Facebook Preachers
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-12-2011, 08:36 AM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 08:24 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  I appreciate what you're trying to get across, I'm just not buying it.

There is no standard of evidence for a statement like this. Studies that attempt to show "average" believers are more charitable than "average" atheists are apologetic in nature and can be twisted in a variety of different ways.

If you take the approach that 76% of the population is Christian and only 10% are a conglomeration of atheists/agnostics/pagans/wiccans (i.e., nontheists) then clearly the sum total of donations is much higher. The problem with the statement lies in the fact that a goodly number of nonbelievers are in the closet still. Additionally, absent tax returns which identify the charitable donations tied to a box checked Christian or atheist, etc., it is faulty math.

I'm not saying atheists give more than Christians - because I can't. I can say they donate more on Kiva - because the data is conclusive. I just think your statement was off - not necessarily wrong, just off...

The fact that they're probably apologetic in nature doesn't make them false. If another study came out showing the complete opposite, we would need to question how accurate the findings are, but to my knowledge this hasn't happened yet.

Yes of course, the sum total would obviously be much higher for religious people based off of population but if you look at the studies they weren't making conclusions based on the sum total of donations.

Of course, but like I said, I'm pretty sure Kiva has more atheist users so the sum total would be higher. Is there some way of checking whether or not the average atheist on that site donated more than the average Christian? That would be a more significant finding.

James 1:27
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world"

"Atheists express their rage against God although in their view He does not exist." C.S. Lewis
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 08:44 AM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 08:15 AM)Sharks9 Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 08:05 AM)free2011 Wrote:  Sharks9

1. "Theistic Evolution" - explain please
2. "He could've just stopped them from eating each other" - Do you know how much room two of every species would require? But maybe God made them super small so they could all fit. We can play who has the better imagination all day.
3. "Why would God be limited by what's medically possible?" - If a girl went on the national news and said she did not have sex rather God impregnated her. You wouldn't want some type of test as proof?
4. "Loving your enemies, helping the poor. Religious people have been shown to give more money and time and that's definitely a good thing." - I'm not claiming religious people don't do good things. They do as much good as non-religious. The difference is the religious do it to get a reward from God. Atheists do it to be kind to their fellow humans.
1. God created the Universe and set Evolution in motion
2. Maybe, I don't know. But you need to realise how dumb your objections sounds to people who believe in that story. God do anything so he wouldn't have a problem making Noah's Ark work.
3. For sure, but how could we test Mary now? It's an unreasonable objection to the story.
4. That's one motivation for sure, but there are tons of religious people who would donate even if they didn't believe in God. Their beliefs motivate them to give more money and time more frequently which is definitely a good thing.

1. Universe Creation - Modern scientists carefully calculated theories vs. a book written by bronze age sheep herders who thought the earth was flat. I'll take the former.
2. Precisely what I mean. Mathematically impossible to fit that many animals on the ark. Bioligically impossible for them to survive. Physically impossible for them to be taken care of. But you want to believe. Ever see how hard a 9-year-old will defend Santa Clauses existence. Dreaming over logic is a step backwards.
3. Exactly - The technology to test for such a thing was not available to people of that time period. But it is now. Again, believing the former is a step backward
4. I agree but a large percentage do give for the ultimate reward. NO atheist that gives expects a reward.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 08:53 AM
RE: Facebook Preachers
free2011, I believe this could be a good place for you. You seem to be very ignorant on theology and Christianity. The fact that you did not know what theistic evolution was says much about your understanding of what Christians believe. Also, there is an example in the Bible where God shut the mouths of lions to prevent them from eating. If you are going to argue theology, it is important that you at least have a theological framework to argue.

I suggest taking a look at some of the theistic threads on this forum.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 09:00 AM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 08:44 AM)free2011 Wrote:  1. Universe Creation - Modern scientists carefully calculated theories vs. a book written by bronze age sheep herders who thought the earth was flat. I'll take the former.
2. Precisely what I mean. Mathematically impossible to fit that many animals on the ark. Bioligically impossible for them to survive. Physically impossible for them to be taken care of. But you want to believe. Ever see how hard a 9-year-old will defend Santa Clauses existence. Dreaming over logic is a step backwards.
3. Exactly - The technology to test for such a thing was not available to people of that time period. But it is now. Again, believing the former is a step backward
4. I agree but a large percentage do give for the ultimate reward. NO atheist that gives expects a reward.

1. Go for it.
2. But you're assuming God can only do what's possible.
3. That doesn't disprove that it happened back then.
4. http://www.fundraising123.org/article/se...ple-donate

There are lots of reasons why people donate. To say religious people only donate because they want an ultimate reward or atheists only donate out of the goodness of their hearts is false. I'm sure it's usually a combination of reasons that move people to donate.

James 1:27
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world"

"Atheists express their rage against God although in their view He does not exist." C.S. Lewis
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 03:42 PM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 08:53 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  free2011, I believe this could be a good place for you. You seem to be very ignorant on theology and Christianity. The fact that you did not know what theistic evolution was says much about your understanding of what Christians believe. Also, there is an example in the Bible where God shut the mouths of lions to prevent them from eating. If you are going to argue theology, it is important that you at least have a theological framework to argue.

I suggest taking a look at some of the theistic threads on this forum.


I am perfectly comfortable admitting I did not know the term Theistic Evolution. Now I do therefore I have increased my knowledge. I would be foolish to ignore this new information and go back to my earlier less educated self. I was actually arguing logic vs superstition not theology, however. There are many passages that can support virtually anything you choose to believe. I don't believe the bible is anything other than a collection of stories written by superstitious people in an attempt to explain a world they did not understand so quote anything you like.

I am curious, though. Does a person that subscribes to Theistic Evolution discount all of the Old Testament or just Adam and Eve? This is a sincere question.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 03:52 PM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 03:42 PM)free2011 Wrote:  I am perfectly comfortable admitting I did not know the term Theistic Evolution. Now I do therefore I have increased my knowledge. I would be foolish to ignore this new information and go back to my earlier less educated self. I was actually arguing logic vs superstition not theology, however. There are many passages that can support virtually anything you choose to believe. I don't believe the bible is anything other than a collection of stories written by superstitious people in an attempt to explain a world they did not understand so quote anything you like.

I am curious, though. Does a person that subscribes to Theistic Evolution discount all of the Old Testament or just Adam and Eve? This is a sincere question.

Nope. I think it varies from person to person.

James 1:27
"Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world"

"Atheists express their rage against God although in their view He does not exist." C.S. Lewis
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 04:20 PM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 03:52 PM)Sharks9 Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 03:42 PM)free2011 Wrote:  I am perfectly comfortable admitting I did not know the term Theistic Evolution. Now I do therefore I have increased my knowledge. I would be foolish to ignore this new information and go back to my earlier less educated self. I was actually arguing logic vs superstition not theology, however. There are many passages that can support virtually anything you choose to believe. I don't believe the bible is anything other than a collection of stories written by superstitious people in an attempt to explain a world they did not understand so quote anything you like.

I am curious, though. Does a person that subscribes to Theistic Evolution discount all of the Old Testament or just Adam and Eve? This is a sincere question.

Nope. I think it varies from person to person.

I guess I'm not getting Theistic Evolution. If it means God started the ball rolling then evolution took over wouldn't that mean you can't believe in Adam and Eve?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 04:50 PM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 04:20 PM)free2011 Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 03:52 PM)Sharks9 Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 03:42 PM)free2011 Wrote:  I am perfectly comfortable admitting I did not know the term Theistic Evolution. Now I do therefore I have increased my knowledge. I would be foolish to ignore this new information and go back to my earlier less educated self. I was actually arguing logic vs superstition not theology, however. There are many passages that can support virtually anything you choose to believe. I don't believe the bible is anything other than a collection of stories written by superstitious people in an attempt to explain a world they did not understand so quote anything you like.

I am curious, though. Does a person that subscribes to Theistic Evolution discount all of the Old Testament or just Adam and Eve? This is a sincere question.

Nope. I think it varies from person to person.

I guess I'm not getting Theistic Evolution. If it means God started the ball rolling then evolution took over wouldn't that mean you can't believe in Adam and Eve?

Well, as for me, I believe in a literal Adam and Eve, but they were the first people that imprinted His image upon - not literally the first homo sapiens.

As I understand Genesis 1 and 2, it is ancient cosmology, and it is not supposed to be taken literally; however, there are literal aspects of it: the original homo sapiens that God placed His image upon thus granting them the knowledge of good and evil.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-12-2011, 05:08 PM
RE: Facebook Preachers
(24-12-2011 04:50 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 04:20 PM)free2011 Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 03:52 PM)Sharks9 Wrote:  
(24-12-2011 03:42 PM)free2011 Wrote:  I am perfectly comfortable admitting I did not know the term Theistic Evolution. Now I do therefore I have increased my knowledge. I would be foolish to ignore this new information and go back to my earlier less educated self. I was actually arguing logic vs superstition not theology, however. There are many passages that can support virtually anything you choose to believe. I don't believe the bible is anything other than a collection of stories written by superstitious people in an attempt to explain a world they did not understand so quote anything you like.

I am curious, though. Does a person that subscribes to Theistic Evolution discount all of the Old Testament or just Adam and Eve? This is a sincere question.

Nope. I think it varies from person to person.

I guess I'm not getting Theistic Evolution. If it means God started the ball rolling then evolution took over wouldn't that mean you can't believe in Adam and Eve?

Well, as for me, I believe in a literal Adam and Eve, but they were the first people that imprinted His image upon - not literally the first homo sapiens.

As I understand Genesis 1 and 2, it is ancient cosmology, and it is not supposed to be taken literally; however, there are literal aspects of it: the original homo sapiens that God placed His image upon thus granting them the knowledge of good and evil.

It's a nice thought to think, but since you're departing from the Holy Writ, how can you support such a conclusion as thinking God placed his image on some specific couple? (Maybe Lucy and her Hubby?) Doesn't evolution remove the idea that there could be only two "humans" in existence for the first time exclusively? So there would most likely be numerous other first "humans" around and propagating when Elohim pops in to put his maker's mark on Bonnie and Clyde. Therefore, without more support, I have to conclude that you've just conjured this idea up as a desperate attempt to still somehow believe there's truth to be read in Genesis.

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
24-12-2011, 06:00 PM
RE: Facebook Preachers
I don't want to sound like an angry atheist. I'm really not. I am more of a frustrated atheist. Frustrated for this very reason. When I read a book on the cosmos or evolution I can't pick and choose what to take literally and what to take figuratively. But theists seem to have this freedom. Adam and Eve is semi-literal. Noahs Ark is literal. The serpent is figurative. Can you see why it is frustrating for those of us trying to put logic to the test?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like free2011's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: