Discussion in 'Religion' started by Magical Realist, May 31, 2014.
Do you have problems answering questions?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
No. You have the problem.
8 Reasons Jesus Definitely Existed
The quickest way to get a reaction in the modern world is to shout ‘religion!’ on a crowded server. From diehard fundamentalists to rabid atheists, the internet is a breeding ground for lunatics—all of whom will throw the world’s most-condescending temper tantrum if you question their insanity. Luckily, when it comes to answering some of the most important questions in history—such as ‘did Jesus really exist’—we have centuries of work by scholars and archaeologists to build on, such as:
8 Paul’s Epistles - 7 Contradictions - 6 The Baptism - 5 Josephus - 4 Tacitus - 3 The Ossuary - 2 Modern Religion - 1 The Crucifixion
Yeah, we have years of work by scholars that makes that list look pretty dumb.
8: The claims here seem obviously false. For example: Who would have had the ability to verify that Jesus' brother existed if they couldn't verify that Jesus existed?
7: This makes no sense whatsoever.
6: Just because a religious idea is new doesn't mean that it has some basis in fact. By the same argument, the Flying Spaghetti Monster must be real because it wouldn't make sense for people to want to worship spaghetti on its own.
5: OK, so we have a name. Not surprising that someone added fake testimony to someone who referenced a name. But this doesn't mean that the person referenced in this document had anything to do with the person referenced in other documents.
4: Nobody isn't saying that there wasn't a Christian cult. It is quite a leap to say that Tacitus is not simply repeating the claims of the cult.
3: Few archeologists take this seriously. Even if it is not a fake, all it does is represent two people of two names. There is no providence linking it to specific people who may or may not show up in other documents.
2: While Jesus' "teachings" might be different from previous forms of Judaism, they are very similar to other cults. So even if there was some person named Jesus that started a cult, the historical record about what he did is very dubious. The stories could be attributed to Jesus from other sources. (Similar to how Pythagoras was attributed theorems that came from other sources.)
1: This is again a strange claim: the author seeks to represent this "humiliation" as if it were too strange to be made up, yet it is similar to events that happen to other deities predating Jesus. It is just an update to events happening at the same time and region.
they were to find a drivers license (figuratively) with Jesus's name and address and they found bones that were irrefutably jesus, ppl still would not accept it as evidence , they would still find reasons to not believe. it is a waste of time to debate existence.
if you do not want to believe, that's fine, don't believe, if God has need of you, then he will show himself to you.
respect others beliefs regardless of whether you believe or not.
all you are doing is creating hate.
<sorry dupe post>
How can I possibly respect a belief I don't take to be true? Should I respect someone's belief that I as a gay man am bound for eternal hellfire? Or that I as an atheist am in league with Satan? No..I will not respect delusion, particularly when it demonizes and dehumanizes other humans in the name of God.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
you should respect someone elses belief because you want them to respect yours.
because you want to show them what respect is.
because you will not hate as they hate.
because you want to set a better standard than the religious nutters.
because IF you see someone demonizing and dehumanizing others you will step up and stop it, instead of watching it and blaming God because you did not act.
(im gonna stop here..)
No..I don't care whether they respect me or not. In fact, they already don't if they believe I deserve to go to hell simply for being gay or atheist. I don't respect that sort of bigotry and I'm not going to pretend I do all in the interest of some dubious moral display.
Yeah, I think I agree on this one. I don't need their respect, just the power under the law to not have to behave like they do, to not have to read their literature. This, of course, is what all these weak-minded people and their abusers/con-artict leaders want to fight; they can't handle that they don't get to make their thoughts into law.
You shouldn't have started...
I am not obligated--morally or otherwise--to respect anyone else's beliefs. Respect is not required to treat them humanely or practice kindness. Suggesting otherwise is ludicrous, and should be met with ridicule. It's merely an attempt to avoid criticism, a bully tactic. "You may not like what I believe, but you'd better stay out of my way or else you're a bigot/hater/whatever." It's absolute nonsense.
Some beliefs are very bad, and can be damaging if spread. It would be morally wrong to give those ideas respect, because then I'm contributing to the harm of others. So, no, I'm not going to shut up or respect your beliefs.
Strongly agree. Respecting a person does not entail respecting all their beliefs.
In fact, being forced to respect the beliefs of others violates the principle of the freedom of ideas and of free speech in a fundamental way. Nobody is going to tell me I must respect the beliefs of of a Marxist, or of a follower of Ayn Rand, or of the "Rev" Sun Myung Moon. The notion is both preposterous and dangerous to society.
There were obviously men named Jesus. (It's still a fairly common name in the Spanish-speaking world.) I think that most of us think that there was a so-called 'historical Jesus', an early first-century Jewish prophet around whose memory the Christian myth formed.
The harder-to-believe stuff is the theological stuff: Jesus was God in-the-flesh, Jesus is the one-way to salvation and so on. I'm not sure what kind of evidence could be evidence of that.
I think that the arguments about existence are very interesting, philosophically.
Yeah, that's how I look at it. I don't believe that the Biblical God exists. But if I'm wrong and by chance he does exist, and if he needs me to believe or do something, he must already have my phone number. (He's omniscient and omniponent, after all.) He knows how to get in touch with me.
I don't always respect other people's beliefs. But I do try to respect people as human beings.
The rule I try (however imperfectly) to follow is simple: Don't be an asshole.
It isn't rocket-science.
I think that this thread has been dangerously close to assholism from the very beginning.
key word 'they',
the control freaks,
the 'do as your told' crowd,
they do not think for themselves, they do not deserve your scorn for they will not learn from it.
just be the best 'You' you can be and let history tend to itself..
Yes they do. Nobody is helplessly trapped inside religious delusion. I am living proof of this, having freed myself from it's clutches at the age of 23. My opinion of the deluded is not so low that I think they can't free themselves like I did. They can and they should. And I will not respect and excuse their delusions when I know they should know better.
is that what respect means to you?
"Respect is not required to treat them humanely or practice kindness"
what does that leave?
that is exactly what my definition of respect is, 'To treat people humanely and practice kindness, regardless of what beliefs they hold.'
when I say respect their beliefs, I mean do not go off on what you think is wrong with their beliefs, they have pry heard it millions of times before, and it shows them you have no desire to learn about their beliefs and just want to judge them on your own understanding of things regardless of any understandings that can be had if you were to actually listen.
you can disagree with a persons beliefs and not disrespect the belief or the person, you do this by not judging the others beliefs or at least not confronting them with that judgement.
I digress back to one of my earlier arguments:
u2: your wrong!
which is more informative.
" Some beliefs are very bad, and can be damaging if spread. It would be morally wrong to give those ideas respect, because then I'm contributing to the harm of others. So, no, I'm not going to shut up or respect your beliefs"
yes some beliefs are bad, but they don't become problems until others start believing it.
by trying to defeat their belief, you are only cementing their belief, they have the will to have their beliefs stand up to scrutiny, (note:did not say anything about reasonability)
ignore them and scrutinize your own beliefs like where you get your information, what do you know, what do you think you know, how did you come to know, then you will have your own beliefs, not theirs. if everyone does this, then eventually all those 'bad' beliefs will be no more because no one will just follow someone else's beliefs blindly anymore..
But Grandma (Hi Squirrel!) wasn't it you who said
Go check post #469 for me 'cos I'm unsure. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
What do you think we should with someone, who, for example, claims (and sincerely believes) that the Earth is flat? That We've never been to the Moon? That 1+1=3?
Respect is earned, not an automatic due.
"Writing on Christian Post last week, Michael Bresciani launched a sustained attack on President Barack Obama's pro-LGBT policies and suggested that gay people are responsible for terrorism.
Bresciani is the publisher of AmericanProphet.org
In a blog post titled The Perversion and Terrorism Connection - Modern Man’s Ball and Chain, Bresciani wrote that "homosexuals see injustice on every level of society because they are not fully accepted and their normal is seen by most as damaging perversity. They don’t realize that the more their plight becomes accepted as the norm, the closer the rest of the world is in danger of judgment."
Making the link between gay people and terrorism, he argued that "the days of warning about judgments due to perversion are over, these judgments have already begun and terrorism is part of it."
Bresciani continued that Barack Obama's liberal interpretation of the bible is "a satanically inspired lie" which "has already cost close to sixty million bodies lost to abortion, untold numbers of good minds have been lost to godless academia’s hidden agenda. Character and what remains of the human heart have been hijacked by the morally repulsive trends of the pop-culture generations top voices and all that remains to be stolen and usurped is our very eternal destinies."
Arguing that St. Paul would disagree with Obama, he says that the President "is a pompous politician and former community organizer who prior to his run for president accomplished virtually nothing of any notable significance" who dismisses "the words of [St. Paul] as obscure and not worth taking seriously."---http://www.towleroad.com/
Separate names with a comma.