Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

People using billboards, ads to spread word of Judgment Day

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don't pretend you're someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don't insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.

Welcome to the discussion.

52 comments:

  • Manuel Martinez posted at 11:03 pm on Sun, Apr 10, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    Bob, you've done it again. You ignore any rebuttal to your use of logical fallacies and continue to rattle on about what a "true" atheist is. I wonder if you do this to other atheists who do not make positive assertions that there is no God, calling them 'faux atheists' because they haven't reached a state of self-acclaimed certainty that you have. It also appears that you have surpassed your arrogance in claiming that there absolutely is no possibility of a god existing by making claims about our discussion that most certainly did not take place, such as:

    "You continue to deny that more lives have been lost in the name of religion than for any other reason. You claim that the majority of lives have been lost due to those in quest of power, and not due to religion."

    Where in our discourse have I ever denied the harm that religion has done? Did you not even read my response? I quote "While I agree that religion has committed many many wrongs in the history of civilization ---> (wrongs that surpass the good), <--- there is something Kevin and I can find some common ground on, and that is the opposition to power seekers and, worst of all, those who believe they have acquired certainty." I think it wise to refer to Christopher Hitchens, who said it beautifully, "The trouble with religion only starts when people have affirmed that it is true. It only begins then, then comes the really nice bit, inter-religious warfare." Thereby inferring that the level of certainty we ascribe to our positions is what promulgates the danger of evil acts because with certainty comes the act of rationalizing atrocities.

    Here is another of your baseless claims: "You’re afraid that if you’re wrong, you’ll burn in hell."
    A pathetic assumption without any shred of evidence. I have never believed in hell, so I wonder how I could possibly fear what I have never feared before or currently.

    From a naturalistic standpoint, we have to accept for the possibility for the existence of God. This does not translate to a belief that God exists. It implies that in the absence of evidence for this entity to exist, we actively assume that it does not exist until positive evidence can be presented. To deny that there is a possibility for a deity to exist is to make an absolute proposal without positive evidence in favor of the claim. You have become just as dogmatic as the religious and your level of certainty has the potential to reap the same level of evil that emanates from those that are equally certain of their beliefs (...the religious).

    Even if I were to entertain this notion of a "true atheist" you most certainly would not fit it, given that the vast majority of atheists argue that one cannot make an affirmative assertion without evidence and that this very act is one of the reasons why we maintain a critique of religion. Numerous atheists, have made statements regarding the possibilities and limits of knowledge and concluded that it is sufficient to disregard the God hypothesis for the reason that the claim is unfounded.

    Christopher Hitchens: "The atheist proposition is the following, most of the time; it may not be said that there is no god, it may be said that there is no reason to think that there is one."
    http://youtu.be/dbhFXpI8DHA

    Richard Dawkins: "atheists do not have faith, and reason alone could not propel one to total conviction that anything definitely does not exist."
    http://youtu.be/Y_jD-ki6b_Q

    Sam Harris: "An atheist is simply a person who has entertained the claim, read the books, and found the claim to be ridiculous."..."The atheist is simply saying, as Carl Sagan once did, that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
    http://youtu.be/TSbdsvCrq2A

    Betrand Russell: via the oration of Richard Dawkins, "maybe we have to be technically and strictly agnostic, but in practice, we are all teapot atheists."
    http://youtu.be/hxqy32SFW-w

    A C Grayling: "when you talk to people full of certainty about things...there is a quite different methodology at work, the methodology of accepting authority, of accepting closure when you're thinking about things, not this open-minded quest which tries to find the ratio, the proportion between the evidence that you have and the thing that you think."
    http://youtu.be/up0NhnrVdAw

    To argue that such copious iterations from self described atheists are statements made by those who are not "True" atheists is to make one of the largest invocations of the No True Scotsman fallacy I have thus far witnessed. At this point, I no longer wonder why few atheists describe themselves as a 7 on Richard Dawkins' religiosity scale, because to do so would be to maintain a series of unverifiable assumptions that inflame the intellectual senses of those more cautious than they.

     
  • Audrey Harrison posted at 7:45 pm on Sun, Apr 10, 2011.

    Audrey Harrison Posts: 1

    Interesting conversation. Straying back to the topic of the article, a well known tactic has been employed and demonstrated right here. People are being confused and their truths challenged. First you take a bit of truth, 'Jesus Christ is coming back for those who have received Him as Savior and obeyed His Word.' Then you pervert or change that truth, say you give a specific date for his return, when he clearly says no one knows the day when he will return. Then you sell people something else and make it their new reality. Wasn't this same tactic used in the Garden of Eden?! The purpose is to distract / divert people from seeking the true and living God, Jesus Christ, in a formal religious setting where they can learn the heart of God, the Word of God and God's purpose for them as individuals. Family radio specifically tells people NOT to go to church but to buy their products to ensure they go with Jesus when He returns. They have definitely put Jesus Christ's return to the front of our thoughts but without the proper interpretation of the Word of God which speaks of this momentous day, they will cause panic similar to what ensued during the Y2 frenzy 11 years ago. I would like to suggest that individuals who don't have a truth on which they stand go ASK someone THEY trust before they buy the truth Family Radio is promoting or the products they're selling. Hey thanks for listening!

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 5:37 pm on Sun, Apr 10, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Manuel,

    I really don't like to sink to the level that you have over the course of these discussions, but....YOU ARE THE IDIOT !
    You refuse to admit that there is such a thing as aTRUE atheist. In reality, you either ARE or ARE NOT an atheist. If you even have the slightest doubt that there is or isn't a god, you are NOT and atheist. I don't give a darn who you choose to listen to regarding some imaginary scale that some other idiot developed for other idiots who were stupid enough to fall for it. If you are an atheist, there is no doubt in your mind.
    I have been paying VERY close attention to the discussiona presented here, both between you and Darrell and you and myself. I can assure you that my opinion has not changed whatsoever. You sir, are a sheep. You continue to deny that more lives have been lost in the name of religion than for any other reason. You claim that the majority of lives have been lost due to those in quest of power, and not due to religion. Just exactly what do you think the followers of Caesar, Napoleon, and Hitler were following? They believed them to be gods! You claim that I exhibit arrogance in my responses because I refuse to believe there is even the possibility of a god. Hello, Manuel. That’s exactly what a TRUE atheist is! You claim to be an atheist, but will still consider that there is a possibility of a god. You’re not an atheist. You’re “on the fence” and can’t make up your mind. You don’t want to be known as a believer or a non-believer. You refuse to take a definitive stand and proclaim your true beliefs. Don’t sit there and rag on me. I stand by my convictions and beliefs. Unlike you, I have them. You’re a fence sitter that wants it both ways. You’re afraid that if you’re wrong, you’ll burn in hell. TRUE atheists don’t give a damn. But then, you wouldn’t know what one was, would you Manuel? Truthfully, I’m growing weary of discussing this with someone who doesn’t have the guts to make a decision. Crawl back in your cave, Manuel. You’ll be safe there.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 10:46 pm on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    "What makes you think I give a rat’s butt what you think? You’re not even a true atheist!"

    The fact that you have ignored the series of rebuttals detailing why references to "True" atheism are fallacious indicate that you have willfully ignored my statements or are completely oblivious of them. There is no such thing as a true atheist. To say that there is, is to infer that there is a central dogma surrounding atheism when all it really is, is a state of disbelief in Gods. The conclusion can be reached in a number of ways, and in no other fashion are we to have something in common since there is no central dogma to take from. All you have done is perpetuate the common misconception that atheists are arrogant and just as faithful as the religious by promoting a positive assertion that a God absolutely does not exist.

    While I agree that religion has committed many many wrongs in the history of civilization (wrongs that surpass the good), there is something Kevin and I can find some common ground on, and that is the opposition to power seekers and, worst of all, those who believe they have acquired certainty. Pony up the dough for your claims or face a rebuttal. If this be a friendly fire incident, then it need take place to separate one shade from another for the purposes of maintaining intellectual integrity.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 8:47 pm on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    Actually Bob, more lives have been taken in the name of power, not religion. Religion has just been the way for corrupt to gain power in the past most notably and to a lesser degree today. It's cowards who use religion as an excuse to justify aberrant behavior who get the headlines, but most people who are religious (For the most part whatever religion) do a lot of good under the same umbrella of religion that these same power-munchers hide under.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 6:32 pm on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Manuel,
    Nothing could frighten me less than you not tolerating me or my position. What makes you think I give a rat’s butt what you think? You’re not even a true atheist! You’re probably not a true anything. You ride the fence, afraid to jump off on one side or the other. Just what are your convictions? Either come out of the closet, or get off the battlefield.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 2:51 pm on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Kevin Paglia wrote
    "But then we remember all of the wonderful things that man has done when being convinced by faith. We see people giving up their property to feed the hungry and sending money to strangers half the world away. We see lives fought for on religious grounds, mercy and charity selflessly given because of a few bible verses, and total acceptance of people because in the end we are all equal in God's eyes."

    Kevin,
    You forgot to state that more lives have been taken in the name of religion than for any other purpose in history. If you believe in a god, he has one sick sense of humor!

     
  • Kim Lee posted at 2:45 pm on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Kim Lee Posts: 1798

    Personally, I think the billboard money could be better spent on things that really matter.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 1:05 pm on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Manuel,
    On April 8th at 8:57 PM you asked "I would like to know, what positive evidence do you offer that there is no God?"

    Easy.....you have Jerry Brown for a governor !

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 11:08 am on Sat, Apr 9, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    to paraphrase a blog from earlier:

    As a Christian, I find this dialogue amusing.

    In one corner, we have Atheist lvl 7 claiming they have a correct interpretation of the universe. In the other, we have the other atheists claiming they're wrong.

    It's just the same with morality, premarital sex, homosexual rights, gun control, abortion, and war. We have people seeing the exact same things and being absolutely certain that their interpretation is the only one that is correct.

    Except, as a Christian, we realize that it's not the same view of the universe you are seeing. Besides all of the personal experiences, the biases, and the misunderstandings that may or may not exist... everyone is going to put their own spin on what they believe in the absence of a central compass of consciousness.

    But then we remember all of the wonderful things that man has done when being convinced by faith. We see people giving up their property to feed the hungry and sending money to strangers half the world away. We see lives fought for on religious grounds, mercy and charity selflessly given because of a few bible verses, and total acceptance of people because in the end we are all equal in God's eyes.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 9:04 pm on Fri, Apr 8, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    Darrell, here is the full quote

    Manuel Martinez posted at 8:18 pm on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.
    "To put it bluntly, you are an idiot (based on my experience with you, not just this moment.) The two atheists you've been speaking to serve to alter your perception of atheists with a new experience that until now, you seem to have misunderstood."

    Reading comprehension my friend...please, do something about your deficiency.
    I did not call you an idiot because you "agreed" with Bob Silvano (not in this instance) but because you ignored the two atheists (David and I) that gave you viewpoints that weighed counter to your past dealings or perception. You brushed it off as if we were irregularities or not "true" atheists. That is why you are an idiot.

    I will go further and say that you are an idiot for the additional commission of the No True Scotsman fallacy. There is no "True" Atheist. There exists a spectrum in which individuals that label their lack of belief accordingly, generally along the lines of strong and soft atheism. We operate on the same assumption but come to the conclusion in different ways. In this case, Bob asserts that there absolutely is no God. In my case, I remain open to the possibility that there is a God for the sole purpose of maintaining empirical objectivity and intellectual integrity. I will not make positive assertions without evidence, nor will I tolerate those that do.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 8:57 pm on Fri, Apr 8, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    Bob, I already pointed out that there are two forms of atheism. One asserts that there is no god, and the other asserts that there is no reason to think there is a god. This is not just my viewpoint, this falls in line with the definition Darrell provided. One who denies and one who disbelieves. If you wish to be provided with the more formal terms, strong atheist and weak/soft atheist. I would implore you to review Richard Dawkins' religiosity scale. You fall on a 7, I on a 6.

    One must operate on the basis of evidence and to make a positive claim requires evidence to back it up. I would like to know, what positive evidence do you offer that there is no God?

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 1:48 pm on Fri, Apr 8, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Hi, Darrell

    This was not meant for you, actually. It was meant for Manuel. I was following the rather interesting back and forth you and he were having, and decided to chime in. Put your name on it instead and couldn't call it back. Was kinda hoping it would miss your radar, but no such luck. Sorry.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 6:32 am on Fri, Apr 8, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Bob Silvano posted at 7:29 pm...Darrell,
    I don’t think you actually fully understand the concept of a true atheist. We don’t believe as we do because there is not enough proof of a supreme being. We believe, in fact, that there is not a supreme being at all, and life ends when it ends.

    Bob... please note my post at 8:08 am... Manuel called me an idiot for basically agreeing with you... can you please explain what I do not fully understand... I think your post at 5:09 pm on Thu, Apr 7, 2011 was exactly accurate and is my experience as well.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 4:00 am on Fri, Apr 8, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Manuel,
    I don't know how one of my previous post got posted twice, but I apologize for the error.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 3:37 am on Fri, Apr 8, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Manuel,
    By the definition you put forward, being an atheist is very much like being almost pregnant. You walk the fence of indecision, never fully committing to jump off one side or the other. I, on the other hand, took that leap a long time ago. I can see you walking atop that fence, but I need binoculars to do it. Well, at least you're part way there, and I respect your caution.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 7:58 pm on Thu, Apr 7, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    I'm not sure how you missed that I am an atheist...

    Nor am I sure how you came to the conclusion that I follow someone blindly when they claim to have the truth. In fact, to do so would be to commit an argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy.
    I operate on the basis of evidence. I agree with David and other atheists that there is no god, but it isn't formulated through the use of a positive assertion. As expressed earlier, from a common standpoint, there are many things that we disregard as untrue precisely because there is no evidence to defend the proposition that 'x is true'. However, we have to remind ourselves that the absence of evidence for a creator cannot serve as evidence against it's potential existence. It simply serves to dash the proposition that a god does exist.

    It must be further stated that the possible existence of God is not an argument to believe that there is a God. David said it correctly, "it baffles me that many people feel the argument of "you cannot disprove god" leads us to proof of Jonah and the big fish, Noah's flood and ark, prayer, and the rapture." In the words of Christopher Hitchens, "it doesn't, it simply doesn't and cannot!"

    To quickly summarize, I am a number 6 on Richard Dawkins' religiosity scale.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxwBtfkv9ns

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 5:09 pm on Thu, Apr 7, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Manuel,
    There are millions of people , like yourself, who are what is commonly referred to as sheep. They follow blindly what someone, who they have no personal knowledge of, has proclaimed to be the truth, asking that others follow their instructions without question. These instructions are called the bible, a rather lengthy, verbose document that purports to hold the truth to the beginning of Christianity, and provides guidelines as to how everyone should lead their lives, in order to insure the continuation of their being at another level. I really fell sorry for people like you, who are afraid to live their lives in the manner that they would find most comforting and enjoyable to them, but are unable to, in fear that they may become subject to some imaginary damnation to an eternal inferno, deplete of air conditioning. (sorry, but I absolutely have to have air conditioning) I am, by no means, insinuating that anyone should lead their life in a manner that would harmful to any other. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am not a Christian, yet I am always willing to help my fellow man who is in need, and has demonstrated a willingness to help themselves. Wait ! How could this inconsistency possibly exist? Very easily. Atheists are not without compassion for their fellow man. They simply do not believe that there is a supreme being, or there is anything beyond this life. They also do not believe in any form of structured religion, all of which require a lifetime monetary commitment in order to prove ones faith. Bunk ! My belief is that I should live my life in a manner that causes harm to no one, that enables me to enjoy life to the fullest, and that allows all others to remember my existence with envy. What more is there?

     
  • David Diskin posted at 12:57 am on Thu, Apr 7, 2011.

    David Diskin Posts: 175

    Manuel, while you're right that we cannot prove the non-existance of something (such as god, a tea pot, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster), we can comfortably say that the other 99% of religion is definite, provable bunk.

    That's why it baffles me that many people feel the argument of "you cannot disprove god" leads us to proof of Jonah and the big fish, Noah's flood and ark, prayer, and the rapture.

    If people want to assert that god exists, fine. If they think god has spoken to them, that's fine too. Maybe he has. But to go any further and claim that the earth is < 10,000 years old, or that it stood still for an extra day for Joshua is just nonsense.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 11:05 pm on Wed, Apr 6, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    This "True atheist" talk is commission of the No True Scotsman fallacy. The definition provided by Darrell is sufficient and has been placed into context. Bob Silvano from this point of view, is listed as a Strong explicit atheist. Again, one must be aware that strong atheists are not the only ones, or even the majority (in fact, this is the first time in years of discussing this with many individuals that I have encountered one.)

    Bob, while I agree with you that the bible does not represent our best understanding and fails to provide evidence for it's claim of divine authorship, I do have to point out that all such fallacies and deficiencies cannot defend the proposition that there is no supreme being at all. There are limits to our knowledge, and while it is permissible to state in an informal way that God does not exist (in the same manner that one would argue that there is no teapot between the orbits of Earth and Mars), from a formal perspective, it is not tenable. To argue that there is no supreme being whatsoever is to give the impression that one has positive evidence in favor of this proposition. In the absence of that, the conclusion is invalid. We have to acknowledge that there is a possibility for this being to exist, but until someone can provide evidence in favor of his existence, the weight of the claim fails to surpass the possible into the probable.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 7:29 pm on Wed, Apr 6, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Darrell,

    I don’t think you actually fully understand the concept of a true atheist. We don’t believe as we do because there is not enough proof of a supreme being. We believe, in fact, that there is not a supreme being at all, and life ends when it ends. There is nothing after we are gone, and frankly, I believe most of us are at great peace with this expectation. We are self confident, and trust in those who have proven themselves worthy of our trust. Personally, I trust and believe in only myself, my wife, and my friends, as none of these has ever let me down, and could always be relied upon to fulfill promises made. The bible was written by man, and man is fallible. History has proven this time and time again. Even biblical scholars cannot agree on the interpretation of scripture. I will not condemn those who do believe in the bible, or a supreme being. I only wish that those who claim to be “Christians” would practice what they preach. It would save me a great deal of money on door hardware replacement.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 8:08 am on Wed, Apr 6, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Manuel posted at 8:18 pm ...To put it bluntly, you are an idiot...

    Of course Manuel... I would expect you to think and perceive that I am an idiot... it confirms my perception of your cave man personality and inability to consume ideas and thoughts from others that you think make no sense.
    You think it is is a reasonable and logical position to say that there is a possibility for the existence of a creator god, but that it is illogical to believe that such a god exists until sufficient evidence is presented... I think it is smoke screen and a dishonest picture of a true Atheists position... since I think you are lying to yourself (maybe unconsciously ) or maybe to others as to what you really think, and use this explanation as intellectual positioning, I draw a different conclusion than you... does that mean I am an idiot... does it make you an idiot... in my view no, neither side are idiots. I think anyone who takes a position that others are idiots because they conclude something that makes no sense to them, are intellectually lazy and choose to stay in a world of comfort where they do not have to consider thoughts and ideas that differ from what they perceive as truth. Manuel, I make room for the possibility that you are right and I am wrong... I am just sharing my opinion based on what I observe.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 8:18 pm on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    To put it bluntly, you are an idiot (based on my experience with you, not just this moment.) The two atheists you've been speaking to serve to alter your perception of atheists with a new experience that until now, you seem to have misunderstood.

    One operates on the assumption that there is no God when the claims posited in favor of the existence of this entity are insufficient to satisfy a proper conclusion. Every atheist I have spoken to, and admired (Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and so on past the most notable atheists) maintain that there is a possibility for the existence of a creator god, but that it is illogical to believe that such a god exists until sufficient evidence is presented. This is not a statement regarding a positive claim, it is a default position resulting from doubt.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbhFXpI8DHA

    "Also, Manuel... it was not my definition."
    It was the definition you provided here, does that restatement suffice? Regardless, my response places the two possible camps of atheism briefly described into context and it is something you have ignored for the sole purpose of maintaining your position irrespective of what has been presented to you.

    To conclude, had you bothered to review the clip I provided in my previous response (which is Richard Dawkins' scale of religiosity that David Diskin referred to,) you would have noticed the point of the exercise; that from a informal perspective, we all hold a state of disbelief when it comes to other objects or concepts proposed to exist in the absence of sufficient evidence. "We all have to be agnostic about Russell's teapot, but in practice, we are all ateapotists."

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:40 pm on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Manuel and David...I appreciate your posts but my experience with Atheists is different that yours.
    I think most atheists are dishonest intellectually who claim “We don't "know" there is no god, but we state that there is no evidence that suggests one exists … in reality, they truly believe god does not exist. I think atheists are people of faith completely and simple intellectualize to avoid looking like hypocrites.

    Also, Manuel... it was not my definition.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 8:44 am on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    From your very definition Darrell, "Atheist: a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or being."

    Note that this is accomplished by one of two ways. The outright assertion that there is no god (one who denies) or the lack of conviction that there is a god (disbelieves). Most atheists are described as agnostic atheists, meaning that they do not argue that there absolutely is no God, but that no positive evidence has been presented to satisfy the question of "Is there a God?" In short, your conclusion that atheists have as much faith as the religious is flawed. It may hold true for strong atheists (or positive atheists; a category that is nearly non-existent) but not for agnostic (negative, soft or weak atheism) because it is not a handle on absolutes but on skeptical inquiry.

    To move forward, I tend to be more skeptical of claims that argue in favor of supernatural intervention. I have no ability to absolutely say that there is no God; and by God, I mean a conscious entity that gave rise to the universe; but I can say, that because there is no convincing evidence to deduce the existence of this entity, I have little reason to assume that the entity in question exists. Moreover, if it could be established (for the sake of argument) that a creator of the universe exists and that he his responsible for our existence, it would not imply that this God is benevolent, all knowing, all powerful, immortal, personal or in any way shape or form, concerned about the affairs of rather insignificant beings fighting amongst themselves over, as Carl Sagan put it, "fractions of a dot."

    This is what we maintain, and it is clear that it is not a position of faith but one of skepticism.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxwBtfkv9ns

     
  • David Diskin posted at 8:26 am on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.

    David Diskin Posts: 175

    And let's not combine the concept of a supreme being with all that is tied up in religion.

    Even if the universe were created by a god, it is a far stretch to claim that:
    - the bible is its inspired word
    - Noah created a giant boat to save a bunch of animals
    - we go to Heaven or Hell when we die
    - Jonah survived three days inside a big fish
    - the world is going to end on May 21, 2011 (or any other date)

     
  • David Diskin posted at 8:22 am on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.

    David Diskin Posts: 175

    Darrell, I think we have different understandings of the term atheist (much like how Christians don't always agree on what makes a "true Christian").

    Richard Dawkins considers atheism a scale, from 0 to 7. A zero would be someone who absolutely believes in the bible, and a seven is someone who "knows" there is no god.

    Most atheists, when polled, consider themselves a 6. We don't "know" there is no god, but we state that there is no evidence that suggests one exists. We further assert that the evidence we have leads to a conclusion that the universe has no creator.

    Science, like atheism, is never about absolutes. It's about accepting the evidence and theories (which explain that evidence) until something better comes along.

    Faith is quite the opposite.

    Atheists do not have "faith" that there is no god. We believe there isn't, based on the evidence that we have. (Or, you might say, the complete lack of evidence.)

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:32 am on Tue, Apr 5, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    David Diskin posted at 11:57 pm...And so we sit back and laugh... at people who think the world will end on May 21, and at the people who know it won't because of Matthew 24:36...But then we remember all of the horrible things that man has done when being convinced by faith...

    Then there are people like me, who does not practice religion, that think Atheists guide their life by extreme faith just as the folks of the radio show. According to dictionary .com... Atheist...a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or being.. in my opinion, it takes a man of great faith to “know” there is no god. How ironic that an atheist claims horrible things happen because of people of faith when they themselves lead the pack in such behavior.

    Personally, I think no one knows what is or is not. I wish I could be a person of faith as Atheists and religious people are...there appears to be comfort and security in having faith... and knowing from that faith what the unknown will bring us.

     
  • David Diskin posted at 11:57 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    David Diskin Posts: 175

    As an atheist, I find this dialogue amusing.

    In one corner, we have Family Radio claiming they have a correct interpretation of the bible. In the other, we have the rest of Christianity claiming they're wrong.

    It's just the same with morality, premarital sex, homosexual rights, gun control, abortion, and war. We have people reading the exact same book and being absolutely certain that their interpretation is the only one that is correct.

    Except, as an atheist, we realize that it's not the same book you're reading. Besides all of the translations, the edits, and the forgeries that may or may not exist... everyone is going to put their own spin on what they read.

    And so we sit back and laugh... at people who think the world will end on May 21, and at the people who know it won't because of Matthew 24:36.

    But then we remember all of the horrible things that man has done when being convinced by faith. We see people giving up their property to Family Radio and sending money to televangelists. We see wars fought on religious grounds, rights taken away because of a few bible verses, and sickening intolerance.

    And it's no longer amusing.

     
  • Manuel Martinez posted at 10:06 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Manuel Martinez Posts: 641

    It is a wonder people in the modern era still put trust in ancient texts that have not been validated and of which do not promote Humanity's best possible understanding or ethical outreach, despite being attributed to the supposed creator of the universe.

    Paul Jerome posted at 6:46 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.
    "The judgment day is not a single day but is a period of 153 days or five months spoken of in Revelation from May 21, 2011 to October 21, 2011. The Bible speaks of creation as one day in Gen 2:4 but we know that the day was not a literal 24 hour time period because of what we read in Gen 1."

    Look everybody! The goal posts moved. Like no one saw that coming...I was actually looking forward to celebrating May 22nd...that the Earth kept turning. Guess I'll have to delay it until October 22...

    "The many instances of forged miracles and prophecies and supernatural events, which in all ages have either been detected by the contrary evidence or which defeat themselves by their absurdity, prove sufficiently the strong propensity of mankind to the extraordinary and marvelous and ought reasonably to beget a suspicion against all relations of this kind. It is strange, a judicious reader is apt to say, that such prodigious events never happen in our day, but it is nothing strange that men should lie in all ages." -David Hume.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 10:05 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    Biblically, any member of Family Radio who is carrying debt after May 21 is attempting to steal.

    Leviticus 19:13 "You shall not oppress your neighbor, nor rob him. The wages of a hired man are not to remain with you all night until morning." So if you owe some one money after May 21 then you are attempting to NOT have to pay them. That means that from May 21st on you can only pay cash. Checks, Credit cards and ANY kind of loan is to take a good or service with the knowledge that you may not pay for it, stealing.

    Jeremiah 22:13 Woe to him who builds his house without righteousness and his upper rooms without justice, who uses his neighbor’s services without pay and does not give him his wages.

    1 Timothy 5:18 For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.”

    Psalm 37:21 The wicked borrows and does not pay back, but the righteous is gracious and gives.

    clesiastes 5:5 It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.

    I think you get the point. This also mean those billboards should be paid for in cash, the end of every work day laborers are paid, in cash. And so on. Anything else it to take without paying back.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 7:41 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    May 21 is only the anniversary of the flood for Family Radio. There is NO Biblical support for the date except for the twisting of different passages and melting them together. As i said, there is NO geologic proof of a flood for the time frame of 7000 years ago. One happened 8500 years ago and 5500 years ago. These are geological facts. So, again, unless you are claiming that God is hiding the evidence of this third flood, Noah's flood, there is no support for your arguments of May 21 except for misinterpretations made by people who are collecting money for their work.

    So I ask this, again as well, will Family Radio offer full refunds for all donations and purchases made when Sept 22 rolls around? You and I both know they won't. And in a few years they will come out with a new date and ascribe this one to another one of God's tests. It is amazing how every time God tests mankind, Family Radio stands to make more money.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 7:35 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    Sorry, Mr. Jerome but you are wrong again. Psalm 90 is NOT God talking where Genesis is attributed directly to Him. Psalm 90 is talking about how our lives are difficult and full of doing things that, put mildly, irritate God. But, as the passage ends, it is His unending Love that gives us the ability to overcome our weaknesses to find wisdom. No where does it say God said our time would be limited to 70 or 80 years, it is the author commenting about the duration of life's suffering.

    This is not the case in Genesis 3. The limited numbers of years is given directly by God because of our wicked ways, 120 years. It is not referring to Noah, but all mankind and our lifespan. A FULL reading of the passage would have reveled this. Did you read it before repeating it or are you just parroting what you have been told?

    All of Genesis 6: 1-7 does refer to the wickedness of man in Noah's day. Noah is not mentioned until vs 8 and only to say God found favor with him.

     
  • Paul Jerome posted at 6:57 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Paul Jerome Posts: 3

    Sorry Kevin Paglia but contrary to what you’ve suggested, Psalm 90:10 is the verse that explains the lifespan of mankind. I’m not sure which version you are quoting with regards to Gen 6:3? In any regard, the Old King James Version is the most faithful English translation of the Bible and the context of Gen 6:1-7 is that the human race had become exceedingly wicked and God had decided to destroy mankind in Noah’s day.

    May 21, 2011 being the 7,000 year anniversary of the flood is only one of many, many proofs in the Bible all pointing to May 21st as the day of judgment. Not everyone trusts the Bible and I’m not here to argue anyone into the Kingdom of God. God will save all of those He has elected to salvation. I do encourage anyone and everyone to diligently search this subject before the day arrives.

    May God be merciful to those who read this thread.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 6:27 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    WHY ATHEISTS ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS

    1. Atheists never try to persuade you to believe as they do
    2. Atheists never put up billboards along the freeway
    3. Atheists never knock on your door just as you sit down to dinner
    4. Atheists never condemn anyone for their views on abortion
    5. Atheists never ask you to tithe 10% of your income
    6. Atheists never ask you to volunteer to work bingo games
    7. Atheists never ask you to provide free labor to prove your faith
    8. Atheists never ask for last rights
    9. Atheists never try to influence legislation unless it is to counter a religion initiated or endorsed measure
    10. Atheists are not sheep who follow blindly. They are true to themselves.
    11. Atheists will be your friend regardless of your beliefs
    12. Atheists will invite you over for a BBQ, and you won’t have to say prayers
    13. Atheists will visit you in ANY hospital
    14. Atheists are good neighbors because they don’t insist that you be one

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 6:16 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    Mr. Jerome. I'll ask you the same thing i asked the last representative of Family Radio; If Sept 21 rolls around and we are all still here, is your founder willing to give back all the money he made? Will Family Radio close up shop and admit they were wrong when Sept 22 rolls around or will, as he did last time, just "re-interpret" the signs and pick a new date?

    According to geologic records there was NO flood in the time frame Family Radio claims, there was one a few thousand years before and one 1500 years later, but none that supports your belief that Noah's flood was 7000 years ago. So unless you believe that God wiped out most of mankind then hid the global evidence, there is a significant flaw in the dates presented.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 6:10 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    Mr. Jerome, thank you for again demonstrating that manipulation of the Bible is Family Radio's stock in trade.

    "Yes, Noah was warned at the age of 480 that God would destroy the world in 120 years (Gen 6:3)" "Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with[a] humans forever, for they are mortal[b]; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”

    This passage is BEFORE any mention of Noah. It actually is referring the the mortality of man, he life span. Not how long until the flood comes. If biblical fact, no mention of how long Noah had to build the Ark is made. Only the 7 days before the flood hits.

    Doesn't it make you wonder that if these passages are being so badly misrepresented to you then what else is being misrepresented to you?

     
  • Mike Adams posted at 5:34 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1271

    1. You know, every time they set a date and time, it is even more likely to occur.
    Destiny and goofiness will eventually collide.

    2. If they have a payment plan, that might indicate they are not as solid as they claim.
    Try it. Call and see if you can make payments after the Rapture. I wouldn't use a
    credit card, who knows what crap they'll buy.

    3. If you make a substantial donation, do you get preferred seating? I would be
    interested. I can't stand to hang around in a line with a bunch of cheapskates.

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:36 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    Ms Bobin stated...I am flabergasted that, for someone who has been taken to task for, and accused of, "disrespecting" religion and religious individuals by Mr. Baumbach, he had the audacity to make fun of this group and their beliefs.

    You misunderstand Ms Bobin... I am saying I am equal in ability and accuracy of predicting the end of the world just as any individual or group can. Nothing to do with religion or disrespecting anyone.. I thought April fools day would be an appropriate day to select. It is comforting to know that you are always out there to misinterpret my motives in posts. There is something peaceful and tranquil
    in having predictable events.

     
  • Joanne Bobin posted at 4:12 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4296

    I am flabergasted that, for someone who has been taken to task for, and accused of, "disrespecting" religion and religious individuals by Mr. Baumbach, he had the audacity to make fun of this group and their beliefs. Seems sort of hypocritical, don't you think?

    BTW - it would have been much more humorous, Mr. Baumbach, if you had designated November 6th, 2012 as the end of the world...the day Barack Obama is re-elected!

     
  • Paul Jerome posted at 3:19 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Paul Jerome Posts: 3

    Kevin Paglia, peace be with you. Yes, Noah was warned at the age of 480 that God would destroy the world in 120 years (Gen 6:3), then Noah built the ark, and then 7 days prior to the flood (Gen 7:4), God told Noah to get on the ark. Noah was 600 years old when the flood came (Gen 7:6).

    But the point was that God warns His people of the destruction while the unsaved scoff.

     
  • Bob Silvano posted at 12:49 pm on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Bob Silvano Posts: 145

    Hey, these guys may be on to something. All they have to do is change the year on the billboard and try again for the following year. Actually, I think they picked this day in hopes the end would come just prior to having to take final exams.

     
  • Richard Turner posted at 9:41 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Richard Turner Posts: 80

    These people are still asking for monthly donations, and they have claimed the world is ending several times in the past.

     
  • Robert Jacobs posted at 9:19 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Robert Jacobs Posts: 298

    I would very much like for these people to show me where in the bible it gives a specific date of the end times. Also, Jesus is God, so he absolutely knows when he is coming back because he is the author of all things. They are right about one thing, the main stream church today does NOT teach these things because it isn't in the bible!

     
  • posted at 9:07 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Posts:

    Every born-again Christian knows that judgment day will come eventually and they welcome that meeting with their Lord whether its this way or simply passing on. The big difference is they aren't in a big hurry. I feel sad that this group has so little hope for themselves and this world that "THIS" is their hope for us all.
    I'm not done here, so I won't be joining them, but hey, thanks for the invite.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:53 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2740

    Kevin wrote:

    Biblically he got the warning when he was 500+ years old, flood came when he was 600+ years.

    -Noah is the only one in the Bible who was hundreds of years old when he died. Yet he was not a prophet. I have trouble believing the whole story of Noah was not a fable.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 7:41 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    Paul wrote: "Please be aware that Noah and his family were not a part of those who 'knew not until the flood came' because we know that Noah and his family were warned of the flood seven days prior to the flood (Gen 7:4)."

    Again, omission to meet the goal of manipulating biblical passages. Noah had much more than 7 days warning. He had enough time to build the entire ark as warning. That was MUCH more than 7 days. Biblically he got the warning when he was 500+ years old, flood came when he was 600+ years.

    If you are going to use the Bible to support your Profit then at least be accurate in what you say. Or you may find an uncomfortable millstone in your future.

     
  • Kevin Paglia posted at 7:34 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 1879

    It demonstrates just how easily this group either misinterpretes Biblical passages or manipulates them for their own purposes. The billboard pictured quotes in part Ezekiel 33:3, "blow the trumpet, warn the people". Ezekiel was not talking about the end of the world in this passage but rather warning people when they are doing something wrong. This billboard has absolutely NOTHING to do with warning people that they are doing something wrong but everything to do with gaining more listeners to their radio show.

    If they can't even understand/use such a straight forward passage, then how are we to believe that they interpreted "hidden" messages in the Bible correctly? Oh wait, I'm sorry how are we to believe the hidden messages correctly THIS TIME? After all they have tried this already and were wrong before. The last rep from them that interacted with us here claimed the first date was just a "psych" moment from God, trying to see who was really faithful.

     
  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:21 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2740

    I see Chicken Little is a t it again. We've been through this before throughout the centuries. Everyone had their own little angle. And once again, another group of people have their own little angle. I'm on the edge of my seat:) :)

     
  • Paul Jerome posted at 6:46 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Paul Jerome Posts: 3

    From the article: "The May 21 date that Family Radio uses is not based on today's calendar. On the calendar used 7,000 years ago. Each day constitutes 153 of the days we use in today's world..."

    This was misunderstood by the article’s author. The judgment day is not a single day but is a period of 153 days or five months spoken of in Revelation from May 21, 2011 to October 21, 2011. The Bible speaks of creation as one day in Gen 2:4 but we know that the day was not a literal 24 hour time period because of what we read in Gen 1.

    The 153 days relates to the 153 fish safely brought to shore in Jhn 21. The number 153 breaks down to 3 * 3 * 17 = 153. The number three is God’s purpose and the number seventeen relates to Heaven. The doubling of the number three means that God will shortly bring it to pass (Gen 41:32). In other words, all of the true believers will have been safely brought to Heaven on May 21, 2011.

    In addition to numerous other proofs (the 2,300 days in Daniel, the length of time in previous tribulation periods as well as the Great Tribulation all tying to the number 84, the 1,290 days in Daniel equating to multiples of 1,290 years between the three tribulation periods, the number of years from Christ’s death on the cross to May 21 being 722,500 which breaks down to spiritually significant numbers, the five month judgment spoken of in Revelation, the 153 days of judgment beginning May 21, 2011 and ending on October 21, 2011 being a spiritually significant number, the final Feast of Tabernacles which has not yet had it’s spiritual fulfillment falling on October 21, 2011 – all of which would fall apart if the judgment day fell on a day other than May 21, 2011) it’s also 7,000 years to the day from when the doors of the ark were shut in Noah’s day and that ties to the only verse in the entire Bible that commands the beloved not to be ignorant of this one thing.

    2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

    Anyone reading this is free to believe that Jesus will come as a thief in the night on judgment day for them and that Jesus did not know the timing of His return; however, a careful reading of Mar 24:36-39 reveals that He comes as thief in the night for the unsaved.

    Mat 24:36-39 But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

    Please be aware that Noah and his family were not a part of those who 'knew not until the flood came' because we know that Noah and his family were warned of the flood seven days prior to the flood (Gen 7:4). That seven days equates to the 7,000 years of which the beloved are not to be ignorant (2Pe 3:8).

    May God be merciful to anyone reading this post.

     
  • Bob Smith posted at 6:44 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Bob Smith Posts: 128

    I hope the people buying the advertising are paying up front. What are they going to tell us when the world doesn't end?

     
  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 5:30 am on Mon, Apr 4, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9403

    I am really upset that this group is proclaiming the end of the world between May 21 and Oct. 21 this year... they have no idea what they are talking about... in fact I think they are intentionally lying. I know for a fact that the world is not ending until April 1st, 2012... I cannot believe the nerve... really.

     

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists