Observations

Recently I saw an atheist claim that ‘spiritual beliefs do not equal religious beliefs’. This may be true, but for an atheist to say so is a bit like a vegetarian lecturing on the best way to prepare a steak.

Advertisements

40 Responses to Observations

  1. ashleyfmiller says:

    Spirituality and atheism are not mutually exclusive.

    http://tinyurl.com/33xb276

  2. NewEnglandBob says:

    As is usually the case, more atheists know more about religion and the bible than most religious people. The reason for this is that if most religions actually taught directly from the bible, without cherry picking and trying to rationalize and reinterpret the words then people would wise up and see the bible for the inconsistent and error filled bronze age document that it is.

  3. jackhudson says:

    As is usually the case, more atheists know more about religion and the bible than most religious people. The reason for this is that if most religions actually taught directly from the bible, without cherry picking and trying to rationalize and reinterpret the words then people would wise up and see the bible for the inconsistent and error filled bronze age document that it is.

    Yeah, 3000 years of Judaism, 2000 years of Christianity, numerous translations in every language imaginable, billions of believers, millions of preachers, thousands of theologians, and until the New Atheists came along, none of us have actually ever read the Bible.

    Really?

  4. jackhudson says:

    Spirituality and atheism are not mutually exclusive.

    Honestly curious here – absent a ‘spirit’ and or belief in ‘spirits’, how is an atheist spiritual?

  5. NewEnglandBob says:

    Yes, really. Not the few theologists, the 99.999999% of the religious.

  6. jackhudson says:

    Yes, really. Not the few theologists, the 99.999999% of the religious.

    And you know this how?

  7. NewEnglandBob says:

    By talking to them in person, asking them to justify their outrageous claims, which they almost never can do. Also seeing the wrong things they write.

  8. jackhudson says:

    So, you have talked to 99.99999% of a billion persons directly to determine their degree of knowledge about Scripture?

    I know hundreds of Christians personally, and have interacted with thousands more – and they all seem to be familiar with what the Bible says, and read it regularly.

  9. Grant Dexter says:

    Atheists are so silly. 🙂

    Greetings, Jack. Michael has been encouraging people to stop by your site, so I thought I’d check it out. 🙂

  10. jackhudson says:

    Welcome Grant.

    Yeah, I noticed a sudden up-tick in traffic – I’m glad people are stopping by to say, ‘Hi”. 🙂

  11. NewEnglandBob says:

    You seem to have a poor command of the English language, Jack. Maybe you should go to a remedial class in understanding the language. Is it a second language for you?

    I have talked with many theists, because they are all around me. I talk with them every single day. At the dentist office, at work, at the market, etc.

    How many atheists have you actually sat down with and had a one-on-one talk? I doubt many, even though you think you are an expert on the subject.

    Very few theists around the northeast actually read the bible and those who do have little understanding of it.

    Theists are so silly. I will try to use smaller words from now on so their understanding is less challenged.

  12. jackhudson says:

    How many atheists have you actually sat down with and had a one-on-one talk? I doubt many, even though you think you are an expert on the subject.

    Quite a few actually. In fact I engage every atheist I know about and have any sort of interaction with; I have had a number of them seek me out specifically because they heard I am willing to engage them. And I have engaged hundreds on the web – perhaps more. If you know any send them my way, I am always open to reasonable and forthright discussions on issues of faith and non-faith.

    As a former adamant agnostic, I know where atheists are coming from, and I bear them no ill will, I simply disagree with them.

    Very few theists around the northeast actually read the bible and those who do have little understanding of it.

    Well I have to admit I haven’t surveyed my Northeastern brethren lately – I can only speak for those of us in the Midwest, and we are an incredibly well read lot. Good looking too.

    Theists are so silly. I will try to use smaller words from now on so their understanding is less challenged.

    Expressing another reasonable and well thought out argument I see.

    One more thought, since we are discussing understanding the Bible. You referred to it in your first post as a “bronze age document”. In fact, the Bronze Age in the Mesopotamian region occurred some 4000-5000 years ago, while the oldest Biblical writings only date to about 3000 years ago, many of course much more recently than that.

    If you the very first (and only) fact you mentioned here is verifiably wrong, how can we know you are capable of evaluating the accuracy of others statements as they pertain to the Bible?

  13. NewEnglandBob says:

    “Expressing another reasonable and well thought out argument I see. ”

    That was a response to the jackass minion Grant who said the same thing here above about atheists.

    Why did YOU not respond to him saying it? I guess fairness is not used here. Biased and bigoted?

  14. NewEnglandBob says:

    3150 — 2900 BCE Early Bronze Age I
    2900 — 2600 BCE Early Bronze Age II
    2600 — 2300 BCE Early Bronze Age III
    2200 — 1950 BCE Middle Bronze Age I
    1950 — 1550 BCE Middle Bronze Age II
    1550 — 1400 BCE Late Bronze Age I
    1400 — 1200 BCE Late Bronze Age II

    ———————————-
    One source:
    Job is perhaps the earliest book that was written (around 2000 BC)
    ———————————-
    another source – from Reading The Bible With Understanding by Dr. Lane Burgland:

    We will examine the first five books of the Bible, sometimes called the Pentateuch. According to several passages (Exodus 24:4; 34:28; Deuteronomy 4:13; 5:22; 10:4; and others) Moses wrote at least part of the Pentateuch. Referring to Deuteronomy 24: 1-4, Jesus states that Moses wrote this section of Scripture (Mark 10:5; a parallel is Matthew 19:8). When the Sadducees refer to the levirate marriage law as having come from Moses (Mark 12:19; parallels are Matthew 22:24; Luke 20:28), Jesus does not correct them.

    The internal testimony of Scripture clearly shows that Moses wrote at least some of the first five books of the Bible. Some parts may have been updated later (see Genesis 14:14; 36:31; 47:11), and the last chapter of Deuteronomy, which records Moses’ death, may have been added by someone else. However, it is fair to say that as far as the record of Scripture is concerned, Moses is the author of the Pentateuch. Since the Exodus may be dated to 1446 B.C. (see 1 Kings 6: 1), this would mean the first five books of the Bible written in the last half of the 15th century it B.C The events that took place prior to Moses’ birth in Exodus 1 would have come down to Moses, most probably in oral form. However, some written records, especially from the time of Abraham (about 1900 B.C.), could have been part of the resources available to Moses. (At least five different writing systems were available to Abraham. He may well have been familiar with at least one of them.)
    ———————————-
    Therefore Bronze age.

  15. jackhudson says:

    That was a response to the jackass minion Grant who said the same thing here above about atheists.

    Why did YOU not respond to him saying it? I guess fairness is not used here. Biased and bigoted?

    So you were correcting that by telling me I should go to remedial English class? You don’t make a lot of sense here Bob. None the less, I appreciate you coming here at Michael’s behest. I hoped there would be more of you here – apparently his reading audience isn’t as large as he presumed – or as pliable.

    As pertains to the ‘bronze age book’, while the writing of certain portions of Scripture may overlap the final years of certain Bronze age civilizations, the vast majority of Scripture was written well after that – certainly the New Testament was.

    Not that it matters much anyway; the bronze age was a great time for writing books from what I hear.

  16. NewEnglandBob says:

    I see, you don’t like the answer that even came from your fictitious Jesus, so you redefine the problem as “most of it was written after”. Typical slimy move.

    “the bronze age was a great time for writing books from what I hear.”

    What you hear is wrong. People were extremely ignorant and uneducated. They didn’t even know to wash their hands and apparently neither did the god of the bible or the fictitious Jesus, since millions of lives could have been saved if that had been noted in either the old or new testament.

    There is nothing in either testament that was unknown to any sheep herder of the day. Oh yes, and a lot of what the bibles say is flat out wrong. Go ahead and cherry pick some more and move the goalposts once again. I will keep on laughing at the silliness here.

    PS: the response to the Grant spewing and my comment about your command of English were two separate issues. You were the one who said I talked to billions of people – so which is it? Do you have poor understanding of English or were you maliciously attributing to me something I did not say? You make little sense here. You conflate one issue with another as a diversion when you have no sufficient answer. Just diversions and straw man tactics. I continue to laugh at the tactics which are juvenile.

  17. jackhudson says:

    I see, you don’t like the answer that even came from your fictitious Jesus, so you redefine the problem as “most of it was written after”. Typical slimy move.

    I said in my first post – “while the oldest Biblical writings only date to about 3000 years ago, many of course much more recently than that.” I haven’t redefined anything. What you find ‘slimy’ about that may be in your imagination.

    What you hear is wrong. People were extremely ignorant and uneducated. They didn’t even know to wash their hands and apparently neither did the god of the bible or the fictitious Jesus, since millions of lives could have been saved if that had been noted in either the old or new testament.

    Leviticus elaborates at length on proper hygiene, as well as quarantining the infectious. The Bible was no medical text (nor was it intended to be) but one would certainly live a much more healthy life if one followed its precepts.

    There is nothing in either testament that was unknown to any sheep herder of the day. Oh yes, and a lot of what the bibles say is flat out wrong. Go ahead and cherry pick some more and move the goalposts once again. I will keep on laughing at the silliness here.

    I don’t actually think the average sheep herder of the day could even read or write, so obviously even in that respect the Bible was an advance.

    PS: the response to the Grant spewing and my comment about your command of English were two separate issues. You were the one who said I talked to billions of people – so which is it? Do you have poor understanding of English or were you maliciously attributing to me something I did not say? You make little sense here. You conflate one issue with another as a diversion when you have no sufficient answer. Just diversions and straw man tactics.

    I asked if you had talked to billions of people (thus the question mark at the end of the sentence), since that is the population of believers that would have to be surveyed to determine whether they had in fact read the Bible. Of course, as I said I personally know any number of Christians who have read and are familiar with what’s in the Bible, contrary to your claim. It’s not that difficult Bob.

    I continue to laugh at the tactics which are juvenile.

    You seem to be quite a jolly fellow.

  18. NewEnglandBob says:

    “…unknown to any sheep herder of the day”

    That has nothing to do with whether they could read or write.

    There you go again, obfuscation instead of addressing the issue.

    “one would certainly live a much more healthy life if one followed its precepts.”

    Like smite the child who disobeys? LOLOL

  19. jackhudson says:

    That has nothing to do with whether they could read or write.

    There you go again, obfuscation instead of addressing the issue.

    It’s rather hard to address a rather vague issue, or entertain it seriously.

    Are you saying that the basic sheep herder was able to lay out an extensive legal system for governing the nation of Israel? That they were able to lay out a fundamental moral system which continues to serve us to this day? That they were able to opine on the nature of God, that He ‘is that He is’, a foundational notion of an eternal uncaused Being?

    How exactly do you expect to survey those sheep herders to find out how much of this they did or did not know Bob?

    Like smite the child who disobeys?

    Well yes, for one; many children would live longer, more productive lives if they were regularly and appropriately smitten.

  20. NewEnglandBob says:

    The bible has no moral system, it is one of the most immoral documents produced.

    It is OK, according to the bible, to kill whole nations of people, including women and children.

  21. NewEnglandBob says:

    Then if smiting their children does not work…

    Deuteronomy 21:18-21 to kill their disobedient children with stones:

    “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.” 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death.”

    This is morality?

  22. jackhudson says:

    The bible has no moral system, it is one of the most immoral documents produced.

    I think anyone following the Ten Commandments faithfully would be undoubtedly moral by any standard.

    It is OK, according to the bible, to kill whole nations of people, including women and children.

    Yes, God has the right to give or take away life – it’s His to do with as He will.

    According to Scripture, everyone dies for exactly the same reason.

  23. jackhudson says:

    Then if smiting their children does not work…

    Deuteronomy 21:18-21 to kill their disobedient children with stones:

    “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard.” 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death.”

    This is morality?

    Why would punishing a shamefully immoral drunk be immoral?

  24. NewEnglandBob says:

    Your stances now make sense, Jack Hudson. You have shown how immoral you are. You are as bad as the Islamists, supporting murder of individuals and entire nations including innocent people.

  25. jackhudson says:

    Your stances now make sense, Jack Hudson. You have shown how immoral you are. You are as bad as the Islamists, supporting murder of individuals and entire nations including innocent people.

    Well no, I don’t support any such thing; I don’t think any innocent people should ever be murdered. In fact, the very reason Biblical morality is essential is because it addresses the condition which causes people to murder each other to begin with.

    The fact that I allow for God to judge people for crimes as He sees fit doesn’t mean I think its my job to harm anyone; it does however recognize that this is His perogative, not mine or yours.

  26. jackhudson says:

    By the way, talk about goalpost changing – what happened to your smart shepherds? Weren’t working for you?

  27. NewEnglandBob says:

    No, its DUMB shepherds. Comprehension is the key. They work fine for me, its the apologetics who have the problem.

  28. NewEnglandBob says:

    “The fact that I allow for God to judge people for crimes as He sees fit doesn’t mean I think its my job to harm anyone; it does however recognize that this is His perogative, not mine or yours.”

    Blind faith leads men to do the most dastardly, disgusting acts – the hallmark of the religious fanatics.

  29. jackhudson says:

    No, its DUMB shepherds. Comprehension is the key. They work fine for me, its the apologetics who have the problem.

    Either way it’s dissembling.

    Blind faith leads men to do the most dastardly, disgusting acts – the hallmark of the religious fanatics.

    I am not quite sure what this has to do with faith either way; if God exists and is the Creator of men, then this is His perogative – if He doesn’t exist, then there is no immoral – do with others how you wish.

  30. NewEnglandBob says:

    Blind faith, like Osama bin Laden.

    Blind faith, like Pope Ratzi, who is only concerned about protecting his church.

    Blind faith, like the followers of Hitler through his Christian faith that resulted in the holocaust with the Catholics, Lutherans and others sitting idly by.

    Blind faith, like the crusades.

    Blind faith, like the one who killed Theo van Gogh

    Blind faith, like the creationists who discount the hundreds of thousands of pieces of evidence to disprove Genesis and half of the old testament and much of the new testament and hypocritically discount science while using science’s output in nearly every moment of their lives.

    It has everything to do with faith, as opposed to thinking rational thoughts.

  31. jackhudson says:

    You mean blind faith like faith in Stalin?
    Hitler?
    Mao?
    Pol Pot?
    Kim Jong Il?
    Fidel?

    Yes I think I understand.

  32. NewEnglandBob says:

    No, you do not understand anything, Jack

    Are you implying those people had anything to do with atheism? Those tyrants who started personal cults just like religions? You expose your ignorance, Jack.

    Are you claiming they did things in the name of an atheist religion? Show me the documents, Jack. Show me where they prayed to the head of the atheism religion? You expose your ignorance Jack.

    Are you claiming whole nations followed those people due to an atheist creed?

    Hitler as the whole world knows did his killing in the name of Jesus Christ. His hatred was due to 2000 years of lies and persecution drummed into everyone by the Christian church. The pope and the Protestants stood by and either let it happen or encouraged and participated. Only Christian apologetics who are immoral try to blame this typical Christian action on atheism. You expose your hatred and ignorance Jack.

    Stalin studied for the priesthood.

    Communism, for the rest on your inane list, is an ideology, a dogma, just like Christianity, Islam and Judaism. Atheism is the lack of an ideology. Time to put away your ignorance, Jack.

    So what point were you trying to make? Or were you just throwing out random nonsensical dogma just like your immoral bible? You show your ignorance, your hatred and your immorality Jack.

    Jack Hudson shows by example on this blog how Christian teachings encourage lies, deception, obfuscation and extreme ignorance of how the real world operates.

    Slimy stuff from you again. I expect filth and lies just like this from theists who have blind faith instead of thought.

  33. jackhudson says:

    Actually, it shows how ignorant atheists are of their own history. History in general for that matter.

    I love how atheists will equate Osama Bin Laden to every Christian alive because they are both ‘religious’ in broadest sense of the word, but when it comes down the obvious connection between the materialism of Marxism and atheistic thought, well there is no connection – it’s all coincidental that the most brutal and oppressive states to ever have existed were officially atheistic.

    You are only convincing yourself. Talk about blind faith, you can’t even acknowledge reality!

  34. NewEnglandBob says:

    So obviously you have nothing to counter what I said and are now spewing generally inane statements. You are wearing your ignorance boldly on your chest.

    Blind faith makes one blind and ignorant. Just look at this blog for examples.

  35. jackhudson says:

    I did counter what you said; you just didn’t get it.

    Notably, the web offers a small microcosm of what happens when atheists gain of modicum of power.

    Anyone who disagrees with an atheist in the slightest is ignorant, immoral, hateful, deceptive, filthy, disgusting, etc. The atheist mindset doesn’t allow for the fact that ideas can differ – that others can be merely ‘wrong’, no, all other opinions are evil, as are those who hold such opinions. There can be no tolerance in such a mindset; it is an absolute imperative to purge opposing views.

    Thankfully in our country atheists are thus far constrained by our protected freedoms – one shudders to consider what a hell our society would become if such a mindset comes to predominate.

  36. NewEnglandBob says:

    Too bad that Jack does not understand that Communism is not Marxism. Marxism was supposed to be a system of the people. Communism, despite its name, is tyrannical totalitarianism that oppressed people and does not allow freedom.

    As usual, Jack STILL is ignorant of the definition of atheism. It is the lack of belief in any gods. That is all. Everything else that you attribute to it just shows your ignorance and hatred.

    See the poll on your teabagger cousins and how they despise freedom and euality:

    http://futurity.org/society-culture/some-in-tea-party-support-less-liberty/

    Once again, Jack Hudson makes up his nonsense to be OPPOSITE of reality.

  37. jackhudson says:

    I don’t think one needs to look any farther than your own posts Bob to see the repression inherent in your beliefs. In Bob’s world, Christians are the equivalent of genocidal murderers, “supporting murder of individuals and entire nations including innocent people.”

    In Bob’s world, Christians would be dead or in re-education camps. Hopefully we never have to live in Bob’s world.

  38. NewEnglandBob says:

    Jack Hudson, you are one slimy liar. I will no longer come to your cesspool.

    I can not tolerate immoral, ignorant liars. Your posts are disgusting.

  39. Grant Dexter says:

    Seeya, Bob. :wave:

    🙂

  40. jackhudson says:

    As a wise man once said, “You can’t handle the truth!”

    Yes, have a lovely day in la-la land Bob. 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: