@Wehraboo Thorne was a badass, the stuff of legend, worthy of articles in Soldier of Fortune. Those were great days, when men were men and fought across continents, career soldiers making history

@Victus Shmmidtt you ever read any of those? Like the Books of Adam and Eve...all kinds of really weird stuff in them

2 Adam/Eve even says there's two heavens

I haven't actually sat down and read them but I have looked up some of the main thesises of those types of books

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/index.htm

Pretty much all of them are at this site

And a bunch of other religious texts, Buddhism etc

I like how it calls them the"Other Apocrypha"

The Catholic books are what non Catholics, including atheists call "apocryphal" but we call "deuterocanonical"

So the "other apocrypha" are rejected by everyone except Tewahedo

I have been recently been in debate with someone about the validity of the Book of Enoch. I reject it and he supports it. Weirdly enough he's a prot.

Weird

Even Catholics reject it

Indeed. Then again, he reads into Jewish and Hebrew Mysticism

Well I think it's all worth reading. Even if it's not inspired, at worst we need to know how to explain it away. Have an answer for everything. But a lot of it definitely should not be believed as inspired, or even historical fact.

I am pretty disappointed in the lack of any really good, consistent arguments against Atheism itself.

Especially on Youtube.

Man, I wished this guy was still around now-a-days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZimD8DKiPTU

Until a god is proven real there wont be

Excpet for the fact that Atheism has no sense of unity except for the universal principle of "everything is relative."

Atheism is, in a sense, one projection of the total philosphy of post-modernism (i.e. everything is relative and all things are subjective).

It doesnt need unity

You do if you want to even have a society to begin with.

It isnt a religion in itself but a rejection of it

Which is why Atheism is always doomed to bring about chaos.

And you dont need religion to have a society

Just set morals

If you need to believe in a god to not rape steal or murder then thats a pretty shit society regardless of whether theres a god or not

"Just set morals."

Again, if everything is relative, why should anyone follow a set of morals?

If you want to have a free society, you need to have religion. If you want to have a society that actually progresses, you need to have religion.

Without religion, you have authoritarianism and, in the end, nothing.

Why should anyone follow a set of morals from a god they dont know exists

Furthermore having religion isnt always the right way as the religions have fought against each other by saying another religion is different.

Or that their belief is false somehow.

On top of that you cant teach religion in school anymore. How do you suppose to go about teaching morals or ethics through religion? Through which religion?

Basic ethics can be taught without religion and works more with the law and how laws are made.

On top of that ethics and morals are already enforced by learning institutions, public office and government jobs.

>why should anyone follow a set of morals form a god they dont know exists

ask that to literally the billions of people throughout history who did the very thing you question

it's a weak point and should be discounted

That anyone with any shred of legitimate real world power would follow them is enough to follow them.

as long as you believe that humans are significant and unique in the vast cosmos, and that you believe we have an innate moral compass, that's good enough for me

i really hate people who say we are no different than animals