Is Christianity nonsense?

Post Reply New Topic

Not sure if you have checked you bible recently but:

Mark 3:29 "Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." Jesus will forgive you for just about anything, but he won't forgive you for denying the existence of the Holy Spirit. Ever. You don't get an old testament cop out clause on this one either.

I don't believe Jesus said anything about "pitying" sinners. For example:



Rather than engage with people you scorn them and mock them about their descent to hell. Like I said in an earlier post by the majority of Christians alive today impenitence is considered to fall under the category of unforgivable or mortal sin depending on who you ask. Regardless of whether you personally believe that you are being an awful hypocrite and in no way Christian by mocking people and "pitying" them and you are manifestly committing that sin. I never fail to be amazed at how un-Christian many Christians can be. Most atheists I know live lives more similar to Jesus' than the Christians I have met.

I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints; the sinners are much more fun.

And the most interesting people dwell in hell and not in heaven.

Heaven is a place for crashing bores and crushing boredom.

ruveyn

Wouldn't you like to sit on a cloud playing a harp?

Heaven for the climate, Hell for the people.

I have stolen that picture, that has always been my personal image of hell as is

I don't know many details about the crusades/inquisition (though news articles I've comes across say the tens of thousands of deaths are largely an urban myth, the actual number being more like 100, over the course of centuries) so can't really argue about them, but I know what the world is like at present.
If religion disappeared overnight, do you think that tomorrow all those ex-muslims would say, "Oh, now I'm no longer a Muslim, suddenly I'm quite happy living in squalor while people in the west live in nice houses with plenty of luxuries, thanks in no small part to the oil they get from us!" No, they'd still hate us, and some would still fight us. Without religion as an excuse, race would be an excuse, or something else. The point is that while religion is a handy excuse, it isn't the cause - the cause is the fact that they're so poor and they know we're so affluent and they're somewhat justifiably unhappy about that.


Actually I didn't have viruses in mind when I made the side-point that not all life actually shares the same DNA code, I was referring to the fact that some life uses different sets of DNA-pairs to encode certain proteins. I'll include a link about it since you say you like to find holes in your knowledge. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/03/ve ... 44681.html
But again, this wasn't the main point, just an interesting aside (which is why it was in brackets). The main point is that, even if it were correct, it's a logical fallacy to use this as proof of evolution.



Only your interpretation of the data is horribly mangled. I'll demonstrate why below.


Are you sure about this? My understanding is that the opposite should be true. After all, the base sequences that are important to the function should be conserved and therefore give no useful information (after all, they should all be pretty much the same - there's no information to gain from that). Rather, assuming evolution were true and that humans and chimps had a common ancestor, it should be the base sequences that aren't important that mutate at a predictable rate since humans and chimps diverged, and therefore by measuring the differences between human and chimp we should be able to tell how many of those mutations have occured since our divergence and therefore how long ago it was.


My data said we were 11.5% different. They've said the difference is 0.15 or 15% - even greater. I'm still puzzled as to why our figures are different though, but their paper doesn't seem very specific about that - maybe it just depends on what individual human or chimp the sequences come from.
And their scatter diagram says that some creatures considered to be the same genus actually have >80% difference, which seems bizarre. Unfortunately they don't explain much about how they get the numbers, only about how they correlate to body mass.


Some of it is a matter of trust. Having found evidence of God and what he wants us to do, we must trust that what he asks us to do is best for us.


Yes, having faith is important in our religion. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prove things - just the opposite.
"Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld." - Hebrews 11:1
We could say we have faith in atoms. They are a reality ... not beheld. We find evident demonstration of their reality, therefore having faith that they exist.
Faith has everything to say about science - they are intimately connected. They are both about using evidence to discern indirectly what can't be determined directly. The only difference between the two (the reason you could say believing in atoms isn't faith) is that to be called faith, it's implicitly in something you're glad about - 'things hoped for'. But unless you have 'assured expectation' - unless you have evidence - it still wouldn't be faith.


While it certainly is simplified for human minds to understand (as is everything humans say as well - e.g. we almost always speak of space and time as separate even though we know they're not, and so does God), there's no reason to presume such a simplification.
As said before, what's usually presented as evidence of evolution is our similarity to other animals. But is similarity evidence of evolution. Look at the similarity of cars - is it evidence of evolution? Of course not. You know there's a better explanation for that similarity - there were made that way. Why does that suddenly seem to you like a better explanation? Simple - because you know creators exist, and that's always a better explanation. Only if you thought creators were impossible would you then start looking for other explanations. So suppose you believed a God existed. Would you anymore have any reason at all to believe in evolution? We've already established that similarity - at any level - doesn't prove that; similarity can easily happen when things are created! And it's a simpler explanation to boot! So why wouldn't you just go with Ockham's Razor, and assume that God created them?
Indeed, the only reason to assume evolution is if you assume God doesn't exist, as some evolutionists admit.



But as argued above, the so-called 'avalanche of evidence' is based on circular reasoning - it only exists for as long as you assume that evolution is true. If you let go of that assumption, and let yourself see that the data on which this 'avalanche of evidence' rests is usually easily susceptible of an alternative explanation (i.e. creators almost-always create sets of similar things - just look at some of the created things in the room you're in and you'll see this is true - and create more complicated things as time goes on), the avalanche becomes more of a couple of snowballs.

What's far more difficult is for evolution to explain how such a number of beneficial genes can arise in the time they supposedly do - for example, how the 1400 genes we have that, according to Jerry Coyne, have no analogue in chimps, could have come about over the few million years separating us. That's such a small population size and such a long generation time that if so many new genes could easily appear during that time in nature, then it should be really easy to do it with the bigger generation sizes and much shorter generation times and enhanced selection pressures found in lab bacteria experiments. But that's not what we observe.

And since any atheistic view has to also explain the origin of life itself, with it's DNA-protein system etc., which is as much a task (probably more of one) as explaining how life came to exist in more complex forms, I think atheism is the view that is 'fighting an avalanche of evidence'.
http://www.jw.org/apps/index.html?filef ... tCMSLang=E

Religion on balance has been a bad deal for mankind. What has religion brought to us? Division, strife, hatred, war and tyranny.

ruveyn

Doctor: I'm going out shortly so I don't have time to reply at the moment but I will take pleasure in addressing your points of contention when I get home later on tonight.

This statement proves that you actually do not understand the scientific method in the slightest. If I could sum up the scientific method in two words it would be these: question everything. Scientists do not assume anything is true except in an abstract sense for the purposes of a given experiment or study. It is this constant questioning of everything that has enabled all of the advances which science has brought us. The reason that the fact of evolution is less often questioned is because it is proven beyond all reasonable doubt. What you are doing is projection of the worst kind - religious people are the ones doing ALL of the "assuming".

Like I said when I get home I will address the rest of your arguments and explain the things which you asked for clarification about unless somebody gets to it before me. I may not have worded one or two things perfectly so I can understand the reason for a couple of the questions you asked. I couldn't let that part stand in the meantime though.

@Doctor

No assumption need be made that evolution is true when considering the evidence. When one examines the mountains of evidence of so many different types that all point to the same reality, the fact of evolution is obvious. As Pope John Paul II said "The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory." Now granted that most who argue against the fact of evolution are not Catholics, that is still an accurate assessment of the situation regarding the evidence.

Look at the fossil record showing a clear progression over time of hominids from more ape-like to more human-like features. Look at Tiktaalik, a "fishapod" that was found exactly where and when it would be expected to be found if evolution happens. What about human chromosome 2 which shows many clear signs of being two ape chromosomes fused together end to end?

There is at least as much evidence for evolution as there is for gravity. Your arguments show incredible ignorance of the amount of evidence that exists. Most Christians worldwide belong to denominations that say whether or not evolution happens is not crucial to their faith, but there are some who insist on a literal interpretation of Genesis even though the claims made there that can be tested have been falsified.

Educate yourself before making such ridiculously ignorant arguments as you've been posting recently.

QFT

When Jesus Christ was on earth he knew that he would die a cruel death at the hands of his enemies. Why did Jesus know this? He was thoroughly acquainted with the prophecies concerning himself in the Hebrew Scriptures, or the “Old Testament.” A number of those predictions were written by the prophet Isaiah more than 700 years before Jesus was born. How can we be sure that Isaiah’s words were written long ago?

In 1947 a Bedouin shepherd in the West Bank found scrolls hidden in a cave at Qumran, on the northwest shore of the Dead Sea. Those scrolls, along with others found in nearby caves, came to be called the Dead Sea Scrolls. They include a copy of the entire book of Isaiah (Note: the only complete scroll contains the entire book of Isaiah. The other scrolls are fragments..) This copy has been dated to about the second century before Jesus’ birth. Therefore, what Isaiah wrote was, in fact, prophecy. What did he foretell about the sufferings of the Christ, or Messiah?. Consider three of Isaiah’s prophecies.

Prophecy 1: “My back I gave to the strikers.” — Isaiah 50:6..

Fulfillment: In the year 33 C.E., Jesus’ Jewish enemies brought him before Roman Governor Pontius Pilate for trial. Recognizing Jesus’ innocence, the governor tried to release him. However, because the Jews relentlessly clamored for Jesus’ death, Pilate “gave sentence for their demand to be met” and handed Jesus over to be impaled. (Luke 23:13-24) First, however, “Pilate took Jesus and scourged him,” or had him severely flogged. (John 19:1) As Isaiah foretold, Jesus offered no resistance but ‘gave his back to the strikers.’

What history reveals: History confirms that the Romans commonly scourged their victims before executing them. According to one reference work, “flogging was done with a whip made of a number of leather strips weighted with pieces of lead or sharp metal. The victim was . . . beaten on the bare back . . . until the flesh was torn open. Sometimes death resulted.” Jesus, however, survived this initial ordeal.

Prophecy 2: “He poured out his soul to the very death.” (Isaiah 53:12). Adding more Psalm 22:16 states: “A band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.” — "New International Version.”

Fulfillment: “After having Jesus whipped, [Pilate] handed him over to be impaled,” says Mark 15:15. In Jesus’ case, this cruel form of capital punishment involved nailing his hands and feet to a stake. (John 20:25) Some hours later, “Jesus let out a loud cry and expired.” — Mark 15:37.

What history reveals: Although secular accounts say little about the nature of Jesus’ death, respected Roman historian Tacitus, born about 55 C.E., wrote that “Christus, from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”*. Tacitus’ words fully harmonize with the Gospel accounts, which also mention Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate, and other officials.—Luke 3:1; 23:1-33; John 19:1-24.

* Other ancient chroniclers also mention Christ. These include respected Roman historian Suetonius (first century); Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia (early second century); and Jewish historian Josephus (first century), who refers to “James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.”

History also confirms that the Romans impaled slaves and people they viewed as despised criminals. Sometimes the Romans tied their victims to a stake. At other times they used nails. “Nails were driven through the hands and feet,” says a reference work, “and the victim was left hanging there in agony,” experiencing “insufferable thirst, and excruciating convulsions of pain.”

Prophecy 3: “He will make his burial place even with the wicked ones, and with the rich class in his death.” — Isaiah 53:9.

Fulfillment: Jesus was executed alongside two condemned criminals, yet he was buried in a quarried-out tomb donated by a wealthy believer — Joseph of Arimathea.—Matthew 27:38, 57-60; John 19:38.

What history reveals: Numerous ancient non-Christian writers — including Jewish historian Josephus and Roman historian Tacitus — testify that Jesus was executed as a criminal.

Archaeological investigations in Palestine have uncovered ancient tombs consisting of chambers or vaults cut into rock. Having such a tomb already prepared and available would not have posed a problem for awealthy and influential person such as Joseph of Arimathea.

The foregoing represents just a few of the many Messianic prophecies that were fulfilled in Jesus. Clearly, no human could falsify the fulfillment of those detailed prophecies. Their precise fulfillment strengthens our faith that God was their Source and that he will yet bring all the foretold Messianic blessings to
reality for obedient mankind.

Jesus knew well ahead of time that he would die a cruel death. Hence, as his end drew near, this courageous man said to his loyal followers: “We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man will be delivered up to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death, and will deliver him up to men of the nations to make fun of and to scourge and to impale.” (Matthew 20:18, 19) Could you, knowing your death was imminent, do the same as Jesus? Would you have the courage and bravery to go to Jerusalem knowing you would meet a very violent death? You may ask if Jesus knew these things then why did he have to die? The answer to that question involves us all, and it provides the very best news we could ever receive!

As imperfect humans, we often do wrong. The Bible calls this sin. Sin might be likened to grit in an engine. Eventually, grit will cause that engine to wear out and stop. Similarly, sin causes us to grow old, get sick, and die. “The wages sin pays is death,” says Romans 6:23. Christ’s death, however, makes it possible for us to be set free from this tragic condition. How so? In another amazing prophecy, Isaiah wrote concerning the Christ that he would die “for our transgression,” or be “crushed for our errors,” and that “because of his wounds there has been a healing for us.” .— Isaiah 53:5.

Isaiah’s prophecy calls to mind Jesus’ words found at John 3:16: “God loved the world somuch that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.”

How can you develop faith in Jesus? By learning about him. Jesus said in prayer: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3) That precious knowledge is found in the Bible. — 2 Timothy 3:16.

Understandably, Jesus wants as many people as possible to gain everlasting life. Accordingly, he made this remarkable prediction shortly before his death: “This good news of the kingdom [God’s government, which will administer the benefits of Christ’s sacrifice] will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations.” (Matthew 24:14)

Myth: The Wicked Suffer in Hell

What is the origin of this myth? “Of all classical Greek philosophers, the one who has had the greatest influence on traditional views of Hell is Plato.” — Histoire des enfers (The History of Hell), by Georges Minois, page 50.

“From the middle of the 2nd century AD Christians who had some training in Greek philosophy began to feel the need to express their faith in its terms . . . The philosophy that suited them best was Platonism [the teachings of Plato].”—The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1988), Volume 25, page 890.

“The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, ‘eternal fire.’ The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God.”—Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1994 edition, page 270.

What does the Bible say? “For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, . . . for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.” — Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10, Revised Standard Version.

The Hebrew word Sheol (pronounced She'ol), which referred to the “abode of the dead,” is translated “hell” in some versions of the Bible. What does this passage reveal about the condition of the dead? Do they suffer in Sheol in order to atone for their errors? No, for they “know nothing.” That is why faithful Job, when suffering terribly because of a severe illness, begged God: “Protect me in hell [Hebrew, Sheol].” (Job 14:13; Douay-Rheims Version) What meaning would his request have had if Sheol was a place of eternal torment? Hell, in the Biblical sense, is simply the common grave of mankind, where all activity has ceased.

Does this definition of hell sound more logical and in harmony with Scripture? Consider this: what crime, however horrible, could cause a God of love to torture a person endlessly? (1 John 4:8)

Compare these Bible verses: Psalm 146:3, 4; Acts 2:25-27; Romans 6:7, 23

FACT: God does not punish people in hell

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myth: All Good People Go to Heaven

What is the origin of the myth? After the death of Jesus’ apostles, by the beginning of the second century C.E., the early Church Fathers gained prominence. Describing their teachings, the New Catholic Encyclopedia (2003), Volume 6, page 687, says: “The general stream of teaching was that heavenly bliss is granted to the disembodied soul immediately after whatever necessary purification follows death.”

What does the Bible say? “Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth.”—Matthew 5:5.

Although Jesus promised his disciples that he would “prepare a place” for them in heaven, he indicated that the righteous do not automatically go there. (John 3:13; 14:2, 3) Did he not pray that God’s will take place “as in heaven, also upon earth”? (Matthew 6:9, 10) In reality, one of two destinies awaits the righteous. A minority will rule in heaven with Christ, but the majority will live forever on earth.—Revelation 5:10.

Over time, the early church changed its view of its own role on the earth. With what result? “The institutional church increasingly replaced the expected Kingdom of God,” states The New Encyclopædia Britannica. The church began solidifying its power by becoming mixed up in politics, ignoring Jesus’ explicit statements that his followers were to be “no part of the world.” (John 15:19; 17:14-16; 18:36) Under the influence of the Roman Emperor Constantine, the church compromised some of its beliefs, one of which involved the very nature of God.

Compare these Bible verses: Psalm 37:10, 11, 29; John 17:3; 2 Timothy 2:11, 12

FACT: The majority of good people will live forever on earth—not in heaven

I hope this information clears up these two lies churches have taught people for the last 1,500 years. Jesus said, "YOU will know the truth, and the truth will set YOU free." (John 8:32)

Hi kixmode. I appreciate your sincerity. Again though my main problem with Jehovah's Witnesses (or any denomination that denies that the evidence supports evolution) is why I should trust their opinion on spiritual matters when they are so very easily shown to be wrong about something that has so much physical evidence of so many different types?

Why, or HOW can I trust their opinion about salvation or damnation when they are so very very wrong about something so easily checked that has so much evidence clearly showing it happens?

Thank you. I appreciate your civility.



Spiritual evidence is not the same as physical evidence. For example I could try and explain the color red to a blind person but until that person actually sees the color red they will never know what it means. The same is true with spiritual evidence. I could use all kinds of physical evidences (math, science, and so forth) and illustrations to make the point about creation verses evolution but until your mind and heart is open the words will sound meaningless. The bible states, "faith is not a possession of all people." (2 Thes 3:2)

Keep this in mind, faith isn't blind. For example you have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow. Why? Does your experience and evidence show that the sun rises every day? Yes! That's why you have faith the sun will rise tomorrow. The same is true for Jehovah Witnesses. Through our study of the Bible our faith is built. So when we tell people about what the future holds this isn't based on our feelings or opinions it based on the pages of the bible.



People have fundamental questions about God. When they ask their priests and pastors the general response is to provide opinions, and very rarely, if ever, based what they say on the bible. Worst, some priests and pastors aren't concerned with the spiritual well-being of their members and only care about making money. This can be seen when they require members to buy their religious products to "learn" about God. In contrast Jehovah's Witnesses use the bible as our source. We try to live our life but what it states; though we are imperfect and acknowledge our imperfections. If the bible tells us something we strive to listen to what it says. We produce bible-base literature to help people learn what the bible teaches. Why do we refer to the bible as our source? 2 Timothy 3:16, 17 simply tell us, "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work."