ContraRarian

blogs silasriis, quoting an “article” at  creationsafaris.com. He didn’t quote this bit that follows:

…The Bible’s history fits the facts of archaeology – just as the continuing evidence shows…

…I can only presume because he knows that is absolute bullshit.

says silasriis.

I have never tried to prove that archeology completely supports the Bible, I don’t know where I’ve said I would do that. This is the second time you misinterpreted what I said, maybe I haven’t made myself clear enough? Anyway what I’ve tried to prove is that the Bible is used as a pinpointing device by archaeologists, which I have done. I never said I would prove anything else about archeology in this conversation (or whatever word I’m allowed to use without getting slaughtered :D ) so the false witness argument against me doesn’t stand. I’ve also said that the Bible is the most accurate historical document we have today, you haven’t responded to that.

Jumping jephosephat. How on earth can you function when you have to tie your brain in knots like that? “The Bible is the most accurate historical document we have today”. No it isn’t. That single sentence of yours is absolute balderdash. It completely misrepresents what archaeologists say about the Bible (cf. Dever). It is a complete fantasy. Like I said, a lie. It bears false witness.

How can you like to yourself like that? I really do not know.

I know why you lie to yourself like that. It is called cognitive dissonance, and it is what one must have to be a “bible believing christian” who also wishes to pretend that science supports their religious beliefs.

 “since you’re an atheist, why do you even care if people lie or not?”

Yeah that was probably an ad hominem, I can see your point – I’m sorry about that. Though I would still like an answer to the question, if you want to answer it?

I was hoping you would try to answer that question yourself… But clearly another very strong element of your cognitive dissonance is to have to believe absurd things about “atheism”. 

Look, morality and ethics and rules of behaviour have existed for tens of thousands of years at least. Sheesh, you can even see such rules in the behaviour of the more social primates.

We are social beings, silasriis. We are not individuals. Everything humanity has ever built, from my tiny social group to going to the fucking moon (we stood on the fucking moon!) we’ve done together. 

If you can’t see the benefit of morality and rules of behaviour without some imaginary big-bad-god there to punish you for transgressions, then i seriously pity you. I would also have to suspect that you were some sort of sociopath. (Luckily, I don’t believe that about you). 

The clear, obvious, no-brain basis for social behaviour and morality is some form of the Golden Rule. It appears in all cultures in one form or another… Do unto others as you would have the do to you. Don’t do to others what you would’t want them to do to you.

You don’t need a “god” to be moral, silasriis.

In fact, as you sadly demonstrate yourself with your bible/archaeology nonsense, belief in “god” is often an easy excuse to avoid behaving morally :/

Anyhow can I ask you some questions about atheism?

Since you’ve been playing nice…

The atheistic worldview says that there isn’t any ultimate meaning, purpose and values in life.

Let’s stop right there. We do not KNOW whether there is any ultimate meaning. But that doesn’t stop us living our lives. We are alive. We are certain only that we have one life.  We have values, which some to us from our society and from philosophical first principles. But that is as far as “the atheistic worldview” goes. Beyond that we - like everyone else - believe a whole bunch of different things. Some of us as conservative, some liberal. Some like cheese and some don’t.

We some of us even have completely irrational and nonsensical beliefs about that other people believe. Like this sort of nonsense, for example:

It doesn’t matter if we lived as a pig or a human when the end is the same. It doesn’t matter if our life influenced other people’s life, because they are going to die as well. And the universe is heading for its own death the; Big Crunch, even if that doesn’t happen, there’s still a big chance that the human race would have become extinct or destroyed itself before a potential Big Crunch would occur. Would it make any difference if the universe existed or not? Not according to atheism.

Absolute nonsense. Who on earth told you that? What you describe is some sort of bottom-of-the-pit-depressed-nihilism. It has nothing whatsoever to do with anything I or anyone else does on a day-to-day basis.

From a normal perspective, if the guy sacrifices his own life to safe the hundreds of passengers, that would be a noble deed.

From an atheistic perspective, it would be stupid for the guy to sacrifice his own life to safe the hundreds of passengers. Since there is no meaning, purpose and values in life one should only strive to life for the self.

A normal perspective? LOL.

As you say yourself no atheist lives like that.

Is what I said above totally wrong? I know, almost no atheist lives like that (thank God), but isn’t it what the atheistic worldview really says? And what is your opinion on the train story?

My opinion of the train story is that an atheist would be every bit as likely to sacrifice himself as a theist in those circumstances. Your prejudices tell you something different, but that’s your problem, not mine.

I can tell you one thing for certain tho. No-one ever blew up themselves and everyone else on a train in the name of atheism. Can you say the same about religion?

This has nothing to do with anything what we are ______ about, but how old are you anyway?

Old enough to be your father, I am sure.

Now, run along and stop lying about history and the Bible. 

silasriis:

Why are you posting from two different accounts and why did you just delete your post from your glasgow-effect blog?

One account, two blogs. One for Glasgow, one for ranting :)  I posted to the wrong blog, because I am not infallible…

The gap theory – there’s many different versions of it, don’t assume I believe in the most popular one.

I have no idea what you believe. Do you, I wonder?

I’m definitely not an expert on history, but I don’t know a document more accurate than the Bible, I would like to know if there’s any. As to archeologists using the Bible as pinpointing device -> Biblical archaeology

LOL. Did you read *anything* in the link you posted? I just blogged a quote from that very link from William Dever, one of the world’s leading authorities on archaeology and the Bible. Here’s a highlight:

Archaeology certainly doesn’t prove literal readings of the Bible…It calls them into question, and that’s what bothers some people. Most people really think that archaeology is out there to prove the Bible. No archaeologist thinks so.”

You made an argument that the Bible is supported by archeology. You gave a link in support of that argument. The link you gave directly contradicts your argument. Not looking good, is it?

“Isn’t there something in the Bible about bearing False Witness?”

That’s spot on! – The Bible also says “Thy word is truth” and “it is impossible for God to lie.” (Hebrews 6:18 and John 17:17) So what I said must be true…

But the evidence (which you provided in your link) is that the Bible is wrong. If indeed God cannot lie, then the only reasonable conclusion (if God exists and is as you say) is that the Bible is not the word of God.

- since you’re an atheist, why do you even care if people lie or not?

It’s lesson time, silasriis. My arguments against you were not fallacious ad hominems - because I was talking directly to your argument.

Your absurd notion that atheists should not “care” about lying is a fallacious ad hominem, because it bears no relation whatsoever to our argument.

I seriously doubt that we will get anything out of this conversation..

But you are not conversing, silasriis.

First, you bear false witness about what archaeologists say about the Bible.

Then, you imply that anyone who does not agree with your notion of “god” must by definition be immoral.

You are a sterling example of how religion perpetuates itself, sad to say.

I’m sure you are a really nice guy, silasriis. I just wish you walked your talk.

says silasriis

Basically your whole post relies on something I did not say.

ORLY?

“I’m sorry to disappoint you, but that is not what Christianity says. The Bible tells us that there has been life on earth for the last 6000-10000 years.”

As you can see above I wasn’t talking about the age of the universe, but how long life has been on earth.

Huh? Science says there has been life on Earth for around 4 billion years. So either you agree with that, and you were looking for me to fall into your “cunning trap” so you had a reason not to speak with me, or you don’t agree with that, in which case Lord knows what you are thinking…

Other than that, your post is filled with ad hominem attacks, which I flat out refuse to answer. If you want to talk with me, you will have to use a proper tone.

As you like.

You wrote last time round:

In fact, the Bible is probably the most reliable historical document we have today. Many archaeologists use the Bible as pinpointing device, not because they believe what it says, but simply because it is accurate.

This is false. A fantasy. A lie. 

Isn’t there something in the Bible about bearing False Witness?