Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You make some really good points here. When I was a Christian, it was really a book called "The Secret Origins of the Bible," by a gentleman named Tim Callahan, that showed me just how human the invention of the Bible really was.
For me it was a college class "Introduction to the Study of Religion," by the great Tim Murphy who's now at Alabama. I honestly took it just because it looked easy - well, it wasn't particularly demanding, but it was quite theoretical. We always came back to a specific Native American religion (the Lakota) and then analyzed it with ideas of Berger, Barthes, Cassirer, and a couple others. Very fascinating - and it was pretty easy to realize that we just as easily could have chosen Christianity (which we did talk about occasionally). Now it would take me 3 more years to admit I wasn't Christian, but the seed was planted with a vengeance.
Importantly, we learned the idea of "methodological atheism," where the main idea was "we treat all of our data the same." This was a hurdle for me (a couple people in my class expressed that the idea offended them) but it was crucial in realizing that all the data IS the same. There was also the idea that religion is "naturalized" - something stronger than blind faith, but weaker than logical proof, and the idea that humans need something to explain all "anomic" (without name) phenomena. I enjoy remembering this class, possibly my favorite humanities class ever!
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpc1
What would you say are the KEY arguments against Christianity?
Oh God, putting me on the spot. For me it came down to realizing - yeah, there are passages in the Old Testament, Leviticus for instance, which modern Christians don't follow. So do we accept that this was the actual God talking here, or do we accept it as a human creation? OK, it's probably a human creation. So why are the Gospels any better? Because the messages are more in line with modern (ideal) values? That's why it feels better (more naturalized), but it sure doesn't prove it's better.
The next step was - It's possible that there was a divine revelation here, and here, and here - or it's possible that human beings wrote those things down. Again, apply the same to Greek mythology, and we all know which one to choose.
So then I got to the "unaffiliated theist" stage, and now...well, I still hesitate to say atheist, but I think I'm getting there.
Even if Jesus did exist in history, and even if the Bible contained the words of a god about him, the 5,600 copies of the original Greek New Testament that scholars have discovered contain between 200 and 400 thousand text discrepancies. That means that even our earliest copies of the New Testament contain more errors than there are words in the New Testament. Needless to say, it is not possible for us to know what the New Testament originally said about the life of Jesus, about the lives of the apostles or about early church life.
I was not aware of such an astronomical number of text discrepancies in the New Testament.
The time has finally come to step right up! C'mon now; we won't bite (too hard...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpc1
What would you say are the KEY arguments against Christianity?
V. interesting request, rpc1! And timely too. This I'd love to hear. After all, there must be a properly arguable and defensible set of points in there somewhere, right?
Sadly and to that point, I've asked several posting and adamant Christians on this forum, at least 20 or more times over the past 4 or 5 years, for a simple point-form list, with testable specifics of why such proven processes as Evolution, and the ever-more likely and demonstrable Abiogenesis, CAN NOT and therefore DO NOT work.
You know how many responses I've gotten from the usually hostile and über-defensive Christian crowd? Huh?
NONE. NADA. Never so much as a how-dee-doo from any of them except one guy who insisted that my attitude was too hostile for him to expect I'd accept his "obviously logical answers!".
Talk about Convenient Dodge & Weave, eh? A running and dodging wild rabbit being pursued by a dead-eye hunter could not have been more evasive!
And so... uhhhh... why so secretive or dismissive?
Well, the answer is perfectly obvious: to thoroughly and thoughtfully evaluate the so-called strong evidence for their beliefs, their absolute conviction that their God and His son Christ are the only true and testable entities amongst the literal thousands of alternates, none of which are in fact demonstrable, would result in the necessary dismissal of their life-long faith-based spiritual beliefs.
After all, they know damned-well that the growing body of facts regarding the origins of the universe, of this earth, it's geology and the origins of all it's existing species, plus the several multi-million that have already arisen and then gone extinct, is overwhelming and persistent, reproducible and documented.
As well, I'd now wager that the significant majority of adamant Christians haven't the slightest idea of the technical details of evolution or abiogenesis, beyond their tried and true knee-jerk "I can't imagine how it could possibly work without a Creator!" And that, ladies & gents, is the sum total of their expertise and critical analysis! Wow! Impressive.
The fear of the inconvenient truths about such well-demo'd facts is palpable, and it leaves that familiar stenchy odor of defensive denial, not to mention a terrified flight from the argument.
Else, why not step up and defend your ideas? Huh?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For me it came down to realizing - yeah, there are passages in the Old Testament, Leviticus for instance, which modern Christians don't follow. So do we accept that this was the actual God talking here, or do we accept it as a human creation? OK, it's probably a human creation. So why are the Gospels any better? Because the messages are more in line with modern (ideal) values? That's why it feels better (more naturalized), but it sure doesn't prove it's better.
The time has finally come to step right up! C'mon now; we won't bite (too hard...)
