Saturday, 31 May 2008

Resserection debate opening post

Over at theologyweb JB gave me the following challenge: " Tell you what, though. I challenge you to a formal debate, either in the Wrestling Ring at TheologyWeb or via blog" As they delete my posts etc I will debate him on the resurrection here. Here is my opening post:

Science has shown for a long time that dead people stay dead - the message obviously fails to get through to xians. Science shows that bodies rot away and are eaten by worms and once something has been eaten by worms how can it go to heaven?

Richard Dawkins has looked into the historical evidence for this and colcuded "Accounts of Jesus's resurrection and ascension are about as well documented as Jack and the Beanstalk." So no good trying this line of enquiry.

Also most pagan gods rose from the dead and so why don't you believe mithras, dionysus etc etc resserected?

If I were JB I would give up and admit defeat. Infact I've pretty much won this debate in mky opening post.

Friday, 30 May 2008

Science is the way to go

Why does science rule out the existence of sky daddies? Well science is concerned with the natural, things we can touch see and smell. But religion believes in the supernatural which we cannot see, touch or smell. Sky Daddies by definition are not things we can see, touch or smell and so if you want to believe in science then you have to rule out the existence of sky daddies.

Some might argue that this makes it impossible to prove that sky daddies exist. This is ofcourse nonsense. If you could get a bit of your sky daddy and put it into a test tube, carry out an experiment to show that this is a being who can control the universe called Jebus then i would admit that im wrong straight away. Using xian logic then wed need to say fairies and pink unicorns exist etc etc

Heres a challenge to xians, without using the bible and only using stuff which i can personally see and touch or smell show that your stupid religion is true.

And heres another thing. Science has given us toasters, computers, planes and chocolate pudding, what has religion given us?

Thursday, 29 May 2008

A genuine difficulty

people want an example of a biblical difficulty then here we go - but be warned, it is certainly a difficulty.

The gospel of Matthew begins with a boring genealogy like that we are told to avoid in 1 Tim.1:4 ("Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies") and Tit.3:9 ("Avoid foolish questions and genealogies").

Oh, and welcome to my blog fifi - it's nice to know that some intelligent people visit here occasionally.

Wednesday, 28 May 2008

Why doesnt the bible have me on the edge of my seat?

A top notch speech writer will get their point across in a way that even an idiot can understand. They will explain even the most complex issues in a way that even the most retarded person on the planet can understand without even thinking. They will make sure that their oponents cannot twist their words and leave no ambiguities.

Now imagine a novelist who had a writing style that meant it took years of studying their works before you knew what they were on about.

Someone like Dan Brown has these qualities, his arguments, plot line etc are easy to follow. Is his true for the bible? No. Why wouldn't skydaddyum have written the bible to be like the da vinci code? Think about it, Bart Ehrman asks how many people have read the bible and how many have read the da vinci code. if the bible was the word of a skydaddy the wouldnt reading it have you on the edge of your seat instead of the da vinci code?

Tuesday, 27 May 2008

Jebus said ask for anything......

Jebus said 'ask and it shall be given unto you' so if i were to ask that your skydaddy would make himself go out of existance would they?

Monday, 26 May 2008

The anthropic principle

There is this rule of logic that xians ignore called the anthropic principle. Basically it points out that in order to ask a question things have to be the way they are. So to ask why the universe is finely tuned is illogical as we wouldnt be able to ask the question if it wasnt. The same applies to the question 'why did the first xians believe jebus rose from the dead?' If they didnt believe that then we wouldnt be asking the question. All the following also commit the anthropic principle:

-why did people write the bible?
-how do we know that murder is wrong?
-why did the big bang happen
-why do so many people believe in sky daddies?

Each one of those questions can be answered by pointing out that we wouldnt be able to ask the question if it wasnt the case. I think you xians are going to have to come up with some more arguments that dont commit the anthropic principle.

Sunday, 25 May 2008

Indianna jones is fiction and history.

I dont think people understand that not everything if life is complete fiction or complete fact. The russians have got annoyed that the new indianna jones film is historically inacurate claiming 'It's rubbish... In 1957 the communists did not run with crystal skulls throughout the US.' (my source) Well ofcourse they didnt you idiots - its a story.

Its a bit like the xians who say that the bible is all true. No, its a fictional story based in real locations etc Then xians say that because the charcters etc in the da vinci code are not real none of it is. no, some of it is true, and some of it isnt.

Indianna Jones is jazzed up arhcaeology based on a fictional story but things like the crystal skulls exist. The da vinci code is based on real early church history put together with fictioanl character and events but still contains a lot of truth. The bible is based on some real places and superstitious beliefs of the time but the story etc is not real. Although I suspect that archaology suppoerts indianna jones better than it dos the bible.

The new indianna jones film is good though, about the same standard as temple of doom but not as good as the other two. Worth seeing though.

So yeah, stop going through life dismissing stuff as fiction and accepting stuff as facts. It may be a bit of both.