Bible bashing
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-12-2011, 11:49 AM
RE: Bible bashing
(08-12-2011 11:42 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-12-2011 11:31 AM)free2011 Wrote:  If you reject the creation theory of the OT because of the evidence for the Big Bang and evolution then you must reject the entire book. And rejecting the OT makes the NT and Jesus invalid.

Right ?

That is logical, Captain.

Absolutely, but I also find that believers I've discussed this with seem to short-circuit their logic circuits somewhere toward the end of the syllogism.

So, theoretically, if you get a believer to agree that "the OT is bullshit" you should have a solid argument against the entire Son of God idea. Right?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2011, 11:57 AM (This post was last modified: 08-12-2011 12:00 PM by Chas.)
RE: Bible bashing
(08-12-2011 11:49 AM)free2011 Wrote:  
(08-12-2011 11:42 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-12-2011 11:31 AM)free2011 Wrote:  If you reject the creation theory of the OT because of the evidence for the Big Bang and evolution then you must reject the entire book. And rejecting the OT makes the NT and Jesus invalid.

Right ?

That is logical, Captain.

Absolutely, but I also find that believers I've discussed this with seem to short-circuit their logic circuits somewhere toward the end of the syllogism.

So, theoretically, if you get a believer to agree that "the OT is bullshit" you should have a solid argument against the entire Son of God idea. Right?

Absolutely right. Except for that logic circuit shorting out thing. That and the rationalization circuits fire up, and suddenly this or that is a metaphor, then you point out that if some of it is metaphor, how do you tell the difference between fact and story, then you have to pray to God for guidance, or get the priest to tell you, and, and, and, ...

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2011, 12:11 PM
RE: Bible bashing
As long as I can use the evidence achieved through modern scientific analysis to argue against both the OT and NT I think I'll stick with that. At least it may get some of the more logical people to reflect on their beliefs . . . which is a start. I may even throw in a "This is crazy shit" once in awhile.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes free2011's post
08-12-2011, 12:19 PM
RE: Bible bashing
(08-12-2011 12:11 PM)free2011 Wrote:  As long as I can use the evidence achieved through modern scientific analysis to argue against both the OT and NT I think I'll stick with that. At least it may get some of the more logical people to reflect on their beliefs . . . which is a start. I may even throw in a "This is crazy shit" once in awhile.

Oh, absoluetly. We can't stop doing that. I'm just saying that it can get tiring to get to the conclusion of the argument and watch the rational circuits in the believers brain switch off or melt.

I guess maybe that was an unstated part of my rant - I just get really fucking tired of fighting the irrational. But we can't stop trying.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
08-12-2011, 04:44 PM
RE: Bible bashing
Isn't YHWH associated with El who was once known as Y? Doesn't that leave a trinity of HWH? Big Grin

If you want to be technical about it, without divine illumination, all of these works are senseless. With divine illumination, you get peeps like me, who worships Gwyneth Paltrow and supports the Temple of Set... I think you're stuck with the senselessness, Chas. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-12-2011, 04:48 PM (This post was last modified: 08-12-2011 05:06 PM by Chas.)
RE: Bible bashing
(08-12-2011 04:44 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Isn't YHWH associated with El who was once known as Y? Doesn't that leave a trinity of HWH? Big Grin

If you want to be technical about it, without divine illumination, all of these works are senseless. With divine illumination, you get peeps like me, who worships Gwyneth Paltrow and supports the Temple of Set... I think you're stuck with the senselessness, Chas. Wink

Well, Cantor is one of my gods of mathematics, so I might have to get on you for your apparent blasphemy.Angry

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
08-12-2011, 05:01 PM
RE: Bible bashing
(08-12-2011 04:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  Well, Cantor is one of my gods of mathematics, so I might have to got on you for your apparent blasphemy.Angry
Key word: apparent. I ain't bringing any of my ridiculousness to the field of mathematics without proof. Wink

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes houseofcantor's post
08-12-2011, 05:20 PM
RE: Bible bashing
It's true, the holy books are easy targets. But sometimes it just feels good to kick a dead horse (especially while surrounded by people who still "see it breathing")

Besides, where else does all this knowledge come in useful?

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Starcrash's post
13-12-2011, 11:01 AM
RE: Bible bashing
Chas, 1 month and 2 days into my experience on this forum, I find that I must recant my earlier comments on this thread.
I now lend my voice to your rant.

You're right about the short-circuit in logic that occurs in the True Believer that turns to rationalization. No matter how much bashing occurs, that's not what is going to turn a True Believer to the Dark Side.

I don't have examples before I've had my morning coffee, but much of the bashing would not affect a True Believer because the Atheist's critique of the Bible only addresses surface issues that the True Believer doesn't believe in any way. Oh, I do have a case in point (Only took half a cup): Ridiculing God for resting on the 7th Day. Oh, poor God got all tired and sleepy from creating the universe. This is a ridiculous critique in the eyes of a True Believer. No one believes God took a nap. His rest meant that he was done. And threads pointing out what ISN'T in the Bible is also seen as quaint to the True Believer. Fundies and Evangelicals read their Bibles (at least the ones I was around). They know the saying, "God helps those who helps themselves" is not in the Bible. They know angels don't look like Renaissance paintings. Anyway, if I can recant my relationship with Jesus after 40ish years, I can certainly recant my comments that I disagreed with your rant about Bible Bashing. Smile

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
13-12-2011, 11:11 AM
RE: Bible bashing
(13-12-2011 11:01 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  Chas, 1 month and 2 days into my experience on this forum, I find that I must recant my earlier comments on this thread.
I now lend my voice to your rant.

You're right about the short-circuit in logic that occurs in the True Believer that turns to rationalization. No matter how much bashing occurs, that's not what is going to turn a True Believer to the Dark Side.

I don't have examples before I've had my morning coffee, but much of the bashing would not affect a True Believer because the Atheist's critique of the Bible only addresses surface issues that the True Believer doesn't believe in any way. Oh, I do have a case in point (Only took half a cup): Ridiculing God for resting on the 7th Day. Oh, poor God got all tired and sleepy from creating the universe. This is a ridiculous critique in the eyes of a True Believer. No one believes God took a nap. His rest meant that he was done. And threads pointing out what ISN'T in the Bible is also seen as quaint to the True Believer. Fundies and Evangelicals read their Bibles (at least the ones I was around). They know the saying, "God helps those who helps themselves" is not in the Bible. They know angels don't look like Renaissance paintings. Anyway, if I can recant my relationship with Jesus after 40ish years, I can certainly recant my comments that I disagreed with your rant about Bible Bashing. Smile
Thanks. It's something I've repeatedly witnessed conversing with believers.

And we're not the Dark Side, though that is always amusing. We are the side with the light of curiosity and rationality, not the darkness of willful ignorance.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: