Do Atheists "Worship" Anything?

RexRed wrote:

The reason why Genesis say God took a rib of man is because Genesis is saying Eve "evolved" BESIDE man...

If you had studied Genesis you would know a figure of speech when one is used.

The physical earth is round but with the spiritual earth, heaven is always above and hell is below...

You cannot apply atheism and science to a spiritual document.

Faith bridges the gap to God where science leaves off.

For science cannot measure God only the spirit can know the dimensions of God's love.

That's crap. You can't just make rules up. The bridge has to go both ways, which means you can't use your mysticism and hocus in the real world we live in. The truth is that you're too much of a coawrd to defend that your book says eve cam from a rib, and adam came from dust. You could never defend such a lame claim. The truth is the world is round and that the only place you find heaven is in your hopes, and the only place you find hel is in your deepest fears.

Faith bridges no gaps. Science fills its own gaps and has no need for faith.

"god's love" is no more imeasurable than the love one has for their parent, so if god were to exist and have love, it would be no more special than the love that is already avalible to us all.

0 Replies

I Stereo wrote:

RexRed wrote:
The reason why Genesis say God took a rib of man is because Genesis is saying Eve "evolved" BESIDE man...

If you had studied Genesis you would know a figure of speech when one is used.

The physical earth is round but with the spiritual earth, heaven is always above and hell is below...

You cannot apply atheism and science to a spiritual document.

Faith bridges the gap to God where science leaves off.

For science cannot measure God only the spirit can know the dimensions of God's love.

That's crap. You can't just make rules up. The bridge has to go both ways, which means you can't use your mysticism and hocus in the real world we live in. The truth is that you're too much of a coawrd to defend that your book says eve cam from a rib, and adam came from dust. You could never defend such a lame claim. The truth is the world is round and that the only place you find heaven is in your hopes, and the only place you find hel is in your deepest fears.

Faith bridges no gaps. Science fills its own gaps and has no need for faith.

"god's love" is no more imeasurable than the love one has for their parent, so if god were to exist and have love, it would be no more special than the love that is already avalible to us all.

Even evolution states we evolved from dust.

"LET THE EARTH BRING FORTH..." (that is evolution)

You are disagreeing for the sake of simply disagreeing.

Open your heart and God will open they eyes of your understanding.

0 Replies

It's funny. You take time to quote my post, type words, but it's not actually a responce.

I disagree for the sake of reason. If Christianity has made any enemies, it is mind.

I say it again: Faith bridges no gaps. Science fills its own gaps and has no need for faith.

0 Replies

Kings 19:11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: 12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

Comment:

I called upon the name of the lord and the voice said to me walk with me and follow me into the fire.

I took the lords hand and we walked into the fiery furnace but there was no fear for the burning elements could not singe the spirit of God. We became one with the fire and the fire purified the souls of those who journeyed with me.

Then I heard the still small voice speak amidst the crackling fire and say from out of the fire comes the lion and the lamb. For the fire burns within the temple and the cleft in the mountain is the refuge for the spirit. And the stones rumbled and echoed holy is the Lord God of all heaven and earth.

I cried to the lord for his raiment was as pure as light. And the kings of the earth bowed down to the lamb and the lion. For it is the penitent that shall hear my voice and the many waters of the oceans of time shall quench the fire until the peace of God reigns supreme.

When the fire was extinguished only a smoke plume arose up from the ground. This was the spirit of God ascending up into the kingdom beyond heaven and earth like a dove without gall.

The lord called my name and wrote it in the book of life and I flew upon the wind with the dove upon wings. We soared over a great sea and the bottomless abyss until the light of God became so resplendent that I began to weep again at it's brightness.

It was then that I felt God presence embracing me and saying the race has been run and the torch burns for thee my children. I felt as if a new life had come into my form and I became a being of light, a heavenly creature beyond all that I could have ever thought or dreamed.

And the voice of God again spoke and said the former things have passed away and you shall never again be troubled by the world that has gone before you. For you are all my beloved whom I have waited throughout the ages for this day that shall never end... Amen.

RexRed

0 Replies

No one wants to tough that one huh? Smile

As I said, faith bridges the gap between science and God...

Ephesians 4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) 11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

0 Replies

Your post is irrelevant, because none of that happened.

You post does nothing to support the idea that there is

1) A God.
2) A gap between science and God.
3) A need to fill said gap.
4) That Faith has the ability to fill said gap.

Quoting scripture doesn't have any weight. It's useless as me quoting the phone book. don't bother. If your words are not good enough, choose silence instead of the words of men.

0 Replies

I Stereo wrote:

Your post is irrelevant, because none of that happened.

You post does nothing to support the idea that there is

1) A God.
2) A gap between science and God.
3) A need to fill said gap.
4) That Faith has the ability to fill said gap.

Quoting scripture doesn't have any weight. It's useless as me quoting the phone book. don't bother. If your words are not good enough, choose silence instead of the words of men.

How do you know it did not happen? As an unbeliever you cannot judge the journeys of the spirit. The spirit is spiritually discerned. One must have spirit to perceive the spirit. So your unbelief only substantiates this spiritual axiom.

Was Christ Jesus not raised from the dead? Was this not witnessed by many people who then wrote about their "eye witness accounts"?

I might also add that is why it is called "faith"...

One can live a faithless existence.. but it is exactly that, FAITHLESS...

0 Replies

Romans 10:9
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

1Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man [body and soul without spirit] receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned..

0 Replies

Quote:

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. - Bertrand Russell

0 Replies

First, you aren't replying to what I said, you are simply continuing as if I had said nothing.

RexRed wrote:

How do you know it did not happen? As an unbeliever you cannot judge the journeys of the spirit. The spirit is spiritually discerned. One must have spirit to perceive the spirit. So your unbelief only substantiates this spiritual axiom.

I don't need to prove it never happened, you have to prove it DID. You haven't nor has anyone ever, therefore, it didn't happen. done. Proven.

Quote:

Was Christ Jesus not raised from the dead? Was this not witnessed by many people who then wrote about their "eye witness accounts"?

No and No.

Quote:

I might also add that is why it is called "faith"...

I'm not confused about what faith is. You are confused about its value.

Quote:

One can live a faithless existence.. but it is exactly that, FAITHLESS...

One can live without hair... but is exactly that, HAIRLESS...

You offer me no profound arguement to convince me that you know anything worth discussing.

0 Replies

I Stereo wrote:

First, you aren't replying to what I said, you are simply continuing as if I had said nothing.

RexRed wrote:

How do you know it did not happen? As an unbeliever you cannot judge the journeys of the spirit. The spirit is spiritually discerned. One must have spirit to perceive the spirit. So your unbelief only substantiates this spiritual axiom.

I don't need to prove it never happened, you have to prove it DID. You haven't nor has anyone ever, therefore, it didn't happen. done. Proven.

Quote:

Was Christ Jesus not raised from the dead? Was this not witnessed by many people who then wrote about their "eye witness accounts"?

No and No.

Quote:

I might also add that is why it is called "faith"...

I'm not confused about what faith is. You are confused about its value.

Quote:

One can live a faithless existence.. but it is exactly that, FAITHLESS...

One can live without hair... but is exactly that, HAIRLESS...

You offer me no profound arguement to convince me that you know anything worth discussing.

I personally would rather be hairless than faithless. Hair is outer beauty faith is inner beauty.

One is sometimes hairless for only a short lifetime but one may remain faithless for all eternity...

This lifetime in only one drop in the oceans of time compared to all eternity with God.

1 Corinthians 15:3
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Mark 16:11
And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

Mark 16:14
Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

Luke 24:23
And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.

John 3:11
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

John 20:29
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Comment: Eye witness accounts...

0 Replies

Quote:

Comment: Eye witness accounts...

Written 300-400yrs later? Hardly eyewitness.

The Gospels in te NT are not eyewitness accounts. The statue of limitations probably does not allow for 3 centuries of fable before being scribed.

Sorry. No dice. Just three blind mice.

As for being hairless, I'll confess, I'm impressed at your ability to take an obvious mockery of a impotentent statement and draw a comparassion.

"Hairless verses faithless?"

At least hair has a function.

0 Replies

I Stereo wrote:

Quote:
Comment: Eye witness accounts...

Written 300-400yrs later? Hardly eyewitness.

The Gospels in te NT are not eyewitness accounts. The statue of limitations probably does not allow for 3 centuries of fable before being scribed.

Sorry. No dice. Just three blind mice.

As for being hairless, I'll confess, I'm impressed at your ability to take an obvious mockery of a impotentent statement and draw a comparassion.

"Hairless verses faithless?"

At least hair has a function.

Umm 300-400 year later? Where did you get that erroneous information?

Even the apocrypha were written probably within a hundred years of Jesus' life.

The apostles themselves wrote the gospels and they were "copied" by faithful scribes. There are very few discrepancies between the seven Greek copies still in existence and even the Aramaic copies of gospels and epistles are nearly identical.

Also the New Testaments states that the apostles wrote the Gospels first in Aramaic and then they saw to it "themselves" the translation into Greek.

On same logic the works of Plato were written just yesterday because his works were just released in a new hardbound edition.

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Also the New Testaments states that the apostles wrote the Gospels first in Aramaic and then they saw to it "themselves" the translation into Greek.

This is a lie.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Also the New Testaments states that the apostles wrote the Gospels first in Aramaic and then they saw to it "themselves" the translation into Greek.

This is a lie.

Got something to back up your opinion?

0 Replies

http://orvillejenkins.com/languages/aramaicprimacy.html

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Setanta wrote:
RexRed wrote:
Also the New Testaments states that the apostles wrote the Gospels first in Aramaic and then they saw to it "themselves" the translation into Greek.

This is a lie.

Got something to back up your opinion?

You retailed the lie--it is up to you to demonstrate it is not a lie.

I defy you to quote any of the four books of the alleged evangelists with a passage which states unequivocably that the apostles wrote the gospels in Aramaic and then provided for their translation into Greek.

The source you linked nowhere says that the gospels include text in which the apostles said that they had written the text in Aramaic and then provided for their translation into Greek.

0 Replies

Set, I recall reading a scripture in the new testament that actually states that but my memory may have failed me on this particular account but my statement was not intentionally meant to mislead...

I still believe the Aramaic was first then the Greek second...

For one reason I see it this way is the Aramaic has the body, soul and spirit thing a bit more accurate than the Greek relates...

0 Replies

RexRed wrote:

Set, I recall reading a scripture in the new testament that actually states that but my memory may have failed me on this particular account but my statement was not intentionally meant to mislead...

I still believe the Aramaic was first then the Greek second...

For one reason I see it this way is the Aramaic has the body, soul and spirit thing a bit more accurate than the Greek relates...

I don't deny that some portions of the gospels may have first been written in Aramaic, and then translated into Greek. I pointed out that you made a claim about scripture for which you cannot provide a scriptural basis.

For example, your boy Luke very likely did not write in Aramaic, and he certainly was not an eyewitness of the events his gospel claims took place. One of the reasons why the gospels are suspect is that there is so little evidence that any of them were written by eyewitnesses, or that they have passed down to us without being edited, or heavily re-written. No version of the gospels exists which is any earlier than 150 CE, and no complete copy dates from any earlier than the 4th century. That's a lot of time available to screw with the contents.

So, it's bad enough that you peddle so much egregious horseshit based on unreliable sources--it's insufferable that you peddle outright lies.

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

RexRed wrote:
Set, I recall reading a scripture in the new testament that actually states that but my memory may have failed me on this particular account but my statement was not intentionally meant to mislead...

I still believe the Aramaic was first then the Greek second...

For one reason I see it this way is the Aramaic has the body, soul and spirit thing a bit more accurate than the Greek relates...

I don't deny that some portions of the gospels may have first been written in Aramaic, and then translated into Greek. I pointed out that you made a claim about scripture for which you cannot provide a scriptural basis.

For example, your boy Luke very likely did not write in Aramaic, and he certainly was not an eyewitness of the events his gospel claims took place. One of the reasons why the gospels are suspect is that there is so little evidence that any of them were written by eyewitnesses, or that they have passed down to us without being edited, or heavily re-written. No version of the gospels exists which is any earlier than 150 CE, and no complete copy dates from any earlier than the 4th century. That's a lot of time available to screw with the contents.

So, it's bad enough that you peddle so much egregious horseshit based on unreliable sources--it's insufferable that you peddle outright lies.

The oldest dated manuscript is written in Estrangelo Aramaic.

And I do highly value your historical opinion Set.

Thanks for illuminating that particular point.

This is why I am here to fill in the holes in my understanding. It is not just to hear myself speak but to bounce these ideas of others and hear there thoughtful and insightful responses.

Yet I still do believe that it was the apostles themselves that saw to the books being translated into various other languages. These were highly educated people as a collective whole. These translations could have been debated and considered. As you know we only have copies of these original translations but there were once originals and these originals were the inspire word of God. The only way back to this original word is compare the copies and reason the message they impart.

The apostles did have an active ministry and words were their spiritual medium .

By translating these letters into multiple languages all of Asia heard the word in their own language in the space of only two short years.

That is allot of various peoples with different languages the word of God had to reach.

Acts 19:10
And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

Comment: Notice the Jews (Aramaic speaking people) are listed first...

0 Replies

Do Atheists "Worship" Anything?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know