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.
Some atheists really do a disservice to their cause when they try to argue atheism by attacking the Bible.
They dispute "facts" supposedly found in one book.
One LITTLE book!
That's no different than trying to argue for atheism by disputing "facts" found in the stories of Norse Mythology. And you are just as ineffective when you try to do that with the Bible.
It doesn't matter that a lot of people still believe in the Bible stories. There is zero effect in trying to argue reality based on the claims in the stories inside a book. Zero.
On the other hand, it's more difficult to defend atheism from a philosophical standpoint. You could not have won the argument with someone like Plato.
Atheism is easier to defend from a logical standpoint (I won't say Philosophical, because it depends what one means by that) than to debunk the Bible.
That said, Christianity is based on he Bible. If that is debunked - if the claims made in the Bible -are debunked, then, as Paul is taken as implying, Christianity's credibility goes down the tube.
If Christians want to argue the Theological toss without the Bible, I welcome that. But they are like someone trying to race me after having cut off a leg to reduce weight.
Some atheists really do a disservice to their cause when they try to argue atheism by attacking the Bible. They dispute "facts" supposedly found in one book.
What do you think?
What I think is I could care less if they want to believe the myths written in that little book, so as long as they keep it where it belongs...which is NOT in our public school rooms, politics, or science classes.
Some religions teach that the Bible to be the literal word of God as in there really was an Adam and Eve and a global flood. They claim that the Bible is protected by the Creator from any error or Satan tampering. Pointing out the inconsistencies and morally shady practices contain in the Bible is a way of addressing that claim. You cared enough to call an atheist questioning the Bible an attack instead of another word like challenge so....
More likely humanism atheist are like this , that hate religion and detest anyone believing in God ....., Where as some atheist just don`t care for people trying to convert them , and accept religious as their business is them but ``don`t try to convert me or I will tell them off ``.....
Some atheists really do a disservice to their cause when they try to argue atheism by attacking the Bible.
They dispute "facts" supposedly found in one book.
One LITTLE book!
That's no different than trying to argue for atheism by disputing "facts" found in the stories of Norse Mythology. And you are just as ineffective when you try to do that with the Bible.
It doesn't matter that a lot of people still believe in the Bible stories. There is zero effect in trying to argue reality based on the claims in the stories inside a book. Zero.
On the other hand, it's more difficult to defend atheism from a philosophical standpoint. You could not have won the argument with someone like Plato.
What do you think?
I think you're dead bang wrong.
Christianity is predicated on the Bible -- without it, there IS no Christianity.
Why? Because there is no corroborating evidence that anything within the Bible actually took place, from the Exodus to the Great Flood. Without the Bible, there would be no trace of Christianity aside from a few footnotes written about a strange Christ Cult in Rome.
After that, Christianity would only exist through oral tradition -- and that just wouldn't have survived especially through the Medieval period.
What you seem to be missing completely is that ... if we don't use the Bible as a source of major contention, what else is there? Hmm?
Because, you see, once the Hebrews and later the Christians actually began to write things down and both quantify and qualify who and what God is, what he wants, his basic personality, the things he's done ... AND ... once they began writing a completely fictitious version of history from Adam and Eve to the destruction of Canaan, we atheists have something solid to sink our teeth into.
Otherwise, atheists and believers would just be arguing like this:
"There is a god"
"Nuh huh, no there isn't."
"Uh huh, yeah there is."
"Nope."
"Yep."
"Nope."
Because the Christians wouldn't have anything to point to as the Word of God and atheists wouldn't have anything to refute because the entire religion would be based on a lot of babbling nonsense, a few personal experiences, and, well, without the Bible Christianity would have remained an isolated cult with some members in Italy and a few in Israel and/or Egypt.
Atheism is actually quite easy to defend -- and since Plato knew next to nothing about science compared to what we know today, he would be at a severe disadvantage in any debate about atheism.
The problem with that logic is that there are many Christians who don't believe in those literal stories to begin with. They believe in God, and they follow the teachings of Christ. But the truth of the stories has no bearing on their faith.
So those kind of Christians are already almost in agreement with some atheists regarding the Bible.
Some atheists really do a disservice to their cause when they try to argue atheism by attacking the Bible.
They dispute "facts" supposedly found in one book.
One LITTLE book!
That's no different than trying to argue for atheism by disputing "facts" found in the stories of Norse Mythology. And you are just as ineffective when you try to do that with the Bible.
It doesn't matter that a lot of people still believe in the Bible stories. There is zero effect in trying to argue reality based on the claims in the stories inside a book. Zero.
On the other hand, it's more difficult to defend atheism from a philosophical standpoint. You could not have won the argument with someone like Plato.
What do you think?
Unfortunately, that "one little book" represents the playing field that an atheist is one when debating this issue more often than not. Generally, an atheist does not encounter a true believer in Thor or Odin.
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.
