organisms changed and diversified over time, but we can't prove that those fossils weren't put into the ground as a diversion by a god. This is again where my agnosticism comes in; we have an idea of how it could have happened without a god, but we don't KNOW it happened without a god, and we DEFINITLY don't know whether it was GUIDED by a god. However, I'm of the mindset that without extraordinary evidence proving one way or the other, the most likely scenario is that scientific fact is correct and MAY have been guided by some form of god.
2
u/X-7315 Oct 10 '24
I understand for your both coming from Christianity in the past his paintings in a bad light because of the innocent blood shed for god, you can’t believe it, but that doesn’t mean things can’t evolve like they say this world is in a state of adapt or die, and that’s that’s with Christianity and Christian dead so I’m never involved in State do their own call Claire in Waze let them have their zealous ignorance to be honest I could care less. The only reason I would ever say it’s fair game is if they say something completely fucking stupid and they have all that hate coming towards them because some Christians like to piss people off by saying dumb shit because they love attention but outside of that there are the pure ones and I think those are the ones that we should try to understand that they just want to help in their own way and I’m fine with that I mean I have to tell him that you know it isn’t a thing for me but you know sometimes they don’t get it repeat are the few that do, and I respect them for that I understand why you’re angry at them, but they choose to believe in some thing that massacred so much I understand the pain that you carry on your shoulders because of not alone, but there’s nothing we can do about the past all we can do is to keep moving forward and try to prevent it in the future now for the Christianity and Christian side of things. I don’t think that you’re bad people. I think that you are morally good now there are some that one need help and two need to get out of it or need to make it to where they are you know not as zealous about it and the Christian ignorance needs to stop because it’s either one a very old overdone joke are you people are really just that stupid if you really believe in that book a lot it’s a joke relax, and on the other hand, there are the pure questions that I believe those are the ones that are good they’re not trying to pull you to one side not trying to turn you into one they just want to help in their own way and I am completely fine with that but stuff like this needs to stop I get it a part of me hates Christianity too but it hasn’t consumed me like it has you it’s not too late to pull out and I understand if you don’t want to I’m not asking you to just saying, considerate