What's new
By:
Filters

Archeologists find David's palace.

Stoked said:
Devils advocate here.

Just because the person and place are real does not mean the story is.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, but the issue is that many atheists just write off the whole Bible as pure fiction. It seems atheists perceive it as laughable that people could still believe in the Bible. But yet archeologist keep proving a very large portion of the Bible in terms of its people and places.
 
the issue is that many atheists just write off the whole Bible as pure fiction.
Click to expand...

Links/examples? Atheists criticize the way the stories occurred or who actually caused some natural events. Not that the people/groups/cities never existed.

atheists perceive it as laughable that people could still believe in the Bible.
Click to expand...

You really think atheists find the idea of Jerusalem, kingdoms, and wars as laughable? No. They don't necessarily believe all the stories and experiences of the people in these societies that are contained in the bible. Do you believe all the stories and miracles of Mohammad? The Buddha? etc.?

I was more referring to atheist that make fun of the Bible saying that its just a bunch of made up stories.
Click to expand...

Examples please. Who has ever said something that is now disproved with this recent archaeological find?

Atheists will rip the Bible apart but yet Archaeology keeps proving the Bible to be failry accurate in terms of the people in the Bible as well as places.
Click to expand...

Again, links to atheists criticizing the geography of the bible as laughable? Those generally aren't the things that atheists criticize.

As well as matching up with the time frames.
Click to expand...

This is a silly criticism of atheists. Even Mormon/Christian apologists/historians criticize many of the timelines laid out in the bible along with believing Christian/Jewish academics. Many will also admit that many of the books of the bible were not written when claimed. Are you saying that you believe the earth is only 6,000 years old then like the bible states? Or that the earth was created in 6 days? I mean, I can't imagine a believer like you would ever criticize the time frames stated in the Bible.

Again I'm not saying this should make anyone a believer or becomes religious. I stated that before but everyone I guess didn't read that part.
Click to expand...

No, we read it. It just doesn't quite say that. You didn't talk about it "making anyone a believer," but you made a comment implying atheists are too dumb to understand basic history regardless of whether they are "Christian or believe in it spiritually." You said nothing about becoming a believer or religious. And then you used the word "hypocritically" in a way that doesn't make sense.

I am just saying Atheist can no longer just brush off the Bible as bunch of made up stories.
Click to expand...

Again, links? Besides a 15 year old kid who believes he's smarter than everyone, please point me to credible books/articles that deny the historicity of the bible, its people, and its geography on the whole. Then, I will link you to Mormon articles by general authorities admitting errors in the book regarding timelines, geography, people, and events.

Archeology has proven time and time again that many of these people and places did exist.
Click to expand...

Link to atheists denying these places exist? Does anyone dispute that?

Your overall argument is like claiming that people who don't believe in the Doctrine and Covenants/writings of Joseph Smith are also dismissing him as a historical figure or the Mormon experience as a fairy tale. It seems atheists must somehow be amazed to learn Joseph Smith was a real person that really taught people and started a church. And that seeing the Nauvoo and Kirtland temples somehow validates the Mormon religion.

You are mischaracterizing atheist views either intentionally or unintentionally. You've created a strawman that isn't even convincing to the other believers here.
 
Last edited:
Do you really think people turned into salt? Do you really believe a man spent an extended amount of time in a whales stomach? There is so many ridiculous things in religious text that people are expected to believe happened. Why dont things like that happen nowadays?
 
Mr. McGibblets said:
Links/examples? Atheists criticize the way the stories occurred or who actually caused some natural events. Not that the people/groups/cities never existed.



You really think atheists find the idea of Jerusalem, kingdoms, and wars as laughable? No. They don't necessarily believe all the stories and experiences of the people in these societies that are contained in the bible. Do you believe all the stories and miracles of Mohammad? The Buddha? etc.?



Examples please. Who has ever said something that is now disproved with this recent archaeological find?



Again, links to atheists criticizing the geography of the bible as laughable? Those generally aren't the things that atheists criticize.



This is a silly criticism of atheists. Even Mormon/Christian apologists/historians criticize many of the timelines laid out in the bible along with believing Christian/Jewish academics. Many will also admit that many of the books of the bible were not written when claimed. Are you saying that you believe the earth is only 6,000 years old then like the bible states? Or that the earth was created in 6 days? I mean, I can't imagine a believer like you would ever criticize the time frames stated in the Bible.



No, we read it. It just doesn't quite say that. You didn't talk about it "making anyone a believer," but you made a comment implying atheists are too dumb to understand basic history regardless of whether they are "Christian or believe in it spiritually." You said nothing about becoming a believer or religious. And then you used the word "hypocritically" in a way that doesn't make sense.



Again, links? Besides a 15 year old kid who believes he's smarter than everyone, please point me to credible books/articles that deny the historicity of the bible, its people, and its geography on the whole. Then, I will link you to Mormon articles by general authorities admitting errors in the book regarding timelines, geography, people, and events.



Link to atheists denying these places exist? Does anyone dispute that?

Your overall argument is like claiming that people who don't believe in the Doctrine and Covenants/writings of Joseph Smith are also dismissing him as a historical figure or the Mormon experience as a fairy tale. It seems atheists must somehow be amazed to learn Joseph Smith was a real person that really taught people and started a church. And that seeing the Nauvoo and Kirtland temples somehow validates the Mormon religion.

You are mischaracterizing atheist views either intentionally or unintentionally. You've created a strawman that isn't even convincing to the other believers here.
Click to expand...

Links? Im talking about real conversations I have with atheists.
 
I could write a book that said God touched my private parts in my bathroom.

3,000 years later archaeologist find that indeed my bathroom did exist. Does not make my story real.
 
Beantown said:
I totally agree, but the issue is that many atheists just write off the whole Bible as pure fiction. It seems atheists perceive it as laughable that people could still believe in the Bible. But yet archeologist keep proving a very large portion of the Bible in terms of its people and places.
Click to expand...

I haven't met any atheists who find the Bible ridiculous because it does not contain historical events. That actually would have been an accomplishment given the fact that the two testaments were written over a period of about a 1000 years.

But believing that whales exist, and believing some guy lived inside a whale for three days because his all-knowing god got upset with him are two entirely different things.

And you have to understand, for many reflective non-believers, disbelief has little to do with the ridiculousness of the stories. I don't care that some people believe a global flood occurred a few thousand years ago, creating the illusion of old Earth, and planting the evidence for evolution. I don't care that Muslims believe David commanded an army of birds, and could hear ants scrambling to avoid being stepped on. I can accept that those are parables or metaphors or what have you. And I can ignore the idiots who will believe anything they're told, as I know they are as common among atheists as they are among the religious.

My disbelief is very very simple. There is absolutely no reason to believe that any of that stuff is true. Why would I care about a story of a god made flesh so he can temporary die, because doing so somehow washes away the sin of eating the fruits of the tree of knowledge, which forever tainted mankind? Try to see it from a perspective of a person who knows nothing about how religion works, and is hearing this for the first time as a description of our reality. Why would I give it more thought than I do Scientology? Or Norse paganism? Or any other fantastical tale that claims its truth can be verified through the denial of reason (faith). Because believing it makes you feel good? Well, that's nice for you. But I need A LOT more.

My opposition (not disbelief) to religion stem partly from the fact that the idea of faith is a hindrance to free thought and inquiry, and a serious impediment to the quest to understand the world on its own terms. Sure there are those who treat faith as a personal spiritual endeavor that does not need overlap with the naturalistic understanding of the universe and our place in it. But those people are rare. I'm also incredibly skeptical of our ability to construct a meaningful system of morality if we believe morals ethereal and absolute without the need for justification.

This isn't intended solely for Beantown. My time is not THAT cheap. But as atheists were mentioned several times, I felt the thread needed an atheist perspective.
 
Did you just seriously neg rep me for answering your question, Beantown? Are you that insecure?
 
Siro said:
Did you just seriously neg rep me for answering your question, Beantown? Are you that insecure?
Click to expand...

If you're gonna be a little bitch and add stupid sly remarks I will neg rep you. I didn't ask for your specific answer so if you don't like me then don't read my thread.
 
Tom Sawyer took place Missouri... a real state! NO ONE CAN LAUGH OFF TOM SAWYER AS FICTION ANYMORE. BWAHAHAH.

Inglorious ******** had some real historical characters in a real historical setting. EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED IN INGLORIOUS ******** HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE. HITLER DIED IN THAT THEATRE!!!!!!1

So Athiests can't say the Bible is complete fiction... is this some sort of small moral victory for you? They'll still outright reject every single thing you glean from the book to be important. So... hooray?
 
I'm going to write a book about sorcerers and magic, kinda like Harry Potter. Except it's going to take place in historical Egypt.

Historian: "The settings in your book are historically true, and even some characters".

Me: "So does this mean you believe what I've written?"

Historian: "No, it's all fiction. But at least you have the setting going for you."
 
Beantown said:
If you're gonna be a little bitch and add stupid sly remarks I will neg rep you. I didn't ask for your specific answer so if you don't like me then don't read my thread.
Click to expand...

What makes you think I don't like you? That's not true. This exchange literally makes up over 90% of the total time I've spent thinking about you. My remark was in jest.
 
Siro said:
What makes you think I don't like you? That's not true. This exchange literally makes up over 90% of the total time I've spent thinking about you. My remark was in jest.
Click to expand...

The last 10% of that time is dedicated to worrying what he thinks about you following a neg rep, apparently.
 
Beantown said:
If you're gonna be a little bitch and add stupid sly remarks I will neg rep you. I didn't ask for your specific answer so if you don't like me then don't read my thread.
Click to expand...

tumblr_m4i32l7dQR1r1b9aso1_400.gif
 
Sneakers said:
Tom Sawyer took place Missouri... a real state! NO ONE CAN LAUGH OFF TOM SAWYER AS FICTION ANYMORE. BWAHAHAH.

Inglorious ******** had some real historical characters in a real historical setting. EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED IN INGLORIOUS ******** HAPPENED IN REAL LIFE. HITLER DIED IN THAT THEATRE!!!!!!1

So Athiests can't say the Bible is complete fiction... is this some sort of small moral victory for you? They'll still outright reject every single thing you glean from the book to be important. So... hooray?
Click to expand...

Thanks for this enlightening post Dutch...I mean Sneakers.
 
Sneakers said:
Y u call me Dutch? ... I'm going to find a way to consider this a compliment.
Click to expand...

Messing with you for basically acting the exact way you are disagreeing with. Nothing proves a point like lowering yourself to their standards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top