religion, part 8.782

[Pressure Drop]

Bioture ...
your talking about me evading questions , it is you who is doing so.

I've answered your question about what gives me authority ...

There is no authority at all, everyone makes there own minds up with what evidence and knowledge they have. Many claim to be right, you seem to be taking my dogmatic line making light of this fact and over analysing it. If you ppl get to quote the bible as if it all happened i get to talk as if what i say is the abosolute truth too.

in the past you posted a thread about raising money to go to Asia to spread the gospel.

You're still evading the question, I'm asking - who are you specifically and where do you get your authority? Keep in mind I'm asking a question specifically for YOU and not at nonbelievers or believers as a whole. Can you, Pressure Drop, some guy on TW forums, tell me who you are and how you assumed authority?

Well who are you to go over and tell these ppl for thousands of years they've been getting it wrong and your gospel is the answer.

Also as another example of you can't argue with religion from a logical point of view. I could claim to be your god and thats where i get my authority from.. you could niether prove or disprove it, i'm sure you wouldn't believe it though ... SO since you can't disprove it what AUTHORITY do you have to say i'm not GOD , none ... its a stupid point give it a rest...

Is it really as simplistic as you pointed out though? Again, where do you get the authority to say religion (let alone spirituality) is THE wrong way? Also, since it seems like I can't make you question the validity of your own claims, are you here to ask me questions so you can learn something, or so you can prove a point - not the point of athiests, agnostics, or whoever - but YOUR point.

I could do research into all the religions of the past that have died out and lay them in front of you and ask you did you think they were right ... Since you believe in the christian religion you would have to say no . Yet it is you not i that is claiming to have found the true religion where as i say "no i've seen enough evidence to say that all written religions are nothing more than a human construct than anything divine...

How can you say the same about Buddism, Hinduism , Islam ... ? how ocme they are wrong and yet you are right???

Yet again the onus is on you to try to prove that your religion is real, that is impossible yet you claim that others should be converted to your specific religion rejecting their traditional one. I'm not saying "here its not that book, that book is wrong look at all its lies, now here i've got the right one read this it is the truth." I'm saying there all just wrong.

You have a problem with me saying that, yet you reject these other religions and try to convert ppl to your own and then keep asking me what gives me the authority to say they are wrong.

]who has wronged you enough in this world to make you feel as if God doesn't care?

What? That makes no sense to me at all.
i've never been wronged. I consider myself amazingly lucky to be alive and in a place with a good standard of living and social networks like benefits and health care. I live in a place where religion plays a significant part in a long running fued between catholics and protestants and it makes me question why in this day and age we are not moving more rapidly towards secular humanism and working for the greater good of humanity rather than worshiping outdated religions and fighting amongst each other.

I can argue that it's even easier to say that God doesn't exist. But you know what? It doesn't get us anywhere. And I can argue that it's easier to say that God doesn't exist from an athiest's point of view too. But which one will help you see the ignorance of your own statements? I don't think that it's possible to talk about it intellectually unless we're both willing to accept that our convictions, however strong, are up to scruitiny.

well for a start you left out and ignored pretty much all the points i wanted you to consider. e.g.

If its all part of gods great plan that the husband was to die, then why bother praying?

Strangely you quoted everything before that and everytihng after but failed to adress it.
So why if you can't change gods mind, i.e. your amazing yes,no.wait theory why pray for things to happen?

Tell me exactly how your claim that worshiping a man who lived 2000 years ago as the son of god stands up to scrutiny?

[Bioture]

I lose the desire to provoke you to post stupid responses.

No you didn't. Be a man, stop replying.

[Bioture]

...

We could argue like no question has ever been posed, or have you noticed how all my responses to you are in the form of questions? You can continue to call my points stupid, or you can make this dialogue meaningful. It's up to you. But personally, if this was evangelism, right now would be the point where I say nothing at all. Maybe you can help me out here: if you already have the clear mindset that everything I say can be refuted on a personal, logical, level, where would we end this conversation? If I told you that I used to be an athiest, but now I'm a christian defending the christian doctorine, what good will my testimony be if you already have the mindset of striking me down at the very mention of God?

Honestly, you have no idea how much I sympathize with your fustration based on my own history as a nonbeliver, but I can't help you with the answers if you're just going to pick them apart and use them as attacks on someone's personal belief system.

[K2Grey]

On religion, generally there are two main points that come to mind. The first is Occam's Razor. It's much better, from a logical perspective, to pick the simpler of two theories if they both explain things perfectly well and have the same predictive value. I.e., the idea that gravity is caused by attraction between two masses, vs. the idea that gravity is caused by little fairies who pull the objects together. The idea that the universe arose from a Big Bang without any known information about what occured before that (since the Big Bang presumably got rid of all evidence), versus the idea that the Unicorn of Order created it using a Big Bang.

The second one is that quite simply, there are 2 million religions out there, which frequently contradict each other and have provisions to the effect that every other religion on earth is totally wrong and unholy. Whatever method one uses to bash the 2 million - 1 religions out there, can also be used to bash the remaining one, too. This is summed up by a quote that goes something like "You're just as much an atheist as I am, it's just that when you discover why you don't have faith in all the other religions out there, you'll understand why I don't have faith in yours."

[Bioture]

So, to me, the only fact is that he once lived, and if I remember correctly, I read that he didn't even live around where the bible said he lived (timewise).

Ok, first find out what it is that you read, and let me know these sources. It's better to be sure than to just assume, right?

the only "proof" of jesus healing people and whatnot is in the bible..

The proof that jesus has actually lived is also in roman writing and stuff, that is a fact, jesus has lived. But besides the bible nowhere is their evidence about him healing people and whatnot, and I don't trust nor believe the bible.

So you would believe a roman writer (do you know which roman writers wrote about jesus?) but not the people who wrote the bible? I rely on self-refutation in this case. Why would Jesus (or any of the writers of the gospels) make up a lie, and then die for them as martyrs? There's a roman book out there on this you know

And on a more practical level, without the heavy reading, if the romans wrote about jesus, as you so believe he existed, you should know that at the time Christianity was a huge problem for the roman empire. This problem could've been easily solved if they produced the body of Jesus, right? Since the reason people were convicted at the time was because they believed in the resurrecton, why was a body never found?

[ZeUs!!]

No you didn't. Be a man, stop replying.

What? I never said I did? Also, does this post make me a woman?

[Galleleo]

What I mean about proof from the romans that he existed, I am not talking about a roman writer or a book, I am talking about that it is in the records, either birthrecord, or a record about this crusifixtion (sp?). So, that is what I take as a fact.. I hardly ever use books as something that produces a fact.

BTW, ( and I am asking this because maybe I am mixing fiction up with reality) wasn't there some writing found by jesus himself (or believed to be by jesus) in wich it states that he intended for something completely different then how it is now with the church and bible and stuff?

[brookus]

Anectodal evidence does not equal fact. If you can set up a double-blind experiment that points to prayer working better than a placebo and others can repeat your experiment and duplicate the results, then you have some evidence that backs up your statement. Until then, you're relying on faith. Please don't confuse faith with fact.

llater,
Tony

[Pressure Drop]

We could argue like no question has ever been posed, or have you noticed how all my responses to you are in the form of questions? You can continue to call my points stupid, or you can make this dialogue meaningful. It's up to you. But personally, if this was evangelism, right now would be the point where I say nothing at all. Maybe you can help me out here: if you already have the clear mindset that everything I say can be refuted on a personal, logical, level, where would we end this conversation? If I told you that I used to be an athiest, but now I'm a christian defending the christian doctorine, what good will my testimony be if you already have the mindset of striking me down at the very mention of God?

Honestly, you have no idea how much I sympathize with your fustration based on my own history as a nonbeliver, but I can't help you with the answers if you're just going to pick them apart and use them as attacks on someone's personal belief system.

1) you've STILL not addressed the point i made regarding prayer that you've been evading
2) what do you want me to do ? go oh shit your right Jesus was the son of god, how could i've been so stupid to lump christianity in with every other false religion out there?
3) the fact you were once an atheist and are now a christian means nothing, i don't know why you keep on refering to it? your no longer atheist. if i told you i was once christian but was no longer whould that hold anymore sway? Were you once Muslim but are now christian???? does it matter?
4) you basicaly said you can't help (help?) me if i pick apart your answer??? if your answer was sound it shouldn't be able to be picked apart ...
5) its not really YOUR belief system, your basing it all on a book written and edited, by preachers and an organised church. Your system isn't exactly unique becuase you've been told what to believe.


Personly i think the bible contains some great teachings on an ethical and moral level, but its not a true book and some of what it says is complete rubbish and no longer adhered to by most christians, but should be if they believe in the bible ...

I really don't feel like you engaged in what i was saying at all, but more acted like a politician and evaded the questions while distracting from that by hounding me over a pointles issue that i tried to explain whilst you never answered my question about why pray for things if gods mind can't be changed? Does he like ppl begging him?

[Pressure Drop]

On religion, generally there are two main points that come to mind. The first is Occam's Razor. It's much better, from a logical perspective, to pick the simpler of two theories if they both explain things perfectly well and have the same predictive value. I.e., the idea that gravity is caused by attraction between two masses, vs. the idea that gravity is caused by little fairies who pull the objects together. The idea that the universe arose from a Big Bang without any known information about what occured before that (since the Big Bang presumably got rid of all evidence), versus the idea that the Unicorn of Order created it using a Big Bang.

The second one is that quite simply, there are 2 million religions out there, which frequently contradict each other and have provisions to the effect that every other religion on earth is totally wrong and unholy. Whatever method one uses to bash the 2 million - 1 religions out there, can also be used to bash the remaining one, too. This is summed up by a quote that goes something like "You're just as much an atheist as I am, it's just that when you discover why you don't have faith in all the other religions out there, you'll understand why I don't have faith in yours."

this sums up one of my points a hell of a lot more eloquently than i put it :P

[DoTheFandango]

You know, this thread is really tempting... but I would rather photoshop TelCat's face on stuff.

[Theif of Time]

Since the reason people were convicted at the time was because they believed in the resurrecton, why was a body never found?

I'll challenge you on that. The Romans were remarkeably tolerant of other religions: Christians were convicted at the time because they bad mouthed the emporer. They were persecuted not because of their faith, but because they insulted the emporer, the roman gods, and generally were a nuisance to Roman society. When in Rome, do as the Romans do... it seems that Christians didn't, and got persecuted because of it. (Of course it doesn't help that the Bible says "It's good if you get persecuted... it means you're right!!!11")
If you wish, I can dig up some writings to support my point. Can you?

[Facetious]

literally EVERY christian insulted the emperor?

[Theif of Time]

No, that would be difficult if not impossible to prove.
It would also be near impossible to prove that literally every christian in roman times was persecuted.
This thread
EDIT:

In most places and times, Christianity per se wasn’t illegal, what was illegal was refusing to worship the state gods. Like refusing to recite the pledge of allegiance, this was seen as a political act, and that’s why it was problematic. :notworthy

• This is why someone accused of being a Christian could simply burn some incense to the state gods and go free – it wasn’t so much that they weren’t supposed to be Christian, but rather that they weren’t supposed to be treasonous.

[Bioture]

2) what do you want me to do ? go oh shit your right Jesus was the son of god, how could i've been so stupid to lump christianity in with every other false religion out there?

With that attitude, do you think I would want to continue this conversation with you? On the flipside, would you be satisfied if I said "oh shit you're right there is no God, what I believed in for 7 years was actually right, christianity is wrong!"?

Better yet, PM me. If you're really interested in this topic, and not just mouthing off to show everyone else how you can question religion into submission. I will entertain your questions there.