Hmm ... #27 there is kinda compelling, I must say ...

Yes it is. If I had fewer scruples I’d cash in on it. Damn my morality.

I never argue about the existence of God. If you’ve read the Bible you have been sent the message.  It’s an individual choice to respond to that message.  If the person has not read the message then he has nothing to debate. As we know, ignorant people debate things they know nothing of all the time.  It’s the American way.

Fair enough.

I’ve read the Bible front to back over 4 times now. I was a Christian prior to doing that and now I’m an Atheist. Does this mean I got the message?

I agree with you about ignorant people debating things they know nothing about. Just look at some of the comments I’ve gotten from people on Evolution, Cosmology and other theories that it’s clear they know little to nothing about.

To Dawn

What message should I get from the bible?

In Genesis when Lot’s daughters get him drunk and have sex with him, what message do you get from that?  If I read it correctly the girls had sons who became the “fathers” of tribes of people.  So the moral of that story is:  If you want to make sure your kid is successful, sleep with your father—your kid will rule a tribe?

What message do you get when a drunken Noah, who was considered a righteous man by God, curses his grandson because his son saw him naked?!?!?!

What message should I get in Leviticus where rules on dealing with slaves are chronicled?  I can’t help but laugh when I hear inane statements like, “God doesn’t condone slavery”.  The word condone means to overlook, forgive, or disregard (an offense) without protest or censure.  Show me one instance where slavery is cesured and I’ll retract my statement.  I am willing to bet that if God said, “You will not own slaves”, quite probably thousands of years of human misery could have been avoided.

What message do you get when the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John have differing versions of the same story?  Imagine if you came home and found a broken window in your house.  You ask your four kids how it happened and they all give you different accounts.  Would you just say, ‘Well, you are all correct”??

Most of you do not even follow “God’s” commandment of keeping the Sabbath holy!  You go to church on the first day of the week, not the last.  Jesus, who was a Jew, went to church on the last day of the week.  Where in the bible does it say you should go to church on the first day of the week?  I believe if you research it, you’ll find that Christians started going to church on Sunday because they wanted to make it very apparent they were not Jews!

That is another curious thing to me…that Christians want to distance themselves from Jews, because Jews killed Jesus.  Well if they hadn’t killed him, wouldn’t we all be in a world of hurt?  Man, I would be buying the Jews dinner for life if I was you!  Didn’t he come to die for our sins?  Why then did he ask, “Father why have you forsaken me?“  Apparently Jesus’ death was a revelation to him!

It appears to me that Christianity is based more on what some preachers (John, Mark, Matthew, Luke) say than what God says.  So, pardon me because I am nothing short of baffled and astounded by all the double talk in the bible.

After reading your exegesis on other peoples dialectic regarding the existence of God, I cannot help but wonder as to why you devote so much space to criticism instead of expressing some thoughts of your own? Could it be that you have none? In which case you are truly an ass speaking in a man’s voice!
Consider this: Nothing evolves from nothing! The intricacy of creation dictates that there is a creator. Even evolution requires logical progression which cannot exist without a presence. Could modal “T” Ford have evolve into present-day automobile without conscious thought? Just look at yourself, you are nothing but a machine with kidneys and liver as filters, a stomach for a fuel-tank, a heart for a pump,and a brain for a computer. Just think: A combustion enging requires air to function, and so do we! And all this, you infer, evolved from nothing without conscious planning? The only thing unique about a human being is his intellect! And just as a car, our body cannot function without conscious presence behind the wheel. To that end, we were given a unique gift called “Logic.“
Regardless by what name he is called, the Almighty Creator does exist, but stupid people tend to believe only what they can see, touch and smell. they are like fish swiming under the water, not understanding that there is another world above them.

The Model ‘T’ Ford did NOT evolve; it was built by men, not god. The Model ‘T’ could not have come into being through a chemical process, did not evolve from chained amino acids, and is not alive.

If stupid people only believe in what they can see, touch, taste, or smell then what level of moron do you have to be to believe in what you can’t see, touch, taste, or smell? Do you believe in the invisible chocolate cake I have right here on my desk? If not why not? You can neither prove nor disprove its existence, and did I mention that it is not only delicious but can multiply two 63 digit numbers in its head? Can you not see the truth of my sentient chocolate cake? Can you not see the sugary sweet world above you?

Why are you so threatened that there are people who don’t want to waste time believing in the unprovable bedtime stories of their youth? Just because you can not “create” a tree does not mean that there must be a god that did. Your inability to explain the unexplainable does not equate to intelligent design. If you ever find some proof, real proof, by all means show everyone until then keep your stupid opinions regarding the intelligence of others to yourself.

Geez Eric, remind me to stay on your good side!

Alex, I don’t believe the respondents on this page speak with one voice.  It is simply a discussion forum and there are various opinions presented here.  I for one do not only believe what I can see, touch, or feel.

I believe in electricity; I’ve never seen it, though I have felt it   People infinitely smarter than me described how they believe it works.  They design things as varied as washing machines to the telecommunications systems we are now communicating on,  based on the Theory of Electron Flow.  Because it appears to me to that most electrical appliances act consistently, I tend to believe the basic theory, though I could never prove it.

I believe that the sun is approximately 92 million miles away from Earth, though I have never personally measured it.  I believe in pain killing drugs, though most of them relieve pain through “an unknown mechanism”.  That last one is interesting—even the people who discovered and developed these drugs do not know why they work.  Come to think of it, the things I don’t know can (and do) fill the shelves of thousands of libraries.

In my last post, I addressed specific questions about the Christian bible that cause me dissonance and confusion.  If you can explain why the Gospels describe different accounts of the same occurrence, I would appreciate that.  I don’t see how I can be expected to blindly believe several versions of the same story.  For instance:

1.  George Washington was the 1st President of the US
2.  George Washington was the 27th President of the US
3.  George Washington was never the President of the US
4.  George Washington’s horse was the first President of the US

With the options I gave, I believe only one or none of the accounts can be true.  I don’t see how all the statements can be true.

“After reading your exegesis on other peoples dialectic regarding the existence of God, I cannot help but wonder as to why you devote so much space to criticism instead of expressing some thoughts of your own?“

Were you addressing me with that rather haughty introductory statement?  I have no idea if there is a God.  There very well may be.  I asked some specific questions and got no reply to those questions.  In none of my questions did I ask anyone to prove the existence of God.  What a ridiculous exercise that would be.

I personally do not believe life on Earth evolved from single-celled organisms to its current state.  I believe that explanation requires entirely too much conjecture.  I can’t conceive of inorganic material spontaneously forming into organic material.  I can’t fathom how single-celled organisms could then decide to reproduce and form into complex organelles and organs.  And the biggest leap for me is that the multi-celled organisms spontaneously decided that one would be male and one would be female and they would knock off that inefficient asexual reproduction.  I don’t believe it, but that doesn’t make me right just as it doesn’t make the Christian explanation of creation right.

So, Mild Bill, where do you think complex life forms came from? Just curious since you stated what you don’t believe in and not what you do believe in.

After reading your exegesis on other peoples dialectic regarding the existence of God, I cannot help but wonder as to why you devote so much space to criticism instead of expressing some thoughts of your own? Could it be that you have none? In which case you are truly an ass speaking in a man’s voice!

Oh my! Looks like someone has a shiny new thesaurus. Makes for a refreshing change from the barely literate responses I often get around here. You don’t mention whom you’re addressing your missive to, but if it’s me then how could you claim that I am not expressing thoughts of my own? Unless you’ve not bothered to read any of the rest of my website in which I have expressed my opinions on numerous topics both serious and silly.

Consider this: Nothing evolves from nothing! The intricacy of creation dictates that there is a creator.

Oh no! And he started off so well too. What with all them big words and all. Yet he succumbs to the same tired arguments that we’ve been over and over so many times before here at SEB.

Even evolution requires logical progression which cannot exist without a presence. Could modal “T” Ford have evolve into present-day automobile without conscious thought? Just look at yourself, you are nothing but a machine with kidneys and liver as filters, a stomach for a fuel-tank, a heart for a pump,and a brain for a computer. Just think: A combustion enging requires air to function, and so do we! And all this, you infer, evolved from nothing without conscious planning? The only thing unique about a human being is his intellect! And just as a car, our body cannot function without conscious presence behind the wheel. To that end, we were given a unique gift called “Logic.“

So, how many intelligent conversations have you had with your Model T lately? Have you managed to breed your Model T with a Model A yet? What? You say cars can’t procreate? Well, why not? According to you there’s no difference between a car and a human being. Comparing apples to engines is a poor way to win an argument.

Yes, as humans we have a unique ability to utilize logic. However, logic can be faulty as can be seen in your car and animal comparison. You’re essentially just rehashing the same old Argument from Design, sometimes known as the Blind Watchmaker Argument, which suffers from three primary faults:

• Firstly, a watchmaker creates watches from pre-existing materials, whereas God is claimed to have created the universe from nothing. These two sorts of creation are clearly fundamentally different, and the analogy is therefore rather weak.
• Secondly, a watchmaker makes watches, but there are many other things in the world. If we walked further along the beach and found a nuclear reactor, we wouldn’t assume it was created by the watchmaker. The argument would therefore suggest a multitude of creators, each responsible for a different part of creation (or a different universe, if you allow the possibility that there might be more than one).
• Finally, in the first part of the watchmaker argument we conclude that the watch is not part of nature because it is ordered, and therefore stands out from the randomness of nature. Yet in the second part of the argument, we start from the position that the universe is obviously not random, but shows elements of order. The Watchmaker argument is thus internally inconsistent. -The Atheism Web: Common Arguments

Regardless by what name he is called, the Almighty Creator does exist, but stupid people tend to believe only what they can see, touch and smell. they are like fish swiming under the water, not understanding that there is another world above them.

No, stupid people put forth simplistic analogies and that don’t hold up to scrutiny and then claim them as superior logic.

Mild Bill,

Yes I guess I was exceptionally harsh in my response to Alex, I usually cringe when I see the same sort of response from others and usually wish to say something to soften the blow for the intended recipient. However I am usually thick skinned when it comes to criticism and attacks from those who do not agree with me, today I suddenly had enough of being referred to as stupid (yes I do believe in things I can see, touch, taste, and smell) and the main argument is basically ‘regardless of what you say, god does exist and you lack the facility to be enlightened like me’.

I have been called far worse than stupid (I usually refer to myself as a fucking idiot when I pull some bone-headed stunt) but in swaggers Alex, so full of his smug superiority and deficient in his cogent arguments saying that people who believe in what, in effect, is real are stupid because they take the easy road. The enlightened individual transcends reality and believes in what is not.

The belief in the invisible is entirely his right, but to slander others when spouting his arrogant self-righteous pabulum got to me today.

I apologize if I stepped over the line.

Eric, the guy did come off a bit condescendingly (I also have a thesaurus with a spell checker)

What do I believe ? (thanks Brock!) .  The answer is simple—I don’t know.  Let me step through this to illustrate my confusion:

1.  Billions of years ago, inorganic material formed into the first rudimentary cell

2.  This singled-celled organism then built complex organelles; mitochondria, Golgi Bodies, endoplastic reticulum, etc.

3.  This single-celled organism then figured out how to sustain itself through protein synthesis

4.  This single-celled organism then figured out replicate itself through mitosis

5.  Single-celled organism decided to construct themselves into even more complex structures.

—skipping forward a bit—

6.  Multi-celled organisms become animals

7.  Animals decide it would be more productive and efficient to use meiosis (sexual reproduction) to reproduce

8.  Not only did all these things occur, they had to occur in such a way as to create reproductively successful males and females—millions of times for each species.

I’m basically talking about eukaryotic mammal cells here.  I understand some animals still reproduce asexually and some animals use chemosynthesis,  but hopefully you get the gist of it.  I didn’t even talk about enzymes, without which life could not exist.  I understand there have been experiments where inorganic material was formed into what appeared to be a rudimentary cell structure.  That is still quite a stretch from a simple cell to me!

It annoys me when Christians say things like, “The truth is in the Bible, you just don’t want to see it”.  Hell, I would love it if they were right!  I use to go to church with my wife, just to listen to a different perspective.  Most of what I heard was conjecture passed off as fact.  I had no idea how pessimistic Christians were until I went to church with her.  It seems they have to believe we are all terribly wicked and are getting worse.  They concoct statistics showing how bad our society has become, statistics that have no basis in fact.

The final straw for me was when the preacher stated that 9-11 was punishment from God for our wickedness!  I just can’t deal with that kind of ignorance.  If they want to believe the past was some merry little place with no strife, more power to them.  Anyone who makes such ridiculous statements clearly does not comprehend history.

Some pretty shitty things went on in this country in the past.  Two of the worst were slavery of Africans and the slaughter of American Indians.  The treatment of slaves and antebellum treatment of “freed slaves” has to go down as one of the greatest crimes in human history!  Even Dubya said so last month during his Africa visit.  Who were the main supporters of that institution—the mainstream Christian churches!

Do they recognize and accept their complicity???  Hell no, they blame Darwin!  They blame gays. They blame everyone but themselves.  Man I love asking Southern Baptists this question:

“If slavery is a sin and crime in the eyes of God, do you think your ancestors are going to roast in Hell for it?“

I have never gotten a coherent response—I’m usually derided for dwelling on such unpleasantness instead of listening to the “true message” of the bible.  I listen to them talk about their ability to “spiritually discern” God’s will and am amazed.  I guess their ancestors lacked the ability to discern God’s will and it’s a relatively new innovation.

I just can’t believe that a series of books written by I don’t know who and I don’t know when, contain the truth.  There are just two many contradictions.  One of the most baffling to me is when Jesus supposedly told a group of people that some of them standing before him would live to see his second coming.  The apostles and people during the first century taught that Christ’s return was imminent.  From what I’ve read, that did not happen.

So that’s what I don’t believe—what do I believe???  Beats the hell out of me.

Eric, don’t be so hard on yourself. In my mind you didn’t give Alex a hard enough time. He made a ridiculous analogy and vented his anger at people daring to go against his belief system. I doubt he thought twice about how he might be making others feel. He is just one more of the type that cling desperately to fairy tales while illustrating how hate-filled they really are. Why is it that I keep meeting nicer people that don’t have “God in their life” than people who supposedly do?

Good answers Mild Bill and don’t feel too bad. I have a theory of my own on the origin of life but cannot prove it even to myself. Guess that means I can’t legally post her anymore.
Consider though that life has had millions and millions of years to get it right and history is littered with failed attempts. If you look at it that way one might wonder why it’s taking so long to make a decent human being.

Brock

You sound as pessimistic as them thar Christian folk   I try to be optimistic.  I tend to see the mistakes humans make as normal, not as exceptions.  When you think like that (and expect people to act like idiots) it’s just that much more pleasant when you see someone do something decent.

So succinctly, what do you believe?  Please try not to be as long-winded( and grammatically incorrect) as I was in explaining my “beliefs”!

Brock - Of course you can still legally post here. You stated that you have your own thoughts on the origins of life, but you’re not claiming that your thoughts are indisputable facts.

I don’t have a problem with people having different ideas or beliefs that contradict what current science says is true as long as people aren’t trying to claim those ideas as anything more than ideas. Tell me it’s your personal pet theory and I’ll enjoy listening and discussing it with you. Tell me you know for a fact that we’re the result of an alien experiment and I’ll ask you to back that claim up with something in the way of proof. I’m not against new ideas, I’m against wild claims presented as fact without anything to back them up. Thought I should clairify that for folks as I know I can seem a little hard-nosed about this at times.

MB - I share your viewpoint on human nature. I expect people to make mistakes. Hell, I reserve it as a personal right as a human being. Making mistakes isn’t so much the problem, it’s what you do after making the mistake that counts.

I tend to be cynical in my surface thoughts, but deep down I’m actually relatively optimistic which is why it pains me so much when I see signs that my cynicism seems more accurate than my optimism. I say that I think the average American is an idiot, but deep down I like to

believe

most people have at least as much common sense as I do.

OK, I’ve rambled enough for now.

Mild Bill,
if you compare me to a christian once more in any way shape or form I’m going to start pointing out how some of your remarks could compare to how christians think. You apparently missed the meaning of my remark (that’s not rare for you) when I said one might wonder why it’s taking so long to make a decent human being. I suggested that life has had many millions of years to evolve from inert substances to single celled organisms to the complicated life forms we represent and that it surely did not accomplish all this without some mistakes and retries being present along the way. I wasn’t being negative in any way, merely joking that if you find it hard to believe that life evolved from inorganic materials it could be pointed out that in all that time life still has some imperfections to iron out. Nowhere did I state that I expect people to act like idiots. Nor do I think we are finished becoming better sentient beings. Your whole first paragraph was both optimistic and pessimistic in it’s meaning. That’s double speak; something you seem to be quite good at sometimes. And you asked “what do I believe”. What do I believe regarding what?

Les,
you mentioned in another post that you vote Mild Bill as your current favorite new commenter because things have picked up conversation-wise since he started showing up. Don’t insult the rest of us. Speaking for myself, I would have posted just as much if it had been someone else I was responding to. There is no shortage of controversial viewpoints being offered at this site.

And I was joking when I said I guess I can’t legally post here anymore (because I don’t have definite answers.) I come to this site because it engenders (sometimes) deeper thought. Do I think science explains everything? No, and neither do you. The major difference, it seems, between you and I is that you think our consciousnesses cease to exist once we die. I don’t. Yet I’ve made it clear in several posts at this site that I don’t believe a God has control over my after-state.

Muhahaahahahahahaha!

**scribbling furiously in a notebook** ...would still post a lot… ...was joking… ...only difference… OK, got it. Thanks Brock for straightening my ass out.

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to sit on a crooked ass?

Damn Les, you’re getting as bad as Mild Bill at reading my post and then trying to twist it.

*Suggested edits to Les’ notes on Brock’s post.*

Brock: “I would have posted just as much…“
      -not-
Les:  “would still post a lot”
Solution: If I’m posting too much, just tell me.

Brock: The major difference, it seems…“
      -not-
Les:  “only difference”
If you keep this up you’ll be able to open a bottle of wine with that ass of yours (assuming you can’t at this point.) Heh heh!

Hey now, don’t be dissin’ my anal talents! They have gotten me out of more than one tight… er… squeeze…

:doh:

Brock

This ->   is a smiley face.  It is generally used to denote humor in written communications.  Humor is defined as:

That which is intended to induce laughter or amusement

I used it after I made the humorous comparison between you and those “C” people.  It was what is sometimes called a joke.  You know, we keep having these crazy misunderstandings.  Why don’t you just send me your current mensurated GPS coordinates and I’ll have one of my former co-workers fly by your house and “drop” you a 2,000 lb “package”.  Now see,that was humor too!
See there’s the smiley face again, denoting humor (which was previously defined above).  I don’t even have access to a jet fighter, let alone a 2,000 lb bomb…that’s the funny part!

In the words of a great American philosopher:

Lighten up Francis!

Warren Oates, Stripes, 1981, Directed by Ivan Reitman, Available now at Amazon.com and retail outlets everywhere

Sorry Mild Bill but I don’t worship your smiley face gods or even recognize them as such. Humor is in the eye of the beholder so don’t try to convert me with your religious icons. Besides, I already have a black friend.
PS Is this what you mean by humor? Muhaahahahahaha!

Brock

We have a lot of work to do in the humor department!  Let us know dissect your last message:

Sorry Mild Bill but I don’t worship your smiley face gods or even recognize them as such.

When did I say they were gods?  They’re not even mine they’re Les’.  Are you denigrating Les’ smiley faces?  Do you have no shame?  If I was Les, I’d drive over to the bowling alley you work at and kick your butt!

Humor is in the eye of the beholder so don’t try to convert me with your religious icons.

From my previous definition of humor, that’s not so:

That which is intended to induce laughter or amusement

So if the sender of a humorous statement intends it to be humorous, it is humor.  Are you following me?  I’ll type slower.

Besides, I already have a black friend.

Oh no you d-eeennt*, Oh no you d-eeennt.  I know you d-eeennt play the race card!  And besides, do you really expect us to believe you have a “friend”?.  See, that’s humor…it’s called misdirection.

You can see examples of humor in many places.  Watching reruns of SNL, preferably ones with Will Farrell, Cheri Oteri, and Daryl Hammond, are an excellent starting place.

WARNING:  DO NOT WATCH CURRENT EPISODES OF SNL AND EXPECT HUMOR…NONE WILL BE FOUND THERE.

PS Is this what you mean by humor? Muhaahahahahaha!

You’re getting it!  We’ll make a comic out of you yet!

*For the comically challenged (and those who live in Michigan) the word “d-eeennt” is a colloquial, onomatopoeitic representation of the word “didn’t” as pronounced by the indigenous peoples of the South Bronx.  The author of this message can not verify the proper spelling of this word and will not be held responible for it.

I believe in the concept of Christianity.  Not what it has been made out to be today.  I also believe that it has been polluted by the church during King Jame’s reign.  Seeing as how the church then was the same as the church now, after power and money.  I also belive that a lot of what happend before creation in the Bible was left out.  I’m not an atheist, but I’m not a so-called “Christian” either.  I was just raised Christian and I’ve adapted some of the beliefs.
These are only my theory’s and I’m not making and factual statements.