From Christian to Atheist. Your thoughts?

[Heatios]

They have historical accounts, but work for which things in the account are accurate. The Gospels are four testimonial accounts, so that is corroborating evidence, as well as facts that can be independently confirmed.

What is extraordinary evidence? Does it glow?

The facts cannot be confirmed, yes they can be confirmed that they are said to be true, not that they are.

Extraordinary evidence is the biproduct of what's required for an extraordinary claim such as god existing, which is what it is, because it is the highest level claim of existence in the universe, you are claiming something exists outside the universe, if that's not extraordinary, I don't know what is, extraordinary evidence is the large amount of evidence it would take in order to consider this extraordinary claim as true.

 

[Soyeong]

The facts cannot be confirmed, yes they can be confirmed that they are said to be true, not that they are.

Extraordinary evidence is the biproduct of what's required for an extraordinary claim such as god existing, which is what it is, because it is the highest level claim of existence in the universe, you are claiming something exists outside the universe, if that's not extraordinary, I don't know what is, extraordinary evidence is the large amount of evidence it would take in order to consider this extraordinary claim as true.

There are all sorts of facts about the land that can be verified, even something as simple as an account incidentally noting that there was much grass (John 6:10) has been verified by looking at precipitation charts for that area during that season.

The problem with that phrase is that it is completely nebulous as to what it looks like. It is the ultimate cover for moving goalposts around as you please. "Nope that evidence doesn't fly around, so it is not extraordinary enough." You might as well say that any claim requires what you personally deem to be sufficient evidence before you will be believe it, but that's not really saying much and isn't quite as catchy.

 

[Heatios]

There are all sorts of facts about the land that can be verified, even something as simple as an account incidentally noting that there was much grass (John 6:10) has been verified by looking at precipitation charts for that area during that season.

The problem with that phrase is that it is completely nebulous as to what it looks like. It is the ultimate cover for moving goalposts around as you please. "Nope that evidence doesn't fly around, so it is not extraordinary enough." You might as well say that any claim requires what you personally deem to be sufficient evidence before you will be believe it, but that's not really saying much and isn't quite as catchy.

Grass? Oh no way dude, it's not like the book was written by people or anything, who could actually see grass. Wow, didn't know there was so much evidence.

 

[blessedbethyname101]

To the OP, no one is stopping you from finding out the facts about Jesus' existence from other records besides the Bible. If you come across in history another a figure like Jesus who came to save mankind, performed miracles, was crucified, rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven, please tell me about it. Until then, you are just stating that you don't believe because of your past experiences with others about forcing you to believe in Christianity and not allowing you to make the decision to accept on your own. I don't blindly follow the Bible word-for-word either.

For example,Deuteronomy 22 states that " 5 A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this." Well, I happen to wear pants not dresses like the old times. Also, Peter 3 Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— 4 but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious. Well, I sometimes have braided my hair and worn some gold jewlery etc.

I don't know of anybody who follows the Bible word-for-word anymore. There might be, but I don't. Does this make me less of a Christian in God's eyes? I don't think so.

The Bible is the Word. "Jews and Christians consider the books of the Bible to be a product of divine inspiration or an authoritative record of the relationship between God and humans. wikipedia.com

Many within Christian fundamentalism – as well as much of Orthodox Judaism—strongly support the idea that the Bible is a historically accurate record of actual events and a primary source of moral guidance. wikipedia.com

Again, the Bible is a moral guide based on historical events.

God bless!

 

[Soyeong]

Grass? Oh no way dude, it's not like the book was written by people or anything, who could actually see grass. Wow, didn't know there was so much evidence.

Corroborating evidence anything that supports the narrative, so if the narrative claims there was much grass and we can support that claim, then that is one example of corroborating evidence. The Gospel accounts contain many other minor details that have been independently confirmed, which would have been very easy for someone writing outside the land and making it up to have gotten wrong.

Here's another example:

Luke 19:1-4 He entered Jericho and was passing through. 2 And behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector and was rich. 3 And he was seeking to see who Jesus was, but on account of the crowd he could not, because he was small in stature. 4 So he ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see him, for he was about to pass that way.

So the question is...were there sycamore trees in Jericho during that time? Someone who hadn't been to Jericho or spoken to someone who had been there wouldn't have known whether there were. Someone writing outside the land might not have even known what a sycamore tree was.

Something that would have been even harder to get right is the use of names. If you were making up a story that used 100 personal names and took place 100 years ago in a different country, what are the chances that the names you picked would be representative of the actual types of names used and their frequency? Could you even do that for a modern story written in your own country? The types and frequency of names changes over time and our perception of which names are popular is often skewed. The pattern of names of 1st century Jews in Egypt is very different from the pattern of names of 1st century Jews in Palestine. Names are also one of the hardest things to remember, so the fact that the Gospels all get this pattern right as well as other minor details is strong corroborative evidence that we have high quality eyewitness accounts. They were able to accurately recall minor details so how much do you think that they were able to recall the major details right?

If you look at the apocryphal gospels, the amount of detail about the land is night and day, so they actually serve as a baseline for what something that was written much later and removed from the events it narrates would look like.

 

[Heatios]

Corroborating evidence anything that supports the narrative, so if the narrative claims there was much grass and we can support that claim, then that is one example of corroborating evidence. The Gospel accounts contain many other minor details that have been independently confirmed, which would have been very easy for someone writing outside the land and making it up to have gotten wrong.

Here's another example:

Luke 19:1-4 He entered Jericho and was passing through. 2 And behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus. He was a chief tax collector and was rich. 3 And he was seeking to see who Jesus was, but on account of the crowd he could not, because he was small in stature. 4 So he ran on ahead and climbed up into a sycamore tree to see him, for he was about to pass that way.

So the question is...were there sycamore trees in Jericho during that time? Someone who hadn't been to Jericho or spoken to someone who had been there wouldn't have known whether there were. Someone writing outside the land might not have even known what a sycamore tree was.

Something that would have been even harder to get right is the use of names. If you were making up a story that used 100 personal names and took place 100 years ago in a different country, what are the chances that the names you picked would be representative of the actual types of names used and their frequency? Could you even do that for a modern story written in your own country? The types and frequency of names changes over time and our perception of which names are popular is often skewed. The pattern of names of 1st century Jews in Egypt is very different from the pattern of names of 1st century Jews in Palestine. Names are also one of the hardest things to remember, so the fact that the Gospels all get this pattern right as well as other minor details is strong corroborative evidence that we have high quality eyewitness accounts. They were able to accurately recall minor details so how much do you think that they were able to recall the major details right?

Alright you've obviously reached a misunderstanding, which may be a fault on my part.

I am not claiming that the Bible is entirely fictional, no, nothing of the sort. I am claiming that it is a collection of events, some are in fact true, lots of names of places, names of people, the people who wrote this book were not, in my opinion, in on this whole giant prank, conspiring together in order to create this fictional book thinking these "Dumb people" would buy it, no. I do however believe, and it has been proven that, a large majority of the events as described in the bible are fictional, as well there are a lot of attributes, rules, simply borrowed from other religions. This is true in many cases, there is actually a relatively good case to be made that Jesus could very well have never existed, although a large majority of scholars, as well as myself do believe he was in fact a real person. Here's an example, that I made a while ago, showing the incredible similarities in the attributes of Jesus as described in the bible, from ancient religions dating back way before the NT was written, or Jesus ever existed.

However, tying back to the original point, I think you are misunderstood, as I do believe there are large sections in the bible that are completely factual, I am not making the mistake of saying "The entire bible is simply fiction", however wherever these factual passages are, there is much more than the equivalent, of simply what I believe is fiction, just as there are large non-fiction passages, large fiction passages as well.

 

[myarogancewasblottedout]

early teens I was. That was until I started studying science.
just ignore facts and common sense?

(Sorry about the grammar I like science not English)

I shall try to explain this for you , bear in mind that Jesus asked http://www.biblehub.com/matthew/6-6.htm
and Jesus said this Mark 13:26.

Science A.K.A senses is the human experience of the world around them.
Science is taught by governments for the sole reason of educating Working (slaves) to pay tax. (circular support of science for government and government for science).

calculus (science) asks you to 'neglect' 1/infinity.
[When the man called Jesus a "good teacher", Jesus Christ replied "why call thou me good, there is only 1 that is good, that is God"]
Calculus was invented to explain gravity's acceleration (9.8m/s/s) as a relationship to speed.
Gravity is very much like the human trait of Jealousy , where the small planet desires to be where the larger planet is. (this gravity-thought is a side thought, if you are all in this conspiracy against truth of Christianity. Exodus 34:2 . because isn't 9.8 very close to 10, which is same as 10 commandments.)

Ok, so Calculus deals with 2-dimensional areas and 1-dimensional lines, or 3 dimensional volumes.
So what is the fourth dimension? http://www.biblehub.com/genesis/1-14.htm lets have a look at this fourth day.
dimensions are used for what in science? to define how something exists.

Fifth day is ocean's life such as fish and birds in the air. Fifth dimension is alternate futures. for instance if you toss a coin and choose to move east on heads of west on tails, 2 futures exist at the coin toss.
For the oceans under siege by human activity, this is the realm of hope for blessings and conservation. please consider http://www.google.com/search?q=aquaponics+fish+stocking if you want to earn a million dollars.
God Is good God of existance.

Sixth day is then the plans.
and then there is 10 commandments Exodus 20 which defines the 7th day.
Deuteronomy 6:9

So try be faithful , protect the lord Jesus . Bless the Gentile Eternal God, please desist from cursing or doing the devil service, and just Bless our Immortal Jesus's Eternal Father in your prayers and go occupy your mind on that which you love. (

I suggest reading http://www.biblehub.com/proverbs/1.htm every day so you can marry for life the wife of your youth .

s

take it easy.

 

[Heatios]

I shall try to explain this for you , bear in mind that Jesus asked http://www.biblehub.com/matthew/6-6.htm
and Jesus said this Mark 13:26.

Science A.K.A senses is the human experience of the world around them.
Science is taught by governments for the sole reason of educating Working (slaves) to pay tax. (circular support of science for government and government for science).

Science is taught by gov. for the sole reason of educating the working class to pay tax?

What are you even talking about. You see, this is what religion does, it creates this unfounded distrust in science, for no reason. Look around you, are you sitting in a chair? Are you sitting in a chair? How was it designed? Did it just pop in to existence, because science is a load of bull, and science hasn't any clue about what's actually true? No, it was designed, by engineering science. What about your house, no forget your house, what about the entire apartment complex, or entire block of houses that you live in or around? How do you think each of those houses were built, let alone, how do you think a house even came to existence from the damn mud huts that cavemen used to live in? How do you think you're able to use any form of transportation, how do you think you can browse this forum, if not for a device connecting to a cellular tower, or internet connectivity of some sort?

Look around you. Then look around again. Everything, and I mean Everything is a result of Science, and Scientific progression. To distrust Science, simply because it arrives at a different conclusion about theism than you do, is to distrust the very foundations of which your life depends on, to disregard all the scientists that happily devoted their entire life to inventing the tools and technology you now have the luxury of using in your every day life as some sort of Governmental hoax set on corrupting your subjective belief system, is to openly admit your ignorance, and uncanny displeasure with the fundamental ingredients that allow not just you, not just the US, but every single person to live the life in which they live today.

 

[Soyeong]

Alright you've obviously reached a misunderstanding, which may be a fault on my part.

I am not claiming that the Bible is entirely fictional, no, nothing of the sort. I am claiming that it is a collection of events, some are in fact true, lots of names of places, names of people, the people who wrote this book were not, in my opinion, in on this whole giant prank, conspiring together in order to create this fictional book thinking these "Dumb people" would buy it, no. I do however believe, and it has been proven that, a large majority of the events as described in the bible are fictional, as well there are a lot of attributes, rules, simply borrowed from other religions. This is true in many cases, there is actually a relatively good case to be made that Jesus could very well have never existed, although a large majority of scholars, as well as myself do believe he was in fact a real person. Here's an example, that I made a while ago, showing the incredible similarities in the attributes of Jesus as described in the bible, from ancient religions dating back way before the NT was written, or Jesus ever existed.

However, tying back to the original point, I think you are misunderstood, as I do believe there are large sections in the bible that are completely factual, I am not making the mistake of saying "The entire bible is simply fiction", however wherever these factual passages are, there is much more than the equivalent, of simply what I believe is fiction, just as there are large non-fiction passages, large fiction passages as well.

I find the claim that Christianity was a prank to be extraordinary and at least as unlikely as Jesus rising from the dead, but if you want to talk about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence, then you might as well start with the one that Jesus never existed. Honestly, look at what actual ancient historians, such as Plutarch, said about these gods, such as Horus, and you will find that these anonymous lists is supposed similarities unquestioningly copied and pasted around the internet are a bunch of baloney.

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Moralia/Isis_and_Osiris*/A.html

 

[Soyeong]

 

[Heatios]

I find the claim that Christianity was a prank to be extraordinary and at least as unlikely as Jesus rising from the dead, but if you want to talk about extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence, then you might as well start with the one that Jesus never existed. Honestly, look at what actual ancient historians, such as Plutarch, said about these gods, such as Horus, and you will that these anonymous lists is supposed similarities unquestioningly copied and pasted around the internet are a bunch of baloney.

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Moralia/Isis_and_Osiris*/A.html

Really? You literally completely misrepresented EVERYTHING I said.

1. I specifically was making fun of the idea, and said that I didn't believe that Christianity was all "one big prank of conspirators".

2. I also said specifically, that the only thing I believed was that there was an argument that could be made that Jesus may have not existed, and then I specified and said "However, a majority of scholars tend to agree that he was in fact a real person, as well as myself" explaining that I indeed AGREE he was a real person.

 

[Soyeong]

Really? You literally completely misrepresented EVERYTHING I said.

1. I specifically was making fun of the idea, and said I specifically that I didn't believe that Christianity was all "one big prank of conspirators".

2. I also said specifically, that the only thing I believed was that there was an argument that could be made that Jesus may have not existed, and then I specified and said "However, a majority of scholars tend to agree that he was in fact a real person, as well as myself" explaining that I indeed AGREE he was a real person.

Sorry, my eyes glazed over at the copycat mythists stuff, I'd heading to bed.

 

[Heatios]

By the way, I know that my comparison in the picture had some false information, as I said I made this a while ago, after I made it I posted it on an atheist forum and the members were happy to tell me that Horus actually had almost none of the similarities I claimed, and I went on and researched every single deity again and realized that I had gotten some false information. However, there is still a huge amount of similarities, about 70% of the attributes checked as commonality with Jesus remain true. I just wanted to inform you that yes, I am aware that the information for Horus is wrong, as well as a couple of other Deities, I had no desire of posting that picture again, but I suddenly remembered I made it and decided to post it anyway, even though I never got around to changing it, the information is still pretty accurate, and is more meant to prove the point that "Jesus" had almost no new attributes, that couldn't be found in other religious prophets dating prior to the text, and claim.

 

[Hospes]

Heatios,

Just for fun, can you give a formal definition for blind faith and then an argument how there is no blind faith in coming to the conclusion there is no God? Honestly, I can understand the argument for agnosticism, but atheism seems to make a jump I have yet to see as rational. You have a missionary zeal for tearing down another's belief in God and propping up a person's disbelief in God, but do you really have anything better to offer? If so, let's hear it. You should probably start a thread and let me know where it is, as I believe you are not legitimately here on this one.

 

[PapaZoom]

I don't have enough faith to be an athiest.

You read Frank Turek's book?

 

[PapaZoom]

It is not even humanly possible to have blind faith. Any belief at minimum requires evidence or else it would never have been formed in the first place. Learning is the process of taking in new true and false beliefs, weeding out beliefs that we wrongly thought were true, and reinforcing true beliefs. If my beliefs are true, then I want them to be reinforced, but if they are false, then I want to find out which ones they are. The problem comes with wrongly weeding out true beliefs or reinforcing false beliefs, but we should never fear to question them.

Very well said.

 

[Heatios]

Heatios,

Just for fun, can you give a formal definition for blind faith and then an argument how there is no blind faith in coming to the conclusion there is no God? Honestly, I can understand the argument for agnosticism, but atheism seems to make a jump I have yet to see as rational. You have a missionary zeal for tearing down another's belief in God and propping up a person's disbelief in God, but do you really have anything better to offer? If so, let's hear it. You should probably start a thread and let me know where it is, as I believe you are not legitimately here on this one.

I never came to the conclusion there is no god, please don't be so ignorant. Agnosticism and Atheism answer two SEPARATE questions. Agnosticism is a question of what you know, atheism is a question of what you believe. I am an agnostic atheist, as well as a large majority of the community who identify as atheists are. Do I know god does not exist? No, nobody can know that, that's silly. However, do I actively believe that a god exists? No, I don't. Therefore, because I don't know, and don't actively believe, I am an agnostic atheist.

Hey bud, NOBODY'S CLAIMING THERE IS NO GOD. CHECK YOUR DEFINITIONS.

 

[farout]

So I want to start a discussion about religion and more in depth Christianity.
I want to first start by saying that I'm an Atheist but that wasn't always the case. I was born in to a Christian family and for most of my childhood and early teens I was. That was until I started studying science.
What I don't like about religion is the fact that it makes no room for questions, when I was a school it was "don't ask how Noah built the ark just accept that he did" and if I did question the church I would get in trouble.

I guess my real question is how people can blindly(faith) follow a book that was written 4000 years ago but just ignore facts and common sense?

(Sorry about the grammar I like science not English)

You come across like you are angry, or am I reading this wrong. The "book" you refer to is called the Bible.

Ok your are an Atheist, if you have carefully thought about your choice, so have many people. Now I will try enlighten you about things that might help. I wonder what kind of Christian education you were given as a child. A good Sunday School starts with little children telling them basic Bible stories. By first grade Genesis is a central focus. This is where the very foundation of Christianity starts. Each grade level keeps adding more basic Bible foundations.

First let me say I have spent years in study of the Bible. I have two master Degrees form a Theological Seminary. So I can say for certain I have not just blindly believed a book that 4,000 years old. Let me correct you, most of the New Testament is less that 1,800 years old. No other book in history has any writings and so many copies dating as far back.

I do not ignore facts at all, I want proof, and yes I do use common sense. But making these rather daming remarks is not going to get to many like me to really have an open ear. But I believe you may be hurt because you think you believed something and now you think you were lied to. Is that about right?

I am more than willing to dialogue with you but unless there is a attitude of wanting to be hear reasons for at least my point of view. So let me know what you want.

 

[Heatios]

You come across like you are angry, or am I reading this wrong. The "book" you refer to is called the Bible.

Ok your are an Atheist, if you have carefully thought about your choice, so have many people. Now I will try enlighten you about things that might help. I wonder what kind of Christian education you were given as a child. A good Sunday School starts with little children telling them basic Bible stories. By first grade Genesis is a central focus. This is where the very foundation of Christianity starts. Each grade level keeps adding more basic Bible foundations.

First let me say I have spent years in study of the Bible. I have two master Degrees form a Theological Seminary. So I can say for certain I have not just blindly believed a book that 4,000 years old. Let me correct you, most of the New Testament is less that 1,800 years old. No other book in history has any writings and so many copies dating as far back.

I do not ignore facts at all, I want proof, and yes I do use common sense. But making these rather daming remarks is not going to get to many like me to really have an open ear. But I believe you may be hurt because you think you believed something and now you think you were lied to. Is that about right?

I am more than willing to dialogue with you but unless there is a attitude of wanting to be hear reasons for at least my point of view. So let me know what you want.

What are you talking about? There are no original copies of the bible.

 

[farout]

You come across like you are angry, or am I reading this wrong. The "book" you refer to is called the Bible.

Ok your are an Atheist, if you have carefully thought about your choice, so have many people. Now I will try enlighten you about things that might help. I wonder what kind of Christian education you were given as a child. A good Sunday School starts with little children telling them basic Bible stories. By first grade Genesis is a central focus. This is where the very foundation of Christianity starts. Each grade level keeps adding more basic Bible foundations.

First let me say I have spent years in study of the Bible. I have two master Degrees form a Theological Seminary. So I can say for certain I have not just blindly believed a book that 4,000 years old. Let me correct you, most of the New Testament is less that 1,800 years old. No other book in history has any writings and so many copies dating as far back.

I do not ignore facts at all, I want proof, and yes I do use common sense. But making these rather daming remarks is not going to get to many like me to really have an open ear. But I believe you may be hurt because you think you believed something and now you think you were lied to. Is that about right?

I am more than willing to dialogue with you but unless there is a attitude of wanting to be hear reasons for at least my point of view. So let me know what you want.

What are you talking about? There are no original copies of the bible.

I NEVER said original, but yes there are copies of the OT that go back further than you would guess. You come across pretty snarky, is that your intent?