Users Online Now:
GLP Poker Rooms
Donate To GLP
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Thread for Atheists & Christians - STFU
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Don'tBeAfraid:MV8yMTI2NzkzXzM1OTE3ODEzX0Y0NjRFQ0E4] [quote:Anonymous Coward 33254054:MV8yMTI2NzkzXzM1OTE3NzA0Xzc4NDcwRjc3] [quote:Anonymous Coward 1518033:MV8yMTI2NzkzXzM1ODkxMTA0X0EyOERCNDdE] Atheists and Christians usually don't argue specifically if there is a God or there is not a God on this newsgroup. We usually argue if Jesus Christ existed at all and if Jesus Christ is God. We argue if the current cannoized Christian Bible is with error or completely without error. Since the Bible is full of contradictions, we know for a fact that it is with error. Did Judas hang himself or did he fall to his death? A Christian appologist might say that he hanged and when he was cut down, his guts burst out. People who believe that the Bible is without error constantly make these kind of contrived appologies. One appology might seem o.k., but when Christians make thousands of appologies trying to say that the Bible is without error and says the same thing, then they are lying to themselves and to us. Now God is a subjective thing. I can worship breasts and bottoms and money. God to many people is a person that has never lied and a person who hates slavery. Well we know from the Bible that Jesus lied. John 7:8-10. A Christian appologist would say he just changed his mind. "but as it were in secret" is pretty deceptive for God. Jesus also said beat slaves even though the slaves didn't know they were doing wrong. Luke 12:47-48. A Christian appologist would say that it is just a parable, a story. But a story teaches, and Jesus was teaching slavery. If he was God, the kind of God I would worship, he would say, free your slaves. Jesus Christ was never even mentioned together before 325 a.d. Jesus wasn't even a person's name before then. In fact, we do know who wrote several parts of the Bible because we can study early versions of it and see how it changed. We can learn a lot of things by what was mentioned early on and what wasn't. For example, the entire New Testament and Christianity is based on Revelation, a book on Astrology by Apollonius, which was never meant to be publically read. We know that Lucius Plutarchus who was a very famous Roman and royal historian, was the original Luke of the Bible because both men have the same personal history, born in the same town, died in the same place. We know that the travels of Paul (Apollonius) were really the conquest paths of Titus. And we know that the religion of Mythras later was turned into the religion of Christianity. [/quote] You are correct. Suggested reading The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur. [/quote] Some of that is rather silly and not supported by historical evidence. There have been Christians (Christ-followers) since the time of Jesus, and reading the fragment called the Magdelene document which is a portion of Mark, as well very early copies of Paul's letters show that it was written within 50 years of Jesus' death and ressurection. http://www.bib-arch.org/online-exclusives/dead-sea-scrolls-13.asp "On December 24, 1994, the Times of London ran a front-page story entitled “Oxford papyrus is ‘eyewitness record of the life of Christ.’” The article reported the claim that three papyrus fragments of Matthew’s Gospel in Magdalen College, Oxford, date to the mid-first century C.E. Instead of having been written a generation or more after Jesus’ death, as is—or was—the scholarly consensus, Matthew’s Gospel was written within a decade or so of the crucifixion by someone who was there at the time, so the article said. This, of course, would indeed be astounding and worthy of the treatment the Times gave it. “Not since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947,” the story continued, “has there been such a potentially important breakthrough in biblical scholarship.” The newspaper devoted nearly two full pages to the story, including an editorial that likened the alleged new discovery not only to finding the Dead Sea Scrolls, but also to Howard Carter’s discovery of Tutankhamun’s treasures and to Schliemann’s location of Troy. Two days later, the Times included an extended interview with Dr. Carsten Thiede of Paderborn, Germany, on whose scholarship this claim is based. Thiede’s claims are threefold. First, Matthew’s Gospel is an eyewitness account of the life and teaching of Jesus—so today’s Bible scholars (who date it to about 80 C.E.) are wrong, and the early church fathers were right after all. Second, at the time Matthew was written the formal separation of Christianity and Judaism had not yet occurred. Third, “Recognition of Christ’s divinity was made before the end of classical Judaism in 70 C.E.” The earliest known texts of the Pauline letters is ~50AD http://www.systematicchristianity.org/TheLettersOfPaul.htm "Dating the Letters It is likely that Paul did not write many letters until the beginning of his second missionary journey in A.D. 49. There would not be much point in writing letters until he was already somewhat well traveled, and had people to write to. [b][color=green]The oldest letter that we have is 1 Thessalonians, and it was written around A.D. 49-51.[/color][/b] He continued writing letters up until his death in A.D. 67, so we have a range of A.D. 49-67 for all of his letters. Attempting to date the letters more accurately is like putting together an intricate puzzle that is missing many of the pieces. Some letters can be dated fairly precisely, such as 1 Thessalonians, and others not so much. I give the most probable dates of the letters below. Because of the arguments' length, their peripheral relevance to this book, and their tendency to put people to sleep, I do not put them here, but only give a very brief outline. For the full arguments, see the introductions mentioned above. They give slightly different dates, because they did not use Finegan as the source for the chronology of Paul's life." [/quote]
Let's get right to it.
No one can prove that "God" or any variation thereof the concept is real.
No one can prove that "God" or any variation thereof the concept is NOT real.
All arguments are moot without assuming a "given".
How can I say all this with certainty?
BECAUSE NO ONE CAN PROVE THAT THEY'RE NOT DREAMING RIGHT NOW, with fabricated memories and all.
No matter what, FAITH is required just to participate in whatever you think is reality.
Both atheists and God-believers base their beliefs on FAITH in experiential data.
A true atheist "lacks a belief" and that is a perfectly honest position to hold. However, the rabid atheists who argue endlessly that "there is no God" are taking the same leap of faith that the proselytizing Christians are.
SO--is there a GOD?
My experiential data (a near-death experience that was seemingly as "real" as anything else I've experienced) says YES.
That's why I believe in God.
But I'd be a liar if I said that my NDE provides "proof"--even to myself. After all, my dreams are as "real" as anything even when I'm walking on the ceiling and lightsaber fighting and flying a MIG--all with a head full of outlandish memories.
So...all of you know-it-alls arguing FOR or AGAINST the concept of "God" need to
because your arguments ARE DEMONSTRABLY FLAWED.
Pictures (click to insert)
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Misc Small Smilies
View All Categories
Next Page >>
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
with questions or comments about this site.
"Godlike Productions" & "GLP" are registered trademarks of Zero Point Ltd. Godlike™
Website Design Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Godlikeproductions.com
Page generated in 0.005s (5 queries)