SEG wrote: ↑
Fri Mar 15, 2019 12:13 pm
Why would anyone risk their eternal salvation by breaking your god's moral commands if they knew them to be true? It seems to me that either the commands were not compelling or their god was not believable. Both views don't bode well for the messages that were sent or the veracity of the sender.
Og3 wrote: ↑
Sat Mar 16, 2019 8:34 am
that can be shown to be fallacious by a simple observation: People run red lights. Now the consequences (deadly collisions, expensive citations) are well known. And yet people do so.
We cannot from that say that the red light and/or stop sign do not well and accurately express the intent of the local authorities in a compelling and believable way. It also does not reflect poorly against the veracity of the message to stop. It merely means that some people choose to take the risk
Not a good analogy, you are comparing local authorities to a supposedly perfect god and getting a ticket or collisions to the bliss of eternal salvation. If I was a Christian and knew for sure that the claims about God were true, I would study my Bible every waking hour and never risk breaking ANY of his commands. Yet most Christians break his commands every day and the criminal ones commit the more serious offences like stealing and murder. The risk of God looking over your shoulder doesn't seem to worry the vast majority of Christians, which tells me most don't believe the consequences of failing to follow his commands will affect their lives. Your god is not only unbelievable to atheists, he must also be unbelievable to most Christians.
On the question proper, why do people sin despite knowing God's moral code?
1. Because we are humans and are weak. Paul addresses this in Romans 7, where he remarks that he often finds himself doing the wrong things and not doing the right things.
2. For Arminians (a theological position), because they seem to have ample opportunity to repent, and are weak humans.
3. For Calvinists (a theological position) and modified Arminians, because they are secure in the "perseverance of the saints" and are weak humans.
4. Because we are not yet perfected.
You could add perhaps the main one;
5. Unconvinced of the consequences
More Christians in Jail than Atheists? Well, let's assume that to be a correct statistic (I'm not going to bother holding a survey).
SEG wrote: ↑
Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:46 pm
You don't need to, they already have done at least one. The U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons released an April 2013 survey of 218,167 prisoners that reports .02% of prisoners are atheists. You read that right. Not 2%, or even .2 percent, but .02% of American prisoners are atheists.
Which is even lower than what Ricky Gervais quipped on Twitter;
If all the Atheists & Agnostics left America, they'd lose 93% of The National Academy of Sciences & less than 1% of the prison population.
Yeah, and 87.2% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
It looks like he was 1% in error regarding:
and his 1% of atheists in jails was vastly inflated.
Actually, it asserts that fools are atheists, not that atheists are fools. Poodles are dogs, but dogs are not all poodles.
God's word is a lie too:
there is none that doeth good.
Lots of atheists do good, despite their undeserved reputation in the US and other countries.
It also means that 99.98% of U.S. federal prisoners committing crimes and going to prison are religious and not atheists.
This bears on the statistic because a person can be considered "Christian" if he or she was born in a Latin American country, for example, regardless of actual religious practice if any. Also, in some regions (middle east, for example) anyone who is neither Muslim nor Jewish is automatically "Christian." Thus how the groups were defined and where the statistic originated bear on its accuracy.
It can also mean that atheists that had parents that were Catholic for example would also list as Catholic, even if they were actually atheists
Which would also help to make the statistic inaccurate.
I agree on that one.
Second, assuming the survey to be accurately categorized, why are there more Christians in Jail? Is it because more followers of Christ rob banks? Or is it because Jail is a good place for introspection, repentance, and religious conversion? Further, suppose that the survey looked only at jail intake stated religions: This could mean that Christians commit more crimes, or it could mean that Christians, having committed a crime, are more likely to confess or to plead guilty. And cetera.
But assuming that it means that more Christians commit crimes: So what?
It may also mean that Christians were less educated and got caught or came from lower income families that couldn't afford decent legal representation. Look, I'm not saying that being religious means that you are more likely to be a crim, but rather atheists aren't all low lives without morals.
You keep saying that, but no one's arguing against it. You strike me as a very moral man, and I'm not saying that you, or most atheists, or all atheists, or even most people who aren't Christians are not moral. No one says that Atheists can't make and keep rules. The question is whether those rules are meaningful.
Correct. The same goes for your god's commands.
If you become religious just to be a better person, that ain't necessarily the case.
The only reason that I would wish for ANYONE to become a Christian is that the person has considered the matter carefully and has found Christianity to be the most reasonable inference. Becoming a Christian in order to be a better person would be a silly thing to do.
Yet a lot of people do it for exactly that reason and go to church just because they are expected to go by their family and friends.
Don't get me started about how the most Christian nation in the world is also the most violent. Have a look at the most atheist countries in the world like Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Australia. Check out the numbers of violent deaths compared to the holier than thou USA.
Is that the stumbling block, Mate? Do you think that Christians and the Good old USA are judging you?
Why would we do that? What do we have that you don't? We Christians all admit that we're dirty rotten sinners, and our founder said in one of his greatest speeches, "Judge not lest ye be judged."
If you think that Christians, or the "Holier than thou USA" are judging you, I assure you, that feeling is coming from somewhere else.
No, it's got nothing to do about judging me, I don't care about that. I said "holier than thou" because I was making a point that the holy are in fact more immorally violent.
Our entire religion is built around the idea of NOT being judgmental. Remember, to be Judgmental, you first have to be mental. The woman at the well, the woman caught in the act of adultery, the Gadarene demoniac -- even Judas. Did you ever think about the Last Supper, and Jesus saying, "One of you here will betray me?" Why didn't everyone point at Judas and say, "That guy, he's the one?" Well, because they ALL had problems, and Jesus loved each of them, including Judas. So the betrayer blended in with the other dirty rotten sinners.
Have you really never heard Jesus called, "The Friend of Sinners?"
Then why do you judge homosexuals?
I'm not judging you, SEG. I'm not allowed to.
By whose fiat, the biggest intolerant judge of them all?
The entire point of Christianity is NOT that you're supposed to be a moral person: It's that you've failed in being a moral person, and thus God covers your shortcomings through His own sacrifice on your behalf.
Which is a morally vile concept, an innocent person should never take the blame for a guilty person. What would you think of a foreign dictator that sacrificed his innocent son in a public square so that his country's subjects should be absolved of all their crimes? The original sin that he died for was a vile concept as well. Entrapping your own innocent kids and then throwing them out of your home is morally bankrupt too.
You are thus not under the law -- not expected to be morally perfect -- but are under grace, that is, covered by Christ's perfection.
Too bad he wasn't perfect if he existed and was a deity. As a human he had to wear our faults.
Which is not a license to keep sinning (Romans 6-8) but instead reason to turn from sin and try to live as God intended: Micah 6:8 -- Be just, love mercy, and walk humbly before God.
I walk humbly beside no-one, I treat everyone as my equal.
So the statistic fails to make any kind of point, and even if it did, so what?
What I'm saying are the absolute morals that you are supposedly receiving from your deity aren't working too well, are they? Imagine if 99.98% of U.S. federal prisoners were to be rehabilitated using humanistic educational classes. We might be able to make the Earth a better place OG. We just need to get more atheists into your political system. Turn up your speakers and chill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOgFZfRVaww
It's not about making people follow rules, SEG. I'm sure I'm saying this clearly... It's about people realizing that they've got a moral problem, and taking the first step to fix it. It's just like an alcoholic having to admit that he's an alcoholic before he can start treating it.
Ah, the typical Christian assumption, we are all born sick and we need God's magical cure. I'm not buying that at all.
The trouble with that video is that it assumes that God could do no wrong and his nature is perfectly good. Drowning most of the world's population, committing genocide including babies and innocent animals, endorsement of slavery etc is morally corrupt. God ordered people put to death for minor offences such as consulting a witch, having a different religion, gathering sticks on the Sabbath and for being disobedient child.
As stated previously, your god could do morally corrupt acts and hate everybody and still be good according to you. The concept of him being "good" is meaningless.
Back atcher: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaMcMIuN_XQ