Freethought & Rationalism Archive

DivineOb · 10-09-2002, 08:10 AM

Quote:

I'm not sure this is the case. Can you point out where I assumed that Jesus existed in any of my responses to BT?

Actually, reading over the thread, I found a remark that I made to BT regarding burden of proof regarding Jesus' alleged existence. I can't find a single place where I assumed that Jesus existed.

Well, I don't know what to say... to me it doesn't make sense to discuss the thoughts of the followers of jesus without an implicit assumption that those people existed. There's always an implied "(If these people existed)..." preceding every sentence.

Quote:

Certainly, if there is a source (ie the bible) that describes said thoughts.

The Star Wars movies describe the thoughts going on in Luke Skywalker's head. Does that mean that Luke is real?

And I would expect the thought preceding every sentence would be "(If such a universe and person existed then...)"

Quote:

My theist alter ego would respond with a "NO!" because he KNOWS that God exists just as much as the apostles knew when they saw Jesus after he was resurrected.

But your theist alter ego would not have "witnessing Jesus' execution and resurrection than modern day believers?" regardless of how much he thinks he's experienced Jesus through the holy spirit.

Quote:

Does my theist response not make sense? Too bad, that's not my problem. Take it up with your fellow xians.

I'm not a christian

Quote:

First of all, the question itself is meaningless until you prove that Jesus existed.

Exactly. And it is meaningless to discuss the thoughts of the apostles without an implied "Assuming these people existed" preceding everything you say

Quote:

However, if Jesus exists, then why is my theist alter-ego's response invalid? Why can he not "know through the Holy Spirit" (whatever that means) about God's existence?

Because I specifically asked about witnessing the execution and resurrection of Jesus. Only someone alive during the lifetime of Jesus (if such a man existed) could possibly witness such events.

Quote:

And my theist response is:

"But I HAVE WITNESSED the death and rebirth of Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit filling my heart with Love for the Lord!!! HOW DARE YOU DISCOUNT MY RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCES! BURN, HERETIC!"

I mean witnessing through one's eyes

Quote:

Allrighty, then. What if Jesus came to earth and was resurrected 3 times? 25 times? n times (where n positive integer that is as large as you please)? Your "unique" claims of witness are hardly unique anymore, are they?

Fine... not unique... pick some other adjective which means wildly different than the norm...

Mageth · 10-09-2002, 08:12 AM

Third, of the four Gospels about Jesus, two were written by eyewitnesses (Matthew and John) and the other two were written by interviewers (Luke and Mark). I encourage you to read the opening of the Gospel of Luke. Doesn't read like a myth to me.

A subject for another thread (in Biblical Criticism & Archaeology, perhaps), but the authorship of the gospels is by no means as certain as you assume. For example, as John was probably written around 100 A.D., it's highly improbable that it was written by an "eyewitness." Internal inconsistencies in John also indicate the author was not an eyewitness.

You can educate yourself on authorship and dating of the Gospels (and other books of the Bible) <a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/" target="_blank">here</a>, for a start.

Edited to add: Well, MortalWombat beat me to it!

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]

10-09-2002, 08:16 AM

Breeze: I do know what "correlation" means. (Since this is a thread for waving degrees, I have one in Mathematics). The point is that you can't claim any meaningful correlation on an insufficient and possibly biased sample.

I know it's difficult for you, with such a complicated thread, but I don't feel you have really addressed earlier posts.

BreezeinaTree · 10-09-2002, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by frostymama:
People wouldn't die for something that they knew was a lie?

Two words...

Heaven's Gate (heck they even castrated themselves)

Nope. Not the same thing at all. The Heaven's Gate cult killed themselves for a "UFO" behind comet Hale-Bopp. They never saw the UFO, they only "believed" it was there.

The disciples SAW Jesus killed and then resurrected. Big difference!

Mageth · 10-09-2002, 08:22 AM

My point is that you have to look at the core beliefs, not the believers, if you are to ACCURATELY judge the Christian belief system.

That seems to run counter to the words of Jesus. Look, for example, at Matthew 5:13-16 and John 13:35.

Mageth · 10-09-2002, 08:25 AM

Nope. Not the same thing at all. The Heaven's Gate cult killed themselves for a "UFO" behind comet Hale-Bopp. They never saw the UFO, they only "believed" it was there.

The disciples SAW Jesus killed and then resurrected. Big difference!

It does illustrate that people who were not "eyewitnesses" but merely "believers" will die for what they haven't seen. Wasn't that the point?

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]

Starboy · 10-09-2002, 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BreezeinaTree:


I am interested in what atheists believe (or rather, what they don't believe

). I am not interested in becoming an atheist--but, I am open minded and am enjoying our discourse. And, I am not interested in attacking any of you.

Due to the nature of the questions that you all have brought up, I have responded with what I believe. And,I have provided evidence for what I believe. I don't consider that proselytizing. If it is, then you all are just as guilty as I am.

I had thought we were in a friendly debate. Is that not what usually goes on here?

Fair enough. But you must realize that when it comes to religion there are only tough questions, and there is more than one answer. Those that claim openly to have the correct answer must expect hard questions.

Starboy

DarkBronzePlant · 10-09-2002, 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BreezeinaTree:

I have looked for the truth. I think many of you are here because you are looking for the truth. When I read the opening of the Gospel of Luke, I thought about the words, what the writer meant and then drew a conclusion with an open mind. My conclusion was that this writer did not write as someone might who is trying to invent something (like worshipping pink unicorns?). Rather, he was like you all--he wanted to be convinced.
...

Focus on the words "eyewitnesses", "carefully", "investigated", and "orderly". Here is a guy who wants to carefully determine the truth.

If I simply wanted to validate my beliefs, I might be afraid of carefully invesigating something, because it might turn out that what I believe is wrong.

BreezeinaTree,

Thanks for the response. I can imagine it's tough to get back to the numerous folks here who have responded you.

I try to give peopple the benefit of the doubt when they describe their motivation for doing something. Much like I get annoyed when someone on this board tells me that the only reason I am an atheist is because I hate god, I'd imagine you don't want me telling you what your motivations are.

At the same time, I find a real contradiction between what you are saying now, and what you had states earlier, as shown below:

Quote:

That was what originally motivated me to become a Christian. However, I am not satisfied with touchy-feeling stuff as the basis for my beliefs about my life on this Earth or in eternity to follow. Some time after accepting Christ as Savior and Lord, I began looking for other evidence that I could cling to.

In the quote above, you're stating that your original motivation to become a Christian was based, at best, on anecdotal evidence, and you freely admit later that it was an emotionally-based decision. It is only after you made this decision that you began to look for "evidence" that you could "cling to."

Yet above, you state that you are reading the gospels with an open mind. Correct me if I am missing something, but I do not understand how a person who is reading through a book with the intent on finding evidence to support his/her pre-made decision can be said to be doing so with an open-mind.

For which reason, I stand firm with my original statement. If you are trying to affirm your belief in something, then you will find evidence with which to do so. Whether or not a story "reads like a myth" is a very subjective decision; if you're predisposed to want it to read like fact, then to you, it most certainly will. To someone who is truly neutral on the subject, well, that's a different story.

frostymama · 10-09-2002, 08:43 AM

oh give me a break. The leader of Heaven's Gate made the whole thing up and died right alongside the rest of the nutjobs. He died for something that he knew wasn't true.

They had no reason to believe. There was no evidence, yet they still believed enough to castrate themselves and commit suicide. At least Paul didn't require his flock to actually castrate themselves.

K · 10-09-2002, 08:50 AM

Breeze:

I don't mean to keep bringing this up, but can you see why your evidence for belief would be considered extremely lacking when held up to the evidence you use in your job? Is it apparent that you haven't really provided anything close to empirical evidence and that you have offered nothing more than an emotional appeal?

I am sincerely willing to look at real empirical evidence and I would be open to working with you on coming up with a real experiment that would provide that evidence. But since I am unable to experience God, you will have to provide the basics. I can help at eliminating other variables and other parts that don't require me to experience God.

10-09-2002, 08:12 AM	#122
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Third, of the four Gospels about Jesus, two were written by eyewitnesses (Matthew and John) and the other two were written by interviewers (Luke and Mark). I encourage you to read the opening of the Gospel of Luke. Doesn't read like a myth to me. A subject for another thread (in Biblical Criticism & Archaeology, perhaps), but the authorship of the gospels is by no means as certain as you assume. For example, as John was probably written around 100 A.D., it's highly improbable that it was written by an "eyewitness." Internal inconsistencies in John also indicate the author was not an eyewitness. You can educate yourself on authorship and dating of the Gospels (and other books of the Bible) <a href="http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/" target="_blank">here</a>, for a start. Edited to add: Well, MortalWombat beat me to it! [ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

10-09-2002, 08:25 AM	#126
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Nope. Not the same thing at all. The Heaven's Gate cult killed themselves for a "UFO" behind comet Hale-Bopp. They never saw the UFO, they only "believed" it was there. The disciples SAW Jesus killed and then resurrected. Big difference! It does illustrate that people who were not "eyewitnesses" but merely "believers" will die for what they haven't seen. Wasn't that the point? [ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: Mageth ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-09-2002, 08:16 AM	#123
DMB Guest Posts: n/a	Breeze: I do know what "correlation" means. (Since this is a thread for waving degrees, I have one in Mathematics). The point is that you can't claim any meaningful correlation on an insufficient and possibly biased sample. I know it's difficult for you, with such a complicated thread, but I don't feel you have really addressed earlier posts.

10-09-2002, 08:22 AM	#125
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	My point is that you have to look at the core beliefs, not the believers, if you are to ACCURATELY judge the Christian belief system. That seems to run counter to the words of Jesus. Look, for example, at Matthew 5:13-16 and John 13:35.

10-09-2002, 08:43 AM	#129
frostymama Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Georgia USA Posts: 927	oh give me a break. The leader of Heaven's Gate made the whole thing up and died right alongside the rest of the nutjobs. He died for something that he knew wasn't true. They had no reason to believe. There was no evidence, yet they still believed enough to castrate themselves and commit suicide. At least Paul didn't require his flock to actually castrate themselves.

10-09-2002, 08:50 AM	#130
K Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,485	Breeze: I don't mean to keep bringing this up, but can you see why your evidence for belief would be considered extremely lacking when held up to the evidence you use in your job? Is it apparent that you haven't really provided anything close to empirical evidence and that you have offered nothing more than an emotional appeal? I am sincerely willing to look at real empirical evidence and I would be open to working with you on coming up with a real experiment that would provide that evidence. But since I am unable to experience God, you will have to provide the basics. I can help at eliminating other variables and other parts that don't require me to experience God.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.