Original Sin?

Quote: stinkingliberal

ROFL, as they say.

I find this an unhelpful and sad response to pew. I wish you would allow him to challenge your false and preconceived notions about Christanity. Once you pick yourself up off the floor you might want to try again.

Like I said, some people can't see their own bias. It's real easy to see in others.

Quote: FrGamble

evidence testifying to the truth of Christianity, but not that it is proof by itself.

It's not proof of anything, of absolutely nothing.
It's a popular myth carried down thru the ages,
that's all. Present it in court with no corroborating
evidence and it would get tossed out every time.

Quote: FrGamble

I can take you to a courtroom and show you evidence after evidence that would point to His existence
.

And every bit of it would get tossed out
as heresay, or personal opinion. You have
not one single thing that would stand up
in any court as evidence that god exists.

You keep pointing to this 'relationship' thing,
like it's real. Do you know there are people
who think they have 'relationships' with trees,
that's it's a very real thing and they think the
tree is aware of them and it's a two way street?
It's all in their head, just like your relationship
with your god and his so called 'son'.

Humans are very good at this kind of self
deception. Especially if they surround
themselves with others who are of the same
beliefs. A good preacher can even talk his
entire flock into drinking poisoned Kool Aid,
or jumping en mass off a cliff.

When you say 'go looking for god', what you
really mean is, go looking for self delusion. No
thanks. If there's a god, he knows where I am.

Quote: FrGamble

I point it out a piece of evidence in the ever mounting accumilation of evidence testifying to the truth of Christianity, but not that it is proof by itself. I hope that this is clear and you won't keep trying to twist my words and create your strawmen.

Quote:

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world and is expected to outstrip Christianity by the end of the century. The number of Muslims will grow more than twice as fast as the world's population from now until 2050, the Pew Research Center has said. In 2010, Muslims made up 23.2 per cent of the global population.Dec 10, 2015

"Islam is the only religion expected to grow faster than the rate of the world population."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/islam-fastest-growing-religion-overtake-6986333


I sure hope that doesn't mean they are the truest of the true religions.

Quote: Evenbob

It's not proof of anything, of absolutely nothing.
It's a popular myth carried down thru the ages,
that's all.

Stop using proof and evidence interchangeably, they are different.

Even you have to admit it is not just a popular myth like any other passed on through the ages. The Christian myth if you will, has impacted the world very differently than any myth before or since. Even you would have to admit that. If you can't even acknowledge that for some strange reason the story of the crucified Jesus of Nazareth has impacted the world in ways no other story has then you really can't be taken seriously.

Quote: pew

Like I said, some people can't see their own bias. It's real easy to see in others.

As it is to preen yourself and say that you are the only unbiased person and that everybody who doesn't see things the way you do must be biased. Or, alternatively, to say (as, unpacking what you've said, I believe you have) that everybody is biased and there's no such thing as objective truth anyway. That way, you can just shrug off any refutations of your arguments as "He's biased."

I in fact reject the idea of bias in evaluating objective truth. How I WANT to feel about the reality of something or lack thereof has no bearing on the matter. This is where I think believers falter. They don't stop to consider how good it makes them feel to believe in a deity and so, they turn off their bullshit detectors. In other words, they don't ask themselves, am I choosing to believe these concepts because the evidence in their favor is compelling, or because it makes me happy to do so? Father Gamble isn't honestly asking himself this question, for example. But I certainly understand why.

As far as my personal motivations go, I was raised as a Catholic and if anything, am "biased" in the direction of wanting to believe there is a God because a world with a God would be more fair and just and there would be a prospect of life after death. That is very compelling. However, I can't find any evidence for its truth (and yes, I know that FG and billions of others distort the meaning of "evidence" in order to construct their comforting belief systems). So I am saddened by the fact that nothing I was taught is objectively true. But what I want to be true has absolutely no bearing on what actually is true.

Quote: Evenbob

And every bit of it would get tossed out
as heresay, or personal opinion. You have
not one single thing that would stand up
in any court as evidence that god exists.

Are you talking about proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesus Christ is God in a courtroom? If so I think you might be correct. If you are talking about proving beyond a reasonable doubt that there is a God, a higher power, or an ultimate first cause of the universe then you are wrong. You would simply have to point out that everything that does not have the reason for its being in itself and is therefore contingent and has a beginning needs a cause. This is unquestionable and you could bring as evidence anything in the material universe, including the universe itself. Then to avoid the impossibility of an infinite regress you logically need to have an non-contingent, spiritual, eternal, all-powerful being/force as the cause and ultimate beginning of all things. This being/force we all commonly all call God. I mean there are lots of other ways to prove this in court but this is the most simple. If you were the defense lawyer for the atheist side how would you respond?

By the way just for kicks let's reverse the sides. If you were in court to prove that there is no God what would be your opening statement? What proof would you bring to convince the court beyond a reasonable doubt that there is certainly no God? I await your answer.

Quote:

You keep pointing to this 'relationship' thing,
like it's real.

It is very real. Have you never experienced a relationship before? How about a relationship with someone where you knew in their heart what they would say or how they would react without even asking them? Have you ever thought about what someone else would say to you but heard it in your own voice or in your own mind? Is this not real? Are the people closest to you still speaking to you and influencing and guiding you even when they aren't physically right next to you?

Quote: stinkingliberal

That way, you can just shrug off any refutations of your arguments as "He's biased."

Here are two examples where I think you are doing what you rightly condemn above:

Quote: stinkingliberal

Father Gamble isn't honestly asking himself this question, for example. But I certainly understand why.

Quote:

(and yes, I know that FG and billions of others distort the meaning of "evidence" in order to construct their comforting belief systems). So I am saddened by the fact that nothing I was taught is objectively true. But what I want to be true has absolutely no bearing on what actually is true.

On another note, what do you think the difference is between objective and subjective truth to the person who believes? How do you know that it is not your subjective truth that there is no God? I have never heard you defend atheism with any positive evidence. You are quick to deny there is any evidence behind believing in God and so declare that subjective. Why don't you also think it is subjective to believe there is no God when you also realize there is no evidence. It seems to me that you have two choices that you think have no evidence to support them: there is either a God or there is not a God. For some reason you have decided that because it is more compelling and attractive to believe in God then it must NOT be objectively true. Can you explain to me why you think this? Given two equal choices; one that was compelling and attractive to not just me but billions and billions of people and the other that is not, I would tend to think the compelling one was the more objective truth.

Quote: Nareed

Can you imagine what the reaction would be to a modern politician saying we need to persecute this or that group because otherwise god will look unkindly on us and punish the country? We call such people extremists.

I think this is another thing Christianity frees us from. The idea is that God has sent His only Son to free us from our sins; they have been forgiven - all past, present, and future sins. There is no need to appease or turn away God's wrath, God has promised to love us unconditionally and forever, even when we make mistakes. His justice has been fulfilled by His own marvelous love for us. We don't need to make sacrifices over and over again to make God happy and we don't need to read entrails to know His will for now He speaks to every heart and treats every human being, emperor and slave as equal.