Well, you cite Origen as one of the enlightened early chrisitians and he believed in supernatural things. This has been pointed out before. Yet, you do not change and continue to use him as an expert, as if he agrees with you, when he does not. That particular quote does, but since he is an example of an important early Christian and he believed in supernatural things, his use is a terrible one. You also seem to think presenting three, well, actually two examples of early Christians is strong or even mild evidence of what Early Christians believed as a whole. You might want to look up Cherry Picking fallacy.
I don’t ignore that. Feel free to demonstrate that.
Notice how you do not respond to the points I make, but try to make it seem stupid I have the position I have, without you adding any more substance or responding to the points I made. What makes you think this kind of behavior is a philosophical discussion? What kind of example are you trying to set for rationality?
And here you just restate your opinion. I know you belief this.
No, I have never argued that Jesus was only speaking to Jews. I did mention something about what Matthew was doing.
It’s years and you still cannot engage in a real discussion. You cherry pick, do not respond to arguments, tell other people what their opinions are when they have not argued these opinions, restate your opinion as if it is an argument, and insult large groups of people.
If the whole I idea is that gnostics are so rational compared to others, it might be worth your while to learn how to demonstrate rationality.
Yes, although not all believers are intelligent, of course.
Religious people live better lives than atheists do. That’s proven by the social sciences.
Being religious means a better life in this world (happier, live longer, less depression, less suicide, more giving) and hopefully a much better life in the next.
And the mind that refuses to discuss ideas that point out flaws in its ideas would then be no mind at all. Not to mention how much you discuss people and insultingly.
And since you like to appeal to authority, try this…
From the mouth of your authority, and much as there are many things I admire about her, she is not my authority.
Care to discuss your other authority Origen and his supernatural ideas?
Sure the religious live a bit longer and happier lives, but to a thinker, as compared to a sheeple, cannot see being a sheeple as better than a thinker.
The small difference is not enough to make an atheist put his mind in intellectual and especially moral dissonance.
We value our minds and truth more than theists. By we I mean thinkers, not atheists. Not being an atheist, I cannot speak for them.
At present, atheists are beginning the trend of providing what were known as mystery schools. Some are calling them atheist churches. That trend will give them the longer and happier lives without them having to insult their intellect and morals.
They know how utterly stupid and brain killing idol worship of a genocidal son murdering god can be. They have seen what it does to Christians and Muslims.
They are not interested in growing atheism with inquisitions and jihads.
That is why countries with less religiosity are more peaceful and law abiding.
BTW. I look for wisdom saying and do not care who says them. The words are more important than the speaker.
Faith closes the mind. It is pure idol worship.
Faith is a way to quit using, “God given” power of Reason and Logic, and cause the faithful to embrace doctrines that moral people reject.
The God of the OT says, “Come now, and let us reason together,” [Isaiah 1:18]
How can literalists reason on God when they must ignore reason and logic and discard them when turning into literalist?
Those who are literalists can only reply somewhat in the fashion that Martin Luther did.
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”
This attitude effectively kills all worthy communication that non-theists can have with theist. Faith closes the believers mind as it is pure idol worship.
Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths. We cannot show our faith based friends that they are wrong through their faith colored glasses. Their faith also plugs their ears.
Sure the religious live a bit longer and happier lives, but to a thinker, as compared to a sheeple, cannot see being a sheeple as better than a thinker.
The small difference is not enough to make an atheist put his mind in intellectual and especially moral dissonance.
We value our minds and truth more than theists. By we I mean thinkers, not atheists. Not being an atheist, I cannot speak for them.
At present, atheists are beginning the trend of providing what were known as mystery schools. Some are calling them atheist churches. That trend will give them the longer and happier lives without them having to insult their intellect and morals.
They know how utterly stupid and brain killing idol worship of a genocidal son murdering god can be. They have seen what it does to Christians and Muslims.
They are not interested in growing atheism with inquisitions and jihads.
That is why countries with less religiosity are more peaceful and law abiding.
Regards
DL
[/quote]
In a few decades when they’re dead, atheists will see the error of their ways, unfortunately. Pride comes before the fall.
Let’s hope they change before then.
[/quote]
Fear mongering. A poor apologists last lying retort.
Your lying clergy must have gotten to you when too young and you still have yet to reach the age of reason.
But most atheists know hardly anything about religion or theology. They are only guided by their own egos.
Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens (RIP) are the perfect examples. They are experts in their field, so they assume they are experts in every field.
In reality, they have a 7th grade education in religion and theology. Watching them “debate” is embarrassing because of their ignorance.
I include you in this group because of your cliche generalizations and obvious narcissism.
Oh and regards to your ignorant assumptions, I was an atheist for 10 years until I began my own study. I know how you people think.
Belief is a mental state that suggests that there is something out there. It acts intelligently so we can conclude that an intelligent person responsible for it if we accept the argument, which is, I) There is an intelligent act (an intelligent act being an act which is directed to somewhere), II) Intelligent act is caused by an intelligent person, III) Therefore there is an intelligent person. I, however, don’t see any difference between natural and supernatural except that the first is common whereas the second is rare. They are both caused.
Any so called supernaturnal phenomena that is objectively real is natural by definition
And so if it is caused and can be demonstrated to exist then it cannot be supernatural
Belief is a mental state that suggests that there is something out there. It acts intelligently so we can conclude that an intelligent person responsible for it if we accept the argument, which is, I) There is an intelligent act (an intelligent act being an act which is directed to somewhere), II) Intelligent act is caused by an intelligent person, III) Therefore there is an intelligent person. I, however, don’t see any difference between natural and supernatural except that the first is common whereas the second is rare. They are both caused.
[/quote]
Rare?
I hope you do not mean the 7th hand hearsay in holy books.
Tell us what you have seen please or know of miracle as facts please.
Regards
DL
[/quote]
Here are a few associated with Christianity.
@ freespirit; see hume’s argument against miracles and russell’s ‘natural law’ argument. i’d get the links for you but my iced mocha just blew up and i’ve got whipped cream all over my fingers. i shouldn’t even be posting this much. you owe me.