Should have stopped right there, Brent . . . plus ca change, and all that. It is much akin to any other debate between two intractable positions. One side will not convince the other, no matter the quality of their argument.
Let it go . . . your ulcer will thank you.
I have know Ulcer, to worry about. In fact, even as heavy as I am, my doctor is amazed I don't have health issues - none!
I really thought that there were be something Mark and I could agree on after he made his tribute post. I thought I was stating the obvious. I thought I was being reasonable, I thought I was being logical. Hitchens spent over 25 years preaching his message “There is NO GOD” in fact, he is more dogmatic about this than Dawkins! All I was trying to do is point out Hitchens finally knows the truth either he was right or he was wrong and he will never be able to do anything about the position he took.
I have 2 more thoughts on this thread but I don’t know if I will get to them anytime soon.
All I said was he now knows the truth. Either he was right all this time. Or he was wrong all this time. The fact is he now knows the truth. And in fact there is nothing he can do now to convience anyone one way or the other.
False...
What you said is "The sad thing is he now knows the truth and there is nothing he can do about it". This suggests that there is something regretful in his passing, aside from the being dead bit, and he still has some form of consciousness / sentience to regret being unable to do anything about his situation he finds himself in.
Why I allow myself to continue posting in this thread is beyond me. But it comments like this that just suck me back in.
If what you say is true and Hitchens spent his adult life fighting not just the religion but in fact spent a great deal of time arguing that there is in fact NO GOD. Then its not just the "God-squad" view. My statement holds true, he, Hitchens, is dead. He believed there was no afterlife, no judgement, no punishment, no God, no Jesus, no heaven, no hell. He spent years trying to convience people he was right.
All I said was he now knows the truth. Either he was right all this time. Or he was wrong all this time. The fact is he now knows the truth. And in fact there is nothing he can do now to convience anyone one way or the other.
I'd say he doesn't know the truth at all. Cause after death if he's right there's no consciousness and he has no moment of realization after death. He died and ended at his death. There is no knowledge after death.
If the big guy put us here to discover and grow and return to him with a heart full of human experience and the real love that only free will can give...
Why does he have to be such an attention whore? We gotta thank him constantly, call him every night--even when we're tired, spend EVERY Sunday at his house listening to his buddies drone on about the same old shit. He demands a HUGE chunk of our money, and watches us 24-7...we can't even pee alone. He tells us what to eat, how to sleep, what to wear...he even dictates how to act while we menstruate.
If the big guy put us here to discover and grow and return to him with a heart full of human experience and the real love that only free will can give...
Why does he have to be such an attention whore?
Says who?
We gotta thank him constantly, call him every night--even when we're tired, spend EVERY Sunday at his house listening to his buddies drone on about the same old shit.
You are confusing the strictures of different Faiths with what God wants from us.
He demands a HUGE chunk of our money, and watches us 24-7...we can't even pee alone.
Pretty sure god is busy with other things while I pee. Pretty sure he's busy when you pee, too.
He tells us what to eat, how to sleep, what to wear...he even dictates how to act while we menstruate.
Not in my Faith, he doesn't. Think you are talking about the folks down the street . . . and they're just silly.
God is pretty much an abusive boyfriend.
Nothing could be further from the truth. But, whatever . . . continue to believe as you will . . . or won't, as the case may be.
Milo does not "do" his Faith. I have already stated that I am a failed Catholic. I have, however, thought about what it would take to go back and follow that path.
In all seriousness, I am not trying to "win" anything in this discussion, most particularly not with yourself, Mark, or 800. The three of you could wake up tomorrow morning with God Himself cooking eggs and bacon in your kitchens and still protest that atheism is the way to go. In your own ways, you are as wilfully hostile to any worldview that diverges from your own as the extremists which you seem to feel populate most religions.
Correction...i'm pretty open to the possibility of God. Show me any evidence.....any at all. And we can chat. Unless I'm willfully hostile to unicorns, dragons, and Justin Bieber's talent.....I find your characterization passively aggressive and weak.
Correction...i'm pretty open to the possibility of God. Show me any evidence.....any at all. And we can chat. Unless I'm willfully hostile to unicorns, dragons, and Justin Bieber's talent.....I find your characterization passively aggressive and weak.
You say "show me", but refuse to acknowledge what has been laid out for you . . .
Jesus of Nazareth is an historically documented person, by Roman documents, as well as Jewish historical records from the time.
Jesus of Nazareth is noted in those same records being referred to as "the Christ" not only by followers, but by those opposed to him.
After his crucifixion, his disciples, and those who followed them, suffered horrible tortures and deaths without recanting in their belief that Jesus of Nazareth was, as claimed, the Son of God. These tortures and deaths spanned more than two generations of followers so, while it would be easy to say that the "1st generation" of Jesus freaks were delusional, and suffered accordingly, it is less so to think that not one of the 3rd generation followers (and beyond) would not simply say "fuck it" to save their own ass.
And yes, I admit this is ALL circumstantial evidence, but it remains evidence nonetheless. Even in our courts system today circumstantial evidence is often enough to secure a conviction.
And conviction/Faith is what we are talking about, no?
Correction...i'm pretty open to the possibility of God. Show me any evidence.....any at all. And we can chat. Unless I'm willfully hostile to unicorns, dragons, and Justin Bieber's talent.....I find your characterization passively aggressive and weak.
Nik,
I will be in town to play for the Royal Cup either on my own team or as a pick up. If you will allow me to take you out to dinner and talk for 45 min. to an hour, I will make The Case For The Possibility of God as you put it; on two conditions: 1) I am allowed to pray for the food at the beginning of the meal and our time together at the end of time. 2) I pay for the dinner.. We can meet Friday October 24th 8pm. I will PM you details as the date approaches. This isn’t a debate, just me talking and you listening for an hour as I lay out The Case For The Possibility of God. Let me know!
Brent
PS Think about it for a week, if you decline, no worries, I will make the above offer to anyone else, Mark, Shtebs, Trigs etc.
You say "show me", but refuse to acknowledge what has been laid out for you . . .
Jesus of Nazareth is an historically documented person, by Roman documents, as well as Jewish historical records from the time.
Jesus of Nazareth is noted in those same records being referred to as "the Christ" not only by followers, but by those opposed to him.
After his crucifixion, his disciples, and those who followed them, suffered horrible tortures and deaths without recanting in their belief that Jesus of Nazareth was, as claimed, the Son of God. These tortures and deaths spanned more than two generations of followers so, while it would be easy to say that the "1st generation" of Jesus freaks were delusional, and suffered accordingly, it is less so to think that not one of the 3rd generation followers (and beyond) would not simply say "fuck it" to save their own ass.
And yes, I admit this is ALL circumstantial evidence, but it remains evidence nonetheless. Even in our courts system today circumstantial evidence is often enough to secure a conviction.
And conviction/Faith is what we are talking about, no?
But, like I said, you win. I cede the field.
So the "fact" that someone named Jesus may have existed and that someone called him the "Christ" proves the existence of God? DO you doubt that Joseph Smith existed? How about Mohammed (way more evidence for him) or a certain author who is beloved by John Travolta? Any doubt about these people? THere are people (more than Christianity is some cases) willing to die for their faith. And they have a much stronger argument by far. NONE of these people....who we know existed, prove a God existed. God used to show up all the time...miracles left and right. As soon as the camera was invented...not so much.
"Historical Jesus refers to scholarly reconstructions of the life of Jesus,[3][4][5] based on historical methods including critical analysis of gospel texts as the primary source for his biography, along with consideration of the historical and cultural context in which he lived."
First line from the wiki you sent me to. Did you just say the bible is true because the bible says it is true? The wiki seems to point to significantly different interpretations. Again the fact that someone in 30 AD named Jesus died does not in any way prove that there is a God. Unless you are willing to admit that all the falsehoods in the Bible are just as likely proof of the non existance of God.
Your second link is to a Bible website and finishes with this unbiased summation:
"Believers in Christ of the New Testament have every right to worship Him with the full knowledge even the most atheist of scholars generally accept Jesus of Nazareth actually existed. Happy Easter!"
...and the third lists sources quoted long after Jesus' death. The earliest 20 years after his death and most quite a bit later. "20 years ago i remember an eclipse around the time that a guy i never met died" would you think that was reliable info?
And again.....if Jesus existed how exactly does this provide any evidence of God? All it proves is that some people are willing to follow religions which are a human creation (unless God created Odin on a lark).
You asked for sources proving he lived, NOT that he was the Son of God. A thorough reading of those links will lead to a section in ALL of them that states, basically, that there is no refutation, even among atheists, that Jesus of Nazareth was an actual living person.
You asked for sources proving he lived, NOT that he was the Son of God. A thorough reading of those links will lead to a section in ALL of them that states, basically, that there is no refutation, even among atheists, that Jesus of Nazareth was an actual living person.
Asked and answered. good day . . .
You're reading what you want to read / able to make a point on... not what was asked...
"So the "fact" that someone named Jesus may have existed and that someone called him the "Christ" proves the existence of God?"
(The question here is asking about the proof of existence of God)
"And they have a much stronger argument by far. NONE of these people....who we know existed, prove a God existed. God used to show up all the time...miracles left and right. As soon as the camera was invented...not so much."
(Again, God and miracles, not some Jewish dude that hung with 12 homies).
There is a skill called "Active Listening", and one of its teachings is that if you are listening to a person (and yes, written word counts as well), you need to be in the moment with them, not thinking about a story you want to share.
When Albert Einstein realized that the stories in his religion could could not possibly be true he replaced his religion with — God as the sum of all the forces in the universe.
I think it's a very smart thing to do.
I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it.
–ALBERT EINSTEIN
When Albert Einstein realized that the stories in his religion could could not possibly be true he replaced his religion with — God as the sum of all the forces in the universe.
I think it's a very smart thing to do.
I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it.
–ALBERT EINSTEIN
This is the same god that Spinoza talks about.
Actually it's probably +EV to claim to be a Quaker so your kids can avoid conscription.
Actually, I think I'll start a new religion:
Reefism: Being the most +EV religion.
How it works:
You belong to the most +ev religion at the time.
War breaks out? Conscription? : You're a Quaker.
Arrested for dimethyltryptamine? : You're a Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal.
For example: Lets say we live in a province where the Magic Underwearist School board is fully funded by the province, But the Satanist School board isn't.
Comments
I have know Ulcer, to worry about. In fact, even as heavy as I am, my doctor is amazed I don't have health issues - none!
I really thought that there were be something Mark and I could agree on after he made his tribute post. I thought I was stating the obvious. I thought I was being reasonable, I thought I was being logical. Hitchens spent over 25 years preaching his message “There is NO GOD” in fact, he is more dogmatic about this than Dawkins! All I was trying to do is point out Hitchens finally knows the truth either he was right or he was wrong and he will never be able to do anything about the position he took.
I have 2 more thoughts on this thread but I don’t know if I will get to them anytime soon.
False...
What you said is "The sad thing is he now knows the truth and there is nothing he can do about it". This suggests that there is something regretful in his passing, aside from the being dead bit, and he still has some form of consciousness / sentience to regret being unable to do anything about his situation he finds himself in.
It's at best plausible deniability.
Mark
Do ya wanna go FASTER ?!?
I'd say he doesn't know the truth at all. Cause after death if he's right there's no consciousness and he has no moment of realization after death. He died and ended at his death. There is no knowledge after death.
/thread.
All Hispanic members are welcome.
If the big guy put us here to discover and grow and return to him with a heart full of human experience and the real love that only free will can give...
Why does he have to be such an attention whore? We gotta thank him constantly, call him every night--even when we're tired, spend EVERY Sunday at his house listening to his buddies drone on about the same old shit. He demands a HUGE chunk of our money, and watches us 24-7...we can't even pee alone. He tells us what to eat, how to sleep, what to wear...he even dictates how to act while we menstruate.
God is pretty much an abusive boyfriend.
Nothing could be further from the truth. But, whatever . . . continue to believe as you will . . . or won't, as the case may be.
Very wishy-washy.
In all seriousness, I am not trying to "win" anything in this discussion, most particularly not with yourself, Mark, or 800. The three of you could wake up tomorrow morning with God Himself cooking eggs and bacon in your kitchens and still protest that atheism is the way to go. In your own ways, you are as wilfully hostile to any worldview that diverges from your own as the extremists which you seem to feel populate most religions.
In that light, congratulations . . . you win.
You say "show me", but refuse to acknowledge what has been laid out for you . . .
Jesus of Nazareth is an historically documented person, by Roman documents, as well as Jewish historical records from the time.
Jesus of Nazareth is noted in those same records being referred to as "the Christ" not only by followers, but by those opposed to him.
After his crucifixion, his disciples, and those who followed them, suffered horrible tortures and deaths without recanting in their belief that Jesus of Nazareth was, as claimed, the Son of God. These tortures and deaths spanned more than two generations of followers so, while it would be easy to say that the "1st generation" of Jesus freaks were delusional, and suffered accordingly, it is less so to think that not one of the 3rd generation followers (and beyond) would not simply say "fuck it" to save their own ass.
And yes, I admit this is ALL circumstantial evidence, but it remains evidence nonetheless. Even in our courts system today circumstantial evidence is often enough to secure a conviction.
And conviction/Faith is what we are talking about, no?
But, like I said, you win. I cede the field.
Nik,
I will be in town to play for the Royal Cup either on my own team or as a pick up. If you will allow me to take you out to dinner and talk for 45 min. to an hour, I will make The Case For The Possibility of God as you put it; on two conditions: 1) I am allowed to pray for the food at the beginning of the meal and our time together at the end of time. 2) I pay for the dinner.. We can meet Friday October 24th 8pm. I will PM you details as the date approaches. This isn’t a debate, just me talking and you listening for an hour as I lay out The Case For The Possibility of God. Let me know!
Brent
PS Think about it for a week, if you decline, no worries, I will make the above offer to anyone else, Mark, Shtebs, Trigs etc.
So the "fact" that someone named Jesus may have existed and that someone called him the "Christ" proves the existence of God? DO you doubt that Joseph Smith existed? How about Mohammed (way more evidence for him) or a certain author who is beloved by John Travolta? Any doubt about these people? THere are people (more than Christianity is some cases) willing to die for their faith. And they have a much stronger argument by far. NONE of these people....who we know existed, prove a God existed. God used to show up all the time...miracles left and right. As soon as the camera was invented...not so much.
Nikola
Anyone willing to include a link to these historical documents?
https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/eastman_mark/messiah/sfm_ap2.cfm
There is Historical, non-Biblical Proof of an Actual Jesus Christ of Nazareth
Happy reading . . .
"Historical Jesus refers to scholarly reconstructions of the life of Jesus,[3][4][5] based on historical methods including critical analysis of gospel texts as the primary source for his biography, along with consideration of the historical and cultural context in which he lived."
First line from the wiki you sent me to. Did you just say the bible is true because the bible says it is true? The wiki seems to point to significantly different interpretations. Again the fact that someone in 30 AD named Jesus died does not in any way prove that there is a God. Unless you are willing to admit that all the falsehoods in the Bible are just as likely proof of the non existance of God.
Your second link is to a Bible website and finishes with this unbiased summation:
"Believers in Christ of the New Testament have every right to worship Him with the full knowledge even the most atheist of scholars generally accept Jesus of Nazareth actually existed. Happy Easter!"
...and the third lists sources quoted long after Jesus' death. The earliest 20 years after his death and most quite a bit later. "20 years ago i remember an eclipse around the time that a guy i never met died" would you think that was reliable info?
And again.....if Jesus existed how exactly does this provide any evidence of God? All it proves is that some people are willing to follow religions which are a human creation (unless God created Odin on a lark).
Anyone see any similarities.
Asked and answered. good day . . .
You're reading what you want to read / able to make a point on... not what was asked...
"So the "fact" that someone named Jesus may have existed and that someone called him the "Christ" proves the existence of God?"
(The question here is asking about the proof of existence of God)
"And they have a much stronger argument by far. NONE of these people....who we know existed, prove a God existed. God used to show up all the time...miracles left and right. As soon as the camera was invented...not so much."
(Again, God and miracles, not some Jewish dude that hung with 12 homies).
There is a skill called "Active Listening", and one of its teachings is that if you are listening to a person (and yes, written word counts as well), you need to be in the moment with them, not thinking about a story you want to share.
Mark
I think it's a very smart thing to do.
I don’t try to imagine a personal God; it suffices to stand in awe at the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it.
–ALBERT EINSTEIN
This is the same god that Spinoza talks about.
Actually it's probably +EV to claim to be a Quaker so your kids can avoid conscription.
Actually, I think I'll start a new religion:
Reefism: Being the most +EV religion.
How it works:
You belong to the most +ev religion at the time.
War breaks out? Conscription? : You're a Quaker.
Arrested for dimethyltryptamine? : You're a Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal.
Anyone want to join?
In...IF it has a book I can quote to relieve myself of the burden of thoughts
So far the book has one page:
Reefism:fastest growing religion on the planet! Followers doubled in three minutes!
Total followers:2
Anyone else want to join?
When it's +EV , We are Magic Underwearists!
For example: Lets say we live in a province where the Magic Underwearist School board is fully funded by the province, But the Satanist School board isn't.
We live in a situation like this in Ontario!