Israel just doesn't get it...

[E30Kaiser]

Why were the early humans on Earth ignored? There was man on earth long before the Old/New Testaments, surely God knew of them?

Why were only those who inhabited the area of Palestine good enough for God's word?

Why not send "prophets" to other populated areas?

Why no "prophets" in the modern age?

1)The old testament starts before humans were made, so I don't know what you are asking here.
2)The story of the old testament isn't the story of God or the world, it is the story of the Hebrews and their forefathers.
3)See 2
4)Because there can be no more prophets, read the Koran.

[z31maniac]

We can know nothing, life is a farse, what is REALLY reality, etc etc. I get what you're saying, but let's try to stay a bit more realistic.

[Aptyp]

I'm a born skeptic

Why were the early humans on Earth ignored? There was man on earth long before the Old/New Testaments, surely God knew of them?
Why were only those who inhabited the area of Palestine good enough for God's word?
Why not send "prophets" to other populated areas?
Why no "prophets" in the modern age?

Very nice. As a skeptic, you should question all known and unknown. You simply can't say that you're an atheist and a skeptic... Atheism is pretty set on the idea of "no god", which is also taken on faith (as I mentioned earlier, can't be proof of lack of god). Before you hang on the word "god", like a lot of "intellectuals" do, remember "rose by any other name, blah blah blah" the same blanket statements you'd use in other debates.

You reaching into bible is just as valid as you reaching into mythology, and every other early and current religion... All had deities, all had set laws and rituals, and if you're going to claim to be a rational person, understand that every culture had to have something that united them. Usually answer of origin and common laws are a good tool to unite masses. "Isms" explain that behavior...

[briansjacobs]

Then let's search for a middle ground, I'm all for spirited debate. I'm a born skeptic. I think something else that people don't take into account is the general mindset of the average person in antiquity, not exactly as intelligent as we are today.

It's just for me, it's hard to believe, there are far too many questions that can't be answered for me to just pass it off.

Why were the early humans on Earth ignored? There was man on earth long before the Old/New Testaments, surely God knew of them?
Why were only those who inhabited the area of Palestine good enough for God's word?
Why not send "prophets" to other populated areas?
Why no "prophets" in the modern age?

the editor cut those sections before going to print. Kind of like how starwars starts on episode 4.

[z31maniac]

I would challange that he cannot be dis-proven imperically. And as Kaiser is pointing out, we're in the realm of philosophy, morality and the "why" of how things work. Science is key in life, but again, as Kaiser adequetly said, it is not the end all of all conversations/discussions. Logically I'd hope to find middle ground but Z, you seem to be putting more of a stop to that than I am. I can't appreciate your view point when the most that comes from it is disparaging remarks to peoples beliefs while not directly addressing yours. My previous comments were and are still, directed solely at Lee's remarkable bigotry and biase.

Then let's search for a middle ground, I'm all for spirited debate. I'm a born skeptic. I think something else that people don't take into account is the general mindset of the average person in antiquity, not exactly as intelligent as we are today.

It's just for me, it's hard to believe, there are far too many questions that can't be answered for me to just pass it off.

Why were the early humans on Earth ignored? There was man on earth long before the Old/New Testaments, surely God knew of them?
Why were only those who inhabited the area of Palestine good enough for God's word?
Why not send "prophets" to other populated areas?
Why no "prophets" in the modern age?

[z31maniac]

I know right, I love biologism, chemistrism, and the hardest of all physicism.

I was talking about "Relativism", "Skepticism", etc, the different viewpoints in Philosophy. I refer to them as "-isms" because they aren't proven, just thought experiements really.

Which does not compare to real, hard science. Not what I was trying to say at all. But I think you knew that.

[ck_taft325is]

Hostility comes from being called ignorant and having words put in my mouth, if you care to stop that, we can go on with a civil discussion.

To me it's not Faith that there is no God. It's scientific fact. He can't be proven to exist, so until EMPERICAL EVIDENCE constitutes the existence of God, he does not exist.

That is not having "faith" or "belief" in God not existing, that is knowing that God does not exist.

Not talking about Healthcare here sweetheart, talking about your lack of Federal Income tax liability, but we'll drop that. I just wanted to get that jab in on you.

Ha, understandable. I'm still starting out as everyone does at one point. I'll be the first to admit I'm not really where I "should" be, but then again, I think everyone has a different lot in life and making $80,000 + a year really isn't a huge drive for me. We live within our means and try to stay ahead of our bills. Beyond that, money in the bank is money that's not helping those in our (the wife and I) lives that are in need. As for putting words in your mouth, I apologize. I know I'll often stereo type, pigeon hole and make blanket statements when addressing multiple people at once in a single sentance. I'll make more of an effort to clean up what I say to who and when.

I would challange that he cannot be dis-proven imperically. And as Kaiser is pointing out, we're in the realm of philosophy, morality and the "why" of how things work. Science is key in life, but again, as Kaiser adequetly said, it is not the end all of all conversations/discussions. Logically I'd hope to find middle ground but Z, you seem to be putting more of a stop to that than I am. I can't appreciate your view point when the most that comes from it is disparaging remarks to peoples beliefs while not directly addressing yours. My previous comments were and are still, directed solely at Lee's remarkable bigotry and biase.

[Aptyp]

Hostility comes from being called ignorant and having words put in my mouth, if you care to stop that, we can go on with a civil discussion.

To me it's not Faith that there is no God. It's scientific fact. He can't be proven to exist, so until EMPERICAL EVIDENCE constitutes the existence of God, he does not exist.

That is not having "faith" or "belief" in God not existing, that is knowing that God does not exist.

Not talking about Healthcare here sweetheart, talking about your lack of Federal Income tax liability, but we'll drop that. I just wanted to get that jab in on you.

Very nice and dandy, but what you said can be posed the opposite way as well. As there's no prove of existence of no god. That's the whole point that's still driving science to answer questions of our origin.

I have a minor in Philosophy, so I'm not sure what you are driving at. To say there is no science in Philosophy seems a bit misguided. Philosophy very much uses "scientific principles" when trying to espouse a new point of view, or "-ism."

I know right, I love biologism, chemistrism, and the hardest of all physicism.

[E30Kaiser]

I have a minor in Philosophy, so I'm not sure what you are driving at. To say there is no science in Philosophy seems a bit misguided. Philosophy very much uses "scientific principles" when trying to espouse a new point of view, or "-ism."

My point is that while it does use the "scientific principles", as long as you have a sound, logical argument you can put forth a valid statement and you don't need scientific evidence. Scientific laws do not necessarily equal good arguments, while you might argue that gravity is what causes an apple to fall from a tree, if you are merely resting on the scientific laws put forth by Newton, you would most likely be made to look stupid. On the flip side no one takes Skeptics seriously, as they just shoot down everything with no regard to pragmatism.

I think one should come more with the viewpoint of philosophy than science when talking about faith and beliefs, though science should not be ignored, as I said, it is not the end all be all of the argument.

EDIT for Brian's post: Religion itself is mostly just thoughts and ideas, and like philosophy is something that helps you clarify and order your thoughts and morals. I am a Christian, but I don't even know if there is a heaven or hell so I don't buy into "Christian" morals because I feel like otherwise I am going to hell, I do it because otherwise I am letting down myself, my community, and my faith before someone pulls the "I don't need the threat of hell to be a good person!" argument that is made every 5 seconds.

[briansjacobs]

But I completely agree with your point, also science isn't the end all be all of debate, just look at philosophy, where science has very little to do with anything, but no one talks shit about it, beyond the fact that it is pointless.

philosophy is good for provoking thought, but that is all it is, thought and ideas. Science is the proof (or attempt to prove) of the philosophy.

Philosophy with out science has no place in life outside of a school courtyard trying to talk to a girl out of her virginity. (wow that sounds creepy coming from a guy near 40)

[z31maniac]

As anthiest I say I do not have the data back up the belief in the theory of a god or inteligent designer, to say you know for a fact is awfully bold and arrogant. Remember at one time there was not proof that the world was round, the theory made sense and was believable, but no proof. I would suggest a little more humilty patience with one another and their beliefs or lack there of would do everyone a bit good.

I don't believe my statement was made with hubris, just stating why I think they way I do.

You simply stated that you agree with me using different wording. Semantical games are boring, let's stay on point.

Even though we've thoroughly derailed this thread!

This is a fallacy perpetuated by elementary school teachers, and Washington Irving. For the past 3000 years educated men have believed the Earth is round.

But I completely agree with your point, also science isn't the end all be all of debate, just look at philosophy, where science has very little to do with anything, but no one talks shit about it, beyond the fact that it is pointless.

I have a minor in Philosophy, so I'm not sure what you are driving at. To say there is no science in Philosophy seems a bit misguided. Philosophy very much uses "scientific principles" when trying to espouse a new point of view, or "-ism."

[E30Kaiser]

As anthiest I say I do not have the data back up the belief in the theory of a god or inteligent designer, to say you know for a fact is awfully bold and arrogant. Remember at one time there was not proof that the world was round, the theory made sense and was believable, but no proof. I would suggest a little more humilty patience with one another and their beliefs or lack there of would do everyone a bit good.

This is a fallacy perpetuated by elementary school teachers, and Washington Irving. For the past 3000 years educated men have believed the Earth is round.

But I completely agree with your point, also science isn't the end all be all of debate, just look at philosophy, where science has very little to do with anything, but no one talks shit about it, beyond the fact that it is pointless.

[briansjacobs]

Hostility comes from being called ignorant and having words put in my mouth, if you care to stop that, we can go on with a civil discussion.

To me it's not Faith that there is no God. It's scientific fact. He can't be proven to exist, so until EMPERICAL EVIDENCE constitutes the existence of God, he does not exist.

That is not having "faith" or "belief" in God not existing, that is knowing that God does not exist.

Not talking about Healthcare here sweetheart, talking about your lack of Federal Income tax liability, but we'll drop that. I just wanted to get that jab in on you.

As anthiest I say I do not have the data back up the belief in the theory of a god or inteligent designer, to say you know for a fact is awfully bold and arrogant. Remember at one time there was not proof that the world was round, the theory made sense and was believable, but no proof. I would suggest a little more humilty patience with one another and their beliefs or lack there of would do everyone a bit good.

[dirtysix]

ARGH. No one is quoting and arguing with me. I'm out of here.

I'll bite!
You think too much ha!
But here is a question for you and ck-taft.
Why must I, or anyone, take a position on faith or religion? Why has this question become so very important?

[ACMF74]

I usually take that as a sign that I'm right.

or terribly off/wrong :)