Atheist here (Ask me anything)

[Tinker Grey]

I have reviewed all the evidence that is available to me. None of it is convincing.

And if it is an opinion ... so what? Is it not reasonable that if one finds the evidence unconvincing to continue to lack belief in the proposition?

Surely, the default should not be to accept every outlandish proposition that comes down the pike merely because one cannot conclusively disprove it.

As to whether "loving my family" could be a comparable thing: It is not. The difference is that love is a common human experience for which on average we agree what it looks like. There are implicit conventions of understanding what love is and what it means and what it looks like. If you were to refuse all evidence that is consistent with general understanding, we would be justified in wondering whether you were sociopathic.

There are no such conventions for gods. There is, however, a very large question of what sorts of evidence should one accept as valid when considering the existence of gods.

 

[Max3k]

Do you believe George Washington existed?

 

[CoderHead]

I believe there is enough reliable, documented historical evidence of George Washington's existence, yes.

 

[Max3k]

Based upon documented historical evidence. Consider the following;


Flavius Josephus (37-101 A.D.) was a Jewish priest at the time of the Jewish Revolt of A.D. 66. He was captured by the Romans, imprisoned, set free and then retired to Rome where he wrote a history of the Revolt called the "Jewish War." Later he wrote "Antiquities" as a history of the Jews.

Following is a brief listing of some people and places mentioned by Josephus that correspond to biblical references. They demonstrate that the Bible is not alone in its description of people, events, and places.

1. Antipas mentioned
   1. 17:8:1, "And now Herod altered his testament upon the alteration of his mind; for he appointed Antipas, to whom he had before left the kingdom, to be tetrarch of Galilee and Berea, and granted the kingdom to Archelaus."
      1. Rev. 2:13, "‘I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is; and you hold fast My name, and did not deny My faith, even in the days of Antipas, My witness, My faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells."
2. Herod is mentioned numerous times
   1. 17:8:1, "And now Herod altered his testament upon the alteration of his mind..."
   2. 18.5.3, "Whereupon he ordered the army to march along the Great Plain, while he himself, with Herod the tetrarch, and his friends, went up to Jerusalem to offer sacrifice to God, an ancient festival of the Jews being then just approaching."
   3. See also, 18:2:1,2,3; 18:4:3,5,6; 18:5:1,2,3; 18:7:2, etc.
      1. Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene."
3. The Galatians are mentioned
   1. 17:8:3, "First of all went his guards, then the band of Thracians, and after them the Germans; and next the band of Galatians, every one in their habiliments of war."
   2. 12:10:6, "And when he was dead, the people bestowed the high priesthood on Judas; who, hearing of the power of the Romans, d and that they had conquered in war Galatia, and Iberia, and Carthage, and Lybia."
      1. Gal. 1:2, "and all the brethren who are with me, to the churches of Galatia."
4. Jericho mentioned
   1. 17:8:2, "...when Salome and Alexas gathered the soldiery together in the amphitheater at Jericho..."
      1. Num. 22:1, "And the children of Israel journeyed, and encamped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho."
5. Jerusalem is mentioned
   1. 20:9:2, "Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem..."
      1. Matt. 21:10-11, "And when He had entered Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying, "Who is this?" 11 And the multitudes were saying, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee."
6. Jesus is mentioned
   1. 18:3:3, "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."
   2. 20:9:1, "Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done;"1
7. Judea is mentioned
   1. 20:9:1, "AND now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator."
   2. See also, 20:1:1; 20:5:1,2,3; 20:6:1,2; 20:7:1,2; 20:8:5,10; 20:11:1; etc.
      1. Matt. 2:1, "Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem..."
8. John the Baptist is mentioned
   1. 18.5.2 Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and was a very just punishment for what he did against John called the Baptist [the dipper]. For Herod had him killed, although he was a good man and had urged the Jews to exert themselves to virtue, both as to justice toward one another and reverence towards
      1. Matt. 3:1-2, "Now in those days John the Baptist *came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, 2"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
9. Pontius Pilate is mentioned
   1. 18:3:1, "But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem, to take their winter quarters there, in order to abolish the Jewish laws."
   2. See also, 18:3:1,2,3; 18:4:1,2,5, etc.
      1. Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene."
10. Sadducees mentioned
    1. 20:9:1, "But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees."
       1. Matt. 16:1, "And the Pharisees and Sadducees came up, and testing Him asked Him to show them a sign from heaven."
11. The Samaritans are mentioned
    1. 18:4:1, "But the nation of the Samaritans did not escape without tumults."
       1. Luke 10:33,
       2. "But a certain Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion."
12. Tiberius Ceasar is mentioned
    1. 18.6.4, "And now Agrippa was come to Puteoli, whence he wrote a letter to Tiberius Caesar, who then lived at Capreae, and told him that he was come so far in order to wait on him, and to pay him a visit; and desired that he would give him leave to come over to Caprein."
       1. Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene."

There are many other such references. But what they do is help to establish that the Bible was not written in isolation. It was written in the context of ancient Israel when and where it claims to have been written. This is important when authenticating the Bible and this is why external references are sometimes useful. In this case, Josephus who was a contemporary of the disciples, is referenced in support of biblical accuracy

 

[Wicked Willow]

Max3k, please stop and think about what you're writing here.

Should anybody be impressed by the fact that the Biblical writings reference historical persons and places rather than made-up ones???

I mean, "Jerusalem is mentioned"? Well, duh! Now THAT clearly proves that Jesus rose from the dead and turned out to be God Incarnate!

The *only* relevant passage in that body of text is the one about Jesus - and that one spells "forgery" in BIG RED CAPITAL LETTERS: Josephus was a JEW, *not* a Christian. As such, he did not believe that Jesus was the messiah (gk. "christos"), and would not have called him such. The whole style of the passage reads like an insertion, a case of pious fraud. I mean: "if it be lawful to call him a man"... Can you really picture a pious Jew writing that kind of stuff about a sectarian leader whom he perceived as a false messiah?

 

[Skeptic90]

Atheism is an intellectual position. What reasons do you have for holding that position? Your reasons are based upon logic and/or evidence or lack of it. So, is there any reason/evidence for you holding your position that you defend?

Well in other words, what evidence do I have against god existence? The answer is I don't, as well as you don't have evidence for the existence of god. So from the lack of evidence I do not believe. Same way you don't believe in other gods or the tooth fairy or the power rangers. Sure they could be real, I could one day stumble upon a care bear, but the reality is I doubt that they even exist because I do not have any evidence for believing in such supernatural creatures/deities.

What logic, well simple deductive logic. Because I don't know, I remain skeptical. Well there is more logic than this that I can go for days talking about.

 

[CoderHead]

Following is a brief listing of some people and places mentioned by Josephus that correspond to biblical references. They demonstrate that the Bible is not alone in its description of people, events, and places.

I think Willow already pointed out the flaws in this argument sufficiently, but I want it to be said that a great number of fictional works reference actual places and people. It doesn't make them true.

 

[Skeptic90]

But where is the evidence to disprove there is a God? Without evidence it is merely opinion.

Exactly. A weak one that is. The burden of evidence doesn't lie with us, it lies with the ones that believe it to be true. Its like saying that I hold a million dollars in my pocket, because you can't prove me wrong, therefore I am right.

 

[Skeptic90]

Do you believe George Washington existed?

Yes I do believe that he existed, we have 1st hand reports and even things that he himself wrote on. Do you believe in mormon jesus? or do you believe that Joseph smith told the truth? All I believe is what we can encompass in the natural. Son of god and such things like that I put in the 'supernatural' category along with everything else that lacks evidence, overwhelming.

 

[Skeptic90]

Based upon documented historical evidence. Consider the following;


Flavius Josephus (37-101 A.D.) was a Jewish priest at the time of the Jewish Revolt of A.D. 66. He was captured by the Romans, imprisoned, set free and then retired to Rome where he wrote a history of the Revolt called the "Jewish War." Later he wrote "Antiquities" as a history of the Jews.

Following is a brief listing of some people and places mentioned by Josephus that correspond to biblical references. They demonstrate that the Bible is not alone in its description of people, events, and places.

1. Antipas mentioned
   1. 17:8:1, "And now Herod altered his testament upon the alteration of his mind; for he appointed Antipas, to whom he had before left the kingdom, to be tetrarch of Galilee and Berea, and granted the kingdom to Archelaus."
      1. Rev. 2:13, "‘I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is; and you hold fast My name, and did not deny My faith, even in the days of Antipas, My witness, My faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells."
2. Herod is mentioned numerous times
   1. 17:8:1, "And now Herod altered his testament upon the alteration of his mind..."
   2. 18.5.3, "Whereupon he ordered the army to march along the Great Plain, while he himself, with Herod the tetrarch, and his friends, went up to Jerusalem to offer sacrifice to God, an ancient festival of the Jews being then just approaching."
   3. See also, 18:2:1,2,3; 18:4:3,5,6; 18:5:1,2,3; 18:7:2, etc.
      1. Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene."
3. The Galatians are mentioned
   1. 17:8:3, "First of all went his guards, then the band of Thracians, and after them the Germans; and next the band of Galatians, every one in their habiliments of war."
   2. 12:10:6, "And when he was dead, the people bestowed the high priesthood on Judas; who, hearing of the power of the Romans, d and that they had conquered in war Galatia, and Iberia, and Carthage, and Lybia."
      1. Gal. 1:2, "and all the brethren who are with me, to the churches of Galatia."
4. Jericho mentioned
   1. 17:8:2, "...when Salome and Alexas gathered the soldiery together in the amphitheater at Jericho..."
      1. Num. 22:1, "And the children of Israel journeyed, and encamped in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho."
5. Jerusalem is mentioned
   1. 20:9:2, "Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem..."
      1. Matt. 21:10-11, "And when He had entered Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying, "Who is this?" 11 And the multitudes were saying, "This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee."
6. Jesus is mentioned
   1. 18:3:3, "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."
   2. 20:9:1, "Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done;"1
7. Judea is mentioned
   1. 20:9:1, "AND now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator."
   2. See also, 20:1:1; 20:5:1,2,3; 20:6:1,2; 20:7:1,2; 20:8:5,10; 20:11:1; etc.
      1. Matt. 2:1, "Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem..."
8. John the Baptist is mentioned
   1. 18.5.2 Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and was a very just punishment for what he did against John called the Baptist [the dipper]. For Herod had him killed, although he was a good man and had urged the Jews to exert themselves to virtue, both as to justice toward one another and reverence towards
      1. Matt. 3:1-2, "Now in those days John the Baptist *came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, 2"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
9. Pontius Pilate is mentioned
   1. 18:3:1, "But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem, to take their winter quarters there, in order to abolish the Jewish laws."
   2. See also, 18:3:1,2,3; 18:4:1,2,5, etc.
      1. Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene."
10. Sadducees mentioned
    1. 20:9:1, "But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees."
       1. Matt. 16:1, "And the Pharisees and Sadducees came up, and testing Him asked Him to show them a sign from heaven."
11. The Samaritans are mentioned
    1. 18:4:1, "But the nation of the Samaritans did not escape without tumults."
       1. Luke 10:33,
       2. "But a certain Samaritan, who was on a journey, came upon him; and when he saw him, he felt compassion."
12. Tiberius Ceasar is mentioned
    1. 18.6.4, "And now Agrippa was come to Puteoli, whence he wrote a letter to Tiberius Caesar, who then lived at Capreae, and told him that he was come so far in order to wait on him, and to pay him a visit; and desired that he would give him leave to come over to Caprein."
       1. Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip was tetrarch of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene."

There are many other such references. But what they do is help to establish that the Bible was not written in isolation. It was written in the context of ancient Israel when and where it claims to have been written. This is important when authenticating the Bible and this is why external references are sometimes useful. In this case, Josephus who was a contemporary of the disciples, is referenced in support of biblical accuracy

To me as a non believer see this as someone siting things from their favorite fictional story. Like a guy citing from some star wars novels. Well I have to get back to class and get to studying for the next 3 hours.

 

[Janser]

Based upon documented historical evidence. Consider the following;

Please read it above.

There are many other such references. But what they do is help to establish that the Bible was not written in isolation. It was written in the context of ancient Israel when and where it claims to have been written. This is important when authenticating the Bible and this is why external references are sometimes useful. In this case, Josephus who was a contemporary of the disciples, is referenced in support of biblical accuracy

We could do the same with any one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle books about Sherlock Holmes would that mean Sherlock Holmes was a real person?
pretty well everywhere mentioned in the books are real places which only proves that Conan Doyle knew of or had heard of these places and nothing more.

 

[ephraimanesti]

ABBA'S FOOL,
ephraim

 

[Janser]

MY DEAR FRIEND,
What? Look at your atheist icon with the darkened-in brain area--representing what?

Above and beyond that, however, isn't a denial of the existence of THE Light the ultimate darkness?

S o o o o . . . you could retaliate perhaps and tongue-in-cheekly refer to theists as "light clutchers" or perhaps "illumination addicts." That would be rather harsh, but O.K., whatever--just so you don't cross the line and refer to Christians as "collectors of bright stuff."

This is a Christian Forum so Christians can and do call Atheists anything they want because an Atheist is an individual and not part of a collective.

 

[Eudaimonist]

What? Look at your atheist icon with the darkened-in brain area--representing what?

Representing grey matter. Neurons. What else?

Atheist posters often come across as brainy, and demand rational arguments and evidence for the existence of God, so that symbol seems to fit well enough.

Personally, I would have preferred a light bulb, brightly lighted, as a symbol, but no one listens to poor Zathras, no.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Wicked Willow]

I think Willow already pointed out the flaws in this argument sufficiently, but I want it to be said that a great number of fictional works reference actual places and people. It doesn't make them true.

Yes. While I'd suggest that we can all agree on the fact that the Biblical writings are devotional rather than fictional in nature, works of fiction *do* reference historical places, people, and events - and can thus serve to illustrate why pointing to the fact that the NT mentions Jerusalem and the Galatians is not really much of an argument.

Case in point: think of a fictional work like "Shakespeare in Love". It not only references historical places, events, and persons - it actually puts them in the starring roles. London, The Globe, The Rose, Stratford, Christopher Marlowe and his untimely demise in a pub brawl, "Romeo and Juliet", Shakespeare, the Lord Chamberlain's Men, theatres being closed down because of the plague...

Still, it would be preposterous to assume that the historical Shakespeare bore too much resemblance to the character played by Joseph Fiennes.

The same, I claim, applies to the historical Jesus, for even though the NT-writings weren't meant to be fictions, they were written by avid sectarians trying to establish the veracity of their fledgling religion. Tales grew in the telling, an executed leader became a birth-death-rebirth deity - and before long, you had Christianity.

 

[Dragons87]

Ooh...I think once this question of whether Jesus existed comes up, we have to question our claims that of the existence of many historical figures, especially those before the middle ages.

I think Socrates is a case in point. He wrote nothing down, and all that we know of him is what Plato and others wrote about him, but Plato's "The Republic" seems to be a fictionalised account. But somehow we credit Socrates as the father of western philosophy.

I'm not saying that that somehow proves that Jesus is historical. I'm only saying that there is a very slippery slope ahead. If one believes that Jesus is fictional despite all the accounts, they must be prepared to defend their corner for their belief in other, "proven" historical figures.

But in some ways, this is unnecessary, and I accept that. Julius Caesar, for example, doesn't claim to affect people in the future. So whether he existed or not is not that big of a problem for us. Whereas the existence of Jesus, who claims to have a universal and timeless impact on people, is much more contentious because of his claims. But I hope to propose that it is not the lack or abundance of historical evidence that makes the historicity of Jesus so important, but because of the controversy of his claims. If he existed, and he made those comments, he may well affect us today.

At the end of the day, unless we see the characters, or their biographers, appear and explain to us, what we are going to have is only guesswork. That leaves room for individual judgment.

 

[Wicked Willow]

Ooh...I think once this question of whether Jesus existed comes up, we have to question our claims that of the existence of many historical figures, especially those before the middle ages.

I think Socrates is a case in point. He wrote nothing down, and all that we know of him is what Plato and others wrote about him, but Plato's "The Republic" seems to be a fictionalised account. But somehow we credit Socrates as the father of western philosophy.

I'm not saying that that somehow proves that Jesus is historical. I'm only saying that there is a very slippery slope ahead. If one believes that Jesus is fictional despite all the accounts, they must be prepared to defend their corner for their belief in other, "proven" historical figures.

But in some ways, this is unnecessary, and I accept that. Julius Caesar, for example, doesn't claim to affect people in the future. So whether he existed or not is not that big of a problem for us. Whereas the existence of Jesus, who claims to have a universal and timeless impact on people, is much more contentious because of his claims. But I hope to propose that it is not the lack or abundance of historical evidence that makes the historicity of Jesus so important, but because of the controversy of his claims. If he existed, and he made those comments, he may well affect us today.

At the end of the day, unless we see the characters, or their biographers, appear and explain to us, what we are going to have is only guesswork. That leaves room for individual judgment.

Do you distinguish between Jesus and other religious figures in that regard?

Did Siddharta Gautama exist? If so, did little white blossoms sprout in his footsteps? Was he able to walk and talk right after he was born? Did he battle a demon king while verging on the edge of enlightenment, sitting under the Bodhi tree?

Did Muhammad exist? If so, did he travel to Jerusalem (and hence to the heavens) in a single night, on the back of a miracle steed? Did he write down the Word of God, as dictated by the archangel Gabriel?

Did Lao-Tzu exist? If so, was he conceived when his mother gazed upon a falling star, stayed in the womb for sixty-two years, and was born when his mother leaned against a plum tree? Did he live to be nine hundred and ninety years, and travel to India to teach the Dao?

In all of these cases, I would not dispute the historicity of the persons themselves - only of the miraculous claims made about them by pious followers who tried to establish the veracity of their new religion.
You, on the other hand, seem to subscribe to a certain double standard.

 

[Dragons87]

Do you distinguish between Jesus and other religious figures in that regard?

Did Siddharta Gautama exist? If so, did little white blossoms sprout in his footsteps? Was he able to walk and talk right after he was born? Did he battle a demon king while verging on the edge of enlightenment, sitting under the Bodhi tree?

Did Muhammad exist? If so, did he travel to Jerusalem (and hence to the heavens) in a single night, on the back of a miracle steed? Did he write down the Word of God, as dictated by the archangel Gabriel?

Did Lao-Tzu exist? If so, was he conceived when his mother gazed upon a falling star, stayed in the womb for sixty-two years, and was born when his mother leaned against a plum tree? Did he live to be nine hundred and ninety years, and travel to India to teach the Dao?

In all of these cases, I would not dispute the historicity of the persons themselves - only of the miraculous claims made about them by pious followers who tried to establish the veracity of their new religion.

They could have. I don't deny the possibilities. Do you?

You, on the other hand, seem to subscribe to a certain double standard.

Based on my answer, your accusation is spurious, unfair and unnecessary.

 

[Wicked Willow]

They could have. I don't deny the possibilities. Do you?

Well, the possibilities range within the same part of the probability spectrum as UFO-abductions, Joe Smith's Golden Plates from the pre-columbian American Jewish colony, or evil Emperor Xemu's body thetan gatherers.

Not completely impossible, but unlikely and spurious enough to merit a sense of healthy skepticism.

Based on my answer, your accusation is spurious, unfair and unnecessary.

Reading over it once more, I'd agree - and apologize.

 

[ephraimanesti]

This is a Christian Forum so Christians can and do call Atheists anything they want because an Atheist is an individual and not part of a collective.

Yes, i am starting to see this. Perhaps you can teach an old dog new tricks!

Will do my best to clean up my act!

THANKS,
ephraim