How I know there is no God

[Wiccan_Child]

So who, in the ancient world, actually existed according to your standards? I can't think of anyone. And what is "verifiable" supposed to mean?

"Verb: verify 'veru`fI

1. Confirm the truth of
   "Please verify that the doors are closed"; "verify a claim"
2. Check or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or comparing with another standard
   - control
3. Attach or append a legal verification to (a pleading or petition)
4. To declare or affirm solemnly and formally as true "

From here.

If we date a document allegedly written in 20CE, and it comes back as being written in the 1300's, then it has been proven false, and therefore fails the verification. If, however, the document comes back as being written in the first century CE, then we have good reason to believe it is verified.
Basically, a verified document is a document to which we have good confidence that it is 'true'; that a Roman divorce letter is a Roman divorce letter, rather than a fabrication of a Roman divorce letter. Naturally, there are various ways to do this: radiometric analysis, comparative analysis, and so on.

 

[phsyxx]

"Verb: verify 'veru`fI

1. Confirm the truth of
   "Please verify that the doors are closed"; "verify a claim"
2. Check or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or comparing with another standard
   - control
3. Attach or append a legal verification to (a pleading or petition)
4. To declare or affirm solemnly and formally as true "

From here.

If we date a document allegedly written in 20CE, and it comes back as being written in the 1300's, then it has been proven false, and therefore fails the verification. If, however, the document comes back as being written in the first century CE, then we have good reason to believe it is verified.
Basically, a verified document is a document to which we have good confidence that it is 'true'; that a Roman divorce letter is a Roman divorce letter, rather than a fabrication of a Roman divorce letter. Naturally, there are various ways to do this: radiometric analysis, comparative analysis, and so on.

Don't forget carbon-dating! Although this has caused a stir amongst the prudent carbon-society.

 

[DoubtingThomas29]

Dear Everyone,

I am sure AD refers to Annoi Domini which means in the year of our lord, wouldn't that start when Jesus was born, not when he died? Help me out I don't know now.

BC means before christ, so how could it still be BC when christ was born?

Anyways I have an old greek coin from 125 BC and I did have an ancient roman coin from the first century AD. Pretty cool huh?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Dear Everyone,

I am sure AD refers to Annoi Domini which means in the year of our lord, wouldn't that start when Jesus was born, not when he died? Help me out I don't know now.

BC means before christ, so how could it still be BC when christ was born?

Anyways I have an old greek coin from 125 BC and I did have an ancient roman coin from the first century AD. Pretty cool huh?

0AD, or 0CE, was the year 2007 years ago. It was thought to be the year Jesus was born, but it is more likely that Jesus was born a few years after that (2-3CE?).

 

[DailyBlessings]

"Verb: verify 'veru`fI

1. Confirm the truth of
   "Please verify that the doors are closed"; "verify a claim"
2. Check or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or comparing with another standard
   - control
3. Attach or append a legal verification to (a pleading or petition)
4. To declare or affirm solemnly and formally as true "

From here.

If we date a document allegedly written in 20CE, and it comes back as being written in the 1300's, then it has been proven false, and therefore fails the verification. If, however, the document comes back as being written in the first century CE, then we have good reason to believe it is verified.
Basically, a verified document is a document to which we have good confidence that it is 'true'; that a Roman divorce letter is a Roman divorce letter, rather than a fabrication of a Roman divorce letter. Naturally, there are various ways to do this: radiometric analysis, comparative analysis, and so on.

Again, give me an example of anyone in the ancient world who verifiably existed? There are more independent documents concerning Jesus than almost anyone before the Crusade era.

 

[dlamberth]

Again, give me an example of anyone in the ancient world who verifiably existed? There are more independent documents concerning Jesus than almost anyone before the Crusade era.

I can't think of a single ancient world document that independently verified that Jesus actualy lived...not a single one.

.

 

[DailyBlessings]

I can't think of a single ancient world document that independently verified that Jesus actualy lived...not a single one.

The passion narrative, the Q gospel, Paul's five epistles as well as most of the other letters that bear his name, The epistles of Peter and the book of Hebrews, the Didache, the Gospel of Thomas, the synoptic gospels, the Sophia of Jesus Christ, the Fayyuum fragment, the Testaments of the Twelve, and the Mara Bar Serapion were all written within the lifetimes of people who had known Christ in person, and were produced in independent communities from Rome to Syria.

 

[dlamberth]

The passion narrative, the Q gospel, Paul's five epistles as well as most of the other letters that bear his name, The epistles of Peter and the book of Hebrews, the Didache, the Gospel of Thomas, the synoptic gospels, the Sophia of Jesus Christ, the Fayyuum fragment, the Testaments of the Twelve, and the Mara Bar Serapion were all written within the lifetimes of people who had known Christ in person, and were produced in independent communities from Rome to Syria.

None of these documents were written by anyone who even saw Jesus, let alone hear him speak.

.

 

[DoubtingThomas29]

Thank you Wiccan I appreciate that, and also your comments in general. I am so proud to start a thread that will easily have over two hundred fifty replies, I never get to do that. I could not have done it without your help and physx and even daily blessings.

I know navy guy doesn't agree with me but I feel that christianity is an over blown cult. It was a cult in the first century AD, and even up till the fourth century AD. So let us consider this. If Jesus Christ was walking around Palestine trying to convert people to christianity, why was it an oppressed cult for all that time. Why would the people of jerusalem kill Jesus? Was he really so bad at converting people that they even killed him? Wouldn't these people try to get free fish from and free bread? Wouldn't there just be thousands of people standing up for Jesus saying we need him to cure our sick, and restore our old bodies to perfect health? Trust me if the son of God was in their presence, they would have known about it, and they would all become followers.

What do you think?

Notice we cannot prove God exists, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify any of Jesus' miracles, there is no evidence of Jesus' miracles.

Allow me to imagine a world in which there is evidence of Jesus miracles. There would be whole societies of jewish people, who would say, we are the descendents of Lazerus, we are the descendents of Mary and Joseph, Elizabeth and Zacchaeus. There would be people who are descendents the crippled people, who were healed and the people who were cured of leperacy.

In the part of the bible that claims five hundred people wittnessed Jesus ascend into heaven, we would have their names, records of what those people were doing on that day, and what they were wearing. Instead there are no names given at all.

There is no evidence of Jesus' miracles, there is no record of Jesus' miracles.

When you listen to the christian story, it sounds like a magnificant story. The sad fact is they made that story up and our souls are not immortal.

I am still searching for meaning and significance in the human condition, I may want to practice buddhist meditations.

Take care and remember there is a truth to how all of life started on the Earth, and there is only one truth to it to. Keep searching, the truth is worth looking for.

Sincerely,

Thomas

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Again, give me an example of anyone in the ancient world who verifiably existed? There are more independent documents concerning Jesus than almost anyone before the Crusade era.

Do cite them.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Do cite them.

I've already given a list above of a number of documents that describe Jesus as a historical figure. But I really would appreciate it if you would respond to my other request, and give me an example of someone who "exists", according to you. Then we can start to discuss historical sources in a more realistic fashion.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Dear Everyone,

I am sure AD refers to Annoi Domini which means in the year of our lord, wouldn't that start when Jesus was born, not when he died? Help me out I don't know now.

BC means before christ, so how could it still be BC when christ was born?

Anyways I have an old greek coin from 125 BC and I did have an ancient roman coin from the first century AD. Pretty cool huh?

Hrm. Perhaps you are right. Sorry. But still.... that's a fairly small detail to be picking apart. Thanks for the info, though.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Thank you Wiccan I appreciate that, and also your comments in general. I am so proud to start a thread that will easily have over two hundred fifty replies, I never get to do that. I could not have done it without your help and physx and even daily blessings.

I know navy guy doesn't agree with me but I feel that christianity is an over blown cult. It was a cult in the first century AD, and even up till the fourth century AD. So let us consider this. If Jesus Christ was walking around Palestine trying to convert people to christianity, why was it an oppressed cult for all that time. Why would the people of jerusalem kill Jesus? Was he really so bad at converting people that they even killed him? Wouldn't these people try to get free fish from and free bread? Wouldn't there just be thousands of people standing up for Jesus saying we need him to cure our sick, and restore our old bodies to perfect health? Trust me if the son of God was in their presence, they would have known about it, and they would all become followers.

What do you think?

Notice we cannot prove God exists, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify any of Jesus' miracles, there is no evidence of Jesus' miracles.

Allow me to imagine a world in which there is evidence of Jesus miracles. There would be whole societies of jewish people, who would say, we are the descendents of Lazerus, we are the descendents of Mary and Joseph, Elizabeth and Zacchaeus. There would be people who are descendents the crippled people, who were healed and the people who were cured of leperacy.

In the part of the bible that claims five hundred people wittnessed Jesus ascend into heaven, we would have their names, records of what those people were doing on that day, and what they were wearing. Instead there are no names given at all.

There is no evidence of Jesus' miracles, there is no record of Jesus' miracles.

When you listen to the christian story, it sounds like a magnificant story. The sad fact is they made that story up and our souls are not immortal.

I am still searching for meaning and significance in the human condition, I may want to practice buddhist meditations.

Take care and remember there is a truth to how all of life started on the Earth, and there is only one truth to it to. Keep searching, the truth is worth looking for.

Sincerely,

Thomas

*sees his previous comments go in one ear and out the other*

Did you even READ my post? I believe I explained a few things you have restated in this post. Try again, Thomas. Try again.

 

[NavyGuy7]

Notice we cannot prove God exists, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify any of Jesus' miracles, there is no evidence of Jesus' miracles.

Notice we cannot disprove God exists, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify Jesus was not who he said he was, there is no evidence to prove he did not do those miracles. I can play that game too, Thomas.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I've already given a list above of a number of documents that describe Jesus as a historical figure. But I really would appreciate it if you would respond to my other request, and give me an example of someone who "exists", according to you. Then we can start to discuss historical sources in a more realistic fashion.

Plato. A great number of works are attributed to a man named Plato who is alleged to have lived ~2,500 years ago in Athens, Greece. He is referenced, and indeed biographed, in several contemporary and independant works:

• Apuleius, De Dogmate Platonis, I.
• Aristophanes, The Wasps.
• Aristotle, Metaphysics.
• Cicero, De Divinatione, I.
• Diogenes Laertius
• Plutarch, Pericles.
• Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War
• Xenophon: Hellenica
• Xenophon, Memorabilia.

 

[phsyxx]

I've already given a list above of a number of documents that describe Jesus as a historical figure. But I really would appreciate it if you would respond to my other request, and give me an example of someone who "exists", according to you. Then we can start to discuss historical sources in a more realistic fashion.

Homer, circa 8th Century BCE.
Sophocles 496-407BCE
Socrates 470BCE-399BCE
Plato 428-348 BCE
Aristotle 384- March 7th 322BCE.
Hericlitus 535-475 BCE.


Each of these historical figures not only left their names and their legends to future generations - but alot of work, writings, and methods of thinking.

You see, the problem I think Wiccan_Child is having is that, since Jesus was SO influential and SO admired by his followers - why didn't he write anything himself?
Why are his remarkably wise words quoted by someone else?
Why didn't he have a book of dialogues written as a series of discussions with one or more of his disciples?

And why doesn't he have an exceptionally accurate birth date - like that of Aristotle.
Aristotle was so well known that his death was even marked on the very day - and the students of his school mourned his passing.

Surely if Jesus were to have gone about the streets of Jerusalem for three whole years - there can't have been that many people back then - surely EVERYONE would have known him?

 

[phsyxx]

Notice we cannot disprove God exists, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify Jesus was not who he said he was, there is no evidence to prove he did not do those miracles. I can play that game too, Thomas.
[/color][/size]

Yes -and so can I -
watch:

Notice we cannot prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify that Jesus was not one of his noodly appendages, there is no evidence to prove that he did not feed the 5000 with pot noodles.


Navyguy - can you take a leaf out of the judicial
system for a moment (bear with me) -
as your position is the prosecution, accusing a suspect of murdering someone.
Myself and Wiccan_Child represent the defendent.
Now, we're going on lack of evidence - as in, you can't convict our defendent because you don't have sufficient evidence to prove his commited the felony.

Now, the way you're arguing is that - as the defence - we can't prove that the suspect DIDN'T commit the offence, as he cannot provide us with an alibi or any evidence to show to us that he is in the clear.
And saying, "therefore, because you can't show that you didn't do it - you must have done it."

Please substitute where necessary the comparison for the word "God" or "exists" or any relevant terms.


For me, NavyGuy, you are using not only flawed logic, but are coming at the problem from completely the wrong angle.
Perhaps this is to do with your beliefs - but - remember, when it comes to the conviction of criminals - you can't AFFORD to be biased.
You've got to think logically - even if it means raising the possibility (within yourself) that God might not exist.

 

[phsyxx]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiccan_Child
"Verb: verify 'veru`fI

1. Confirm the truth of
   "Please verify that the doors are closed"; "verify a claim"
2. Check or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or comparing with another standard
   - control
3. Attach or append a legal verification to (a pleading or petition)
4. To declare or affirm solemnly and formally as true "

From here.

If we date a document allegedly written in 20CE, and it comes back as being written in the 1300's, then it has been proven false, and therefore fails the verification. If, however, the document comes back as being written in the first century CE, then we have good reason to believe it is verified.
Basically, a verified document is a document to which we have good confidence that it is 'true'; that a Roman divorce letter is a Roman divorce letter, rather than a fabrication of a Roman divorce letter. Naturally, there are various ways to do this: radiometric analysis, comparative analysis, and so on.

Don't forget carbon-dating! Although this has caused a stir amongst the prudent in carbon-society.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Yes -and so can I -
watch:

Notice we cannot prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist, it is impossible given the evidence we have, therefore we cannot prove or verify that Jesus was not one of his noodly appendages, there is no evidence to prove that he did not feed the 5000 with pot noodles.


Navyguy - can you take a leaf out of the judicial
system for a moment (bear with me) -
as your position is the prosecution, accusing a suspect of murdering someone.
Myself and Wiccan_Child represent the defendent.
Now, we're going on lack of evidence - as in, you can't convict our defendent because you don't have sufficient evidence to prove his commited the felony.

Now, the way you're arguing is that - as the defence - we can't prove that the suspect DIDN'T commit the offence, as he cannot provide us with an alibi or any evidence to show to us that he is in the clear.
And saying, "therefore, because you can't show that you didn't do it - you must have done it."

Please substitute where necessary the comparison for the word "God" or "exists" or any relevant terms.


For me, NavyGuy, you are using not only flawed logic, but are coming at the problem from completely the wrong angle.
Perhaps this is to do with your beliefs - but - remember, when it comes to the conviction of criminals - you can't AFFORD to be biased.
You've got to think logically - even if it means raising the possibility (within yourself) that God might not exist.

I agree with you, physxx. There are two fallacies being circulated here:

1. A false dichotomy: either you believe God exists or you believe God doesn't exist. Clearly there is a third option: neither.
2. Misrepresentation of the burden of proof: the onus lies on the party making the claim, not the party to whom the claim is made.
   As in physxx's judical analogy, no lawyer would claim "Since you can't disprove A, it is reasonable to conclude that A occured".

 

[DailyBlessings]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiccan_Child
"Verb: verify 'veru`fI

1. Confirm the truth of
   "Please verify that the doors are closed"; "verify a claim"
2. Check or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment or comparing with another standard
   - control
3. Attach or append a legal verification to (a pleading or petition)
4. To declare or affirm solemnly and formally as true "

From here.

If we date a document allegedly written in 20CE, and it comes back as being written in the 1300's, then it has been proven false, and therefore fails the verification. If, however, the document comes back as being written in the first century CE, then we have good reason to believe it is verified.
Basically, a verified document is a document to which we have good confidence that it is 'true'; that a Roman divorce letter is a Roman divorce letter, rather than a fabrication of a Roman divorce letter. Naturally, there are various ways to do this: radiometric analysis, comparative analysis, and so on.

Don't forget carbon-dating! Although this has caused a stir amongst the prudent in carbon-society.

I think you don't have a firm grasp on how carbon dating works, if you think it can be used effectively on a document. Even if you could, I doubt even a non-religious historian would be happy to see thousand year documents going into the masher.