"How are these things evidence that christianity is true?" They aren't... they are evidence atheism is false, or at minimum for some of them, left wanting. For evidence that Christianity is true, I'd point you to the resurrection of Christ and the testimony of the witnesses.
"How so?" Explain consciousness from the atheistic worldview... or how reason, logic, and information come from matter. (and those are just a start)
Yea, it certainly is a matter of definition... nearly everything is. Well, you could have an something, an event... that maybe you really don't like (others might), but it wouldn't be evil. It might be beneficial or detrimental, but not evil. (Earthquakes, tsunamis, etc. aren't evil, btw.) You need objective morality to have either good or evil. For example, explain, on the atheistic worldview, what is 'evil' with burning a witch.
re: #1 - OK, for example, explain consciousness within the atheistic worldview.
re: #2 - Note that I did qualify what I said in that way. You might find that none match and be theistic, but have to invent or modify an existing religion.
re: #3 - what don't you find plausible about Christianity?
re: my site... very fair point, I'm just getting started there really. Check my 'Resources' page, as I doubt you'll find anything major not addressed in one of those. I'm glad you are thinking about this stuff though. Many here obviously are not.
"the first step would have to be for you to admit that you might be worshiping the incorrect god and to be open to switching gods should evidence cast doubt on your current position; since that's incompatible with the very concept of "faith""
Maybe you don't realize this, but many religious folks have done, and do exactly that! You also don't have a very good definition of faith. Here are a couple articles I've written on the topic: http://www.tilledsoil.org/category/topics/faith-topics/
"True religion is free of dogma and superstition and embraces all truth." I'm not sure if you are aware of this... but when you take a bunch of beliefs and filter out the false ones, keeping the truth: a) you are going to have to eliminate some of them, and b) what you are left with is dogma.
"whether or not they are true is completely secondary" Hmm... so Christ didn't care about truth? It doesn't matter if things are true or not? Didn't you just say Christ wants us to embrace all truth?
Nice post of post-modern mumbo-jumbo though. Unfortunately, what is true for you doesn't happen to be true for the rest of us.;)
So.... premise 1: "66% of the planet doesn't think it's the truth." (anyone notice the fallacy here?) premise 2: "If a book doesn't contain truth then it contains something somebody made up, and we call that "fiction"." (quite true) conclusion: "So according to most of the planet, the bible is fiction." (So?)
So, the first premise if fallacious, the second is good, but the conclusion doesn't follow nor is it relevant to the claims. (Note: I'm not a logician, so I might have not set that out properly... but this was just too obviously wacked out.)
"It doesn't matter if they reported something or not" Sure it does, that's how we know history. What I'm saying is that WE KNOW Egypt WOULD NOT have reported such a thing if their behavior is consistent at all. So, we wouldn't EXPECT this to have been reported... so that it isn't is no surprise (and lends no weight to your claim).
"anything like what's depicted in the bible would have been absolutely devastating to Egypt and left ample evidence." - First, from my understanding, this was one city/region in Egypt, not all of Egypt. Second, I'm not sure how it would have left ample evidence. That was a long time ago.
"Speaking of Exodus, there's no evidence of 600000 people packing up and leaving Egypt either. That would also have left traces." - Not true. First, you should know that even among Biblical scholars, the numbers (population size) are disputed, BASED on the text (not just liberal skepticism). Second, you might want to do a bit more research before making such a sweeping claim: http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBWWO8dCeY0 I could give you lots more... but that's a start.
Ad Hominem won't work on me... I'm too old for that.;)
Yes, someday you and I will both die. The question is what happens after that. I don't think the evidence is stacked in your favor there. I'm not scared at all (well, some forms of dying sound a bit scary, but of being dead, no). Best of luck to you as well. I just hate to see people left in their ignorance.
OK, consciousness, free choice, reason, logic, information. We'll start there. You just have to spend a bit of actual time looking. One way of approaching it is to recognize that the atheistic worldview utterly fails... which pushes one into the theist camp. Then you start ruling out religions. Pretty soon, you're left with Christianity and a couple others to actually consider. Then, you start matching up all the claims with reality and see which is a best fit. Then, you have to decide whether that religion is correct, or none and keep searching.
Check out my work at TilledSoil dot org or some of the resources I list. The truth is out there...;)
Umm... that person was making the claim.... I have plenty of evidence on which to believe Christianity to be true.... and conversely, plenty of evidence to believe other worldviews are false.
I am failing to follow your argument there. What does the % of population believing something have to do with it being fact or fiction?
Re: events that didn't happen... how do you know that? Can you name one? - flood... many Christians don't see the flood as global. - plagues of Egypt (Note: a claim isn't an argument.): but to address your assertion, Hebrew people were there... Hebrew people left... Egypt didn't report defeats.
Haven't seen the book, but given that it was authored by an atheist, is it possibly taking a jab at the Bible, rather than being a 'bible told through Legos'? If so, maybe after some complaints, someone looked at it more closely and decided they didn't want to sell that kind of product.
I agree that there is a good bit of explicit material in the Bible, depending on how you define that. Funny link (so long as you've not actually studied the Bible... work of fiction?!?!?), though not sure what that has to do with the article.
I'm just not sure what the point of that would be. Terraforming makes nice sci-fi, but isn't sustainable without incredible amounts of resources (let alone getting it started). If we want a 'launch-pad' outside of Earth's gravity, the moon would make a much better place. If we're just looking for evidence to put towards the origins of life debate, the moon is going to give us much more evidence of early earth-life. There isn't likely to be any life on Mars (other than earth-life remnants blown into space that might have landed there), as under the evolutionary paradigm, the conditions aren't right and any place where they might have been, were incredibly brief.
Slashdot Mirror
"How are these things evidence that christianity is true?"
They aren't... they are evidence atheism is false, or at minimum for some of them, left wanting.
For evidence that Christianity is true, I'd point you to the resurrection of Christ and the testimony of the witnesses.
"How so?"
Explain consciousness from the atheistic worldview... or how reason, logic, and information come from matter. (and those are just a start)
Yea, it certainly is a matter of definition... nearly everything is.
Well, you could have an something, an event... that maybe you really don't like (others might), but it wouldn't be evil. It might be beneficial or detrimental, but not evil. (Earthquakes, tsunamis, etc. aren't evil, btw.)
You need objective morality to have either good or evil.
For example, explain, on the atheistic worldview, what is 'evil' with burning a witch.
re: #1 - OK, for example, explain consciousness within the atheistic worldview.
re: #2 - Note that I did qualify what I said in that way. You might find that none match and be theistic, but have to invent or modify an existing religion.
re: #3 - what don't you find plausible about Christianity?
re: my site... very fair point, I'm just getting started there really. Check my 'Resources' page, as I doubt you'll find anything major not addressed in one of those. I'm glad you are thinking about this stuff though. Many here obviously are not.
"the first step would have to be for you to admit that you might be worshiping the incorrect god and to be open to switching gods should evidence cast doubt on your current position; since that's incompatible with the very concept of "faith""
Maybe you don't realize this, but many religious folks have done, and do exactly that! You also don't have a very good definition of faith.
Here are a couple articles I've written on the topic:
http://www.tilledsoil.org/category/topics/faith-topics/
"True religion is free of dogma and superstition and embraces all truth."
I'm not sure if you are aware of this... but when you take a bunch of beliefs and filter out the false ones, keeping the truth: a) you are going to have to eliminate some of them, and b) what you are left with is dogma.
"whether or not they are true is completely secondary"
Hmm... so Christ didn't care about truth? It doesn't matter if things are true or not? Didn't you just say Christ wants us to embrace all truth?
Nice post of post-modern mumbo-jumbo though. Unfortunately, what is true for you doesn't happen to be true for the rest of us. ;)
So....
premise 1: "66% of the planet doesn't think it's the truth." (anyone notice the fallacy here?)
premise 2: "If a book doesn't contain truth then it contains something somebody made up, and we call that "fiction"." (quite true)
conclusion: "So according to most of the planet, the bible is fiction." (So?)
So, the first premise if fallacious, the second is good, but the conclusion doesn't follow nor is it relevant to the claims.
(Note: I'm not a logician, so I might have not set that out properly... but this was just too obviously wacked out.)
"It doesn't matter if they reported something or not"
Sure it does, that's how we know history. What I'm saying is that WE KNOW Egypt WOULD NOT have reported such a thing if their behavior is consistent at all. So, we wouldn't EXPECT this to have been reported... so that it isn't is no surprise (and lends no weight to your claim).
"anything like what's depicted in the bible would have been absolutely devastating to Egypt and left ample evidence."
- First, from my understanding, this was one city/region in Egypt, not all of Egypt. Second, I'm not sure how it would have left ample evidence. That was a long time ago.
"Speaking of Exodus, there's no evidence of 600000 people packing up and leaving Egypt either. That would also have left traces."
- Not true. First, you should know that even among Biblical scholars, the numbers (population size) are disputed, BASED on the text (not just liberal skepticism). Second, you might want to do a bit more research before making such a sweeping claim:
http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBWWO8dCeY0
I could give you lots more... but that's a start.
Ad Hominem won't work on me... I'm too old for that. ;)
Yes, someday you and I will both die. The question is what happens after that. I don't think the evidence is stacked in your favor there.
I'm not scared at all (well, some forms of dying sound a bit scary, but of being dead, no).
Best of luck to you as well. I just hate to see people left in their ignorance.
OK, consciousness, free choice, reason, logic, information. We'll start there.
You just have to spend a bit of actual time looking.
One way of approaching it is to recognize that the atheistic worldview utterly fails... which pushes one into the theist camp. Then you start ruling out religions. Pretty soon, you're left with Christianity and a couple others to actually consider. Then, you start matching up all the claims with reality and see which is a best fit. Then, you have to decide whether that religion is correct, or none and keep searching.
Check out my work at TilledSoil dot org or some of the resources I list. The truth is out there... ;)
Umm... that person was making the claim....
I have plenty of evidence on which to believe Christianity to be true.... and conversely, plenty of evidence to believe other worldviews are false.
Your awesome commen.... priceless! :)
Actually, Slashdot has lots of great stuff... which is why I read it. It just seems to collect a super high concentration of overly ignorant atheists.
Maybe that's why Christianity doesn't teach that.
True, though I'm not sure what you seem to be asserting follows.
I am failing to follow your argument there. What does the % of population believing something have to do with it being fact or fiction?
Re: events that didn't happen... how do you know that? Can you name one?
- flood... many Christians don't see the flood as global.
- plagues of Egypt (Note: a claim isn't an argument.): but to address your assertion, Hebrew people were there... Hebrew people left... Egypt didn't report defeats.
They aren't suppressing anything.... just not selling it.
Nope, don't believe anything like that.
What would be modern about holding religion in contempt?
Heh, yea, I don't see racy there.... stupid, yes, racy, no.
And atheists complain about Fundamentalists.... sheesh!
Direct interpretation? Do I need to do a scholarly review on this as a Bible translation? :)
Haven't seen the book, but given that it was authored by an atheist, is it possibly taking a jab at the Bible, rather than being a 'bible told through Legos'? If so, maybe after some complaints, someone looked at it more closely and decided they didn't want to sell that kind of product.
It may or may not be a good business decision, but isn't censorship.
Modern man holds religion in contempt? Seriously? You need to get out more.
I agree that there is a good bit of explicit material in the Bible, depending on how you define that. Funny link (so long as you've not actually studied the Bible... work of fiction?!?!?), though not sure what that has to do with the article.
Umm, no matter what happened (I'm not familiar with the book), a store deciding they don't want to sell a product isn't censorship.
Isn't Europa tidally locked?
I'm just not sure what the point of that would be. Terraforming makes nice sci-fi, but isn't sustainable without incredible amounts of resources (let alone getting it started). If we want a 'launch-pad' outside of Earth's gravity, the moon would make a much better place. If we're just looking for evidence to put towards the origins of life debate, the moon is going to give us much more evidence of early earth-life. There isn't likely to be any life on Mars (other than earth-life remnants blown into space that might have landed there), as under the evolutionary paradigm, the conditions aren't right and any place where they might have been, were incredibly brief.