So every historical document that was not written by an eyewitness, or which contains portions of other written accounts can be tossed out? Well then, there goes almost all of recorded human history.
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
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
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostSo exactly which "law of nature" permits a man to bless water and it becomes wine in the casks?
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostSo consider the possibility that Jesus is actually not "god" or a miracle worker. His message of "love one another" and "return love for hate" and "forgiveness is yours" is a powerful one, one that has the potential to revolutionize the world. If it is backed by a widespread belief that it "comes from god," it could change the world. Am I correct that folks believe it is impossible that someone might look at that message, recognize its power and potential, and dedicate their lives to pushing this message forward, knowing that backing it with the power of "it comes from god" is untrue, but necessary for the message to take root? This is an "impossible" scenario?
It is certainly not a proven scenario, by any stretch of the imagination. But it is one of many possible/plausible scenarios of "what happened." I don't see anything about it that is "impossible."
Yet so many evangelicals today ignore that teachings of Jesus in the gospels almost entirely, and instead read their own theology into the Greek words in order to mistranslate and misunderstand, and create a religion that centers on 'believing in' Jesus as 'God' for 'salvation' in the afterlife through his atoning work on the cross. So almost everything Jesus was about gets ignored, because his message is considered irrelevant, and only the new theology of believing 'in' him matters. Studying the history of Christian theological teachings across the centuries is kind of depressing as the former gradually morphs into the latter due to an accumulation of novel and errant theological inventions, until we end up with modern evangelicalism which bears almost zero resemblance to original Christianity on any essential matters."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSo every historical document that was not written by an eyewitness, or which contains portions of other written accounts can be tossed out?
Found any evidence that the gospels were circulated in Galilee before Jesus' contemporaries died yet?Last edited by Roy; 04-19-2018, 07:41 AM.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThere were still numerous witnesses around when they were written, meaning if the Gospels and Epistles were simply made up of whole cloth would have been quickly shot down and ignored. This simple concept is far beyond the grasp of Christ Mythers.
Yes, it is possible some early witnesses still existed. But if they were young men/women in their late teens when Jesus died, they would have been 50+ at the time Mark was written, and that's the youngest they could have been. So the most likely scenario is that there was a smattering of old timers when Mark was written who were alive and credible witnesses (e.g., not toddlers) of the events. There would have been even fewer (if any) when Matt/Luke were written, and most likely none when John and Acts were written. The earliest of the Epistles we have is Thessalonians, which dates to around 51 AD, two decades into the life of the early church. Again, it means that any witnesses of Jesus who were old enough to have heard/understood him (let's say 10+?) would be 30+, approaching the life expectancy number.
It seems reasonable to me that, by the time Paul begins writing, the early church is populated more with people who never saw/witnessed Jesus than people who did, especially given the far-flung nature of these communities by the time Paul begins writing (Rome, Thessalonica, Corinthia, Jerusalem, Ephesus, Phillipi, etc.).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 Starlight View PostThere's plenty of Fake News even in the present day. Just because someone somewhere knows the truth, doesn't mean other people elsewhere aren't perfectly capable of writing things that are not true.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 PostSo every historical document that was not written by an eyewitness, or which contains portions of other written accounts can be tossed out? Well then, there goes almost all of recorded human history.
So if you think "there goes almost all of recorded human history" is some kind of Reductio ad absurdum, let me note that I think probably the majority of people would be perfectly willing to embrace that absurdum and toss out all of human history as unobservable to them, and therefore untestable and unverifiable, and thus unbelievable. Getting people to believe even something like the Holocaust which occurred within the lifetime of some people still alive can be an effort at times. Expecting the populace at-large to buy-into the idea of a particular thing happening 2000 years ago, because you have some religious document that says it did, is pretty much a joke. Scientology with their document proclaiming Xenu the alien has about as much of a chance. JimL's "it's all fiction" approach to the NT is not an approach that most historians would agree with, but is incredibly common among the general populace who don't really believe in history in general.
Perhaps it's worth adding that I was recently reading one of Stephen Hawking's books and in it he argued that the implications of current quantum physical theory are that there was no one past or one future. Rather all possible pasts exist in superposition with one another (their possibilities interact), just as all possible futures do. So rather than there being One True History that Really Happened, the present moment was in fact caused by a combination of All Possible Histories. In this view, a statement like "Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical figure" doesn't even have a truth value - it is neither true nor false - it is true in some possible histories and false in other possible histories, and both the histories where he existed and the histories where he didn't have interacted together to create this current moment in time.Last edited by Starlight; 04-19-2018, 08:02 AM."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostSo every historical document that was not written by an eyewitness, or which contains portions of other written accounts can be tossed out? Well then, there goes almost all of recorded human history.
When we apply that same assessment to the biblical narratives, there is some extra-scriptural verification for some elements (e.g., the reign of Herod, etc.). Almost all of the details about the life of Jesus, however, arise from within the same community (the Christian community). So they give us a strong historical view of the beliefs of that community. But there is not enough variation of source to give us high confidence about the details of Jesus' life. And there is reason to think the details should be questioned. When someone writing 38+ years after the events documents exact words spoken, there is reason to consider the possibility that the authors were putting a theology that had seen almost 4 decades of evolution into the mouth of their founder in the form of stories. There is no reason (IMO) to accept as true that an author who was very likely not present for the events would be able to accurately document a conversation between two individuals from four decades before. That is an unreasonable stretch.
And modern studies of how human memory functions suggest it is about as close to impossible as we can get.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 PostIt is not a record of "what actually happened" with respect to Jesus. It is a record of what the early Christian community BELIEVED happened. The gospels were written 38-110 years after the events they purport to record. That's a great deal of time, and provides ample opportunity for a theology to develop. The books were written in the context of that developing theology."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by carpedm9587 View PostI suggest you read the definition again, MM. And this time, include the entire sentence, including "especially."
So exactly which "law of nature" permits a man to bless water and it becomes wine in the casks? Or takes a man three days in the tomb to be resurrected (unless of course, he was never actually dead to begin with).
As far as I know, yes. There is no biological process I know of that would restore an atrophied limb in a human. Some other species perhaps, but not in human biology. I have one.
...or the bible records events that never actually happened...as recorded
We understand much about how those processes work - in those species. They are not part of human biology.
MM, I actually miss some aspects of my Christian faith. There is no more sublime feeling than that of being infinitely loved. No deeper contentment than sitting contemplating my creator in the company thereof. I would welcome the first bonafide miracle that would cause me to rethink my existing beliefs and return to those things. Your post suggests you have little idea what motivates me.
Sorry, but the definition still doesn't help your argument because it does not imply that miracles actually transcend the laws of nature. They might have the appearance of doing so, but they don't actually. Think of it this way: a miracle is simply God operating within natural laws in ways that we don't understand.
And you missed my point regarding atrophied limbs. There are creatures in nature who can restore appendages, or even their entire being without violating the laws of nature, so why would it be a violation of the laws of nature if a human were to do something similar? Just because we don't know or understand how such a process might happen does not mean that it would transcend natural laws.
But I do like the escape hatch you've created for yourself, so that if you're ever in danger of having to concede that the Bible records a plausible miracle, you can simply assert that the record must be false and breath a sigh of relief. Is an impenetrable wall of skepticism really an admirable thing?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 Mountain Man View Post"departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature."
Sorry, but the definition still doesn't help your argument because it does not imply that miracles actually transcend the laws of nature. They might have the appearance of doing so, but they don't actually. Think of it this way: a miracle is simply God operating within natural laws in ways that we don't understand.
The term miracle, which you appear to have shifted to in your response, is a different word. It can mean the results of supernatural action, but it can also mean, "very very unlikely," or "surprising," as in, "it's a miracle that my Uncle won the lottery!"
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostAnd you missed my point regarding atrophied limbs. There are creatures in nature who can restore appendages, or even their entire being without violating the laws of nature, so why would it be a violation of the laws of nature if a human were to do something similar? Just because we don't know or understand how such a process might happen does not mean that it would transcend natural laws.
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostBut I do like the escape hatch you've created for yourself, so that if you're ever in danger of having to concede that the Bible records a plausible miracle, you can simply assert that the record must be false and breath a sigh of relief. Is an impenetrable wall of skepticism really an admirable thing?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 Dimbulb View PostYup. Honestly, most people today are, for pragmatic reasons, what I would call "historical agnostics". History doesn't affect their daily lives, they don't directly experience it, and so find no reason to have any particular belief in the truth or falsity of any historical claims, and tend to be generally skeptical of all historical claims, and tend to lack understanding regarding the methods historians use or what kinds of surviving historical evidence and documents there are. They do this because they have no reason to do otherwise, and no particular reason to spend much effort caring about history, because history does nothing to them if they ignore it.
So if you think "there goes almost all of recorded human history" is some kind of Reductio ad absurdum, let me note that I think probably the majority of people would be perfectly willing to embrace that absurdum and toss out all of human history as unobservable to them, and therefore untestable and unverifiable, and thus unbelievable. Getting people to believe even something like the Holocaust which occurred within the lifetime of some people still alive can be an effort at times. Expecting the populace at-large to buy-into the idea of a particular thing happening 2000 years ago, because you have some religious document that says it did, is pretty much a joke. Scientology with their document proclaiming Xenu the alien has about as much of a chance. JimL's "it's all fiction" approach to the NT is not an approach that most historians would agree with, but is incredibly common among the general populace who don't really believe in history in general.
Perhaps it's worth adding that I was recently reading one of Stephen Hawking's books and in it he argued that the implications of current quantum physical theory are that there was no one past or one future. Rather all possible pasts exist in superposition with one another (their possibilities interact), just as all possible futures do. So rather than there being One True History that Really Happened, the present moment was in fact caused by a combination of All Possible Histories. In this view, a statement like "Jesus of Nazareth was a real historical figure" doesn't even have a truth value - it is neither true nor false - it is true in some possible histories and false in other possible histories, and both the histories where he existed and the histories where he didn't have interacted together to create this current moment in time.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
-
So every historical document that was not written by an eyewitness, or which contains portions of other written accounts can be tossed out?Originally posted by Roy View Post
Found any evidence that the gospels were circulated in Galilee before Jesus' contemporaries died yet?
And I ask again, are you genuinely ignorant of early Christian history and are seeking enlightenment, or are you tossing out an ignorant rhetorical question and don't give a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys about the answer? Because if it's the latter, I'm not wasting my time.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 PostThere are any number of possibilities. 1) They found value in the ideology, enabled by the Jesus myth; 2) they had actually come to believe their own stories to be true (the science of memory tells us this happens a LOT); 3) they had come to identify with their roles within the community; 4) the history of why they died and THAT they died, which is supported by fragments, is inaccurate.
Sparko - we have stories from all over the world of "faith healings," and a huge population of people who believe them - some of them who were actually there. We have precious little evidence of actual healings, and a huge swath of frauds and charlatans. You folks have locked into one possibility: it was all true. I have not dismissed all of the other possibilities because I do not have your "Christian myopia."
I understand the need for you to find some way to rationalize it away Carp. Otherwise you have to admit Jesus was who he said he was.
I'm not trying to "prove" anything, Sparko. I can't. Neither can you. We have fragmentary history, written well after the events they purport, by authors unknown (with the possible exception of Paul's letters). You accept one interpretation as "the truth." You are free to do so. I look at it in the light of modern discoveries about memory, human psychology, historical methodology, and conclude, "we cannot know it is true." When I look at it in light of all other religions, as well as what natural science has taught us, I conclude, "it's most likely not true."
You have to come to your own conclusions. You clearly have - but how you got to them (at least what you've shared) I do not find compelling. ergo, I don't have those views.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostOr they could have become greedy and corrupt, and continued with the lie, growing it over time until their sect became dangerous and/or unstable, and either external pressure or internal politics led to violence and arrest, murder and betrayal, imprisonment and execution.
Joseph Smith could have gone back to his old life, but he was killed in a jail cell.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostRaising people from the dead is a bit different from fake faith healings. Especially after there was a funeral and burial of someone who died of sickness. These people were not idiots. And then there was Jesus himself, crucified and raised from the dead. Kinda hard to fake that.
I understand the need for you to find some way to rationalize it away Carp. Otherwise you have to admit Jesus was who he said he was.
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou made certain claims about what "happened" based on nothing but your own conjecture and expect that to refute actual written documents and 2000 years of history. Without any evidence. Sorry but that doesn't cut it. Your conjectures are no more valid than some kook who claims Jesus was an alien who was taken back aboard the mothership.
So you can call it "evidence you do not accept," but the claim that it is "no evidence" is simply false. It is evidence I find compelling, and you do not. That much appears to be true.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
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Sparko, 06-25-2024, 03:03 PM
|
37 responses
189 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 03:12 AM | ||
Started by Cow Poke, 06-20-2024, 10:04 AM
|
27 responses
147 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
06-27-2024, 01:35 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 06-18-2024, 08:18 AM
|
82 responses
481 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-28-2024, 03:48 AM | ||
Started by whag, 06-15-2024, 09:43 AM
|
156 responses
645 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 06:38 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
468 responses
2,142 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-05-2024, 04:09 AM |
Comment