 |
|
|
|
|
March 28th, 2014
01:22 PM ET
Does God have a prayer in Hollywood?By Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor Los Angeles (CNN) – Forgive Darren Aronofsky if he’s begun to identify with the title character of his new film, “Noah.” Like the infamous ark-maker, the 45-year-old director has weathered a Bible-sized storm – and it’s not over yet. Aronofsky’s epic, which stars Russell Crowe and boasts a $130 million budget (with marketing costs to match), rode a swelling wave of controversy into American theaters on Friday. Despite fierce criticism from some conservative Christians, "Noah" was the top box-office draw last weekend, raking in $44 million in the United States. Part Middle-Earth fantasy flick, part family melodrama, the film is an ambitious leap for Aronofsky, director of the art-house hits “Black Swan” and “The Wrestler.” Both of those films were showered with praise and awards. “Noah,” on the other hand, has sailed into a stiff headwind. Glenn Beck and megachurch pastor Rick Warren blasted the film. The National Religious Broadcasters insisted “Noah” include a disclaimer acknowledging the filmmakers took “artistic license” with the Bible story. Several Muslim countries have banned the movie, citing Islam’s injunctions against depicting prophets. Even Paramount, the studio releasing “Noah,” has agitated Aronofsky, testing at least five different versions of his film with focus groups. “I can understand some of the suspicion because it’s been 50 years since an Old Testament biblical epic has come to the big screen,” Aronofsky said recently. “And in that time a lot of films have come out of Hollywood that have rubbed people the wrong way." Box office report: 'Noah' wreaks Old Testament havoc on its competitors 2014 is supposed to be the year Tinsel Town reversed that trend and finally got religion. A decade after “The Passion of the Christ” surprised Hollywood, rankled liberals and raked in $600 million worldwide, big studios are backing a flotilla of faith-based films. In addition to “Noah,” there’s “Son of God” from 20th Century Fox, which came out in March and is culled from the History Channel’s megahit miniseries, "The Bible." In April, Sony Pictures will release “Heaven is For Real,” based on the bestselling book and produced by Bishop T.D. Jakes, a Texas megachurch pastor and multimedia entrepreneur. The movie “Exodus,” directed by Ridley Scott and starring Christian Bale as Moses, is scheduled for December. So, too, is “Mary, Mother of Christ,” which is billed as a prequel to Mel Gibson’s “Passion.” More biblical epics may be on the horizon. Steven Spielberg is reportedly in talks to direct another movie about Moses, and Warner Brothers recently bought a script about Pontius Pilate. The box office hasn’t seen this many faith-based films since Charlton Heston delivered the “The Ten Commandments” in Technicolor. And that’s not even counting “God is Not Dead,” the indie sleeper that took in $8.5 million last weekend. So what’s behind Hollywood’s religious revival? “The biggest factor is the dynamic growth of the box office in international markets,” said Paramount vice chairman Rob Moore, one of the forces behind “Noah.” MORE ON CNN: A flood of reviews for 'Noah' Moore pointed to the $14 million his film has made in Mexico and South Korea, two of the more than 20 countries where “Noah” will run this year. As Hollywood’s supply of comic-book heroes seems to run dry, studios know the Good Book comes with a built-in audience of billions. The Bible’s heroes and villains are jeered and cheered on nearly every continent. Its morally complex stories are rife with blockbuster-ready special effects like locust plagues, apocalyptic floods and talking donkeys. But the controversy over “Noah” illustrates the promise and the peril of bringing the Bible to the big screen. Yes, there’s a ready-made audience that loves the book, but will they tolerate a script that strays from Scripture? On the other hand, will increasingly secular young Americans flock to see films that look and sound like sermons? "The earlier emphasis of faith-based films was to sacrifice quality for the message," Jakes said in a recent interview. "But it's dangerous to divide entertainment from evangelism. You're not going to connect with the average movie-goer if you're not putting out good stuff." But even Jakes, a longtime pastor and film producer, said it's not easy to turn a religious text into a movie.  Megachurch pastor and multimedia entrepreneur Bishop T.D. Jakes' latest film, "Heaven is For Real," releases in April. The author of "Heaven is For Real" has been adamant that the movie mirror the bestselling book. And Jakes cautions that the film's depiction of heaven does not comport with Christian orthodoxy. "It's a little boy's vision of heaven," he said. "It's not a theological film by a council of scholars." Like Jakes, Mark Burnett said he sees the silver screen as an evangelistic tool. "We believe that over the next few decades, billions of people are going to see 'Son of God'," the reality-show producer said. "This is not just some film to us." Burnett pitched his movie hard to religious leaders before its release. Evangelical pastors like Rick Warren rented out entire theaters, and Catholic bishops endorsed the film – which hews to the New Testament telling of Jesus’ life. The Christian push lifted “Son of God” to No. 2 on its opening weekend in February when it made more than $26 million in the United States. Since then, sales have fallen sharply. But Burnett cautions filmmakers against bowdlerizing the Bible to succeed at the box office. “There’s a big price to pay for departing from the sacred text,” he said. Just ask Universal Pictures, the studio behind Martin Scorcese’s “The Last Temptation of Christ,” which sparked outrage in 1988. Not only did Christians boycott the movie, in which Jesus fantasizes about married life, some sent death threats to studio executives. “These stories hit really sensitive areas,” said Elijah Davidson, director of the Reel Spirituality program at Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. Noah’s tale is a prime example. Just four short Bible chapters, it’s more sketch than story: The protagonist doesn’t speak until the boat finally lands ashore. “And yet it’s a foundational story for many Christians,” Davidson said. For centuries, theologians have taught that God’s covenant with Noah and post-flood promise to be merciful prophesied Christ’s later arrival. Building Noah’s arc Aronofsky, who describes himself as culturally Jewish but not especially religious, said he respects how important the Noah story is for believers. “We tried very hard not to contradict anything in the Bible,” the director said. “But we also wanted to bring the story alive for a 21st century audience.” Wiry and intense, with a shaved head and a Brooklyn accent, Aronofsky looks like a man who’s just finished one fight and is girding for another. “What’s been missing from the whole controversy is my personal passion for the film,” the director said. “I’ve been thinking about this for 30 years.”  "Noah" director Darren Arnofsky's previous films have included the art-house hits "Black Swan" and "The Wrestler." When he was 13, Aronofsky’s middle-school class in Coney Island was asked to write about peace. He penned a poem about Noah called “The Dove” that was recognized by the United Nations. (As a thank you for setting him on the creative path, Aronofsky gave his teacher, Ms. Fried, a bit part in “Noah.”) Even as a child, the director said, the Noah story unsettled him. Aronofsky didn’t see the happy tale of rainbows and doves told in children’s books. He saw the humans and animals consumed by the waters – the world drowning in the deluge outside the ark. As he began his film career, the director grew obsessed with telling the Noah story from that perspective – and employing the power of modern special effects to portray Earth’s first apocalypse. “It’s one of the oldest and most famous stories in the world,” Aronofsky said. “And yet it’s never been told on the big screen.” There are good reasons for that. After all, it’s a dark story. God, distressed at human wickedness, decides to hit the cosmic reset button. His waters wipe all life from the planet, except for the fortunate few on the ark. After the storm, Noah gets goodly drunk – perhaps the first known case of survivor’s guilt – and curses the descendants of his son Ham to slavery. To understand Noah, and to give his character a story arc, Aronofsky and his co-writer, Ari Handel, spent 10 years poring over the Book of Genesis and the midrash – stories written by rabbis to fill out the Bible’s narratives. They also read texts like the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Book of Jubilees and the Book of Enoch, a work ascribed to Noah’s great-grandfather. Handel, who studied neuroscience, is known as an obsessive researcher. The script’s bibliography runs five pages long, single-spaced. “We had to figure out how Noah and his family would get through this, and what it would feel like,” Aronofsky said. The studio also hired a Christian consultant for the film. John Snowden is a former youth pastor at Vineyard Christian Fellowship Church, where Moore, the Paramount executive, is a member. Snowden, who was pastor to Moore's son, said the filmmakers’ questions ranged from the sublime (Why did God create human life?) to the ridiculous (Would Christians be upset if Noah wears pants?). “I gave them a sort-of manifesto of Christian theology,” said Snowden, 38, who now lives in Nepal. “The most important part of the story is why God created humanity, which is basically to reflect God’s glory. Those are the kind of conversations we would have.” Script or Scripture? Several evangelical leaders have posted positive reviews of the film, and, with the help of a Christian marketing firm hired by Paramount, are spreading the word that nothing in "Noah" belies the Bible. But others aren’t so sure. On March 16, megachurch pastor Rick Warren tweeted this message to his 1.3 million Twitter followers:
For the record, Aronofsky said he’s made the “least biblical biblical film ever made.” That is, don’t expect the camel-and-sandals settings of last century’s Bible movies. “We wanted to smash those expectations, Aronofsky said. “We are reinventing the biblical epic for the 21st century.” Count conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck among the unimpressed. Before he even saw the movie, Beck, who is Mormon, called “Noah” a “slap in the face” to religious people. “It’s dangerous disinformation,” he told his 10 million radio listeners. After Paramount screened “Noah” for Beck last weekend, he acknowledged that blasting the film sight unseen was “kind of a dirtball” move. Then he blasted the movie again, calling it a “$100 million disaster.” Beck’s biggest problem with “Noah” was Noah himself, whom Mormons believe is the angel Gabriel in human form. “I always thought of Noah as more of a nice, gentle guy, prophet of God,” Beck said, “and not the raving lunatic Paramount found in the Bible.” MORE ON CNN: Is 'Noah' film sacred enough? Jerry Johnson, president of the National Religious Broadcasters, said he has the same problem with Aronofsky’s depiction of Noah. The Bible calls Noah a “righteous man,” Johnson said. In the movie, his character is much more complex. Noah begins the film as a rugged environmentalist who teaches his family to respect the Creator and all of creation. As he becomes increasingly zealous, Noah seems bent on destroying life rather than saving it. “I understand that the writers want to create tension and resolve it, but they push it to a spot where if you haven’t read Genesis, you wouldn’t know whether Noah is really a man of faith or not.” Moore, the Paramount executive, said focus groups had similar questions: How much of the film is from the Bible and how much was invented by Aronofsky? At Johnson’s urging, Paramount agreed to include a disclaimer before the opening credits and in marketing materials stating that the film is “inspired” by the Bible and true to its values but takes certain liberties with the story. (The language mirrors Dreamworks' disclaimer for “The Prince of Egypt,” which was based on the Book of Exodus.) “People needed to know upfront that this is not a literal re-telling of Scripture,” Moore said. “It helped set their expectations for a movie about a guy who goes on an intense journey. This is probably not the Noah they remember from Sunday school.” Aronofsky and Handel insist, however, that their film never directly contradicts Genesis, and even takes pains to remain faithful to it. The ark, for example, is built to the Bible’s specifications, down to the last cubit. Ultimately, though, the director has little patience with literalists on either side of the believer-atheist divide. It's ungenerous to insist, as some Christians do, that there is only one way to interpret Genesis, according to Aronofsky. But it's also pointless to argue, as some atheists have, that no ark could possibly hold all the animals. The story of the flood has lasted for millennia not because it’s "right" – or wrong – but because it’s deep and alive and unsettling, the director said. The artist's job, like Noah's, is to make sure those kinds of stories survive – to prepare us for the next storm.
Next entry »How evangelicals won a war and lost a generation
« Previous entryVatican landmark Obama will miss
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
OMG, I can't post anymore!
April fool!
And that concludes my April Fools' day 2014 celebration.
kermit
"My God you are pathetic"
"My God you cant read"
So you call your god pathetic and illiterate. Nice.
Seems our little green friend has left the building.
That's unfortunate... I had a lot more to say about his chicken fetishes
That's what being raised in the bible belt does to one, too much time with those farm beasties.
Commandment 13.2... "Thou shall not upset the chickens... for they are greatly loved by our Lord the Colonel..."
Not to mention that his continued breaking 3rd Commandment is pretty...curious.
I don't know but I think I might
Jump from an airplane while in flight
Soldier, soldier, have you heard
I'm gonna jump from a big iron bird
Up in the morning in the drizzlin' rain
Packed my chute and boarded the plane
C-130 rollin' down the strip
64 Rangers on a one-way trip
Mission Top Secret, destination unknown
They don't know if they're ever coming home
When my plane gets up so high
Airborne troopers gonna dance in the sky
Stand up, hook up, shuffle to the door
Jump right out and count to four
If my main don't open wide
I got a reserve by my side
If that one should fail me too
Look out ground, I'm a-coming through
If I die on the old drop zone
Box me up and ship me home
Pin my wings upon my chest
Tell my Momma I did my best
What does that have to do with the subject matter? Lucifer – suggest you go to the Bible and look up the real meaning of your twin. Also suggest to take up knitting sweaters as a hobby and stay away, far away from the written word unless it is on the back of whatever gives you the assumed courage to text, Sad that the point of the piece was the flack that the film producer had received for putting this together. Of the thousands of responses yours was tripped over because of the smell it left on my shoe sole.........
“The Bible: proof that gullible people will believe any dumbass thing that you tell them” ~LET
Also, I find your contrived 'outrage' at my non-sequitur of a post... regarding an article about a fictional story turned into a fictional movie... hilarious
Should I hire a lawyer with expertise in the Consti.tution?
Oh please do...you'll get sucked out of your money (kind of like the churches to do your Mommy and Daddy) and you'll lose!
Or, you could read the terms of service:
http://www.cnn.com/interactive_legal.html
that you agree too everytime you hit post.
Absolutely. Don't wait, do it now. And hire a good therapist while you're at it.
OMG a Fascist atheist is still moderating my comments. Should I hire a lawyer with expertise in the Consti.tution?
Oh dear, the delusions!!! Silly child, maybe if you'd learn to use proper words your posts would get past the word filter!!! See what a lack of education does??? You are a prime example!
How about a therapist to deal with your paranoia?
Right! Because this is a government website that is protected under the constltution in regards free speech! Yeah!
Oh, wait, none of that is true, so, um, you can go back to picking your scabs Salero.
Jesse James said before he died...
There's five things he wanted to ride...
A bicycle, tricycle, automobile...
A bow-legged woman on a Ferris wheel!
Well atheist what can I say that I haven't said already?
Even such a place as Hollywood is not listening to you. Though I'm not going to see this movie because except that they got the Ark thing as a box rather than a boat right, the rest is anti-Scriptures.
Even the Hom.ose.xuals have more influence and pull there than you all. It just doesn't get any worse than that.
I want to apologize for the entire U.S. education system for failing you... There isn't enough Schoolhouse Rock to fix what ails you...
Ad populum.
Salero, you hateful ignorant fool...you weren't missed-when did they let you out of the reform school (you know where bad kids go)?
Leave them chickens alone Kermit! Besides, I thought you had a thing for Miss Piggy.
how did I get involved with this chicken thing???
Because you are showing less brain power than a chicken?
If his god loves him so much why is he so dumb?
Cause god makes you dumb...couldn't have a smart christian or they wouldn't be christian.
I cannot speak for invisible beings that most likely do not exist but perhaps it is how his god gets his jollies – by filling fools up with Jesus Juice and watching them go to battle with reality.
"If his god loves him so much why is he so dumb?"
Maybe it's like when the God of the Hebrews kept reducing the already insufficient troops before going into battle so that the Hebrews knew it was God that gave them the victory instead of their superior military power. In this case God apparently is reducing the intelligence of his followers to prove a point I guess...
Molesting chickens is not a good thing Kermit... what did they ever do to you? Commandment 13.2... "Thou shall not upset the chickens... for they are greatly loved by the Lord and Col Sanders..."
what is it to you if I did?
What?
Molest chickens... I'm pretty sure he said that earlier
Perhaps he started in "Pink Flamingos".
The John Waters movie? Man, that was a disturbing movie... and I'm not easily disturbed
Oh, I know! I think they achieved their goal as "grossest family".
you asked me if I deny writing a message (aboiut being hypocritical) to TP
That would make you a liar. Duh.
what would make me a liar...mysyaing you posted something? if thats not the case then there is a miscommunoication and I will be the first to apologize.....I was only respoinding to a post that I got in my email
Kermit, I an referring to this:
“oh dear..youNEVER stop with your rudeness amd hypocricy do you? there you go again….get a life…and actually debate here”
Do you deny you wrote this, Kermit?
If you deny writing that, you would be a liar. Because clearly you wrote that.
oh dear..youNEVER stop with your rudeness amd hypocricy do you? there you go again….get a life…and actually debate here”...yes i did write it..I di dnot imp;ly it..I was askign earlier..WHAT is it to you if I did?
omg kermi, the blatant ignorance! In stating what you did when you do the exact same things, you show your own hypocrisy! How hard is that to comprehend??
What is it to me if you did WHAT?
Is this some sort of April Fool joke ? Because the continuity going on is negligible.
"WHAT is it to you if I did?"
It just shows you're a fraud. Your only defense of Christianity seem to be rude and insulting responses to people. How is such behavior consistent with New Testament teachings, which you claim to believe?
uhh..MY point was that TP was a whining hypocrite when they had earlier acussed me of being rude..yet they were rude before I was..and they continued on....that is all..leave it be ok? between me and TP
Kermit,
If you post on a public forum, the public may answer.
If you want a private conversation, a public forum may not be the place for it.
Perhaps you should consider Facebook?
No kermi, you may not welcome their voices but I do and given how this is a public blog, anyone can comment.
@kermit4jc: "uhh..MY point was that TP was a whining hypocrite when they had earlier acussed me of being rude..yet they were rude before I was..and they continued on...."
The Bible doesn't teach you to treat other people the way they treat you, it says to treat others as you would have them treat you.
As a Christian God requires you to follow his teachings all the time, not just when it's easy or convenient. If you truly embrace Christian values you are expected as a Christian to act in a manner consistent with them. The "they did it first" argument, popular with children, doesn't justify bad behavior for any adult, much less a Christian.
For someone who claims to have studied the Bible you don't seem to understand it very well.
"that is all..leave it be ok? between me and TP"
This is a public forum. I'll comment as I see fit.
OMG you still missed the point! I do NOT deny I been rude and all..MY point was to tell TP to stop their wihing about MY being rude when THEy were rude as well....I know I was rude...but to have some stupid jerk call me out for being rude when they were doing even worse is totally stupid and childish
@kermit4jc: "OMG you still missed the point! I do NOT deny I been rude and all.."
I realize that. The fact that you feel no remorse for your bad behavior tells me you don't really care what the Bible says.
"MY point was to tell TP to stop their wihing about MY being rude when THEy were rude as well"
No one is whining about your behavior, just pointing out that you're a fraud. You keep talking about what the Bible says, but you ignore what it says and don't even care.
"....I know I was rude...but to have some stupid jerk call me out for being rude when they were doing even worse is totally stupid and childish"
No one here has said anything worse than what you just said. I pity you. You're obviously not very bright or you're mentally ill, and frankly I think both apply. It serves no useful purpose for any Christian to go into a public forum and behave badly.
A true Christian wants to spread the "gospel of Christ." He does not troll the Internet behaving badly. He wants to please God by following what he believes are God's teachings. Actions speak louder than words, as the saying goes, and your actions here consistently say you feel no need or desire to follow those teachings.
MY Gosd how pathetic..you still imply that I do not want to change or have no remorse.....so you ASSUME I wont have remorse later? you ASSUME I will do nothing about this later? just layoff ok? I am a HUMAN who WILL and does make mistakes..and I WILL repent..as a TRUE Christian I do go and repent.....as for the trolling..nope..youre assuming again....just stick to the debate ok?> and TP HAS been whining......so just stay out of it then ok?
Perhaps someone can explain this to me, as I've never understood it. If I'm not mistaken, the Biblical idea of the flood is that God was grieved at the wickedness of the people he had created (and not particularly long after he'd made them) and was sorry he'd made them and decided to destroy them all (including all the animals, for some reason?). But since God looked favorably on Noah he decided to let Noah and his family survive, and also the animals, but only if Noah spent years building an ark to contain his family and representatives of all the animals. Everybody else was destroyed.
My question is this: Do Christians believe that the world of today is less wicked than it was in Noah's time? My guess is that the common answer is that today's world is not less wicked, it is more wicked and deserving of being destroyed, except that God promised not to again. But if today's world is not less wicked, then the flood does not appear to have accomplished its purpose and thus seems to truly be an "epic failure of Biblical proportions".
the answer is this..God has a long range plan..the Flood wasn't a fix up to remedy the problem all together...its part of a long range plan..God knows the future....andin HIS time the earth will totallybe destroyed andno more evil to exist
Right, murdering possibly millions of souls, women and babies incuded and saving only a handful in order to wipe out the wicked was only phase one! In phase two he had to let the population regrow including all the wicked to new heights so he could wipe them all out again during the final war on the plains of Meggedo which is why we Americans MUST support Israel so we have a place to fight the final battle and without them the prophecies in Revelation could not happen so if you are a believer then you are hoping and praying every day for the murder and torture of any and all who diagree with your version of God and are using the secular powers having been given a vote as a citizen to force your holy war on those whom you claim your God despises. "your will be done on earth as it is in heaven..." It is funny to me though how often those believers judges as "wicked" and deserving of teir Gods wrath always seem to be the same people the believers have personal issues with and often biased by racism and bigotry.
YOUleft out other stuff too..right from the VERY beginning God told of the messiah to come! and NOWHERE in the account of the Flood did God say or evenIMPLY this was a once and for all solution....remember..use context..read the stuff BEzfore Noahs account..God had plans already..and I sure wish you would refrain from using the word "murder" unless you can back it up that God had no right to take life from which HE gave in the first place..and thathe had no right to judge life....if not..refrain from using the term..thank you
kermit
Arguing semantics is really not effective when you are just plain wrong. Murder is the correct term, since it is the premeditated taking of human life. Wheter or not he was justifed or not is your argument, which doesn't change that it is murder.
It is really moot though, since we know it never happened.
are you for the death penalty?? and murder is notONLY defined as such..it ALSO has defintionof UNLAWFUL taking of life..and you are dancing around the subject..I asked you to SHOPW that God had NO right to take life..thus jhe murders.....stop playing the game ok?
I suppose the Cliff Huxtable thought is also true then: "I brought you into this world, I can take you out!!"
If I can't use the word "murder" to describe the intentional drowning of women and children and pregnant women by some alien force as descibed in the bible then what would you like me to use? Execute? The all powerful deity executed the babies by drowning them enmasse. Would that be a better description of the flood account? Like drowing kittens i'm sure he got to hear their mewling screams and if his creation of heII tells us anything about the God you worship it tells us that he likes to make his creations suffer. Not even Jeffrey Dahmer would have been so cruel.
theysuffer already at the hands of their parents....and second..why not simoly use the word kill or taking of life???
"that God had no right to take life from which HE gave in the first place"
Wouldn't your argument also give the right to a parent to not only abort a fetus in the womb but pretty much anytime thereafter as the child grows up? If you decide they are being wicked little brats you get to drown them in a tub like Andrea Yates did? Oh, right, I forgot you get to assign a double standard to your God. He gets to have all the range of human emotions, love, anger, jealousy, hate, but he never gets blamed for acting in the heat of the moment during an emotional outburst. I just find it strange that so many humans don't seem to notice this giant flaw in their God theory.
please use the full context of my argument..God is also JUDGE..we are not..we are not one to judge life...second..humans do not fully give life to babies..they do not give them soul, conscious, spirit...God does..he is ultimate Creator
kermit
Your "god" put into law, thou shall not kill ( or murder).
If you claim that he is not bound by that or any other law, then it is unlawful by definition.
It is still moot since it never happened.
NOT at all..God says YOU shall not murder..cause you (Us humans) are NOT judges or Creator of Life....we have NO right to do so..only GOD reserves that right...
"I forgot you get to assign a double standard to your God."
"please use the full context of my argument..God is also JUDGE.."
Exactly...
apparenlty you dont know what a double stabndard is...WE are not Judge..only GOD is...let me ask yo uthis...is a parent a hypocrite and using do0uble standard when they tell kids they are not allowed to drink beer..but then the parent drinks beer? or that a 10 year old is not allowed to drive a car, yet adults do? come on..your comparisons are weak..God is Judge..and HE resefves the right..not us..we have NO qualificaiotns to judge..its not double standard
If the parent says that the child can't kill but the parent can, then yes they are being hypocritical.
I find the parent/ child God/man analogy insulting.
kermit4jc, the obvious flaw in all of your arguments and explanations is that there is no rational or objective reason to believe your God even exists, or that any event in the Bible related to acts of God ever happened.
kermit –
Thank you for your reply, but I'm still a little confused. If the purpose of the flood was not to correct the condition of creation (by wiping out all the wicked people–and the animals of questionable character), what was its purpose?
think about it..read thru the Bible....think about what You do affects others...or have you heard of the butterfly effect? the Flood was part of a long range plan that God was in control of history.....to make for things to happen.....remmeber prophecy....God works it so that it all works out to fullfill the prophecies
kermit –
So I guess you're saying the flood wasn't ineffective, and are falling back on the standard answer for just about everything, tha it was all just a part of some unknown plan of god? I hear this "God has a plan for everything" explanation all the time, but I can't imagine that those who use it really think that will be taken seriously.
@James XCIX: "tha it was all just a part of some unknown plan of god?"
Exactly. It's the biggest copout imaginable.
He doesn't know, his answer to you was for you to read the bible and think about it.
OMG seriously? is that what you truly think? NO ..it means do NOT take my word for it..but READ for yourself! my goodness...what little minds we have here
yes, Kermit, it is all us
@kermit4jc: "OMG seriously? is that what you truly think?"
Yep.
"NO ..it means do NOT take my word for it.."
More excuses. We wanted you to tell us what you believe was the purpose of the flood. Don't just punt and say it was part of God's plan, tell us how it fits into God's plan. But you can't, so you punt and tell people to read the Bible to find out. Yet you claim to have read the Bible and you clearly don't know. Why tell others to read the Bible to get answers is hasn't given you?
OHHH you want every little minute of it? I did tell it was very simple..you missed it cause youre trying to look at it under a microscope..step back....I spoke of the peophecies of the coming Messiah that God made right at Genesis 3..and again with that in mind...and the Messiah not having come by time of Noah..then obvisouly it was not to totally rid of humanity for good and totally rid of evil for good.....I cant give you more cause it is all in the Bible..the whole of the Bible..not just some little spot here and there..that is why I recommended looking into the Bible again
Meaningless Christian gibberish. "God has a plan" is just a standard Christian copout that absolves you from having to answer questions.
wow...wghat intellect..It was a answer..nto a op out..and it involves readiong the BIBLE...the BIBLE shod it....sheesh....use your brain ok?
Ummm... sky tag is using his brain. You are not.
He uis not using his brain..I did..i READ thru the Bible and SAW hwo the plan progressed...its nOT a cop out.. iSTUDIED about it..it was not something I suddenly came up with..so tell me who is not using their brain again?> skytag came up with that response without thinking at all....
Rigorously following The Babble is *not* a sign of intelligence.
wonider who you were referring to..certainly not me...the point was at least I looked into it..and read...skytag did not..he showed he did not look into thre Bible ....to see what I explained..he disagreed..so he insulted instead..with nothing to back it up
@skytag,
Would you prefer he say, "I don't know."? Perhaps the answer you're looking for. It certainly doesn't invalidate his belief, nor does it prove a lack of existence of God. All it states is that someone doesn't know. Asking for any Christian to explain everything their God does is a weak argument, because it presumes that the Christian has perfect knowledge of everything. News flash. Christians don't know everything, just like atheists don't.
I suppose the answer is, you can ask question after question after question until someone doesn't have an answer. It sort of reminds me of the incessant child questioning "Why?"
"Go clean your room?"
"Why?"
"Because it's dirty."
"Why?"
Because you live in it."
"Why?"
"Because that's where we have you living."
"Why?"
"Because I said so."
You get to a point where you can't answer a question. And that's ok. At some point, you have to say, "I don't know why. I have faith." There's nothing wrong with that. And that goes for atheists and believers alike. You can't be expected to know everything.
@toleranceofall: "Would you prefer he say, "I don't know."?"
At least that would be honest. Claiming everything you can't explain is part of some grand plan even though you can't possibly know that just shows you'll make claims even when you can't know if they're true or not.
"Asking for any Christian to explain everything their God does is a weak argument, because it presumes that the Christian has perfect knowledge of everything."
Wrong, and disingenuous. The problem isn't that they can't explain everything, it's that they can't explain anything satisfactorily to anyone who hasn't already bought into their narrative. Their answers only make sense to people already inside the cult.
"I suppose the answer is, you can ask question after question after question until someone doesn't have an answer. ..."You get to a point where you can't answer a question. And that's ok."
I disagree. Here's the problem: To have a valid argument it has to be built logically on known and accepted facts. But this is not the cause for any explanation or argument Christians offers. No matter what they try to explain, if you examine their argument enough it ultimately comes down to "That's just what I believe."
Christianity, just like every other religion is nothing more than a fictional narrative its adherents choose to believe because they find it more appealing than the other alternatives. People convert to another religion when they find a new narrative they find more appealing than the one to which the current subscribe. But there's no objective evidence to support any of them, and pretty much everything about the concept of a god raises significant questions no one can answer.
The standard Christian explanation for why there is no evidence of God's existence is that if there were evidence of his existence we wouldn't need faith. But if there is no evidence he exists, and hence no reason to believe he exists, what's my incentive to invest time and energy to develop faith in something I have no reason to believe exists?
NOTHING is taught about faith in Gods existence..in FACT..EVERYTHING in the Christian religion through the BIble has KNOWLEDGE of Gods existence..so where do I have faith? It is in Gods PROMISES>.this is CLEAZrlY spelled out in Hebrews 11 !! IM surprised you didn't know this as YOU said you been a Christian for 40 years.....NOWHEER is it taught t ohave faith in Gods existence..but everywhere hacving faith in Gods PROMISES...no wonder you left..you are so messed up in the Christian ways
@kermit4jc: "the point was at least I looked into it..and read...skytag did not..he showed he did not look into thre Bible"
That's it, when all else fails, lie about your opponents. For the record I have read the entire Bible from start to finish. I have read many parts too many times to recall. I've highlighted favorite scriptures during my study of it. I have taught it as a Sunday School teacher. You people tell yourselves that anyone who doesn't believe the Bible just hasn't read it because you can't handle the truth that many atheists are former Christians who have read and studied the Bible every bit as much as you have.
"....to see what I explained..he disagreed..so he insulted instead..with nothing to back it up"
Oh, as if you have anything to back up anything you say. ROFL Feel free to cite the verses that explain how the ark story fits into God'd grand and mysterious plan.
and youSTILL don't get it......reading the WHOLE Bible..ok..so you read it..but you are showing that YOU have problem connecting the dots! I gave a little bit of it in earlier posts....how prophecies were to come true...right from the very start..in Gensis 3 God prophecies of the coming Messiah! so of course then in THAT conrtext..the Ark story wasn't about God making evil totally come to an end..the story continues..and it is OBVIOUS cause the Bible does nOT stop at the end of Gensis sotry of the flood..its again connecting the dots..using logic..."Hey, so apparently there is a grander scheme as the story keeps going on.." again its no wonder youleft the Christian life...you have had difficulty connecting the dots as you shown here
@kermit4jc: "and youSTILL don't get it......reading the WHOLE Bible..ok..so you read it..but you are showing that YOU have problem connecting the dots!"
Given your behavior here you obviously don't get it.
"I gave a little bit of it in earlier posts....how prophecies were to come true...right from the very start..in Gensis 3 God prophecies of the coming Messiah! so of course then in THAT conrtext."
The authors of the New Testament were aware of Old Testament prophecies, so when they wrote the piece of fiction known as the New Testament they included some fabricated stories about events that were consistent with those prophecies. Prove me wrong.
"the Ark story wasn't about God making evil totally come to an end"
The ark story is about a supposedly perfect god admitting that his crowning achievement in the creation saga, the human race, was a dismal failure.
..the story continues..and it is OBVIOUS cause the Bible does nOT stop at the end of Gensis sotry of the flood..its again connecting the dots..using logic..."Hey, so apparently there is a grander scheme as the story keeps going on.."
"again its no wonder youleft the Christian life...you have had difficulty connecting the dots as you shown here"
The Bible tells you not to judge other people. I'll just add that to the list of things the Bible teaches you think don't apply to you.
I can connect the dots just fine. The problem is that no matter how well you connect the dots, no matter how thoroughly you know the narrative and all the explanations and excuses, none of that changes the following facts: There is no objective evidence to support any of it. Not a shred. There is no evidence any story in the Bible related to spiritual events actually happened. There is no objective evidence any prayer has ever been answered. There is no evidence your god has altered the outcome of any event or caused any event.
I understand Christianity quite well, better than you, obviously. I just got to the point I couldn't keep rationalizing why the real world didn't support anything I believed. Buying into Christianity required me to ignore too many issues, make too many excuses, rationalize too much.
For example, were I still a Christian I'd feel a need to reconcile your rude behavior as a Christian. As an atheist I feel no need to rationalize why you say you believe the Bible but feel no need to live by what it teaches. The explanation is obvious: You're naturally a jerk and there is no spirit or other supernatural influence doing anything to change that or prompt you to change it.
For example, were I still a Christian I’d feel a need to reconcile your rude behavior as a Christian..the story went on..so a LOGICAL thinking person would then se REASON (NOT exucses) to think that "hmmm...then it is OBVIOUS that the Flood was NOT intended to be the end of it all" that there MUST be some larger plan and picture here" youobviously did not do that..you pretty much decided you wee going to find every little supposed inconsistencie to give yourself ammunition...sorry..your argument still shows you couldn't connect the dots...
kermi: Get with the times!! Geez, science has already proven that the flood could not have happened!!
You're dealing with someone who believes in a god that is all-powerful and not subject to the laws of matter, time, or space. You can't prove anything to people like that because they can dismiss any argument simply by speculating that God could have done this or that. Since there god has no limitations their answers are limited only by their own imaginations.
And their imagination is limited to the bull dodo in The Babble. They are trapped in their own circular "reasoning."
@hotairace: "And their imagination is limited to the bull dodo in The Babble."
Oh, quite the contrary. Ask questions about the ark story and you'll get some really creative answers that have no biblical basis whatsoever, many of which will start with "God could have..."
People tend to respond examine claims from one of two positions. They ask themselves, "Can I believe it?" or they ask themselves "Must I believe it?"
When a Christian offers an explanation, he only needs to be able to answer "can I believe it" in the affirmative. In his mind it only matters that he consider the answer plausible. If it's plausible he's satisfied. But since the creators of Christianity gave its followers a god with no limits everything is plausible.
For example, suppose you point out that there are well over 20K species of land animals and birds, and that a 450'x75'x30' boat, even with three floors in it, could not hold 40K animals and birds, as well as a 40-day supply of food for them.
A Christian could respond by claiming God shrank the animals to a fraction of their normal size while they were on the ark. There's no mention of this in the Bible, of course, but since God can do anything this would be plausible explanation, at which point our Christian friend is satisfied your objection does not cast doubt on the veracity of the ark story.
They feel no need to have answers; they only to convince themselves that what they believe could be true.
For example, suppose you point out that there are well over 20K species of land animals and birds, and that a 450′x75′x30′ boat, even with three floors in it, could not hold 40K animals and birds, as well as a 40-day supply of food for them.<-however..that is moot as the Bible does NOT EVEN imoply that many in the ark! The Bible does not make mention of a number...and the person writing the story CERTAINLY isn't a stupid idiot who couldn't think how many the ark can hold...I mean this is beyond stupid to assume the writer couldn't at least have that much common sense...
@kermit4jc: "that is moot as the Bible does NOT EVEN imoply that many in the ark! The Bible does not make mention of a number..."
It does not mention a number, but it does imply that many:
"And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them." — Genesis 5:19-21
There are well over 20K known species fitting that description. There is no evidence that there were significantly fewer species at the time of Noah. You can claim there were, but you can't support such a claim with anything in the Bible or any credible scientific argument. It would be pure speculation.
"and the person writing the story CERTAINLY isn't a stupid idiot who couldn't think how many the ark can hold..."
The person writing the story would not have had even a clue about the number of animals and bird species on the planet at the time.
"I mean this is beyond stupid to assume the writer couldn't at least have that much common sense..."
Your argument is beyond stupid. There would be no way for the author of that story to know about the vast majority of the species existing at the time since species tend to be specific to particular regions of the world, in some cases very small regions. He would not have known about species unique to the Arctic, the Antarctic, North America, South America, the Galapagos Islands, Australia, Japan, and so on.
Thus he would not have known about polar bears, penguins, moose, white tail deer, grizzly bears, the Galapagos tortoise, or any of thousands of other species not native to his part of the world.
He wrote the story based on his limited understanding of these facts, which is why only someone with the mind of a child who also has a limited understanding of these facts would take the story seriously.
There is nothing either in the Bible or credible scientific knowledge that refutes my reasoning. This is why you resort to this gibberish to dismiss it. Any explanation you offer will be based on speculation we both know you can't support and unsupported speculation doesn't prove anything.
Oh, and for the record, this is just one of many serious issues any thinking person would have with the ark story.
YOUr argument is poor..you say it "implies many" and then you say the athor does not know how many animals existed...sir..that does NOT connect! the fact is..the author is NOT so stupid he couldn't figure that one can NOT fit 20k on the ark!!!!!! your argument did not actually address that..
Hey everybody! There is a magic man in the sky that watches your every move and monitors your every thought and he loves you but he will punish you if you break any of his rules and if you praise him enough you will go to a magical land in the sky after you die and live happily ever after ...
APRIL FOOL!!!!!
You forgot... "and he wants your money!"
Fundamentalist Christians inherited their "god" because of where they were born, if they lived in India or China they would be stupid about a whole different "god"
NOT so..there are MANY Christians in INdia and China....some MAY have inherited it as you say..I certinaly did not...I came to know God personally..not cause "proved" it to me..but thatGod Himself proved it to me
oh dear, there you go with your crazy delusions again...such a child and a liar!
oh dear..youNEVER stop with your rudeness amd hypocricy do you? there you go again....get a life...and actually debate here
oh and by the way.....the people at the psychiatric place..they want your false degree in psychology back...they say youre a poor excuse for a psychologist..pretending to make diagnosis of people having delusions and all....
Did I claim to be a psychologist? NOPE, that would be you and based on how you speak I'd say you're lying! This is the 21st century, not the 1st...grow up and attempt to live it! You're a horrible person who only cares about the imaginary unfounded vindictive god and not about humanity at all! Such a waste in this world but you keep it up, show the children why christianity is bad for them-it is what you're doing and for that we thank you.
Maybe I did not make my self clear enough.....I did not say or imply that you are a psychologist...hence my post..you are a wanna be throwing around diagnosis of delusions when you have no business doing so...youre not a psychologist..don't pretend to be one..stop throwing around the stuff ok?
and You are a horrible person for making up lies about me..I care about humanity.....I don't know why you asssume otherwise....I mean..if its being rude...then look in a mirro as you are continuing to use rudenss to others and then YOU complain they are rude to you
kermi: I call you out for your portrayal of christians and how pathetic you help make the belief system look. Maybe delusional is too strong of a word, brainwashed would be more accurate. You say you care about humanity-do you believe that women should be allowed to have am abortion (control over their own body)?? Do you believe that LGBT are your equals? If you answer no to either of those, then I stand by my statement...to care about humanity to me means caring about everyone regardless of gender or sexual orientation.
Your claim of knowing with certainty that a god exists is not really evidence to anyone other than you, it certainly isn't evidence to me or Akira or doobzz or perhaps myweightinwords (a pagan) or maybe not even to one who believes in Zeus or any of the other numerous gods-that is why it is deemed belief, not knowledge and for someone who claims to be so intelligent, stating you know doesn't really show intelligence to that degree. It is very dishonest to state you know when non-one can possibly know.
The shoe is put on the other foot here and it is nice to see you getting a taste of what you deal out to people here.
My God you are pathetic..you talk about humanity..I noticed you say woman have control over HER body and you purspoefullty leave out the FACT there is ANOTHER body in there..I have compassion on humanity that the woman MURDERS the child in her....sorry your line of reasonign stinks..and GLB and all are EQUALLY human..but that does NOT mean their lifestyles are ok...I care about everyone..inncluding gays..my coisin would be the first one to defend me....she was a dear cosin of mine who knew my beliefs yet she knew i cared for her....we wrere onl ya month apart in age..second..i do ONT expect ANYONE to take my word and believe God exists cause I say so..that is naive..i did nmOT come about knowing God exists in that waty..not that some person proved it..but that GOD proved it to me....and it seems dishnonest to you cause YOu are the problem..putting yojurself in a littl e box and thinking scien ce will answer all things...when science can only deal with PART of our lives....you make science your god
Abortion is not murder or every woman would go to jail for it. You may not comprehend the many reasons why a woman would have an abortion-risk of life; victim of incest or rape; not ready and things do happen...it doesn't matter in the end, it's not your business and for you to think it possibly could be does not show compassion. it shows a want for control...no-one deserves to have anyone tell them what they can and can't do with their body, not to mention the fact that by saying no to abortion, you risk a child being unloved and in my opinion, that is unacceptable.
LGBT is no more of a lifestyle than being hetero is-there is scientific evidence that trumps your bible on this. It is pure bigotry and hate to call it a lifestyle, it shows your ignorance on the subject and your complete lack of care. These people raise children, they pay taxes, they are not harming anyone and yet you wish to judge them and tell them they are sinning??
and science is STILl out the door..it has nOT proven for fact it is genetic and all...first of all..it goes against evolution..if it is genetic..then in due time....no humans will exist cause all will have been eventually turned gay..and no more procreation....thing is sir....it is a chosen lifestyle..people twist and use science to rtrey to justify it...its a game..and it does not work...and again..you are so arrogsnt to thinki i dont care...i do care..as i said my cousin would be the first to tell you to f off
Wow, science is all we really have if we hope to survive.
No it is not a chosen lifestyle!! I do not care what you say about it, you are seriously wrong!! If your cousin is saying it is a choice, then I'm guessing you're lying that your cousin is even gay-no gay person I've ever met and I know numerous, would ever tell you they made the choice. For you to even say that your cousin would tell me to 'f off' shows a lot of immaturity on your behalf-that if completely ill-mannered but I guess in your small world view it wouldn't be.
BTW ALL peopkle are sinners anyways...ALL still need Jesus as Savior.whether gay or not..
I don't need jesus...I'm not so weak that I need imaginary friends. I'm not a sinner either, sin is biblical and given that I dismiss your bible for the horror story it is, sin doesn't pertain to me.
Kermit,
This was your answer to Keith when he asked a sincere question of you;
"…God isn’t there ti play games and to your petty little stuff"
And yet you complain about rudeness?
My God you cant read..I amnot complaining about being rude..YOU are the jerk complaining of being rude..and then YOu showed rudeness...I am pointing out your hypocricy!!!
"there are MANY Christians in INdia and China"
My goodness kermit is a moron of the highest degree.
Truths statement holds true for the VAST majority of persons and the few pockets of Christianity in India and China are not indicitive of anything other than a zealous ministry work in those countries in an attempt to reverse the very well docvmented phenomenon of regional ambient religious absorption. The fact that a handful of persons have been reached by these missionaries is hardly surprising as those people just traded one invisible deity for another as they had already been trained from infancy to believe in invisible fairys.
Noneed to call me amoron..especially since you missed what was really at question..the guy who made claim it was territorial made a totally blanketstatement..not allowing for FACT that it is NOT exclusive..in other words..he implied there are no Chritians in China....or INdia
"oh dear..youNEVER stop with your rudeness amd hypocricy do you? there you go again….get a life…and actually debate here"
Do you deny you wrote this, Kermit?
"My God you cant read..I amnot complaining about being rude..YOU are the jerk complaining of being rude..and then YOu showed rudeness…I am pointing out your hypocricy!!!"
Please point out where I was rude/hypocritical to you.
I am Akira, not TruthPrevails.
Oh, I noticed that TP had posted after me and Kermit may have been addressing him.
My kingdom for an edit button.
Akira; the time stamping on here is very skewed, My last comment to kermi was in reply to this: "and You are a horrible person for making up lies about me..I care about humanity…..I don’t know why you asssume otherwise….I mean..if its being rude…then look in a mirro as you are continuing to use rudenss to others and then YOU complain they are rude to you"
Nah, with a second perusal it is clear that Kermit is talking to me. Huh.
And I'm a jerk, too. Fabulous.
Akira: If we disagree with him on anything, we're all jerks. He speaks of debate but it doesn't seem to be debate he is after. He attacks with a child like vengeance at times (ie; the random use of capitalizing words) and yet when called out for it, he attempts to turn it around. He claims to have Bachelors in Psychology and maybe he does but that thought is truly frightening when he believes the stuff he does and doesn't seem very educated otherwise.
OH MY GOD Tp you ARE the moron and arrogant..it had nothing to do with disagreeing with me..ity has everything to do with YOUR whining like a baby as to how rude I was...then You youdself turn around and CONTINUE to be rude to others..IM callign you out on your hypocricy and continnual use of it....and I HAVE been debating..youre the idiot who is not doing any debating at all..ALL of your posts are full of nothing BUT rudness and name calling..I have NOT seen ONE biut of debate ouit of you yet...maybe youshould get your memory checked out
He certainly needs to visit the dictionary to revisit the word "hypocrite", TP. I don't think it means what he thinks it means. Also, the word "debate".
If he wants insults slung, I can do that; I raised teenagers. Guaranteed they would cut more than being called a jerk.
apparently YOu cant read either....I am NOT complaingin about the name calling or such..TO was the one who has been doing it....I was rude one time to them and they cried like a baby..when they themself was doing the very thing..and they CONTUINUED on it..and STILl cry to me that IM rude to them....
"..he implied there are no Chritians in China....or INdia"
Actually he said "Fundamentalist Christians inherited their "god" because of where they were born" and that statement is true in nearly every case. Are there some Idian or Chinese persons who change their faith based on exposure to another? Of course, but the numbers are so tiny they an be effectively discounted in the argument as a whole. This is why I pointed out that you are a moron Kermit. You are using a rare exception to a general rule to try and disprove the general rule as stated by Keith.
then MAYBE next time make it ClEASR it s a general rule....they way YO ucome off.its as if there were NO Christians in China or such
I read just fine; I only question when what is written is written in such a manner as to be ambiguous and unclear.
Kermit, let me be perfectly clear. Until the azzhole god you claim exists gets in front of me in person, no screwing around, and causes me to believe what I currently believe is utter crap is actually true, I am not a member of your or his cult and he can, figuratively 'cause there's no actual evidence he literally exists, shove The Babble up his azz, and you can fuck off. Any questions idiot?
thats fine by men..Im not here to prove Gods existance to you..and that is YOUR choice to accept or rejct..I cant make you do so
@kermit4jc: "OH MY GOD Tp you ARE the moron and arrogant"
Ah, good Christian talk. Apparently you don't put much stock in the part of that Bible known as the Golden Rule.
ahhh like we are supposed to be PERFECT and NEVER make a mistake? sorry if I disappointed you withy your looking up to mne as such
moron: a stupid person.
stupid: lacking intelligence or common sense.
Kermit has without a doubt displayed on many occasions on these boards his lack of common sense and his inability to understand basic truths about science and the universe around us. Therefore I can but come to one conclusion, Kermit is a moron. He may be a nice moron, but I rather doubt that as well because morons tend to get angry and violent when confronted by their deficiencies.
I prefer dolt to moron but you're right. He comes across as angry especially when he thinks that typing in capitals proves a point and while doing so misspells so many words as if he were blinded by so much rage that he can barely see the page.
how dishonest of you..IO really have not talked about basic truths of science or such...why you lie? tell me..where did I show such thing?
Exactly. Virtually all of his posts seem frantically written gripped by some panicked emotion, maybe fear, anger, self righteousness or some combination of any and all of them, unable to articulate a clearly thought out point and back it up with anything other than unverified opinion. But he wields his unverified opinion as if it were an imaginary sharp sword that he continues to swing and cut at reality since reality has not materialized as he was told as a child it would by his peers and parents. And he loves his peers and parents and cannot fathom that they might not really have all the answers, so it's easier to fight reality tooth and nail than to admit that the people he holds dear might not be right about the universe.
wow youpeople are morons...to you there is only one option about me..HOW about the fact IM trying to keep up with the posts and have limited time? ever thought of that..or are yo ubeing azzes and tryin desperately to discredit me any way you can?
Kermie, you discredit yourself. You don't need any help!
another lie.....I have aid or done nothing of the sort...again I pointed out facts that you are moronic and liit yourself to one option about another person..wiothout considering anything else..such as I pointed out the FACT I am writing several threads..have limited time..and trying to get as much as possible..rather than this carp of being emotional panic and such..ok? just cut with the stupid azz assumptions about my typing
hotair: Absolutely...although for kermi to admit that would mean he'd have to take the blinders off.
so you concede in the debate..cause now ALL yo uare doing is resorting to insults and nothing more....I accept your conceding.....Ill move on and debate with someone else
You just called people asses!!! Is that not insulting? You're such a hypocrite! You don't want debate...you probably don't even know the meaning of the word! You care about being right and when confronted, you scream like an infantile child who hasn't gotten their own way! Stop pretending to be better and stop pretending to care when in reality if you had your way we'd all be burning in a pit...you do not care about humanity, you only care about your imaginary friend. Grow up and attempt to join the 21st century!
well..IM not complaining about your calling names at all..so how am I sa hypocrite...you still cant seem to read...the POINT is..You are whining about me bein grude..and YOU are rude as well! so youre a hypocrite..Im NOT whining about your name calling at all...try to read ok? and GROW up..stop whining about me being rude....you are rude too...dont be so childish
"are yo ubeing azzes"
And you wonder why you're told you are being rude!! Wow!! Acting like that, why should anyone take you or your claim of your supposed credentials seriously? If you wish to see the true ass here, you might wish to look in a mirror!
and there you go whining again.....being a total hypocrite...doing what youre whining about yourself.....grow up
kermi: Wah, wah, wah...cry me a river little one-you called people asses and when it is put in your face, you turn it about and have your wee feelings hurt!!! Not whining at all...pointing out the obvious hypocrisy!! You act like a child, so maybe you need to look in a mirror and grow up yourself...I'm not the one with imaginary friends!
my feelings hurt? oh geez...you even have a terrible time reading other peoples emotions! My feelings are not hurt..immerely pointing out the little use of brain power in here of those who cant seem to use their brains for optionsd about things....such as why my typing stinks..its pathetic that people like them would only have one option..shows they cannot think about other options..thus not using their brains at all
You're the one calling people asses, not me! You're the one screaming like a child when confronted with updated information and when your beliefs are questioned. You're being extremely ill-mannered. You lie when you say you care about humanity-if you truly did you wouldn't wish unwanted children to be brought in to this world and you wouldn't call LGBT a lifestyle!! I get that you're not able to see past your imaginary friend but please stop pretending it is real and that you have evidence when that in and of itself is a blatant lie. All your misspelling of words does is show exactly how very angry and bitter you are, it's almost like you're blinded by rage and can't see clear enough to type coherently. If you want respect, then give it and until you do you deserve the treatment you get. Some of us truly care that what we believe is based on evidence, maybe that doesn't matter to you but it should.
UNWANTED baby? thsats how PATHETIC this world is..IM the one who hates? its the idiotic adults who say the baby is unwanted..THAT is hateful..youdont think very well..and SoME person wants that baby anyways..and second.WHY conceive the baby in the first place if it isn't wanted? it boggles the mind how silly you statements are..and I do NOT care what IM doing..IM simply poin tinmg out that YOu are whining about ME being rude..and YOu are being rude yourseldf! WHY are youwhining that IM being rude? you are rude too..WHINE about yourself ok? and my misspelling is d..ue to trying to type out fast cause of time...agains stip your stupid nonesnes e and think about other options a person has...and I do NOT pretend anything..do NOT do my thinking for me ok? its dangerous to try to do someone elses thinking..especially by arrogant people like you
oh..and IM NOT asking for respect..Im asking you to SHUT your whining about me being rude..cause You are rude as well hypocrite
@kermit4jc: "ahhh like we are supposed to be PERFECT and NEVER make a mistake?"
You are to strive for that goal and be both humble and repentant when you fail because you are too prideful. You know full well your behavior here has been contrary to what the Bible teaches, but you refuse to stop or exhibit any remorse because of your pride.
From the perspective of a Christian this means you'd rather disobey and disappoint God than admit to people here you've been wrong and apologize.
Understand this is fine with me. I don't believe in your imaginary friend and all I see is another fraud Christian who doesn't actually believe what he claims to believe. Your behavior says nothing about me, but volumes about you. Behaving badly toward me doesn't hurt me one iota. I don't know you and have no respect for you, so none of your juvenile attempts to insult or belittle me will have any affect on me.
I don't post in the Belief Blog often, but I've been discussing politics online for years. If I let obnoxious individuals whose emotional development stopped at an early age bother me I would have given up commenting years ago.
Your behavior doesn't make me look bad, it makes you look bad. It makes Christians look bad. It makes the people who raised you look bad. Since I am none of these people, by all means keep acting like a fool.
"sorry if I disappointed you withy your looking up to mne as such"
Snooze alert. Grow up and stop embarrassing decent Christians.
You are to strive for that goal and be both humble and repentant when you fail because you are too prideful. You know full well your behavior here has been contrary to what the Bible teaches, but you refuse to stop or exhibit any remorse because of your pride.-> yes..STRIVE..which means we WILl fail..and will repent.....thus I WILL repent at some point...just cause I don't show it immediately doesn't mean it isn't going to happen...thus YOU seem to imply agaiun some type of "perfection" its got to be immediate
@kermit4jc: "yes..STRIVE..which means we WILl fail..and will repent.....thus I WILL repent at some point...just cause I don't show it immediately doesn't mean it isn't going to happen...thus YOU seem to imply agaiun some type of "perfection" its got to be immediate"
You aren't even striving, you're just making excuses for your failures. You don't care about what the Bible says. You like being a jerk, probably because in real life you can manipulate people by bullying them. A real Christian would not consciously plan to do his repenting at some indeterminate time in the future. That's what frauds do.
As a Christian you are a representative of Christ. That places an important responsibility on you to conduct yourself in a manner that reflects well on other Christians, and on your religion. Your casual willingness to behave badly is evidence there is no spirit inspiring you to be a better person or that your love for the savior drives you to be a better person.
Obviously you're just a Christian because it makes you feel better about yourself and superior to others. You feel no desire to actually be a better person. You are a Christian for what you can get out of it, not because you really believe what it teaches.
kermit – "I came to know God personally..not cause "proved" it to me..but thatGod Himself proved it to me"
If that's the reason you believe in your god, then surely you can understand why the billions he hasn't proved it to don't believe in him?
sure..cauyse they ignore God..I seen it..they think science is the wayto prove God....science is their god...you look in wrongplaces..you want certain things...God isn't there ti play games and to your petty little stuff
Keith, you are correct; it's mostly the location of the person that determines their belief system. And yes, there are billions that don't believe in the Christian God.
And the same reasons that Christians reject their gods are the ones that these people reject the Christian God; it's not their particular god...
There are many out there that have never even heard of Jesus. This is a mighty big world. The people who would believe that these people who have never heard of Jesus are destined for Hell because of their ignorance of Him are misguided, and really, quite silly.
The ones who take such glee in the thought that these innocent people going to hell for never having heard of Jesus are beyond silly...they're vindictive, and display none of Christ's qualities.
and the same reason Christains reject their god..man that's such a load of carp!!! I live it..I know God personally..it isn't a mtter of "being my particular god" cause of territory or culture..its truth....don't try to speak for us ok???
Please read again.
What is the reason you reject Allah?
The same reason Muslims reject your Christian God. I am not talking about individual experience; I am talking about culturally.
And knock off the insults if you do not want people to be rude to you.
You seen to be living breathing proof of the stereotype that Christians are asshats.
kermi: If we're just going to give things a label as god, then happily I'll say science is my god. Without science, many of us would not have made it past infancy; without science many things would not be happening-no electricity; no cars; no computers; without science medicine would not be what it is today. Whether or not science has discovered all the answers is rather negligible to a large extent-it still doesn't mean you get to plug an unknown, unproven god in to the fact, it simply means "We don't know"-I'm very content with not knowing, it makes for a far more interesting life. You're such a hypocrite for your tirade against science when you're using the very things science has made possible.
IM NOT at all against science..nor did I even implyh it..IM merely referring to making science as yoru GOD...I love science..i love biology and all..but since all you pretty much do is name call and no debate..you wouldnt known that...maybe this should give you wake up call to leave out the name calling and do some actual debate
Was there name calling there? You called science our god; making it sound like a bad thing...I merely point out the true benefits of science.
when you make science as your god..and depnd on nothing else..it is a bad thing..cause science will not help you in every thing....there is more to life than the natural....you can deny it if you want...but see..science deals ONLY with the natural..thus science really cannot prove OR disprove god's existance! science is a wrong tool to use...its as if you are using a weight machine to figure out how fast light travels..wrong tools
Your god can't be shown to exist, so you rely on nothing but science in reality. I have no reason to accept the supernatural, I care about what can be evidenced to exist-that is the stuff we rely on for our survival as a species.
kermit –
If your god proved his existence to you, why doesn't he prove it to everyone, regardless of his or her current beliefs? What makes you so special?
first of all..Im nothte only one..I know of many christians who are in same boat..God does go to prove himself..the problrem are people..who think too much...or who dont want God....when I say "think too much" I mean they try to use human reason as only way...or science....science cannot prove or disproive god....its simply experiencing Gods presence and seeing the works in our lives...much same as I dont use machines to see the effects of gravity..I know gravity exists..cause I experience it
Kermit,
Many claim to "know" aliens, ghosts, spirits, and other gods. Should we believe them as well?
kermit –
Surely your god can think of a way to prove his existence to anyone. Apparently, he thought of a way to prove his existence to you. Why should it matter if someone tends "think too much", or to trust science?
WHY must it be ONLY Gods responsibility? WHy cant You accep-t that people make bad choices and reject God? He is not a puppet master...YHe gives us choice..and WE have to choose...what I see here in your argument is a denial to take part of seeking the proof....they want to place all the blame on god...I mean..no way am I imperfect..I am perfect...I make no mistakes..so if God doesnt prove himself to me..i cant be to blame......get it?
kermit –
Yet, you're saying he proved himself to you. Your point seems to be that whatever action he took with you is the same action he takes with everybody, but how can you possibly know that?
the same action God tookl with me I assume he wojudl tak with everyone else..you mean the way God proves himself? I did not say that if thats what you meant..god wuill porove himself to people in different ways..im referring to that God proves himself..and we cannot blame him if we reject him..its height of arrogance..its almost as if saying ""Im never wrong, i never mess up and make wroing decisions, so if I rejected God and he actually exists..its HIS fault"
kermit – "god wuill porove himself to people in different ways..im referring to that God proves himself..and we cannot blame him if we reject him"
You seem to have a fundamental misconception of what it means to not believe in your god. It's not that he's somehow "proved" himself to everyone but some choose to reject him anyway. Some simply find no reason to believe he exists, just as you find no reason to believe any of the thousands of other possible gods exist. You haven't acknowledged and rejected them, you simply don't acknowledge their existence, and acknowledgement must come before acceptance or rejection.
You haven’t acknowledged and rejected them, you simply don’t acknowledge their existence, and acknowledgement must come before acceptance or rejection....quie some assumption yo ugot about me.....why must tyoumake such statements without getting to know who Iam..and also, you need to read m post again.God sets out to prove himself to all..and you simly reject cause you don't "see" it...you miss it..and then yuoblame God
James: Have you gottne the feeling yet that you're speaking to a 5 year old who is desperate to make their imaginary friend real? He kind of reminds me of a conversation I had with my friends 5 year old when she was speaking to her imaginary friend and insisting he was real.
kermit – "quie some assumption yo ugot about me.....why must tyoumake such statements without getting to know who Iam."
I'm confused. Yes, I made an assumption, but I thought it was a pretty reasonable one. I assumed you did not acknowledge the existence of gods other than yours. Are you saying that you do acknowledge the existence of other gods, but you reject them in favor of yours because he's a better god in some way?
what I AM saying is that I have acknowledged that there are other gods purported to exist..but I reject that notion..NOT because "my god is better" but because I found truth..and that if there is ONE true God....then WHY include others? if ONE true God..then LOGIC follows that all others are false..and GOD of the bIble has shown me HE is the one true God...its simple logic and reason
@kermit4jc: "sure..cauyse they ignore God."
ROFL If God exists his primary mission is to ensure there is no evidence he exists. His followers rationalize that if their were evidence then you wouldn't need faith, but to ensure there's no evidence your God has done nothing to give anyone a reason to believe he exists. The notion that anyone is "ignoring" God is laughable. It's like saying I ignore Santa Claus and leprechauns.
This is a fundamental problem for Christianity. There is no reason a nonbeliever should even suspect there is anything one could reasonably call a god. Yet despite the complete lack of objective evidence of any god, I am supposed invest time and effort "seeking" him, reading the Bible, praying to him and so on. It makes no more sense than saying I should seek leprechauns, who I also have no reason to believe exist.
Furthermore, since there is no objective reason to believe any god exists, even if I decided to "seek" one, why would I choose to seek the Christian god? Why should I read the Bible instead of the Quran or the Talmud? Why shouldn't I seek him through one of many eastern religions? Because you say it's true? You're a jerk. You insult people, laugh at them, belittle them; people like you are some of the best evidence Christianity is a fraud.
What you really want people to do is immerse themselves in the Christian cult life — reading scriptures, praying, hanging out with Christians, going to church and so on — until they are brainwashed to the point of believing it.
here you go assuming again..and seeking to read..rather than activiely seek.I read the Bible..but it did not prove God to me..GOD proved Himself to me..you seem to get yourself confused....if someone exists..I go to MEET them...sure..if there is a a book about them..id read it..btu if I want to know this person..personally..I go and meet them....no one can know someone personally by reading a book about them...its all part of a relationship..and experiencing the relationship..i don't have a relationship with a Book (Bible) I have a relationship with God
@kermit4jc: "and the same reason Christains reject their god..man that's such a load of carp!!!"
He's right.
"I live it."
People in other religions can say the exact same thing. In fact, many of them live a lifestyle that demonstrates more devotion to their god than you yours.
"I know God personally"
Meaningless Christian jargon. Good luck explaining what this means and why someone in a different religion couldn't say the exact same thing. Do you have God's phone number? Have you been to his house? Do the two of you hang out listening to tunes?
"it isn't a mtter of "being my particular god" cause of territory or culture.."
"its truth..."
More meaningless Christian jargon. Christians have their own custom definition of "truth." For them it's code for "what I believe that's consistent with my interpretation of the Bible." It is not "truth" in the sense the dictionary defines it.
"don't try to speak for us ok???"
I spent four decades my life as a Christian. I am well versed on what Christians believe, that the Bible says, and all the rationalizations and excuses they use to dismiss inconsistencies between reality and what they believe about God. Insulting me won't change any of that.
see..YOU say YOu been a Christian for 40 years..but you do NOT know all Christians..did I say its truth cause BIBLE says it? WHY must tyou keep bringing up the BIble..I said I have a personal relationship with GOD..not a Bible..so you do NOT clearly understand all about a Christian..you simply had a pseudo Christian experience
Do you have God’s phone number? Have you been to his house? Do the two of you hang out listening to tunes? This is really silly and uncalled for mocking...and shows you have no respect for one who believes...and when I say I know God personally..how frigging simple is that ..is it too simple that you cant figure that out? it means what it says..I know God personally.I know Him..I met with Him..I talk with Him..I experience His presence.....sheesh..so with that said...and your comments..it is VERY clear that you didn't experience much of a real Christian life and its no wonder you left
@kermit4jc: "when you make science as your god..and depnd on nothing else..it is a bad thing..cause science will not help you in every thing....there is more to life than the natural..."
Yet another claim you know you can't support with evidence.
It wasn't God who defeated the Nazis, it was men and tanks and planes and bombs and ammunition. It wasn't God who told the RAF when German pilots were on their way to bomb England, it was radar. It wasn't God who liberated those in Nazi extermination camps, it was Russian and American troops.
It wasn't God who eliminated polio from almost every country on Earth, it was a vaccine invented and distributed by dedicated human beings. God isn't saving lives in hospitals, medical science is. Pacemakers keep heats being regularly, not God.
They say there are no atheists in foxholes, but that's not true. What you won't find in foxholes are Christians willing to give up their guns because they believe God will save them and defeat their enemies for them. As the title of the WWII song says, Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition.
Science produces results. There is no evidence your God has ever done anything.
"you can deny it if you want...but see..science deals ONLY with the natural.."
Thus far you've failed to demonstrate there is anything else to deal with.
"thus science really cannot prove OR disprove god's existance!"
So what? It can't prove or disprove Santa Claus' existence either.
"science is a wrong tool to use...its as if you are using a weight machine to figure out how fast light travels..wrong tools"
Idiotic gibberish. You only say this kind of stuff because you know you have no evidence for anything you believe about God. Science, logic, and reason don't cease to have value simply because they fail to confirm your myths and delusions.
Idiotic gibberish. You only say this kind of stuff because you know you have no evidence for anything you believe about God. Science, logic, and reason don’t cease to have value simply because they fail to confirm your myths and delusions...wow such arrogance...you cant accept my answres to be something else..it has to be your way huh? Its not gibberish...I DO have evidence..and LOGIC says that science ONLY deals with the natural..is there ANYWHERE that shows that GOD is natural..especially if HE is the Creator of ALL things? then LOGIC and REASON says he is ABOVE the natural...but I guess that passes you by...seems you try to forgo logic at times in this discussion
@kermit4jc: "see..YOU say YOu been a Christian for 40 years..but you do NOT know all Christians.."
I know Christians just fine. Your need to consistently rely on ad hominem arguments is both pathetic and tiresome.
"did I say its truth cause BIBLE says it? WHY must tyou keep bringing up the BIble..I said I have a personal relationship with GOD..not a Bible..so you do NOT clearly understand all about a Christian.."
A real Christian wouldn't use straw man arguments to justify his ad hominem arguments. I never said anything about having a personal relationship with the Bible. So you're not only a rude jerk, you're pathologically dishonest, as you have repeated resorted to straw man arguments to deal with people's comments.
Why are you even here discussing any of this? You're behavior is some of the worst I've seen online from someone proclaiming to be a Christian. You make Christians look bad. You make yourself look like a fraud and a hypocrite. You haven't convinced anyone of anything and your behavior would never in a million years cause an atheist to question his view of Christians. So, why are you here? Pride?
You claim to have a "personal relationship with God" but you don't act like it. You act like someone who feels threatened when people question your beliefs and your sincerity. Seriously, I've had these kinds of discussions with Christians for years and your behavior is some of the worse I've encountered. Why would you continue to behave badly, even after multiple people have pointed out your bad behavior?
Why would a Christian who claims to have a personal relationship with God behave badly and act as if there's nothing wrong with that because he doesn't have to be perfect immediately?
You tell others they "don't get it," but your every action here screams that you don't get it.
and why rag onmeabout my behavior? I said I would repent..and yet you are continually trying to drag me back down...youre just as horrible for ragging on me and not trying to help out..thanks a lot...go away if youre not going to do something constructive ok?
@kermit4jc: "you simply had a pseudo Christian experience"
I couldn't care less what lies you tell yourself about me to justify ignoring the points I make. You have no credibility here; not because you're a Christian, but because you're such a lousy excuse for a Christian.
"Do you have God’s phone number? Have you been to his house? Do the two of you hang out listening to tunes?
This is really silly and uncalled for mocking.."
Actually, it isn't. Christians use a lot of jargon. They use words to which they assign their own meanings, such as "truth" and "knowledge." They do the same thing with phrases too, such as "personal relationship with God." But what does that mean? It sounds like you're trying to lay claim to having some kind of special relationship with your imaginary friend, but what does it really mean exactly?
"and shows you have no respect for one who believes."
Why should I have any respect for you? How have you earned respect here, constantly passing judgment on people, insulting people, belittling them, and so on, and then making it clear it doesn't even bother you when people think you're a jerk?
In point of fact I have the utmost respect for believers who actually live what they believe. You don't do that, you just make excuses for failing to do so. "I can repent later. I don't have to be perfect now. I don't care if I'm rude because someone else was rude first." How old are you, 14?
You certainly don't act like an adult. If you want people to respect you then you need to warrant that respect by the way you act. You want to act like a jerk, ignore what the Bible teaches, and then cry when people don't respect you as a Christian. What a loser.
so you don't think people can change..and yocontinually rag instead of trying to builkd up? common...youre lazy
@kermit4jc: "..and when I say I know God personally..how frigging simple is that ..is it too simple that you cant figure that out?"
And yet you can't answer the question.
"it means what it says..I know God personally.I know Him..I met with Him.."
Met with him? Where, at Starbucks, or some place a little more private, such as in your head?
"I talk with Him.."
People talk with their dogs. They talk to them and then interpret the dog's reaction as talking back to them. People have talked with their various gods for thousands of years.
"I experience His presence....."
More meaningless Christian jargon. This is Christian code for "I have feelings I attributed to God."
"sheesh..so with that said...and your comments..it is VERY clear that you didn't experience much of a real Christian life and its no wonder you left"
Your comments make it clear that rational discussions of Christianity make you feel threatened. Your behavior here more than demonstrates you don't have a clue what it means to be a Christian.
assumptions again..its not feelings..it is very difficult toi explain..but that is not a cop out.....
Exactly now did God prove this to you?
"The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. That is why I am your king!"
Oh wait...wrong myth....
Most have inherited it, but I suppose that there are some, like you, that found god from some un-churched place.
I was raised by Fundamentalist Christians and I have totally rejected your "god" and religion. That happens too.
Thank you for being honest there and accepting that not all Christians are alike or believe in same way or got to know God in same way
No matter how I believe I can honor another mans beliefs.
@kermit4jc: "Thank you for being honest there and accepting that not all Christians are alike"
Contrary to what you're insinuating we all know Christians are not all alike. Some of the finest people I've known have been Christians. You, on the other hand, are a real jerk who reflects badly on decent Christians.
It seems he is one of the fundamentalist that never read anything other than the bible and has never traveled out of his hometown.
It seems he is one of the fundamentalist that never read anything other than the bible and has never traveled out of his hometown. -> referring to me????
Yes, it seems you have the fundamentalist line and can not debate your faith. You have been perfectly nice to me but some of your other threads would lead me to believe that you have not had much exposure to the rest of the world.
The "where you were born" rule is not meant to be interpreted literally, and it's not an absolute rule, but far and away the best predictor of which religious narrative you'll embrace is which ones you were exposed to growing up and followed by the people you respected.
We have a pretty diverse assortment of religions in this country, but generally speaking the children of Christians grow up to be Christians, the children of Jewish parents grow up to be Jewish and so on. The same is true within Christian denominations. People who grow up in a Catholic family tend to be Catholics. People who grow up in Mormon families tend to be Mormons. People who grow up in Amish communities tend to be Amish.
If you'd been raised by a Muslim family in Saudi Arabia, where 98% of the population is Muslim you'd almost certainly be Muslim, not Christian.
Every religion is a narrative its adherents embrace because they find it more appealing or compelling than the alternatives. People convert from one religion to another when they find a narrative that seems more appealing than the one they currently embrace.
In choosing a narrative, you'll only consider narratives to which you have been exposed. If you'd lived your entire life without knowing anything about Christianity there's no way you'd be a Christian. People almost anywhere can be Christians because Christianity has spread so widely as a result of missionary work and bring it to conquered nations, but the likelihood of someone being a Christian can be pretty remote depending on where he grew up and lives.
I should also point out that Christianity exists in many forms. While you will find Christians in Saudi Arabia, for example, you won't find any Amish communities in Saudi Arabia, nor do I think it likely you'll find any there who speak in tongues and handle venomous snakes.
I would be very interested to see the actual statistics on those that were raised with one belief and cenverted vs those that were raised on way and stayed that way.
Not sure if this will answer your questions but you might find it interesting. To be clear, I only skimmed it very quickly so make no claims.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w13689
Thanks. It turns out it contains a pdf of a 42 page paper. Looks very detailed though.
Thanks for the information
That would be interesting. I don't' believe changing churches is a conversion. From Baptist to Catholic or Pentecostal, they are still Christians that believe in the Triune Deity.
From Christian to Jew, or Hindi that would be a conversion.
These yahoos writing a movie about a Biblical event is like the T-ball team reporting the World Series.
No, it's more like making the Thor movie. They are both myths.
It seems to me that no one would be more qualified to tell a make believe story than the masters of make believe.
So there you have it atheists, not even Hollywood of all places on earth is giving you any attention or credit. And that's Hollywood of all places where atheists could have a mouthpiece.
Even the hom.ose.xuals have more pull in Hollywood than atheists. That's as bad as it gets!!
There is only one "pull" in Hollywood and that is money and obviously a good tale whether it be sci-fi or biblical fiction will continue to be put on the screen.
Some added notes from an expert:
" For instance, an essay on Ancient Near Eastern Mythology," by Robert Wexler, president of the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, states that on the basis of modern scholarship, it seems unlikely that the story of Genesis originated in Palestine. More likely, Mr. Wexler says, it arose in Mesopotamia, the influence of which is most apparent in the story of the Flood, which probably grew out of the periodic overflowing of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. The story of Noah, Mr. Wexler adds, was probably borrowed from the Mesopotamian epic Gilgamesh. "
Conclusion: The Jewish scribes wove many a fine tale !!! Just like their Greek counterparts.
Still trolling, I see.
Good comparison of comic books and the bible. Both are examples of good fiction that can be used to make blockbuster movies and take the audiences' thoughts off of the hardships of real life.
And both have their fanboys that will go into a rage if someone goes outside their vision of the book and its characters.
Noah is nothing more than a story. It's not real anymore than most of the stories in the bible. They are good character building stories and perfect fantasy epics. Seems to me this is the best approach possible.
What could possibly cause you to doubt the veracity of a story about a 600 year old man and his three sons building a giant floating zoo in the middle of the desert on the psychic instructions of the Creator of the UNiversE?
Clearly you don't have a clue!!
Has anyone ever tried to estimate how long it would take four men to build a boat that's 450'x75'x30' high with three floors in it out of wood that would have to hewn from trees?
I have, but with modern tools, a little over 25,000 hours. four men, 10 hours a day, 6 days a week about two years and a few months.
Keith: You built a replica of Noah's ark? Can we see pictures online? How long do you estimate it would take with tools available at the time of Noah?
What "character-building" lessons do you see in this story? How to save your ass by siding with the alien being destroying the rest of mankind?
And merely a few miles from Hollywood we have this story:
"Rescuers have ended their search for a 43-year-old man swept to sea during a baptism ceremony on a Southern California beach."
http://www.sfgate.com/news/us/article/Search-ends-for-man-swept-away-off-California-5363367.php
God HATES that dude man!
Clearly a sign that HBO should not have canceled John from Cincinnati...
skytag
" The problem with using such subjective criteria is that they are unreliable"
The problem here is that we are discussing an issue, the existence or non existence of God, that can only be debated in terms of subjectivity. Your position is not based on objectivity, but rather on a set of presuppositions you have arrived at through subjective means.
" What other reliable method is there? " " ... something that has been shown to be repeatedly unreliable..."
Again, you are defining " reliability" as something that can be quantified and verified through experimentation. You have made the self determination that because there is the element of subjectivity in things like faith, it follows that it cannot be true. I, on the other hand, acknowledge the subjectivity of faith, but that acknowledgement does not inhibit my believing it is true.
I think it is important to note here that I have never demanded anyone accept my angle on truth as being universal. I believe my Christian faith is true, and while I believe it will ultimately be vindicated as universally shown as true, I recognize that at this particular moment in space/time/history, subjectivity remains.
It's difficult to get away from subjectivity regardless of your belief or non-belief.
I find it logical to avoid second-hand or hand-me-down subjectivity, with a couple of thousands of years of hand-me-down subjectivity perhaps the most logical to avoid. If were completely different and completely trusting of hand-me-down subjectivity and had a toothache, I might just let someone bleed my leg trying to cure it.
ddeevviin.." I believe my Christian faith is true" what did you use to come to that conclusion.. how did you dismiss the other faiths as being false as they claim the same status as your particular indoctrination. If you "feel" your faith will be vindicated on what basis do you see that.. You require evidence as much as an atheist does. If a fellow walked to you today claiming to be the resurected Jesus Christ, would you demand proof or accept it on faith? if he or she claimed you must accept him with out any proof would you? What if a woman claimed to be Jesus Christ now that would be a real test for the religious..
That the existence of gods can only be discussed subjectively is yet another believer claim to allow their alleged but never proven god to hide. It is a consequence of their definition of their god, yet another circular argument. It is just as likely, if not more likely, that there is no actual evidence for any god because said gods do not exist.
hotairace: The creators of Christianity were not stupid. They knew there would be challenges to their claims, demands for evidence, questions exposing gaps in their narrative and so on. They addressed these potential threats by including teachings designed to give their followers an excuse to avoid dealing with them.
For example, they are taught that your feelings are a more reliable mechanism for discerning truth than using facts, evidence and logic, even though it's well known that feelings are easily manipulated.
In the 1930s Germany was an overwhelmingly Christian nation. Yet all it took was a few good speakers and some well-crafted propaganda playing on the German people's resentment of the Treaty of Versailles to get them to abandon Christian values learned over lifetimes of church activity and studying the Bible.
The designers of religions want you to trust your feelings, knowing your feelings can be easily manipulated by some well crafted stories, good music, and rituals. Forget about evidence. Don't trust logic and reason because man can't comprehend God's logic. Trust your feelings.
feelings are more reliable..where did you get that carp from? it snot the bIble that's for sure..in FACT..the BIble says the heart is deceitful above all else
you are right, people are easily manipulated, and religion is a prime example of that.
skytag doesn't know what he is talking about.....he doesn't even give an example of such...as I had showed him in earlier posts..I did not cop out..but actually looked into this...yet all he could come up with was "cop out" when he couldn't check it out himself...I believe he is the one copping out
I despair some people ever learning how to follow a thread.
@kermit4jc: "feelings are more reliable..where did you get that carp from?"
Listening to Christians talk. Haven't you ever heard one say he "felt the spirit" or "felt God's presence?" Even when they don't explicitly refer to feelings that's really what they're talking about when they talk about "personal evidence," "personal knowledge" and so on.
All that stuff is "personal" because it exists only in your mind, where no one else can objectively verify it.
"it snot the bIble that's for sure..in FACT..the BIble says the heart is deceitful above all else"
It also says this:
"For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." — Romans 10:10
In practice Christians rely heavily on their "hearts" and feelings to determine what to believe. I did some Google searches about discerning between good and evil spirits and here are a few excerpts from what I found:
"The experience will be unpleasant and uncomfortable. It will create stress." — The Seven Signs of a Negative Spirit, beliefnet
Unpleasant, uncomfortable, stressful, these are all feelings.
let me put it this way, if it was an evil spirit then you and your family would be extremely more uncomfortable then you are at the present moment.
Again, "uncomfortable." That's a feeling.
"Entities give off this 'feeling' of positive (happy/cheerful) or negative (anger/sadness)"
"It is also possible to sense spirits with a feeling of joy or what I can only describe as an inner 'ugliness' that makes your stomach turn"
These people aren't quoting the Bible, but this is how Christians think and talk.
beliefs are not feelings..and second..beliefs inGods PROmisES....not once did it say belief or feeling He exists...the bIble is clear that we can have KNOWLEDGE of Gods existence...
yes..they are a RESULT of the presence..sure.....but not merely a proof of the presence only
"The problem here is that we are discussing an issue, the existence or non existence of God, that can only be debated in terms of subjectivity."
Why? I contend you choose to take this position because you know you have no objective evidence. Anyone who naively believes he can reason with Christians finds the effort frustrating because Christians feel they get to establish the rules of debate at their whim.
If God doesn't exist then your claim is obviously true. If he does, then objective discussion should be possible.
"Your position is not based on objectivity, but rather on a set of presuppositions you have arrived at through subjective means."
Rubbish. This is just you making a claim to rationalize dismissing reasoning you don't want to deal with. In point of fact you have no idea how I came to my position because I haven't shared my story and you can't read my mind.
"Again, you are defining " reliability" as something that can be quantified and verified through experimentation. You have made the self determination that because there is the element of subjectivity in things like faith, it follows that it cannot be true. I, on the other hand, acknowledge the subjectivity of faith, but that acknowledgement does not inhibit my believing it is true."
Religious gibberish. This is nothing but pseudo-intellectual claptrap trying to justify embracing a belief system for which there is no supporting objective evidence of any kind. You believe what you believe because you want to believe it and largely because was the dominant religious belief system to which you were exposed growing up. Had you been born to a Muslim family in Saudi Arabia where 98% of the population is Muslim you'd almost certainly be saying these same things about your Muslim faith. Had you been born and raised in India it would be your Hindu faith.
The reason the world has seen so many religions and there is nothing they all have in common is that they're all just made up out of people's imaginations. Without an existing religion influencing someone's thinking the only constraints on the god or gods he makes up and any belief system based them are the limits of his imagination.
"I think it is important to note here that I have never demanded anyone accept my angle on truth as being universal."
Why is this important? I think it's irrelevant to the discussion.
"I believe my Christian faith is true"
You believe what you believe is true. Wow, what a shocker.
How are you any different than any believer in the history of the world? Every religion has had devoted followers who were just as sure what they believed was true as you are that what you believe is true.
Even within Christianity there is considerable variation in what people believe and they all believe their understanding is true. Catholics, the Amish, Mormons, the people who handle snakes and speak in tongues, the gay-haters in the Westboro Baptist Church and members of denominations that ordain gays to the ministry. They all believe their interpretations of scripture are correct and the others false. Many go so far as to claim others are false Christians or are member of cults.
No one, and certain not I, questions your sincerity. The reality you refuse to see is that sincerity is no evidence in any way that what you believe is true.
"and while I believe it will ultimately be vindicated as universally shown as true, I recognize that at this particular moment in space/time/history, subjectivity remains."
Actually, it's been that way for 2000 years and no indication that's going to change any time in the next 2000 years.
Can you just imagine the envy the giraffes must have had when they saw the Brontosaurus' walking up to board the boat. I bet they pulled their tiny heads down out of the sky roof and hid for weeks!
CS
I agree. Size matters to those that have it, the rest of us just try to shrug off its importance.
Stupid Brontosaurus
Apatosaurus... no such thing as a Brontosaurus (my childhood memories of the Flintstones is forever ruined)
The sharks and mackerel went at it too I bet.
Sto esaminando una foto dei dipinti della Cappella Sistina. Si tratta prevalentemente glutei.
Le pene sono molto piccole.
Chiedo scusa!
Non c'è bisogno di scusa.
Ridere ad alta voce.
Akria es correcto, una madre de dios debería ser suficiente penitencia
¿Le gusta mirar las fotos de colillas?
Watoto hawa leo ... ni kama wao ni kuzungumza lugha mbalimbali
I am sorry, I don't recognize your language.
Hey, I goggled it and that is funny.
Disculpe, pinturas
magis ubera – per pectus ipsum – evidence one should not rely on google translate!