Need anti-inerrancy resources help

[steve_bank]

Chronicle of the Pharaohs: The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt With 350 Illustrations 130 in Color Hardcover – October 1, 1994​

by Peter A. Clayton (Author)


Here is a book you should add to your list. You need to know true Egyptian history to understand how fake Bible pseudo-history truly is. If the Bible was true, we should read of the Egyptians in Canaan, their wars, military campaigns, their centuries of hegemony over Canaan. From Moses and the exodus to Joshua and judges, the Egyptions are most conspicous by their absence. By the time the first Israelites began writing their fraudulent history, they had forgotten all of this history of Egypt in Canaan. All of it.

I found this a truly useful book to understand just how false the Bible truly is. Read carefully it is chock full of gotchyas. Rameses II fough the Hittites 20 years and that did not make it into the Bible? And Christians claim Rameses II was the Pharoah of the exodus?

The title sounds lie one of those pseudo historical TV shows. Lots of subjective inference presented as facts.

 

[Brian63]

"It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced."

Are you sure about that? No progress has ever been made against those religions? At all? Anywhere?

Anyhow, I have experience debating religion online for ~20 years and this past summer especially I have engaged in a project of visiting different local churches on Sundays, identifying as an atheist, having good discussions with staff people and lay members, and also with pastors in private discussions. So far I have visited ~25 churches and half of them involved a later discussion with a pastor. Those tend to last approximately 2 hours. That is not counting all the other discussions with other people inside their church.

Yes, several of those Christians were very new to atheist points of view. Some pastors were very transparent and open with me about theological problems they had with their religion or frustrations with their church members, etc. A pastor admitted to me that he would soften his language against atheism as a result of our discussion (and we have even become friends).

If you are that concerned that this type of meeting would result in a bad appearance, perhaps you do not understand how to conduct yourself properly in this type of situation. Some added experience and reflection may benefit you.

oood luck.

That is not as good as "Sorry, I am willing to admit being wrong. Progress is possible.". But if it is the best you are willing to give, so be it.

 

[Politesse]

Are you that unfamiliar with how deconversions happen? They are not instantaneous. They tend to take years or even decades to occur. They include several contributing factors. This can be among them though.

Do you really think that if I did not see it happen myself then they did not have their beliefs challenged at all? I know of Christians who secretly were troubled by Christian beliefs or atheist arguments for years. They would not display it publicly and especially not right away after they heard it. But they still had an effect.

If you only look at their immediate reaction and determine success/failure on that, then you are missing the point.

They of course feel the same way, that every time they bug their co-workers about Jesus, they are "planting a seed" that may one day blossom into faith (Mtt 13:1-9).

You would do better to actually know what you are talking about yourself, than to just blindly cite sources at people. What exactly are you expecting them to do, write them down on a scribble pad to look up later? Or are they just supposed to convert on the basis of merely knowing that other perspectives exist?

Sorry, if there's one thing that annoys me more than a proselytizer, it's a lazy proselytizer. If you're going to pester people to change their worldview to change their lives to your liking, at least do your own homework first.

 

[steve_bank]

"It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced."

Are you sure about that? No progress has ever been made against those religions? At all? Anywhere?

Anyhow, I have experience debating religion online for ~20 years and this past summer especially I have engaged in a project of visiting different local churches on Sundays, identifying as an atheist, having good discussions with staff people and lay members, and also with pastors in private discussions. So far I have visited ~25 churches and half of them involved a later discussion with a pastor. Those tend to last approximately 2 hours. That is not counting all the other discussions with other people inside their church.

Yes, several of those Christians were very new to atheist points of view. Some pastors were very transparent and open with me about theological problems they had with their religion or frustrations with their church members, etc. A pastor admitted to me that he would soften his language against atheism as a result of our discussion (and we have even become friends).

If you are that concerned that this type of meeting would result in a bad appearance, perhaps you do not understand how to conduct yourself properly in this type of situation. Some added experience and reflection may benefit you.

oood luck.

That is not as good as "Sorry, I am willing to admit being wrong. Progress is possible.". But if it is the best you are willing to give, so be it.

Seriously, good luck in a formal debate with theists.....I think you will need it. You do not appear to be prepared.

 

[Brian63]

Are you that unfamiliar with how deconversions happen? They are not instantaneous. They tend to take years or even decades to occur. They include several contributing factors. This can be among them though.

Do you really think that if I did not see it happen myself then they did not have their beliefs challenged at all? I know of Christians who secretly were troubled by Christian beliefs or atheist arguments for years. They would not display it publicly and especially not right away after they heard it. But they still had an effect.

If you only look at their immediate reaction and determine success/failure on that, then you are missing the point.

They of course feel the same way, that every time they bug their co-workers about Jesus, they are "planting a seed" that may one day blossom into faith (Mtt 13:1-9).

You would do better to actually know what you are talking about yourself, than to just blindly cite sources at people. What exactly are you expecting them to do, write them down on a scribble pad to look up later? Or are they just supposed to convert on the basis of merely knowing that other perspectives exist?

Sorry, if there's one thing that annoys me more than a proselytizer, it's a lazy proselytizer. If you're going to pester people to change their worldview to change their lives to your liking, at least do your own homework first.

What annoys you is not relevant in any way. Since you do not think well on the topic, I am not going to heed your advice on the topic.

 

[Brian63]

"It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced."

Are you sure about that? No progress has ever been made against those religions? At all? Anywhere?

Anyhow, I have experience debating religion online for ~20 years and this past summer especially I have engaged in a project of visiting different local churches on Sundays, identifying as an atheist, having good discussions with staff people and lay members, and also with pastors in private discussions. So far I have visited ~25 churches and half of them involved a later discussion with a pastor. Those tend to last approximately 2 hours. That is not counting all the other discussions with other people inside their church.

Yes, several of those Christians were very new to atheist points of view. Some pastors were very transparent and open with me about theological problems they had with their religion or frustrations with their church members, etc. A pastor admitted to me that he would soften his language against atheism as a result of our discussion (and we have even become friends).

If you are that concerned that this type of meeting would result in a bad appearance, perhaps you do not understand how to conduct yourself properly in this type of situation. Some added experience and reflection may benefit you.

oood luck.

That is not as good as "Sorry, I am willing to admit being wrong. Progress is possible.". But if it is the best you are willing to give, so be it.

Seriously, good luck in a formal debate with theists.....I think you will need it. You do not appear to be prepared.

Your insults and ill-informed opinions are noted.

 

[Politesse]

What annoys you is not relevant in any way. Since you do not think well on the topic, I am not going to heed your advice on the topic.

I don't "think well" on what topic? Generally speaking, I actually read the books I recommend to people. Believe it or not, a practice that helps one learn to think better, rather than just spouting the same rhetoric from year to year.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Chronicle of the Pharaohs: The Reign-By-Reign Record of the Rulers and Dynasties of Ancient Egypt With 350 Illustrations 130 in Color Hardcover – October 1, 1994​

by Peter A. Clayton (Author)


Here is a book you should add to your list. You need to know true Egyptian history to understand how fake Bible pseudo-history truly is. If the Bible was true, we should read of the Egyptians in Canaan, their wars, military campaigns, their centuries of hegemony over Canaan. From Moses and the exodus to Joshua and judges, the Egyptions are most conspicous by their absence. By the time the first Israelites began writing their fraudulent history, they had forgotten all of this history of Egypt in Canaan. All of it.

I found this a truly useful book to understand just how false the Bible truly is. Read carefully it is chock full of gotchyas. Rameses II fough the Hittites 20 years and that did not make it into the Bible? And Christians claim Rameses II was the Pharoah of the exodus?

The title sounds lie one of those pseudo historical TV shows. Lots of subjective inference presented as facts.

It is good history. I also have Sir Alan Gardiner's "Egypt Of The Pharoahs" an older reign by reign history not much different, Redfords "Egypt, Canaan, And Israel In Ancient Times", translation of the Armana Letters and other miscellanous books.

The book I cited is quite good. Basically, Egyptian history leaves no room for the tall tales of the Bible, Moses or Joshua.

 

[Brian63]

What annoys you is not relevant in any way. Since you do not think well on the topic, I am not going to heed your advice on the topic.

I don't "think well" on what topic? Generally speaking, I actually read the books I recommend to people. Believe it or not, a practice that helps one learn to think better, rather than just spouting the same rhetoric from year to year.

Why do you "Generally speaking" actually read the books you recommend to others?
Why not "Always speaking"?

 

[steve_bank]

"It is naive that the cultural inertia for both Islam and Christianity that has built up for over a thousand years is going to be reduced."

Are you sure about that? No progress has ever been made against those religions? At all? Anywhere?

Anyhow, I have experience debating religion online for ~20 years and this past summer especially I have engaged in a project of visiting different local churches on Sundays, identifying as an atheist, having good discussions with staff people and lay members, and also with pastors in private discussions. So far I have visited ~25 churches and half of them involved a later discussion with a pastor. Those tend to last approximately 2 hours. That is not counting all the other discussions with other people inside their church.

Yes, several of those Christians were very new to atheist points of view. Some pastors were very transparent and open with me about theological problems they had with their religion or frustrations with their church members, etc. A pastor admitted to me that he would soften his language against atheism as a result of our discussion (and we have even become friends).

If you are that concerned that this type of meeting would result in a bad appearance, perhaps you do not understand how to conduct yourself properly in this type of situation. Some added experience and reflection may benefit you.

oood luck.

That is not as good as "Sorry, I am willing to admit being wrong. Progress is possible.". But if it is the best you are willing to give, so be it.

Seriously, good luck in a formal debate with theists.....I think you will need it. You do not appear to be prepared.

Your insults and ill-informed opinions are noted.

If you can't cope with this stuff here you are ill prepared to debate theists in a net debate. If you can't keep your coll with this kind of easy debate good luck with aggressive theists.

I am not prepared. To do something like that. I would pick a specific topic and write out my talking points and references. Too much work for a pointless exercise. As an engineer I got up in fromt of people making presntaions and defnding a position, I know what it is like.

There is also a moral issue. If you pull somebody away from religion who can't cope without it are you responsible if they becme alchoholic or drug addicted? Do you bare responsibility for whatever happens to someone you convince to leave relgiion?

It is not a trivial issue.
i
If I am talking to somene with problms I'll offer advice to a point. I am not a trained psychologist and I could easly cause harm. As such I do not interfere in theists' lives. For theists it is not just a belief, it is a way of life. I have to respect that as a general philosophy even though I don't always get that in return.

 

[Brian63]

Your great thoughts and insights have been taken into consideration.

 

[Politesse]

What annoys you is not relevant in any way. Since you do not think well on the topic, I am not going to heed your advice on the topic.

I don't "think well" on what topic? Generally speaking, I actually read the books I recommend to people. Believe it or not, a practice that helps one learn to think better, rather than just spouting the same rhetoric from year to year.

Why do you "Generally speaking" actually read the books you recommend to others?
Why not "Always speaking"?

Well, actually, yes, always. So what's this bullshit you're up to?

 

[Ruth Harris]

I heard one atheist phrase it well awhile back:
"I do not want just separation of church and state. I want separation of religion from planet".

I find this chilling.

It is reminiscent of extremist fundamental Christians and Muslims, who also believe that there should be no other viewpoint than theirs in existence. It is basically preaching that the only acceptable ideology is the one they hold.

Yes, feel free to promote your views. But you don't have the right to insist that your worldview is the only acceptable one. That tactic does not work for the groups I mentioned earlier and it will not work for you either.

The other commenters in this thread are correct; you need to do some individual research and study the resources you are wanting to provide to others instead of just "compiling a list". If you don't you will be doing nothing better than the people you are denigrating as "ill informed".

Ruth

 

[Brian63]

Is it really that chilling to believe that some viewpoints are toxic to our world? That the world would be better if they in particular were gone? You can't think of a single one? How about cannibalism? Slavery? All views and beliefs ever in history are great?

Also note you made a strawman. I never said or believed only my views should be in existence. You misidentified my view.



Even in atheist circles some settle for just separation of church and state. As long as you do not encroach on others, I do not care what you do to yourself.

Some of us realize that is an impossible scenario. We do not live in a laissez-faire world where people’s beliefs (including their religious beliefs) will not affect the others. They will. The only questions are how they will affect others and whether those others are aware of it or oblivious to it.



Also, I do not like to see religion hurt the members of the religion. I care about them. Maybe you are unaware of the harm of religion on the members themselves or you do not care about it. Others of us are and do.

 

[Brian63]

What annoys you is not relevant in any way. Since you do not think well on the topic, I am not going to heed your advice on the topic.

I don't "think well" on what topic? Generally speaking, I actually read the books I recommend to people. Believe it or not, a practice that helps one learn to think better, rather than just spouting the same rhetoric from year to year.

Why do you "Generally speaking" actually read the books you recommend to others?
Why not "Always speaking"?

Well, actually, yes, always. So what's this bullshit you're up to?

You ask a loaded question---nice tactic but logical error. It reveals your bias, dogmatism, and closedmindedness.



The point is to perform a test of the group tactics---are they even willing to consider the possibility that it is okay to investigate the merits of views other than the ones they espouse? Do they even encourage it? Or do they in any way discourage it? I personally do not have to have researched those views or have plans to---them simply revealing if they are open or closed to the possibility of such research is very telling.

 

[steve_bank]

Is it really that chilling to believe that some viewpoints are toxic to our world? That the world would be better if they in particular were gone? You can't think of a single one? How about cannibalism? Slavery? All views and beliefs ever in history are great?

Also note you made a strawman. I never said or believed only my views should be in existence. You misidentified my view.



Even in atheist circles some settle for just separation of church and state. As long as you do not encroach on others, I do not care what you do to yourself.

Some of us realize that is an impossible scenario. We do not live in a laissez-faire world where people’s beliefs (including their religious beliefs) will not affect the others. They will. The only questions are how they will affect others and whether those others are aware of it or oblivious to it.



Also, I do not like to see religion hurt the members of the religion. I care about them. Maybe you are unaware of the harm of religion on the members themselves or you do not care about it. Others of us are and do.

The atheist sstems of the last and current centuries all ended up being oppressive of all speech. That is the slippery slope.

Soviets and Chinese communism. China on paper has freedom of relgion but thegovt peonotes atheism. It controls relgion. North Korea.

I do not want to live in an atheist system anymore than I want to live in Saudi Arabia.

Atheist as a govt policy becomes as or more oppressive than any religion.

Who decides what is 'toxic'? You? I communist systems the stste or an individual.

Given humans as we are separation of church and state is the nest solution.

Choosing and speaking what you belive us what western liberal democracy is all about. It is what Ukraine is fighting for.

You are the flip side of the ignorant simplistic shallow theist who makes arguments without really underhand reality and people. The first order of busyness in any ideology is ceaete an enemy to focus on. I don't see much difference between aspects of organized atheism and religion. Same characteristics.

The fight is to maintain separtion of church and stae.

 

[Brian63]

Your great insights are taken into consideration. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[steve_bank]

An experiment began with constution that was passed down. Everyday is an exeint that can fail.


Right now we do not need more discord, we are in dire need of toleration and cooperation.

I oppose anything that promotes ad accentuates divides, that includes both atheist and theist.

I identify as atheist because it is convieiet. I do mot carry an atheist identity. I do not promote atheism. away form the forum I do not think abut atheism and theism. They are flip sides of the same often absurd coin.

 

[Brian63]

You have great insight into the human psyche.

 

[Elixir]

Why isn’t “anti- inerrancy” the same thing as “errancy”, and why would anyone need it?