If the God of the bible does not exist, then why debate it?

Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
If the God of the bible does not exist, then why debate it?

In attacking Jesus Christ , Atheism might render itself a disservice. 

Do you lead an attack on a non existent being? 

Atheism to the logistician seems unreasonable. 

 

 

At night we see many stars in the sky. But when the sun rises, they disappear. Can we claim, therefore, that during the day there are no stars in the sky? If we fail to see God, perhaps it is because we pass through the night of ignorance in this matter. it is premature to claim He does not exist. 

Richard Wurmbrand

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
latin

show me where it says that i CANNOT use the witnesses in the bible to support the claim? You also did not provide a rule book to follow historical procedure. show me where it says
that i HAVE to have an outside source? if you provide the rule book (saying i have to use this or i cannot use that) then i will provide an outside source. sounds fair .

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
One would think it's obvious you need outside sources

You are in effect trying to sell a machine that requires no input to produce infinite output without detailing it's operation and schematics or going through the detailed physics and laws why your machine violates the laws of physics but still works.

So before I plunk down thousands to buy your perpetual motion machine or grant you a patent I want more to prove its real. This involves verification and outside sources and duplication of your claimed operation or in this case story telling as real.

 

Jimenezj wrote:
show me where it says that i CANNOT use the witnesses in the bible to support the claim? You also did not provide a rule book to follow historical procedure. show me where it says that i HAVE to have an outside source? if you provide the rule book (saying i have to use this or i cannot use that) then i will provide an outside source. sounds fair .

You are in effect making a claim - This book written by unknown writers on pp xxx says "  ....." and on pp xxx it says " .. ..." which proves it. You are trying to prove that your single source - The Bible aka "The book of Jewish & Christian Story Telling" is true by referring to unsubstantiated claims to prove unsupported claims.

For example - In Genesis there are unsupported claims the god El or Yahweh created the world and man. The man gets kicked out of the paradise made for him in the story. You use this to verify that the Jesus in the later created stories was sent to save man from the upset god who allows part of himself to be killed though he is immortal and can't die anyway.  And this action is supposedly a sacrifice to himself so he can forgive the man for actions at the beginning of time in the land of mists which are not supported by outside sources or even archeology.

You need to verify all along the way all claims you make from the stories with evidence and proof from outside the source you are trying to sell as real. If not, it is a single source and not verifiable.

Arguments are made the bible is from multiple sources, not a single writer. However, its an ongoing story with a foundation in the mists of time without support. There are many stories that make claims of how we/it all got here that conflict with the story you are trying to sell. The later parts of the story you are selling are built on the weak foundations that have no basis to support the structure. In effect, it's the ongoing adventures of Superman, whereby the later stories use the original legends and tales and further develop them. If nothing else is provided but the hundreds of issues of the comic Superman, to prove he is real it's only nonsensical appeal to a single source. There have been many writers of Superman comics, not one. The original author is long dead. Yet despite all the comics, TV shows and movies, I have yet to see him fly across the sky. Nor does there seem to be a way for a humanoid creature to have the attributes of Superman by relocating from a star system with a red star to one like ours. I need proof that this can happen since physics indicate otherwise.

 

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

Arguments are made that the bible is from multiple sources, with archeological support . there is no archeology in superman.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
None of which have you presented

Jimenezj wrote:
Arguments are made that the bible is from multiple sources, with archaeological support . there is no archeology in superman.

So far you have presented nothing in this regard.

Author of specific book; a secondary source that verifies the writer, outside of the Bible

Archeology that details the event/claim in the specific biblical discussion.

And yes Superman does have multiple writers which is easily shown, therefore multiple sources.

And you have provided not a scrap of verification for your claim of archeology to prove the Jesus and the fall of man/creation stories one must buy into to see the Jesus as the mashiach.

Quote book, chapter and verse and supply a specific archeologist's expedition and research to start for your claim.

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

show me archeological support for your superman, and i will give you archeological support for my biblical Jesus . sounds
fair.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


RobbyPants
atheist
RobbyPants's picture
Posts: 148
Joined: 2011-11-30
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:show me

Jimenezj wrote:
show me archeological support for your superman, and i will give you archeological support for my biblical Jesus . sounds fair.
So, if we're willing to let Superman go, you're willing to let Jesus go?

In all seriousness, the problem with you using the Bible to support any claims is the whole idea of great assertions requiring great evidence. For example, if I told you I drove my car to work on Monday, you'd probably believe me at face value. If I told you I flew my helicopter, you probably wouldn't believe me unless it was either verified by someone else whom you trusted or if you saw the helicopter yourself. If I told you I flew my pegasus, you probably wouldn't believe me, no matter how many people I got to tell you it's true. You'd demand to actually see the actual pegasus to accept it... and you'd be reasonable to do so.

That's the problem with the Bible. It says too many fantastic things to just take at face value. None of us here take it as a viable source on it's own authenticity just as we wouldn't trust I-have-a-pegasus-guy on his own word.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:show me

Jimenezj wrote:
show me archeological support for your superman, and i will give you archeological support for my biblical Jesus . sounds fair.

I am not claiming Superman is a realty based character.

You however are claiming the jesus and the yahweh are real world.

Don't show anything or provide any proof. Your choice to do so and evade the questions. You were the one who was making claims in regards to the jesus and the god yahweh. 

You have done the typical here by evasion and moving the goal posts.

Show your cards or fold!

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

you cant compare superman to Jesus.
if you do, then man up and play your chips.
you want me to show my cards.the problem is that you have not
layed down your chips. pay before you play or leave the game.

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:you cant

Jimenezj wrote:
you cant compare superman to Jesus. if you do, then man up and play your chips. you want me to show my cards.the problem is that you have not layed down your chips. pay before you play or leave the game.

Umm we have asked you to provide evidence that jesus character existed and did all those things claimed in the bible by using outside sources other than the sole book that claims he did all these things. We don't need to man up, you need to man up since you claim this character to have actually existed. This is out it work you make a claim then you provide the evidence, using the only book that makes these claims as evidence is called circular logic, and it is a fallacy. I am going to out on a limb and say that you don't really understand this concept as you simply avoided providing any evidence at all for your claims as you already know that you don't have any evidence.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Latin

The bible is made up multiple sources , from different time periods .
Multiple authors from multiple time periods . It is not ONE source .
It is a record of multiple witnesses . Paul was an outside source who
Did not believe in Jesus. Their testamony is considered valid back then and today. Are you saying that the bible is not made up of multiple sources ?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:you cant

Jimenezj wrote:
you cant compare superman to Jesus. if you do, then man up and play your chips. you want me to show my cards.the problem is that you have not layed down your chips. pay before you play or leave the game.

Comparison

The Jesus - walks on water

Superman - can levitate so doesn't need to walk on water

The Jesus - rose into the clouds

Superman - can fly as well

The Jesus - can see you though walls

Superman - he can too

The Jesus - can hear you though walls

Superman - yep, him too

The common factor here is fantasy and story telling.

One story was invented in the 20th century and the other in the 1st century.

This was never about proof for you, it was always about preaching, no more.

In the event you have something other than the faith in the story telling bring it on.

If not, just keep on preaching. That and $1.08 (in most places) will get you a cup of coffee.

I noticed you chose not to address "where's the trash" from the Exodus.

The Bible has many claimed events that don't fit in the reality we occupy, you know, the real world.

Why? Because the Bible is story telling.

If not so, address the questions and bring on the proof.

As I tried to show you with the Superman story, it also has multiple sources just like the Bible. Yet, Superman is storytelling fiction.

You however cling to multiple sources or writers as proof.

So, once again I ask you to detail each writer of the Bible sources. Name them each and every one. Then, provide verification for each one from an outside source that at least verifies the author lived and was a real person.

 

 

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


RobbyPants
atheist
RobbyPants's picture
Posts: 148
Joined: 2011-11-30
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:The bible is

Jimenezj wrote:
The bible is made up multiple sources , from different time periods . Multiple authors from multiple time periods . It is not ONE source . It is a record of multiple witnesses . Paul was an outside source who Did not believe in Jesus. Their testamony is considered valid back then and today. Are you saying that the bible is not made up of multiple sources ?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I'm not going to take it on the word of a bunch of different guys who couldn't agree on a lot of things. 


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:The bible is

Jimenezj wrote:
The bible is made up multiple sources , from different time periods . Multiple authors from multiple time periods . It is not ONE source . It is a record of multiple witnesses . Paul was an outside source who Did not believe in Jesus. Their testamony is considered valid back then and today. Are you saying that the bible is not made up of multiple sources ?

No it not considered valid today, one source making the claim, cannot be considered a reliable witness at the same time. Hence why we require multiple outside sources to back up such said claims the bible, is not considered as multiple sources, it is considered as 1 source. Hence why the claim of the jews wandering the desert for 40 years as per the torah/bible, is not considered to be true because there is no evidence at all to back up the claim that 600,000 men plus women and children (somewhere near 900,000 people) wandered the desert for 40 years and left NO evidence behind, there is no evidence that there was that there was an exodus of that many people from Egypt. Other claims such as jesus showing to 500 hundred people but not one person wrote about it outside of the bible is a problem for the claim he was resurrected. Let me help you here, how do we know King Herod actually existed outside of the bible? Well there are roman text that refer to him. As well using text from that era they have found his tomb.

However the massacre of the first born in Bethlehem is doubtful that it every happened, at least to modern historians, why? Because no documents of the time back up that claim, there is documents about him killing his wife and 2 of his sons, and various other brutal acts of killing Rabbis etc, etc etc but none of massacring children. Although it is a remote possibility, as Bethlehem was a small town and probably had no more than 20 male children at the time, there is no outside source from the bible to back up said claim as such it is not considered as fact at all for any modern historian. However you are free to disregard anything I have said here and insert your own babble about how the bible is some how reliable witness even after it has been show multiple times to you as to why you need outside sources from that which is making the claim.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

As I tried to show you with the Superman story, it also has multiple sources just like the Bible. Yet, Superman is storytelling fiction.

You however cling to multiple sources or writers as proof.

So, once again I ask you to detail each writer of the Bible sources. Name them each and every one. Then, provide verification for each one from an outside source that at least verifies the author lived and was a real person.

Again, the problem with your argument is that superman does not have
Archylogical proof.

So far you have argued Sumerian enki and superman 
And have come short. Would you like to try someone else? Perhaps wonder-woman or maybe Baal or Egyptian Ra? 

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


Anonymouse
atheist
Posts: 1687
Joined: 2008-05-04
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote: Again, the

Jimenezj wrote:
Again, the problem with your argument is that superman does not have Archylogical proof.
 

 

Here you go : http://www.g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/blog/post/690583/fortress-of-solitude-found-in-mexico/

 

And here you go again :   http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=1013

 

That's the thing with fantasy stories. You can always find "proof", if you're not too picky.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:. Would you

Jimenezj wrote:
. Would you like to try someone else? Perhaps wonder-woman or maybe Baal or Egyptian Ra? 

All you do is evade, move goal posts, and use circular reasoning.

So, Sure. Let's try The Jesus and Paul the myth maker.

The character 1st appears in the writing of Paul the spouter of lies.

Paul AKA the myth maker reports he sees The Jesus on his way to Damascus.

He reports the encounter in multiple ways. The details do not match in any of his telling of the story.

It has been suggested by many that Paul the myth maker had an epileptic seizure and the entire story was a fantasy.

Following Paul the spouter of lies story telling the legend of the Jesus is launched.

There was nada in regard to The Jesus written before the myth maker Paul.

Your serve.

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

Let me make it simple for both of us. Who do you think did exist ( including jesus himself) that were followers of Jesus? I myself believe they all Existed . You know were I stand. Were do you stand at ?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote: Let me make

Jimenezj wrote:
Let me make it simple for both of us. Who do you think did exist ( including jesus himself) that were followers of Jesus? I myself believe they all Existed . You know were I stand. Were do you stand at ?

Perhaps if we discuss the storytales in regard to The Jesus themselves we'd get somewhere.

As to who existed.

There were many real people named Jesus in the 1st century.

In fact, the Romans arrested one named Jesus who claimed he was the messiah. After detention and questioning they released him as they decided he was insane.

The Jesus as described in the story tales did not exist as described. Were the tales a consolidation, exaggerations, legends that were expanded with each telling, or just fantasy is the real question.

There was a priest named James the Just. He was zealous for the law, that's why he was called the Just.

There is writing attributed to a man named Paul. Not all of it was his, there are many forgeries, some in the New Testament.

As to all the rest who can tell. There is no historical proof for any of them.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

Sounds like you don't believe Jesus , Paul , James or any other
Follower existed. Correct me if I am wrong?

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


RobbyPants
atheist
RobbyPants's picture
Posts: 148
Joined: 2011-11-30
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote: Let me make

Jimenezj wrote:
Let me make it simple for both of us. Who do you think did exist ( including jesus himself) that were followers of Jesus? I myself believe they all Existed . You know were I stand. Were do you stand at ?
There are followers of lots of religions. Does that make all of those gods exist? Heck, there are followers of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and that's only been around about seven year or so. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:Sounds like

Jimenezj wrote:
Sounds like you don't believe Jesus , Paul , James or any other Follower existed. Correct me if I am wrong?
 

Read what I wroteThere was a James.   As to James what can be shown is a not what is claimed exactly in the nt. Someone wrote named Paul.   Though not all that has been attributed to him, some are forgeries as to the rest we can discuss them.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
Sounds like you don't believe Jesus , Paul , James or any other Follower existed. Correct me if I am wrong?
 

Read what I wroteThere was a James.   As to James what can be shown is a not what is claimed exactly in the nt. Someone wrote named Paul.   Though not all that has been attributed to him, some are forgeries as to the rest we can discuss them.

He seems to lack that ability to comprehend what you are stating JPS, after all we all have asked the simple request of providing outside source from that bible that the miraculous attributed to jesus actually happened.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
latincanuck

latincanuck wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
Sounds like you don't believe Jesus , Paul , James or any other Follower existed. Correct me if I am wrong?
 

Read what I wroteThere was a James.   As to James what can be shown is a not what is claimed exactly in the nt. Someone wrote named Paul.   Though not all that has been attributed to him, some are forgeries as to the rest we can discuss them.

He seems to lack that ability to comprehend what you are stating JPS, after all we all have asked the simple request of providing outside source from that bible that the miraculous attributed to jesus actually happened.

We have had discussions in other threads. I wondered before if English was not his 1st language. Maybe he just ignores the requests for proof as a tactic. 

He is getting boring though.

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

so you believe paul and james existed and no one else. correct.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:so you

Jimenezj wrote:
so you believe paul and james existed and no one else. correct.

Believe is not a word I would use in regard to whether or not the characters of the NT existed or not.

There is proof for James the Just.

There is proof for Paul the writer of some of the NT Epistles.

There are 2nd century references that have survived from a few writers that mention Peter.

As to the characterizations in the Gospels of the followers it is unclear and not proven that they existed as described.

Bart Ehrman's book "Did Jesus exist" takes the position he did, but again, not as described.

Existing in the real world and not just as characters in a story does not make the story real.

When  extraordinary occurances are in a story, extraordinary proof is required.

I imagine you will ignore all I say in regard to characterization in a story versus real world.

You want to jump to the end and overlook everything in between, Try going into the meat of the matter which brings out the issues.

Issues must be addressed in the story of The Jesus. These issues are no less severe as those you probably would have in accepting Enki as the Lord of the Earth.

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 411
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Bart Ehrman's book "Did Jesus exist" takes the position he did, but again, not as described.

 

Probably the most plausible scenario. I liken it to saying that Abraham Lincoln existed, but he did not hunt vampires. 

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jabberwocky

Jabberwocky wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Bart Ehrman's book "Did Jesus exist" takes the position he did, but again, not as described.

 

Probably the most plausible scenario. I liken it to saying that Abraham Lincoln existed, but he did not hunt vampires. 

Pretty much!!!

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

There is proof for James the Just.

There is proof for Paul the writer of some of the NT Epistles.

There are 2nd century references that have survived from a few writers that mention Peter.

It is interesting how you did not add Jesus into this historical group ,
Yet Bart Ehrman does . Bart said that there is no doubt that Jesus
Did exist.

The question is:
Why would all these people risk their lives for a story/ lie? To include the other followers who did not make the list.
Unless you think that the Christian persecution during this
Roman era did not exist. Can you answer this .

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:There is

Jimenezj wrote:
There is proof for James the Just. There is proof for Paul the writer of some of the NT Epistles. There are 2nd century references that have survived from a few writers that mention Peter. It is interesting how you did not add Jesus into this historical group , Yet Bart Ehrman does . Bart said that there is no doubt that Jesus Did exist. The question is: Why would all these people risk their lives for a story/ lie? To include the other followers who did not make the list. Unless you think that the Christian persecution during this Roman era did not exist. Can you answer this .

People can be naive.

How do you know people risked their lives?

Hadrian certainly persecuted Jews.

Other emperors persecuted many people for many reasons.

It's time for you to stay on track and make your case instead of constantly jumping around.

You quote Ehrman, did you read "Did Jesus Exist?" or are you just using the reviews?

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:The question

Jimenezj wrote:
The question is: Why would all these people risk their lives for a story/ lie? To include the other followers who did not make the list. Unless you think that the Christian persecution during this Roman era did not exist. Can you answer this .

why would mujahideen blow themselves up for allah?  why would hindu tamils shoot at buddhist sinhalese in sri lanka, even though they're hopelessly outnumbered?  your answer would probably be that these and other nonchristian religious fanatics are deluded and believe a lie.

the difference between us is that i extend that reasoning to christians as well.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
PJ

How do you know people risked their lives?

Tacitus, Suetonius,  Cassius Dio
and Josephus recorded the Christian persecutions in Rome . 

Why did you not add Jesus to your list of biblical people that 
Existed? 

Here is your answer. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdqJyk-dtLs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


RobbyPants
atheist
RobbyPants's picture
Posts: 148
Joined: 2011-11-30
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Maybe he just ignores the requests for proof as a tactic. 

He is getting boring though.

I think this is it. I've dealt with someone like this on another forum. I've found the best thing to do is to refuse to respond to anything but a direct answer to your question. If you allow for anything else, you allow them to dodge the question and keep running a wider and wider circle around the issue.

 

iwbiek wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
The question is: Why would all these people risk their lives for a story/ lie? To include the other followers who did not make the list. Unless you think that the Christian persecution during this Roman era did not exist. Can you answer this .

why would mujahideen blow themselves up for allah?  why would hindu tamils shoot at buddhist sinhalese in sri lanka, even though they're hopelessly outnumbered?  your answer would probably be that these and other nonchristian religious fanatics are deluded and believe a lie.

the difference between us is that i extend that reasoning to christians as well.

You beat me to it. 


Jimenezj
Theist
Posts: 344
Joined: 2011-12-16
User is offlineOffline
Communist and Atheists

And they sang a new song: "You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.

When Christ purchased by his blood men of every nation, he purchased also the communist and the atheist . 

Richard Wurmbrand 

Farewell !

appeal to ignorance is an argument for or against a proposition on the basis of a lack of evidence against or for it. If there is positive evidence for the conclusion, then of course we have other reasons for accepting it, but a lack of evidence by itself is no evidence for a no God. 


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jesus was a Socialist if not the 1st Communist

Jimenezj wrote:
And they sang a new song: "You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation. When Christ purchased by his blood men of every nation, he purchased also the communist and the atheist .  Richard Wurmbrand  Farewell !

Clearly the Jesus of the storytales was a Socialist.

What of give all away and follow me. What of 5000 person picnics. What of free healthcare?

Examples:

Matthew 4:23,

Matthew 9:35,

Matthew 17:14

Mark 7:31,

Mark 8:22

John 9:1-41

As was the early Christian movement according to the storytales.

Peter and the murder of the couple Ananias and Sapphira over land Acts 5:1-11 Were they poisoned or did Peter strangle them? Such details are not given.

See James 2:1-7 as well

See many of Paul's Epistles.

So I conclude The Jesus was a commie and the early movement was as well even utilizing murder.

Just saying.

 

See this link for more - http://valentinelogar.hubpages.com/hub/Jesus-was-a-Socialist

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1951
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Image -- /jimenezj01.jpg

Jimenezj wrote:
And they sang a new song: "You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation. When Christ purchased by his blood men of every nation, he purchased also the communist and the atheist .  Richard Wurmbrand  Farewell !



 p.s. -- Partial tie-in w/ #102


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Jimenezj wrote:How do you

Jimenezj wrote:
How do you know people risked their lives? Tacitus, Suetonius,  Cassius Dio and Josephus recorded the Christian persecutions in Rome . 

all sources that were preserved thanks to christian monks.  it's already been pretty much unanimously accepted by scholars that josephus's supposed mentioning of christ was a copyist's interpolation.  i think the good monk overplayed his hand when he put "jesus was the messiah" in josephus's mouth.  i mean, if josephus really believed that, why didn't he become a christian?

i think there's a pretty informative thread around here somewhere about josephus's supposedly mentioning jesus...

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
See Ya next time!

Jimenezj wrote:
Farewell !

 See ya next time!

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2701
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
RobbyPants

RobbyPants wrote:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I'm not going to take it on the word of a bunch of different guys who couldn't agree on a lot of things. 

Of all the posts, I like this one the best.  I don't take the word of a bunch of different guys... or girls who couldn't agree on a lot of things either.... which is why I could never accept atheism or denominationalism.  

Concerning the card game being played, non-believers ask for "proof", 

I play: "what are you looking for?"

They play: " I fold "

This does not apply to all obviously, but it's the common reaction I get.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:Of all the

caposkia wrote:

Of all the posts, I like this one the best.  I don't take the word of a bunch of different guys... or girls who couldn't agree on a lot of things either.... which is why I could never accept atheism or denominationalism.  

Concerning the card game being played, non-believers ask for "proof", 

I play: "what are you looking for?"

They play: " I fold "

This does not apply to all obviously, but it's the common reaction I get.

The phrase "I could never accept atheism" sounds rather backwards to me...

Since I don't know what god you believe in, I don't know what evidence to ask for. However, give me evidence a person's consciousness can exist without his/her brain, and I will seriously consider believing in an afterlife.

 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15756
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster

harleysportster wrote:

Jimenezj wrote:
Karl Marx is no different then German Bourgeoisie George Bush. You may not understand this , but I see otherwise . Communism has a hidden upper class, no different then capitalism . They both have the same agenda; power and control.

And this has to do exactly with the existence/non-existence of god how exactly ?

But, since you brought it up, I would like to ask, when did George Bush, an American politician, become "German" bourgeoisie ?

 

Here is what they miss.

ANY IDEA without question or oversight can go off the rails. Cuba has universal health care. But so do most free countries in the west, minus America which seems to be in the stone ages. So the idea that believing in a god is a requirement would mean that most Cubans are fucked. It is false to say they are atheists. Their god is worship of the state. Not lack of religion.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:It is false to

Brian37 wrote:

It is false to say they are atheists. Their god is worship of the state. Not lack of religion.

ok, so being fanatical about any sort of ideology, whether it contains a theos or not, disqualifies one from being an atheist?

that is precisely the negative image of what we bitch about theists doing: reading shit into atheism that isn't there.

communism, marxism, marxism-leninism, stalinism, whatever you want to call it, is a militantly strong atheist ideology.  accept it.  i do.  that doesn't put any blood on my hands.

being fanatical about any ideology can make one a fanatic, an idealist, or even irrational, but it does not make one of necessity a theist.  if said fanatic does not believe in a theos according to any reasonable definition that contains qualities of a theos that the majority of humans have historically agreed upon, then said fanatic is an atheist, even if what he does pisses you off.

let's stop playing fast and loose with terminology.  if we fuck up language we fuck up everything.

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Meh, it's not quite the same

Meh, it's not quite the same thing. Statism is not inherent to atheism. I dare say the US is as perilously close to becoming statist as they are theist, and could become both if things go badly.
I'd agree there were atheist elements to the ideologies discussed, but not that they were driven by atheism as a concept. They just weren't.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2701
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:The

blacklight915 wrote:

The phrase "I could never accept atheism" sounds rather backwards to me...

depends on the angle

blacklight915 wrote:

Since I don't know what god you believe in, I don't know what evidence to ask for. However, give me evidence a person's consciousness can exist without his/her brain, and I will seriously consider believing in an afterlife.

I'm pretty sure you and I have had conversation in the past.  Either way, let's assume for a moment that we both can agree that a person's consciousness CAN exist without his/her brain.  How would we go about showing that existence to others?  What are you looking for as far as evidence?  Would people who die on an operating table in the moment of death perceiving viewing the room from a different angle than lying on the table and able to recount the actions and words of individuals present in the room be evidence?  If not, what would be evidence?


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
How would we go about

How would we go about showing that existence to others?

How about by showing us a consciousness that came from 'wherever' instead of using consciousness which has arisen from a brain? If consciousness can exist without a brain, then there's probably consciousness' 'floating' all over. Why don't we all get possessed? Why hasn't two consciousness' ever switched bodies?

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


blacklight915
atheist
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:I'm pretty

caposkia wrote:

I'm pretty sure you and I have had conversation in the past.  Either way, let's assume for a moment that we both can agree that a person's consciousness CAN exist without his/her brain.  How would we go about showing that existence to others?  What are you looking for as far as evidence?  Would people who die on an operating table in the moment of death perceiving viewing the room from a different angle than lying on the table and able to recount the actions and words of individuals present in the room be evidence?  If not, what would be evidence?

If we've talked before, I don't remember it. What you mentioned would certainly be a great start--can you point me to this information?

 

Vastet wrote:

How about by showing us a consciousness that came from 'wherever' instead of using consciousness which has arisen from a brain? If consciousness can exist without a brain, then there's probably consciousness' 'floating' all over. Why don't we all get possessed? Why hasn't two consciousness' ever switched bodies?

Hmm, these are some very good points. What would be your response to Vastet's points, caposkia?

 

EDIT:

caposkia wrote:

depends on the angle

What angle do you see it from?

 


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:blacklight915

caposkia wrote:

blacklight915 wrote:

The phrase "I could never accept atheism" sounds rather backwards to me...

depends on the angle

blacklight915 wrote:

Since I don't know what god you believe in, I don't know what evidence to ask for. However, give me evidence a person's consciousness can exist without his/her brain, and I will seriously consider believing in an afterlife.

I'm pretty sure you and I have had conversation in the past.  Either way, let's assume for a moment that we both can agree that a person's consciousness CAN exist without his/her brain.  How would we go about showing that existence to others?  What are you looking for as far as evidence?  Would people who die on an operating table in the moment of death perceiving viewing the room from a different angle than lying on the table and able to recount the actions and words of individuals present in the room be evidence?  If not, what would be evidence?

If the consciousness of a person can exist beyond this realm of the physical, then it might mean that this world is the illusion. I say this because of impermanence of all material items, from the Universe itself, down to the atom. Nothing stays the same, it is always changing.

If the consciousness is the same, never changing, then that is non-illusion. It is real and the only thing which survives through all transformations.

I submit the studies of

http://www.medicine.virginia.edu/clinical/departments/psychiatry/sections/cspp/dops/home-page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reincarnation_research

I believe that mankind is so tied up in the illusion that only 1% of the world population is even prepared for acceptance of such a finding. Even today, so many people are caught up in the illusion of living that they would never accept even scientific evidence of life after death, reincarnation or any other form of the consciousness surviving death.

I know the polls say differently but I don't believe those polls. I believe that people who say they believe in god or the life after are basically grasping at straws. They "hope" that some form or fashion of what they call "their self" will survive.

 

 

 

 


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:How would we go

Vastet wrote:
How would we go about showing that existence to others? How about by showing us a consciousness that came from 'wherever' instead of using consciousness which has arisen from a brain? If consciousness can exist without a brain, then there's probably consciousness' 'floating' all over. Why don't we all get possessed? Why hasn't two consciousness' ever switched bodies?

You are trying to compare consciousness to something that is physical rather than an awareness.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.038.than.html

 

Is a rose conscious? what about an earth worm? a dolphin? now a human?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vij%C3%B1%C4%81na#Dependent_origination

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vij%C3%B1%C4%81na#.22Life_force.22_aspect_and_rebirth

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 4197
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Meh, it's not

Vastet wrote:
Meh, it's not quite the same thing. Statism is not inherent to atheism. I dare say the US is as perilously close to becoming statist as they are theist, and could become both if things go badly. I'd agree there were atheist elements to the ideologies discussed, but not that they were driven by atheism as a concept. They just weren't.

well of course not.  if we take atheism in its most literal, narrow sense (which i argue we always should) then it can't possibly drive anything)

"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
digitalbeachbum wrote:You

digitalbeachbum wrote:
You are trying to compare consciousness to something that is physical rather than an awareness.

No I'm not, I'm asking for evidence that consciousness can exist without a brain or some other physical form. And if you're suggesting that it can, your links fail to provide evidence.

"Is a rose conscious? what about an earth worm? a dolphin? now a human?"

Forget wikipedia, this is beyond scientific understanding and therefore not to be found in its pages even as source material.

What isn't beyond understanding is that there has never been observed a consciousness without physical form, and never been evidence to suggest the contrary, let alone prove it.

Whether or not a rose or dolphin is conscious is beyond our capability to determine at this time. Hell, I've yet to see undeniable evidence that humans are conscious. There are quite a few of them that I'm not so sure about.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Hell, I've yet

Vastet wrote:
Hell, I've yet to see undeniable evidence that humans are conscious.

 

Hands down, the most amazing thing I've seen you post.