Chris Weimer

"More credible witnesses". Sounds like special pleading to me. If Ronald Reagan is invalidated being an eyewitness, then you'd better come up with something to show how you know which witness is credible and which isn't.

Roger Pearse

So it would seem. Not that I have a problem, as a Christian, with atheists basing their religious position on obscurantism... :devil1:

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Chris Weimer

Obscurantism isn't the default position of atheism. It's only in those wishing to disregard history for their own personal biases, probably, I guess, because of their own struggles with past religious experiences. Either that or crackpots.

Roger Pearse

I read on the news today of a WW1 veteran, who fought at Passchendale in 1917 at the age of 19. He's making a return trip to view what's left of the battlefield; at the age of 109. Does anyone wish to tell me that an eye-witness account of an event cannot be written a century afterwards?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

aa5874

WW1 is a confirmed historical event, nothing about Jesus, not even anecdotally, has been confirmed by contemporary historians.
Who are the authors Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul and what exactly did these authors witness?

Cheerful Charlie

Did any 109 year old Chritsian visit Jerusalm at age 109 and write a report telling us what really happened there when he was 19 and saw Jesus crucified?

CC

Cheerful Charlie

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...ht=omnigenesis

God is impossible. No obscurantism here. Thus no Jesus, no Moses, no Mohammed as per Bible or Quran. The claims about God as per Bible are impossible. These tertiary claims are irrelevant.

Obscurantism? Four anonymous, contradictory, lying gospels. Along with all the other foolish religions dead and gone over the millenia. Might as well be a Mithraist for all the good the bible does you.

CC

Roger Pearse

Was that a 'yes' or a 'no'?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Minimalist

I wouldn't be so quick to rely on the 90 year old recollections of a 109 year old. The mind starts to play tricks.

Spanky

But in reality you are only "wishing to disregard history for your own personal biases, probably, I guess, because of your own struggles with past religious experiences. Either that or you are a crackpot." © Chris Weimer 07/30/07

Why are you a hater man? Don't you know the methods, man? The data? The truthiness of the historicist'sicity? The countless undeniable proofs of Jesus' existence as found in the gospels and the epistles and obscure references decades later? Your boundless ignorance confounderates me.

BTW
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/o/o0013200.html
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/o/o0013100.html
Pray tell, which Philosophy/belief/ideology most resembles this, the meaning (at least by this dictionary ) of Obscurantism:
n.
One who opposes intellectual advancement and political reform.
adj.
1. Characterized by opposition to intellectual advancement and political reform.[/I]

Atheism or Christianity?