Why do Christians always assume that people who do not believe their lunacy are unable to understand it?

Question

I understand what the believer's claims are and they are just simply insane.
If you made similar claims about other invisible friends you would be classed as mental and possibly locked up to protects society from danger.

I suggest sincerely that Mike M rereads the bible for himself and thinks a bit less about Mr Comfort's Banana.
The same passage as Mike quotes also has the Idea that the heavens are like a tent pegged at the edges of the Earth. The "round" term in hebrew they use means round like a pizza, not round like a ball.

Annius of Viterbo (c. AD 1490).1500 years ago. ?Check your dates before posting and insulting other folks intelligence. Annius was also a noted fraud even in his own time.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01541a.htm

http://www.duke.edu/~frankbo/pdf/Forgeryhtml.htm

I mention this episode in the context of Foresta and Schedel -- one could easily throw in Enea Silvio -- to show that the disparities in historical understanding were, at the end of the Middle Ages, such that one must be exceedingly cautious about making confident generalizations concerning the dawn of modern historical understanding. Some people had it some of the time (Bruni); some people had it all the time (Valla); some people obviously didn't care (Enea Silvio). And the general popular understanding, from emperors down to city chroniclers, was far from wary or suspicious. As much as anyone else, they had a great thirst for antiquities, for origins. And if these were not provided one way, well, they could be provided another.

It is some such motivation which brought on the scene a pair of remarkable documents of considerable notoriety in their time: They are first: the Berosus forgery of Annius of Viterbo (Giovanni Nanni); seco

Annius was a noted fraud in his own time is not an ad hominum attack. It is however a questioning of your arguements from authority. The other links are also simply arguements from authority and deserve much the same treatment.
They both make an unsubstantiated claim about Matrilineal genealogy. Something the Jews of that time never did as a serious genealogy. Out of all the other examples suddenly they want to claim one exception to cover an error. Think! Even then they have to make special exceptions to the text to justify it.
That just becomes silly.

If you were aware of Annius' position as a hisatorian and used him then that is simply dishonest and severely hypocritical. If you are the victim of people who knew and did use him then you are a dupe.

Answer 1

Because they don't understand life without a belief system. That pretty much sums it up.

They figure everyone believes in god, some of us just don't admit it.

What they fail to realize is that most atheists used to be religious. Unlike them, we have seen both sides of the fence.

And the fact is, once you adopt atheism, you don't go back. It's impossible. Just like it's impossible to go back to believing in Santa Claus.

Edit - Oh, and to Mike M... :) Uhm, let me put this delicately. Ray Comfort makes your religion look even sillier than it did before. Do yourself a favor and don't look to him to "prove" your religion is true. His infantile understanding of science, history, biology, etc, just makes you all look foolish.

Answer 2

We assume that skeptics cannot understand our beliefs simply because many skeptics tend to ask such stupid questions (They probably think that they are being funny, but you cannot make a religion or a belief look stupid by acting stupid yourself.).

Ask yourself, when is the last time someone raised an intelligent objection to Christianity, or any other religion, here on Y!A that they didn't just parrot off of a website somewhere, without realizing that their objection had been rebutted hundreds of years ago? And does anyone ever come up with an intelligent objection to the rebuttal when it is posted? Usually not -- they just ignore it as if no one said anything.

Many of these so called objections are someone simply stating the obvious (Like the fact that the genealogy of Jesus appears to be different in Matthew than in Luke -- Hello! It is literally on the front page! It is the first thing that you see when you read the NT. Don't you think that we noticed that too already?). Stating the obvious with a sense of discovery like you are the first person ever to see this make people think that your intelligence is low.

====edit===

In response to a silly e-mail message that I just got, no I did NOT say that the fact that there are two different genealogies is somehow proof that there is an error in the Bible, since there was a simple, logical explanation for this APPARENT discrepancy published over 1500 years ago.
===edit2===

In response to "LJAY2000" 's argument, I understand your point, but the fact that President Nixon abused his power does not prove that the office of the President of the united States does not exist. Likewise, the fact that religion can be abused does not prove that God does not exist.

===edit3===

Corrected the reference. Thanks for catching that. However, I don't think that making an ad hominem attack on the character of Annius of Viterbo, or any other medieval figure, is going to affect the validilty of the arguments that they may have repeated.

Like I said, you atheists never directly address the rebuttal argument presented, nor do you state what is wrong with the logic of it. You simply go off on an irrelevant tangent and ignore any argument that you cannot respond to.

No one is going to abandon their faith based on arguments this weak. Keep trying if you want to convince us that we need to become atheists.

Answer 3

I find it absolutely delusional.

It is a go along mentality. I had someone suggest it was polite and I should just go along because it might offend someones feelings.

Randy, I have raised very intelligent reasons not to have religion.

Have you ever heard the phrase, Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That is very easily applied to religion. You Claim there is an absolute power, god. Religion claims to be gods word. I have NEVER NEVER NEVER seen a religion that wasn't corrupted in some way. I find that an excellent reason to think religion is dangerous and counter productive.

I make no claim that I can disprove god, no one can. I have no need to try. If I just accept claims there is god why would I ever look look for other answers and possibilities. You were speaking a about Christianity the religion not god, they are not the same thing.

Answer 4

Why do unbelievers say that its insanity to believe in things you cannot see? things happen everyday that can't be explained, yet isn't it crazy or lunacy to believe that they did not happen simply because you can't explain it? You say you understand what Christians believe, but you still call it lunacy, so that shows that you really don't understand , you just claim that you do, so u can attack them. thats the same thing satan does and believe it or not he exist too, if you dont believe me just call his name at midnight and he'll show up.Curse God when you do and he'll show up! Or are you scared to?? Then maybe you'll believe in the lunacy!

Answer 5

I am not that kind. If you are too slow to get it, then you have an excuse. But no. You all are shaking your fist at God. You can understand it...but you choose to stick with your flesh, with your sin. I can tell you right now that will get you nowhere. It is only through Jesus that we can have life. Shake off the ego trip and turn to Him. God bless you.

Answer 6

I asked a related question and received only one answer (and not a very good one). My question asks why christians quote the bible as proof of the bible.

Answer 7

1 Corinthians 2:14
The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Answer 8

They cannot comprehend anything outside their little realm of fantasy.

Their beliefs are pure lunacy, no question about it.

Answer 9

Are you looking for scientific facts?
Repost again:
Over 2000 years ago in the Book of Job it says that God sits on the circle of the earth. When did WE discover that the earth was round??...oh yeah 1492
The Bible also says that "He hangs the earth on nothing". This was written in 1600 BC when it was thought that the earth sat on a great animal.
There are a great number of scientific facts written in the Bible thousands of years before OUR great western minds discovered them. Read "100 scientific proofs that the bible is super natural in origin" by Ray Comfort...then read the Bible

Answer 10

Paul said in Romans that those who turn aside from God do not understand.