December 31, 2005

Discussion over why to even argue over religion.

Do not feel compelled to click on my ad above. – BUM

QUOTE(ProfMoriarty @ Dec 31 2005, 19:33)

If god doesn’t exist, which it doesn’t, then there is no need for a resurrection, so why are we trying to come up with clever reasoning to somehow show how its all so unlikely.

In the many discussions that I’ve had with Christians, I’ve found that the arguments between atheists and Christians tend to be centered around whether the resurrection (or some other "fact") ACTUALLY happened (or is true).

So we get posts, for example, from Aindiachai that give us very good reason to think that the resurrection, if it did occur, had no particular reason for a supernatural intervention.

But my entire point is not to show "how its all so unlikely" — my main point is that it doesn’t matter even if it’s true.

Seriously, I’ll have a Christian talk to me about how the resurrection must have happened, because "who would die for a lie" and because the "romans knew what they were doing" and "couldn’t leave their posts" and all kinds of reasons for why this event supposedly occured.

It actually is a fairly neat effect to say, "Ok, I’ll grant you that the resurrection occurred. So what?"

They usually think, well, if you agree that the resurrection occurred, game over, Christianity is right, I should be a Christian.

The argument runs very quickly from that point from an atheist standpoint, "So Jesus died and came back to life 3 days later. Fantastic, so he’s a creature we’ve never encountered before. By invoking the supernatural, all claims become much more difficult to pin down. By what standard do we judge, trust, compare him to? How can we make even the most outrageous probabilistic claims about him?

For example, no one could persuasively argue, "Well, clearly, Jesus is a good person/being, that is to be trusted because during his life he didn’t sin and he preached a good moral code." Because you can’t continue with, "Because in all my dealings with beings that have this kind of power, and inhabit a human body for this stretch of time, they’ve treated me well.""

And there really isn’t a good response to this line of reasoning – and the Christian will usually admit that it is a legitimate line of questioning.

So yes, God doesn’t exist, etc., but that isn’t a convincing argument for a Christian that thinks that he has a "reasonable faith"; that he has faith in certain events because he can’t imagine another way of explaining them if they’re true. Allow them to be real events, and give at least one other way of explaining it that is equally likely, and you’ve started a line of thinking that may progress somewhere useful.

DianeAbercrombie

January 1, 2006

True points… Christians and Nonchristians are going to have points after points to shove down eachothers throats because of such strong belief in ones own religion or theories. Christians need to go and show love and not to worry over arguing… and you should do as you please… no point in arguing on either one.

Atheist Under Ur Bed

January 2, 2006

Happy New Year, BUM! It’s great to know that you made it into 2006 too. 🙂

soulstice

facts, actuality, truth, reasonability, legitimate argumentation, supernatural power… Regardless of whether all the (see list) are in reality true and those presenting them are trustworthy, one MUST have faith to be a Christian. (Im still a little foggy about faith in what; I think that varies from one proselytizer to another; to some it doesnt matter, as long as its something in the myth

But we also know one can have faith in a lie (myth?). Agreeing with any reasonably argued conclusion, does not make or unmake a Christian. So, mine is not to do and die: nor to even reason why… mine is just to make them prove their own. The convincing for me comes down to my response to their you gotta have faith. Make me.

everyone has an opinion, and they are entitled to it. i am a believer, i have to be. In my current situation i would go insane and have to be locked up if i didnt have my faith and belief in God. But as i said, everyone can have their own opinion, and that has to be respected. It is not right to try to force your own beliefs on someone else.

California Christian

January 4, 2006

Actually, this post is already starting from a flawed perspective, that God doesn’t exist. Truthfully, He does exist. And the thing is, just like Evolution, we just cannot prove God’s existence beyond the shadow of a doubt. That’s where faith comes in. Faith is “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” (Hebrews 11:1)

People would not die for a lie, so that leaves the only possibilities that the disciples were either very deceived or their teachings were true. Jesus’ Resurrection is essential to our faith, because without it, our faith is meaningless and we’re still in our sins. Jesus had to resurrect because a) He proved that He was God, and b) He died and rose to pay the penalty for our sins.

Because Jesus was crucified, we can now be forgiven of our sins if we only place our faith and trust in Him. So by your own admission, the resurrection did happen, ergo Jesus is God. You’ve just affirmed it. Now, to get to the questions on my page, the Apostle Paul penned the book of 2 Timothy. In fact, he penned the majority of the New Testament.

But the actual author of all Scripture is God. 2 Timothy 3:16 states “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God”, and in the original Greek, the word for “inspired” literally means “God-breathed”. God directed Paul (and all the writers of Scripture) to write as he did, to make sure that sinful human perspectives didn’t come into play.

And the “all Scripture” mentioned in the verse is all inspired Scripture by God, Old and New Testament.