Youtube: How your religion appears to us nonbelievers

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
a reply to: Bone75

Just giving you the reference.........

Well thank you. That was very kind of you.

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Ghost147

You do realize that Bible Thumping isn't a literal term. You do not have to literally "thump your bible" to be a "bible thumper".

Umm... you do realize that's why its a derogatory term don't ya? Do you think everyone but Christians should have labels that are off-limits?

At what point in any of my comments here - or anywhere else - have I ever implied that? I only commented on that issue because you have continuously shown a misunderstanding of the term "Bible Thumper" in numerous posts of yours. In those posts you repeatedly made statements that indicated that you believed "Bible Thumper" to be someone who literally thumps on bibles. Hence my non-insulting post. I wasn't ever insinuating that anyone else, other than Christians should have terms such as those. I was never putting you down, or had any tone that should suggest that. I was honestly, and innocently stating what you seemed to have not previously known.

This may surprise you, but not everything that anyone else posts which happens to differ from your current set of knowledge, your beliefs, or your mentality is a direct and utter insult to you or those beliefs you hold.

This issue seems to be an intrinsic one of yours.

there are 2 layers in the scripture. one layer is decidedly negative and the other, decidedly positive. you make the choice what to agree with and it colors your progress and experiences.

originally posted by: Ghost147

I only commented on that issue because you have continuously shown a misunderstanding of the term "Bible Thumper" in numerous posts of yours. In those posts you repeatedly made statements that indicated that you believed "Bible Thumper" to be someone who literally thumps on bibles.

You do realize that i was responding to someone who used it in a literal sense don't you?

Quote by Grimpachi:
"lol... anytime someone says bible thumping I get a mental picture of those I have actually seen thumping their bible and in almost every case they were a nut case."

a reply to: Bone75

Yes I have seen them do it in a literal sense. And when I hear the term I do get a mental picture of them. It is funny when they are waving their bible around and repeatedly slap it making a thumping sound. I am sure you understood what I meant but choose to go on a tangent. The video I showed was of a guy bible thumping not in the literal sense but it was funny because at the end he actually thumps it. If you have never seen street preachers and their like doing it well maybe you missed it or ignored it.

Either way I am sure you know what the term bible thumping means at least I hope you do. Actual thumping is optional but is always great for effect/laughs. It is possible that the term came from those types continuously slapping their bibles while making their holier than though speeches. Seems entirely plausible.

Edit to add..

After writing that I just had to see if I could find where the term came from...

Bible thumper (U.S.) someone perceived as aggressively imposing their Christian beliefs upon others. The term derives from preachers thumping their hands down on the Bible, or thumping the Bible itself, to emphasize a point during a sermon. The term's target domain is broad and can often extend to anyone engaged in a public show of religion, fundamentalist or not. The term is most commonly used in English-speaking countries.[1]

en.wikipedia.org...

So now we know...lol

originally posted by: Bone75
You do realize that i was responding to someone who used it in a literal sense don't you?

Quote by Grimpachi:
"lol... anytime someone says bible thumping I get a mental picture of those I have actually seen thumping their bible and in almost every case they were a nut case."

Actually, I responded to your misconception because of the very quote you just provided. In it, Grimpachi says "Anytime Someone says bible thumping I get a mental picture..." This in no way shows that he/she actually believes that bible thumping is literally people thumping on their bibles. Much the same way "Jumping for Joy" essentially means extreme and sudden happiness, one does not literally have to jump in order to be extremely joyful. However, it does inspire the image of someone jumping about excitedly.

But, Grimpachi explains it above, even though it was evident he didn't mean he believed that Bible Thumping was literal.

Now that you (hopefully) understand, lets try to get back on topic. Earlier in the topic you stated that this video was attacking Christians (or something along those lines), could you source your reasoning for this? I didn't get that impression at all, and I believe that it could simply be another misunderstanding you're dealing with.

God reveals Himself to those who seek Him. In this life. He also sends angels to save people ALL THE TIME. Among other things. Miracles, creation, time etc...
Natural truth and a sense that perfect justice will be done universally come directly from God. BTW, don't forget that perfect justice means perfect justice. We can not do any amount of good that is enough to make up for just 1 sin. We are supposed to do good. It doesn't make up for anything. That's where Yeshua the Messiah comes in.

Is this guy talking about how atheists view Deists or what?

Anyways, for all you uncertain people - seek God and you will find God. God said it. Believe it. It's true.

Soooo....how did "I", "You" or anyone in those rooms get into that house in the first place. I mean isn't there a need for origin or is it acceptable that "we" or "I" Just appeared unknowingly to be put through a phase of tests?a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows


Seriously...even outside of biblical knowledge, I am sure all of us have pondered on our existence and wondered where we came from right? And have any of you just "popped" into existence and "let the testing begin"? I don't really see or appreciate the video. Opinion of course.

If every single religion were wiped out and nothing were passed on, it would never be created exactly that way again. There might be some other nonsense in its place, but not that exact same nonsense. If all of science was wiped out, it would still be true and someone would find a way to figure it all out again.

a reply to: Prezbo369

I dont think thats entirely honest. Scientific knowledge gets rewritten all the time. There are certain things that never change like the scientific method but their views on things have an influence on data interpretation as well as flawed procedures and flawed issues of motivation such as monetary gain from corporations in order to slant results for some studies.

a reply to: Aural

The same results will ultimately surface in time despite any human error, subjective interpretation, flawed procedures or flawed issues of motivation that might arise.

It's kinda the whole point of peer reviewed science.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Some major flaws with this mans analogy as he tried to center it around the premise of Christianity, but he failed unfortunately.

Why does the Father give his son the company in the analogy? He says you are to prove your worth to your Father, and gives you a list of things you must do and you must do everything right while also believing with all your heart that your Father is there. This has nothing to do with what Christianity teaches, in fact I would say that you don't have to prove your worth to your Father at all, but that you must come to understand the nature of yourself and your ego. Simply believing God is there doesn't make your a Christian. Satan and demons know God is there so if just believing in his existence is what made you Christian then the Bible wouldn't say so many negative things about Satan and his actions.

Problem with this analogy is he tries to make atheist to be some all knowing heroes that are just trying to help when the truth is most people have had a personal experience with a Christian or members of a church building that put them off of the Scriptures before they even knew what was in them. He has two gentleman represent Christians and says that they tell the child that His Father is really there, but says there is no objective way of knowing if they are honest. He made the guys representing Christians who told him his Father was really there take a bribe to portray that religious people are bias and untrustworthy while the white lab coats(atheist) are super trust worthy and would never have bias opinions or unhonest answers. If the analogy was done without his personal bias getting in the way I feel like he would have admitted there is no objective way of showing that the men in lab coats were right either.

Another major flaw is many times he mentions what is right and what is wrong. He said the lab coats wanted to stop things that were unethical and something they considered Evil.

This shows that this man obviously, whether he admits it in conversation or not, believes in objective Good and objective Evil. If there is a moral law that describes what is objectively Good and objectively Bad, then how does an atheist justify morality. Now please don't misunderstand the argument I am not saying as an atheist you don't know morality, but I am asking if you suppose a moral law without a moral law giver where is the logic? What standard do you hold your morality to? Society?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Morality is dictated by nature. Without it we as a species would not have survived for as long as we have. Before there was any organized religion, people worshiped forces they could not understand. The sun, wind, rain, etc. They had no "God" and yet they had morality and a sense of community. The analogy that this "God" is what provides morality is completely wrong and flawed. It has been exploited by organized religion, especially the christians.

originally posted by: haarvik
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Morality is dictated by nature. Without it we as a species would not have survived for as long as we have. Before there was any organized religion, people worshiped forces they could not understand. The sun, wind, rain, etc. They had no "God" and yet they had morality and a sense of community. The analogy that this "God" is what provides morality is completely wrong and flawed. It has been exploited by organized religion, especially the christians.

Nice theory about what ancient people worshiped first. God or his creations. You say creations, but there is no proof for this.

In Christian theology, God ingrains the truth in us (morality). God said people would exploit religion, repeatedly, so basically you are saying that what God said would happen happened as a reason you don't believe in God.

Interesting video. I enjoyed it. The second video was also interesting.

I find myself swaying back and forth from atheism, to the belief in some type of "Karma based cosmic force" that binds us all together.

But I try not to get into discussions with people about such things as I don't want to be responsible for changing someones beliefs. On the other hand, many religions priority is to "spread the word", to basically try and change peoples beliefs. I understand the reasoning behind this, but I cannot agree with it.

As long as you're not hurting yourself or anyone else, and you are happy. Good for you.

a reply to: WeAllDieSoon

Sure there is. American Indians had Sun, wind and rain gods. The Egyptians had Ra the sun god. And the list goes on. Religion has been setup to be a fail safe doctrine. No proof, just circumstantial evidence based on opinions and hearsay. And of course all texts have been written in such a way as to keep the believer in a loop of denial. Faith, blasphemy and so forth. There is always a passage or saying that will negate any logical or proven explanation.

a reply to: WeAllDieSoon

Nice theory about what ancient people worshiped first. God or his creations. You say creations, but there is no proof for this.

Have a look at The Evolution of God by Robert Wright.

There's LOADS of references/a huge bibliography, and excellent appendices that will help you. Plus, he's very entertaining.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I never said there is no evidence. The specific word I used was "proof."

a reply to: WeAllDieSoon

Well, there's no "proof" of God or Jesus, either.

There are only archaic bits of texts, cuneiforms, relics/artifacts, and passed down stories. Evidence of what people believed does not make those people's beliefs "true."

Edit: No matter - have you read Robert Wright's book?
I bet you'd enjoy it. Seeing you have a sense of humor.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I disagree. Proof of God is everywhere and in everything. That is not just evidence. It is solid proof.

Proof of Jesus exists, you just have to know how to look for him.

I have heard commentary on him but I have never read his work. I only vaguely remember the commentary. I might check it out. Thanks for the recommendation.