Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Nobody Dies for a Lie

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    Probably. People with those views tend to be hounded off the site by right-wingers who tell them they're not real Christians. Sam was the last regular poster here like that and he left in disgust. I still follow him on facebook though.

    Sam certainly received more than his fair share of criticism from the posters here. I guess you'll have to see and find out.
    This is funny in light of the numerous times you've called the Christians on this board "not real Christians."
    I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      It's these kinds of simplistic arguments that make you not worth the trouble.

      The short answer is that the gospels were written as historical biographies, and they were accepted as such from the very beginning, including by contemporary witnesses.
      Then what happened to the disciples for the next 40 years after the death and supposed resurrection, when the NT was actually written?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        True - it would dying for a mistake, or an incorrect perception. The point is, all of this falls, for me, into a "we don't know" bucket. There are lots of possible scenarios. Of all of them, the "Jesus was actually the son of god and was resurrected" is the least probable/plausible.
        The question is not what is possible but is what is probable based on the evidence. There are a lot more possibilities than there are probabilities. No doubt your claim that the resurrection is the least probable is not based on where the evidence naturally leads but based on your own unreasoned a priori assumption that the supernatural is implausible.
        Last edited by Mountain Man; 04-18-2018, 01:18 PM.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
          First of all, I'm not sure what "radical theory" you are suggesting I hold. The only theory I think I have put forward is that the claims that the supernatural aspects of Jesus' life are historically accurate require an assumption that, from the day of Jesus' death until the time when the "history" was documented, there was little/no theological impact on the historical record. I don't think that case can be made. We are talking periods measured in decades. We also know, today, the impact of group-think and/or a powerful orator on memory, individually and collectively. Christianity had both, and I see no reason to think that the human psyche was any different in that age than it is in this.
          You're insinuating that the narrative changed significantly over that time period. You are vastly underestimating the impact that distance had on communication; it wasn't one group, it was many groups established throughout the Roman empire. Paul said that if he preached a different gospel, he should be rejected.
          My skepticism remains in place because I am getting a story from someone I don't know (you), have little/no way of assessing their psychological state and/or predispositions, on a website that has a strong "supernatural" component, about a "supernatural" encounter that lends itself to other explanations. A truly gifted "mind reader" does not need to have any "prior encounter." I've been to the magic shows. I've read the literature. I know some of the techniques used to get information out of a person leaving them the impression that their mind has "been read." The more open the person is to the possibility of the supernatural, the easier it is to do. Think of it this way. Assuming you do not believe unicorns are real, if I conveyed to you a story about how I was in the woods and encountered an actual unicorn, which proceeded to touch me with it's horn and heal the bruised ribs I had from falling down only a few minutes before, would it change your beliefs about unicorns? Is there ANYTHING I could say to you here that would cause you to walk away saying, "yeah - I have to change that unicorn belief. This guy is compelling!"
          You fail to understand - the "mind reading" happened FIRST in the interaction, with no possibility of prior signals. It was not done by people who advertised their ability to do so - in Orthodoxy, devout people with spiritual gifts are encouraged to hide them, not display them. None of the three encounters to which I refer could be construed as done with intent to display. I understand that YOU would have to have something undeniably supernatural with no possible natural explanation in order for YOU to believe that supernatural events happen. I think it's safe to say that God won't bother doing that for you.
          If you read my statement, I conveyed what I believe. At no point did I suggest you believe it.
          You believe that there's an underlying unifying reality behind all religions? I dare say you haven't looked very closely.
          As for god's abilities, I guess I'll leave that to you. When/if I have adequate cause to believe there is a god, I will so believe. Until then, I will not lie about it.
          You've made it abundantly clear that you don't want to believe. In any case, why would you lie about believing?
          Yeah - this gets said a lot here to. I find myself scratching my head a bit. When we have a disagreement about language, I go find dictionary definitions, ask myself if my use is in line with it, and post the results of that investigation. I can be 100% aligned with the dictionary definition, and someone will tell me that I'm "twisting words to mean what I want." It's an amazing phenomena. I have no clue why it happens.
          Yeah, you've said that more than once, too. I have yet to see you convince anyone of that, however.
          I think you are very narrowly focused on Christianity, as if religions began with Jesus. I am fairly sure you don't actually think that, but you seem to keep going there.
          I'm fairly sure you know that this is a gross mischaracterization. Judeo-Christianity has an explanation for where all other religions come from, and I have yet to see that in any other instance.
          I was talking about how religions arose in the human species itself. We get clues about that from ancient cave art, archeological digs, etc.
          Sure. You're only getting a tiny fraction of the true picture that way, however.
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            The question is not what is possible but is what is probable based on the evidence. There are a lot more possibilities than there are probabilities. No doubt your claim that the resurrection is the least probable is not based on where the evidence naturally leads but based on your own unreasone a priori assumption that the supernatural is implausible.
            Well, actually the resurrection is the least probable and that the supernatural is implausible should be everyone's most reasonable a priori assumption.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Dimbulb View Post
              Probably. People with those views tend to be hounded off the site by right-wingers who tell them they're not real Christians. Sam was the last regular poster here like that and he left in disgust. I still follow him on facebook though.

              Sam certainly received more than his fair share of criticism from the posters here. I guess you'll have to see and find out.
              I don't know if Sam was a "real" Christian or not, but I do know he held certain beliefs that were clearly contrary to scripture, although I can't remember off the top of my head if any of them were related to salvation.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
                Well, actually the resurrection is the least probable and that the supernatural is implausible should be everyone's most reasonable a priori assumption.
                Skeptics are fond of begged questions.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                  And nobody did die for something they knew was a lie. Apparently after the supposed resurrection and until (some 40 years) the NT was written, the disciples just disappeared from history.
                  That's incorrect. The church continued growing all during that time, due to the efforts of the disciples.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    That's incorrect. The church continued growing all during that time, due to the efforts of the disciples.
                    Due to the efforts of the disciples? Is that documented?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      Due to the efforts of the disciples? Is that documented?
                      Yes. And the fact that there is a Church confirms it.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        So has it been straightened out now? The correct argument is "Nobody will die for something they know is a lie"

                        The Apostles would be in the unique position to actually know if Jesus was for real or not. So...
                        If the apostles knew Jesus was lying and they were going around spreading a false religion then
                        1. They were morons because all they did was get themselves and their followers chased and executed by everybody around them: the Jews and the Romans.
                        2. All they had to do was admit they made it all up, or disappear back into the crowd and go about living their lives as ordinary Jews instead of being ostracized and hunted.
                        I think this ignores a huge number of other possibilities.
                        The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                        I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                          The question is not what is possible but is what is probable based on the evidence. There are a lot more possibilities than there are probabilities. No doubt your claim that the resurrection is the least probable is not based on where the evidence naturally leads but based on your own unreasoned a priori assumption that the supernatural is implausible.
                          Actually, it is a reasoned conclusion based on experience and evidence; coupled with observations about the circumstances under which the biblical record was written.
                          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                            I think this ignores a huge number of other possibilities.
                            Do you admit that your initial statement of the argument was incorrect?

                            People will most definitely die for a lie if they don't know it is a lie and believe it to be true. But if they do know it is a lie (especially if they made the lie themselves) then they won't die for it if they can help it. The apostles had an easy out. If Jesus did not rise from the dead, they could have just went back to their old lives and nothing would have happened to them. They would actually know if Jesus had risen from the dead or not since they were eye witnesses. Not only that but if Jesus had not risen, there were hundreds of other around who would know he didn't rise and would have prevented the church from starting.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              You're insinuating that the narrative changed significantly over that time period. You are vastly underestimating the impact that distance had on communication; it wasn't one group, it was many groups established throughout the Roman empire. Paul said that if he preached a different gospel, he should be rejected.
                              I am not talking about the evolution of different groups (though it is clear that actually DID happen, and some groups were "isolated" from the Pauline sects for exactly that reason). I am talking about the evolution of the theology as the early church communities themselves struggled with the inevitable question raised by the claims about Jesus: How can a man be a god as well? How can a man talk about his "father," the spirit that was to be sent, be a god himself, and preserve a monotheism? The list goes on.

                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              You fail to understand - the "mind reading" happened FIRST in the interaction, with no possibility of prior signals. It was not done by people who advertised their ability to do so - in Orthodoxy, devout people with spiritual gifts are encouraged to hide them, not display them. None of the three encounters to which I refer could be construed as done with intent to display. I understand that YOU would have to have something undeniably supernatural with no possible natural explanation in order for YOU to believe that supernatural events happen. I think it's safe to say that God won't bother doing that for you.
                              I am not concerned, since I do not believe a god exists to do that for me. But you are correct that I am not going to accept a supernatural claim without adequate evidence for its reality. Given the number of charlatans out there, the possibility of it being a hoax will need to be clearly eliminated.

                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              You believe that there's an underlying unifying reality behind all religions? I dare say you haven't looked very closely.
                              You've made it abundantly clear that you don't want to believe. In any case, why would you lie about believing?
                              OK, so two things here. First, I think the absence of an underlying reality (i.e., an actual god) is why religions tend to fragment over time rather than converge. When a belief is based on something real, we tend to see the opposite behavior: belief tends to converge. That being said, there are some common themes to many religions (e.g., the flood story, the creation myth, the sacrificial lamb, the god-mating-with-woman or virgin birth theme, etc.). These common themes, though the specific stories tend to vary widely, are rooted in the common experience of "being human on planet earth."

                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              Yeah, you've said that more than once, too. I have yet to see you convince anyone of that, however.
                              If it was my goal to convince, I might be concerned. As it is...

                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              I'm fairly sure you know that this is a gross mischaracterization. Judeo-Christianity has an explanation for where all other religions come from, and I have yet to see that in any other instance.
                              Assuming this is true (and I cannot make that case either way), this proves...?

                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              Sure. You're only getting a tiny fraction of the true picture that way, however.
                              That is merely the beginning of the picture, OBP. The story continues until you have the "big three" polytheisms, and then the emergence of monotheism. And that is a very "western" path. The east saw a completely different religious evolution.
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                                Believers are fond of begged questions.
                                fify

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Esther, 09-27-2020, 02:01 PM
                                56 responses
                                261 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post thormas
                                by thormas
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 09-15-2020, 11:19 AM
                                49 responses
                                412 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Tassman
                                by Tassman
                                 
                                Started by shunyadragon, 09-09-2016, 03:27 PM
                                1,015 responses
                                54,066 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by showmeproof, 01-19-2014, 11:28 AM
                                91 responses
                                19,192 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X