Are you sure there is no God ? [W: 352]

[Tanngrisnir]

You claimed "How in the world do you document a thing that did not happen?"

Where's your evidence and logic that the resurrection never happened? You had to formulate that belief based on something. What lie did you buy into?

Logic? Really? Why attempt to reference and demand a thing that you don't understand?

Evidence? LOL! Oh, the irony.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Like I said, science has never proven that God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist. So your conclusion above that a resurrection is physically impossible is not based in science. In fact, there are multiple historical accounts of it occurring, as we see in the Gospels, etc.

A. Science does not 'prove' anything. It confirms by observation.
B. There is no credible evidence, as in none, zero, nada, that resurrection as depicted in the bible is physically possible.
C. The bible cannot be used to prove the claims of the bible.

This is REALLY basic stuff. You seem completely out of your depth.

 

[RAMOSS]

All four Gospels confirm the resurrection. Jesus' ascension into heaven is seen in Acts chapter 1.

And, gone with the wind testify's the existence of scarlet o'hare.

 

[zyzygy]

Like I said, science has never proven that God and the supernatural do not and cannot exist. So your conclusion above that a resurrection is physically impossible is not based in science. In fact, there are multiple historical accounts of it occurring, as we see in the Gospels, etc.

Do you believe that Muhammad ascended to heaven? Leaving out the fact that if you ascend you go into space and not into heaven.

 

[Tucker Case]

We'll be living somewhere else by then.

That's excedingly optimistic of you. I expect to be dead by then, regardless of what the human species is doing (although evolutionare history implies that being extinct by then is the most likely outcome for the species.)

 

[AllanHampton]

I have no evidence to prove there is a God. If any person does have "evidence" to prove there is a God please post it?

 

[zyzygy]

That's excedingly optimistic of you. I expect to be dead by then, regardless of what the human species is doing (although evolutionare history implies that being extinct by then is the most likely outcome for the species.)

I wasn't using the royal we.

 

[zyzygy]

I have no evidence to prove there is a God. If any person does have "evidence" to prove there is a God please post it?

Take your pick
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_text

 

[Tucker Case]

I wasn't using the royal we.

I know. I was making a joke.

But the optimism still remains. Humans will almost certainly be extinct by the time the sun engulfs the Earth. No species has survived billions of years that we know of, there's really no reason to assume humans will be able to overcome evolution. Especially at the rate we're going.

 

[Cephus]

I know. I was making a joke.

But the optimism still remains. Humans will almost certainly be extinct by the time the sun engulfs the Earth. No species has survived billions of years that we know of, there's really no reason to assume humans will be able to overcome evolution. Especially at the rate we're going.

That assumes we're still on this planet. There are no other species potentially capable of going elsewhere that we know of either. We could be long gone, and also evolved into something very, very different by the time this planet is reduced to a cinder.

 

[Tucker Case]

That assumes we're still on this planet. There are no other species potentially capable of going elsewhere that we know of either. We could be long gone, and also evolved into something very, very different by the time this planet is reduced to a cinder.

If we've evolved, then humans will be extinct. It will be something else that replaced them that survives.

I am assuming that we never make it off this rock because I don't see anything that implies we will. We're racing against a clock: the clock counting down the time when we cause our own extinction. Right now, we're pressing the fast forward button on that clock.

On the flip side, we're going the wrong direction as far as developing the tech needed to get the **** out of here. We're cutting funding to NASA, we're electing people who actively oppose science, and we're generally ****ting all over education.

So I'm not particularly optimistic. I hope I'm wrong, although I'll never know it if I am.

 

[Cephus]

If we've evolved, then humans will be extinct. It will be something else that replaced them that survives.

I am assuming that we never make it off this rock because I don't see anything that implies we will. We're racing against a clock: the clock counting down the time when we cause our own extinction. Right now, we're pressing the fast forward button on that clock.

On the flip side, we're going the wrong direction as far as developing the tech needed to get the **** out of here. We're cutting funding to NASA, we're electing people who actively oppose science, and we're generally ****ting all over education.

So I'm not particularly optimistic. I hope I'm wrong, although I'll never know it if I am.

We're not racing against anything, The sun won't become a red giant for billions of years. Our entire evolutionary path, from the moment that humans started to exist to the time we landed on the moon was about 200,000 years. The sun won't become a red giant for more than 5 billion years. That's 2500 times as long as we've been here. Give us some credit.

 

[Tucker Case]

We're not racing against anything, The sun won't become a red giant for billions of years. Our entire evolutionary path, from the moment that humans started to exist to the time we landed on the moon was about 200,000 years. The sun won't become a red giant for more than 5 billion years. That's 2500 times as long as we've been here. Give us some credit.

I'm not talking about the sun destroying us, I'm talking about us destroying us. And there is definitely a clock running on that one. People are ****ing stupid.

 

[zyzygy]

I'm not talking about the sun destroying us, I'm talking about us destroying us. And there is definitely a clock running on that one. People are ****ing stupid.

Which people?

 

[Logicman]

Do writers ever write factual reports about things that didn't happen? No. "In today's news, there were no resurrections." Doesn't that seem a bit ridiculous? If something didn't happen, it wouldn't even be thought of. When someone claims something extraordinary happened, there has to be more evidence than just taking their word for it, especially if the claim is made by someone who wasn't an actual eyewitness. Bible stories were not written at the time they took place by eyewitnesses. If there is no basis for a claim other than a third hand story designed to win over people to a religious view, I am justified to be skeptical of it.

You have an opinion, not facts.

 

[Logicman]

And, gone with the wind testify's the existence of scarlet o'hare.

That is so lame. There's plenty of historians who believe Jesus existed. In fact, I know of no serious historian who, apart from bias, thinks Jesus never existed.

 

[RAMOSS]

That is so lame. There's plenty of historians who believe Jesus existed. In fact, I know of no serious historian who, apart from bias, thinks Jesus never existed.

Of course, the evidence for it is very sketchy at best for that. And, even if the historical Jesus existed, the Gospel Jesus did not.

 

[Cephus]

I'm not talking about the sun destroying us, I'm talking about us destroying us. And there is definitely a clock running on that one. People are ****ing stupid.

Yes they are. But people have always been stupid and we've still made it 200,000 years. People are becoming less and less stupid as time goes on, which is why things like religion are going away. And thank goodness for that.

 

[zyzygy]

That is so lame. There's plenty of historians who believe Jesus existed. In fact, I know of no serious historian who, apart from bias, thinks Jesus never existed.

The Jesus as we know him - the Jesus of Christianity - definitely did not exist. It is possible that there was no historical Jesus at all. No historians of the first century mention Jesus, despite there being authors who write (at length) about Jewish concerns. There are no Roman records that mention Jesus1. Not only all that, but, there are no Christian eye-witnesses of Jesus. All of the Gospels are anonymous and written by friends-of-friends, and none are written in the first person; also, Paul (who authored 13 of the 27 books of the NT) never met Jesus, except in a vision2. They're also written in very competent Greek (the language of later converts), rather than in Hebrew (the language of the original converts, excepting Paul). Early Christians didn't know when Jesus was born (his birthdate wasn't decided for hundreds of years, in 354CE)3 and didn't know where he was buried. People have doubted his existence since the very first century, and, despite the popularity of Christianity, there is a modern resurgence of people who disbelieve in the very existence of Jesus today. The biggest problem facing such unbelievers is accounting for early Christianity. But there are multiple theories as to how Christianity may have arisen without a historical saviour. For example, it is quite possible, given the similarities of Jesus to previous saviour religions and pagan stories about god-men, that the entire story of Jesus is a rewrite, with Jewish undertones, of Roman and pagan myths that were current at the beginning of the first century4, 5, 6.

Jesus Did Not Exist



1.3. The New Testament11

“The hundreds of documents about Jesus, all contradictory in style and content, derived from multiple physical locations. The disparate stories, all of which use pagan and roman myths interwoven with typical Greek god-man stories12, hint to us that the entire escapade is the result of historical revisionism. In other words, stories about Jesus spread as a result of a single preacher, perhaps St Paul (who never met Jesus and probably never really met the disciples), and people merely (in typical fashion for the era) rewrote older stories but now put Jesus at the core of them, just as happened with other Roman gods and heroes. Hence, a new religion sprung out of thin air, fooling many into thinking there was an actual historical figure. Once this process had started at the end of the first century, it was already impossible for anyone to go back and verify the stories.”
"The Formation and Creation of the Bible's New Testament: 3. Was Jesus Real?" by Vexen Crabtree (2015)

 

[TheGoverness]

You have an opinion, not facts.

Look in the mirror.

 

[Cephus]

Of course, the evidence for it is very sketchy at best for that. And, even if the historical Jesus existed, the Gospel Jesus did not.

But that's really the game that theists play, isn't it? Just because some historical Jesus might have existed, that doesn't say anything about the existence of the magic man-god described in the Bible, which non-religious historians universally don't think was real. But try getting the religious zealots to admit that.

 

[devildavid]

You have an opinion, not facts.

You have belief, not facts.

 

[Tucker Case]

Which people?

All of 'em, myself included.

 

[Tucker Case]

Yes they are. But people have always been stupid and we've still made it 200,000 years. People are becoming less and less stupid as time goes on, which is why things like religion are going away. And thank goodness for that.

We aren't getting less stupid, we're just all starting further down the line as far as information goes. That's why we're doomed. We haven't gotten any brighter as a species, but we have become much more powerful.

 

[Logicman]

Of course, the evidence for it is very sketchy at best for that. And, even if the historical Jesus existed, the Gospel Jesus did not.

You make a lot of far out claims you can't back up. That the Biblical Jesus never existed is one of them.