website: God is imaginary

[jimbo]

This website provides 50 well-articulated reasons why we should believe that the biblical god is imaginary. The site is very user friendly and the author makes his or her points succinctly and clearly.

Here is an excerpt from the site:

"The way to change the world is to change people's minds. As more and more people openly discuss the fact that 'God' and 'Allah' are completely imaginary, the world becomes a better place. The people who believe in 'religion' look sillier and sillier. Eventually, religion becomes a fringe activity that is meaningless."

And another one:

"When we look at the Bible scientifically, ethically or rationally, we find that the Bible is wrong. When we look at all of Jesus' miracles scientifically, we find that none of them left behind any scientific or historical evidence. Nor, for that matter, did Jesus, nor did Jesus' resurrection. Strangely, not a single historical source independent of the Bible ever mentions the resurrection."

Enjoy.

Jimbo

[Glenn P]

And this site provides many well articulated articles, debates and more to show that God is not imaginary.

And so does this site.

And this one.

And this one.

This is fun!

[shunyadragon]

This website provides 50 well-articulated reasons why we should believe that the biblical god is imaginary. The site is very user friendly and the author makes his or her points succinctly and clearly.

Here is an excerpt from the site:

"The way to change the world is to change people's minds. As more and more people openly discuss the fact that 'God' and 'Allah' are completely imaginary, the world becomes a better place. The people who believe in 'religion' look sillier and sillier. Eventually, religion becomes a fringe activity that is meaningless."

Enjoy.

Jimbo

Interesting site. Even though I am a theist, I agree to some extent with the perspective of how ancient world views are presented.

[element771]

"The way to change the world is to change people's minds. As more and more people openly discuss the fact that 'God' and 'Allah' are completely imaginary, the world becomes a better place. The people who believe in 'religion' look sillier and sillier. Eventually, religion becomes a fringe activity that is meaningless."

Then we all become atheists and live in a Utopian society much like the former Soviet Union or China...two places that have/had impeccable records defending human rights.

[shunyadragon]

And this site provides many well articulated articles, debates and more to show that God is not imaginary.

And so does this site.

And this one.

And this one.

This is fun!

Nice clean cut colorful ties, and slick YEC shell games. Ah . . . and Plantinga's you can be normal and sane, and still believe.

[Glenn P]

I love the way the site uses Left Behind as a good source of Christian theology.


What's that you were saying about shell games, shuny?

Oh, and psssst, "Reasons to Believe" (the only site I linked to that covers origins etc) is OLD Earth Creationist.

Woops.

[gharfish]

You load sixteen threads an' what do you get ?
Another year older and deeper in debt.
St. Peter don't you call me; I don't want to go:
I owe my soul to someone I don't know.

[jimbo]

I have always been interested in collating a large list of the reasons why I cannot believe in Christianity. It is nice to see that someone who is much more articulate than me has gone ahead and put together this kind of list.

I am very happy that the Internet puts this kind of information at everyone's fingertips. Years ago when I was struggling with my doubts about Christianity, it was very difficult to find any information which supported what I was thinking and feeling. Now it is all just a click away, and people who are starting to doubt Christianity can see their doubts echoed by others all over the Internet. These people who are troubled by doubts about Christianity no longer have to scour their public library for some obscure work by a 19th century freethinker to find a kindred soul--all they have to do is punch-in "ex-Christian" into Google and they end up with dozens of sites filled with kindred souls. I believe this helps speed up the deconversion process considerably.

By the way, that site should provide all you apologists with plenty of opportunities to practice your
apologetic arguing "techniques." Though the author of the site anticipates and addresses many of the potential objections to his reasoning, I am sure the TWEB apologetic braintrust can come up with countless ways to dismiss what he writes.

Cheers,

Jimbo

[xtreem5150ahm]

I have always been interested in collating a large list of the reasons why I cannot believe in Christianity. It is nice to see that someone who is much more articulate than me has gone ahead and put together this kind of list.

I am very happy that the Internet puts this kind of information at everyone's fingertips. Years ago when I was struggling with my doubts about Christianity, it was very difficult to find any information which supported what I was thinking and feeling. Now it is all just a click away, and people who are starting to doubt Christianity can see their doubts echoed by others all over the Internet. These people who are troubled by doubts about Christianity no longer have to scour their public library for some obscure work by a 19th century freethinker to find a kindred soul--all they have to do is punch-in "ex-Christian" into Google and they end up with dozens of sites filled with kindred souls. I believe this helps speed up the deconversion process considerably.

Cheers,

Jimbo

He's on the Highway to Hell....... (or Autobahn to Hell, for those that have hi-speed internet)

[Mountain Man]

"When we look at the Bible scientifically, ethically or rationally, we find that the Bible is wrong. When we look at all of Jesus' miracles scientifically, we find that none of them left behind any scientific or historical evidence. Nor, for that matter, did Jesus, nor did Jesus' resurrection. Strangely, not a single historical source independent of the Bible ever mentions the resurrection."

And this, you think, is a quality argument? Wait, of course you do, cause you're dumb like that.

Tell me, just what sort of "scientific evidence" would we expect to find from any of Jesus' miracles recorded in the Bible? Turning water into wine? Walking on a stormy sea? Causing an axehead to float? Healing a blind man? The resurrection? Just what sort of scientific evidence do you think these are supposed to leave behind? As for historical evidence, we do have historical evidence. It's called the Bible. Perhaps you've heard of it?

Oh, but of course we need an "historical source that is independent of the Bible", whatever that means. Does this exclude the writings of the early church fathers since many of them refer to Christian scripture? Or is this just another ridiculous request for a skeptical, non-Christian source that nevertheless affirms the truth of Christianity?

[Adrift]

Don't you guys ever get tired of going round and round in these types of threads? If he's looking for attention... don't give it to him. Its not like he's even debating anything (which I thought was sort of the point of Apologetics 301).

[Seasanctuary]

I have always been interested in collating a large list of the reasons why I cannot believe in Christianity. It is nice to see that someone who is much more articulate than me has gone ahead and put together this kind of list.

It would be more meaningful and interesting for us if you were to compile your own list.

Obviously, you might have to work at it a bit harder.

[John Powell]

And this, you think, is a quality argument? Wait, of course you do, cause you're dumb like that.

Tell me, just what sort of "scientific evidence" would we expect to find from any of Jesus' miracles recorded in the Bible? Turning water into wine? Walking on a stormy sea? Causing an axehead to float? Healing a blind man? The resurrection? Just what sort of scientific evidence do you think these are supposed to leave behind?

POWELL:
Scientific evidence.

If you claim that your water boiled at 100 degrees C then what sort of evidence should there be?

Mountain Man:
As for historical evidence, we do have historical evidence. It's called the Bible. Perhaps you've heard of it?

POWELL:
I think the point was other than the Bible.

Mountain Man:
Oh, but of course we need an "historical source that is independent of the Bible", whatever that means.

POWELL:
It means a source that isn't the Bible or dependent on the Bible.

Mountain Man:
Does this exclude the writings of the early church fathers since many of them refer to Christian scripture?

POWELL:
It does if they're basically just repeating the Bible. On the other hand, if they quote some nonBiblical source such as Josephus then that could be independent.

Mountain Man:
Or is this just another ridiculous request for a skeptical, non-Christian source that nevertheless affirms the truth of Christianity?

POWELL:
Well, if people can do miracles like move mountains by voice command then it's likely there would be good evidence in recent times of mountains being moved by voice command. There's no good reason to think your water boils at a different temperature or is easier to convert to wine than my water. If you think your water is special then what's your evidence? If you have a special procedure to get water to turn to wine then let us know so we can try it. If you haven't a clue how to do it but you just believe some magician-type person did it because somebody told you so, well, that shows how gullible you are.

John Powell

[jimbo]

MM,

And this, you think, is a quality argument? Wait, of course you do, cause you're dumb like that.

I specified that that was an excerpt and I provided a link to the excerpt.. If you go to the link I provided with that excerpt, you will find that the author hyperlinks to information which backs up his statements.

In any case, I am sorry if I made it seem that the author was making unsupported claims.

Thanks.

Jimbo

[Mountain Man]

Don't you guys ever get tired of going round and round in these types of threads? If he's looking for attention... don't give it to him. Its not like he's even debating anything (which I thought was sort of the point of Apologetics 301).

Yeah, you're probably right, but sometimes it's just way to tempting to take a swing at the softballs he lobs our way because he thinks they're 100MPH fastballs, and it's fun to watch him desperately scamper for the fence when realizes they're getting knocked out of the park.