Over the past several thousand years, man has continuously asked the question of why he existed, and even more importantly, what happens after we die. The obvious truth, that the same thing happens to humans as it does to every other life form on the planet, well, it?s not pretty. So humans invented gods.And when I say gods, I mean lots and lots of gods. Thousands of them. Each of the gods gave pretty much the same explanation of man?s purpose, as well as an answer as to why the earth shook, the stars glimmered, the moon changed phases, and the weather changed seasons. Most gods had supporting evidence of their existence. People ?felt the presence? of Zeus on Mt Olympus, and where do you think that lightning came from, anyway? Miracles were witnessed, gospels were written and embellished over time, songs of praise were written and sung. All gods promised immortality and some form of enlightenment AFTER death, and to varying degrees, all described bad afterlives for those who disbelieve. Most of these gods are dismissed today as mythology, because we know why the earth shakes and why seasons change. The mysteries of the world are becoming apparent, slowly but surely. Additionally, the number of religious wars has resulted in conquorings and conquest, so today there are far fewer gods considered ?real? by anyone than there once were. Still, the gods of today have NO MORE evidence supporting their existence than their predecessors. People ?feel their existence?, ?see miracles? even though NONE have ever been proven, and sing songs of praise. But there is no more support for these gods than there ever was for Thor, Qetzalcoatl, and Hawaiian Tikki gods. I?m no fan of watering down the truth, so here?s a nice absolute. There is not a single reason to accept any of today?s gods that wasn?t used to support the gods we all consider mythology. This leads to one undeniable conclusion: religion and mythology are the same thing. Discuss.
I’m with peach,
I am a staunch naturalist. Why? because there is no evidence to believe anything to the contrary. I wish I could find evidence for ghosts and goblins and Gods. What a cool universe that would be.
I used to go on ghost hunts, haunted houses, I would sit in front of mirrors and chant bloody Mary and all that other stuff little kids do. Nothing. Ouija Board. nothing. Too bad.
Goose,
I know you’re gone but….this one just jumped out at me….
“we don’t have to tax our brains too much with this, we only have to decide if Jesus is God or not.”
You act like this isn’t a big deal, deciding if someone is god or not. I would think that would be a major LIFE decision, like who to marry or how many children to have, etc. One that would cause enormous brain-taxing. After all, for most Christians, their entire lives are based on their faith. And you would make such a decision by just going with your “gut” (faith) feeling and not looking at all the evidence presented for and against this claim? Base it solely upon maybe one or a few testimonies or experiences, and an ancient book of questionable origins?
Anyway, basically it seems as if you are one of the Christians who chooses to ignore all the atrocities appropriated by the Bible god in the OT, and focus on the alleged love and redemption of Jesus Christ in the NT.
I maintain that you cannot have one without the other. As a few others said earlier, according to the Christian trinity, (the best I can tell, anyway-because I don’t think even the Pope knows for sure how it works) God=Jesus=God. Father-Son-Spirit are representations of one entity. If so, then God as Jesus was the same God-Jehovah-Yahweh that raised so much hell and slaughtered his way through much of the ancient Middle East in the OT. How can you separate the two sections?
Peach, Zac Hunter
The problem is if you were to find and study ghosts, then you,d be able to assign physical properties to them. True there would be some major scientific adjustments to make, but the end result would be that ghosts would be classed as a natural phenomena.
Then you are back to the original question: Is there anything that is supernatural.
The question is self defeating and the only possible answer is ‘no’.
Does that make sense?
Goodnight people…
Peach,
I think you hit Goose’s question on the head.
Xians do not have a consistent answer to this question. Or to be more accurate they have consistently inconsistent answer, namely “yes” and “no” at the same time.
This is why I like to aptly name it The Trinity MindFuck TM.
DiArtemis: Sorry about the bad link. Something’s going on there. D’oh! Much of the relevant info is on my website, in my article about the Virgin Birth.
Damn. Turn my back for a little bit, & the thread explodes. Missed all the good stuff.
Welcome, oh unfurred primate. Apparently you’ve been doing your homework. Carried the day quite nicely. Happy (belated?) B-day.
Love how the ‘good guys’ beat a strategic retreat, upon getting their blinding Stetsons knocked off their heads. Or were those halos?
Back to palms to ears, lalalala I can’t hear you!
Too bad. Wanted to have a bit of a natter w/4him.
“When logic & faith collide! Film at 11!”
HMDK
Welcome! And for your birthday…a giant peanut butter and jelly sandwich! With a side of spaghettios! Ramen
(Sorry HeatheNZ, I like them [the PG&J] mixed together sometimes.)
Ooh. Sorry I got here too late today to mix it up with 4Him. It’s been very interesting catching up on the threads.
Goose Henry
Nah. Pretty much all the supernatural stuff is out of the realm of believability. When you met Jesus, did you eat at the Olive Garden? That’s the official communion spot of the FSM, ya know.
HeatheNZ-
I agree with the taxonomic problematics with the notion of anything supernatural. I was more referring to the notion that some things are not amenable to empirical scrutiny. Hence the reasoning of many theists and believers that they can ‘feel’ or ‘have knowledge’ of something beyond our senses and argue from there that it exists. I think it is bologna thru and thru. Of course if something is amenable to empirical scrutiny it cannot be classed as supernatural. But that is what the supernaturalist contends, that there are things beyond the physical universe
GooseHenry:
“Wouldn’t it have a negative impact on my work, my marriage and my relations to other people? At least to some degree.”
No, of course it wouldn’t. It’s called selective perception.
Or perhaps Stockholm’s Syndrome. If there were any captors to speak of.
Oh, wait. There are.
Plenty of folks over the centuries believed in folklore & mythology. About the only time it impacted them was when hands were laid on them (witness the human sacrifices of the Aztecs, for 1: there were no doubt many tears shed by loved 1s).
Or the decree of Theodosius: the believers weren’t impacted, but the heathens were, to a horrendous degree.
& please, none of the “No true Scotsman” fallacy, or the unrepresented example (NOT TRUE FOLLOWERS/BELIEVERS/CHRISTIANS etc.).
Really, your belief system can’t explain away the rivers of blood that wash up on the feet of your savior.
OMG what was with that meeting Jesus part? Was that a metaphor? A figure of speech? The guy says he met Jesus then converted! Hmmm. I live in San Francisco. There are a lot of people talking to Jesus on the streets. I wonder if one of them is Goose.
No offence, but what did you mean by that? Sorry if I am a bit harsh here, but this is our turf and I am especially grumpy with theists today.
A couple of anagrams for fun:
In God We Trust = Tongued Writs or Gut-rot Widens
President George Bush = There’s God! Superbeing!
Zac Hunter, sm, HeatheNZ, Peach63
Go read “The Case For Christ” by Lee Strobel(who was once an atheist) and then let me know your views. He did all the scientific & historical research and found God to be true.
Good Night.
Zac Hunter
“OMG”
What does this stand for? Oh my, what?
The Case for Christ is not ‘research’ based. Strobel merely interviewed a bunch of Christian historian and scholars. So he didnt do any research himself. Also, he only interviews theists. He does not interview any atheists or sceptics. Further, he was not an atheist, but a ‘spiritual sceptic’
And whats with constantly signing off 4him? We all know you are glued to the screen.
Oh My Goodness. how about STFU what do you thinbk that means
Zac Hunter:
“Hence the reasoning of many theists and believers that they can ‘feel’ or ‘have knowledge’ of something beyond our senses and argue from there that it exists. “
There is actually (something of) an explanation (I know you were talking to HZ).
Longtime student of Qiqong & Tai Chi here.
I have a crude ability to raise gooseflesh on my skin.
The human mind is a magnificent piece of workmanship, albeit random.
It is possible that the random(?) mix of prose, poetry, & symbology (in any complex/simple stimuli, e.g., the bible) triggers an event in the glands/neurons, thereby releasing endorphins/serotonin into the system. I’m no biologist (no degrees whatsoever, I humbly submit), but I have had some interesting experiences w/meditation, doing my form, & whatnot.
IMHO, it boils down to the release of energy, chemical events firing in a prescribed sequence.
Formula is formula, after all. You find a good recipe, you stick w/it.
4Him,
Already read it. One of the better apologist books but blatantly one sided. He makes a good lawyor argument, but like most lawyors is interested in supporting his client, not finding truth.
Might I suggest you read some of the responses to his book. They are compelling.
karen:
“HMDK
Welcome! And for your birthday…a giant peanut butter and jelly sandwich! With a side of spaghettios! Ramen”
Ah, ’tis like a homecoming…
complete with home-cookin’!
Like I always say:
A woman serves best by the oven!
*sarcasm duly noted, I hope!*
The correct answer being, of course,
the bedroom…
Ahem!
Reluctant:
“Welcome, oh unfurred primate. Apparently you’ve been doing your homework. Carried the day quite nicely. Happy (belated?) B-day. “
Well, yes, massah! Mah humwork be reel wel dun! Seriously, man,
YOU were the reason I decided to register here. Not that you swayed or convinced me or something like that; Nah, I was already pretty well grounded in my *snicker!* beliefs.
But I enjoyed yer eloquence, Reluctant, and read, well, just about all the txts on yer site.
Which lead me to read online, 2 nights ago, Thomas Paine’s “The Age Of Reason”.
I read it straight through, sippin’ cheap whiskey, laughing harder and harder -with- every new sentence (not -at-).
Such an old book, yet so immensely readably and sharp.
Ah……………………………………….
HMDK:
Welll…thanks. My ego has now swollen well past its limits, & am having trouble not tilting over. LOL.
Not a drinkin’ man meself, but a tip o’ the glass to you as well, m’friend.
The AR is really a treat and a 1/2, isn’t it? Small wonder Paine’s my hero.
Cool. Read Ingersoll yet? ‘Some Mistakes of Moses’ is a must-read for all us heretics (IMHO).
4him: Still there?
I am interested in some of these alleged ‘external’ attestations to the late JC. No 2nd century references, please. Acts of Nicodemus excluded, as that is pseudipigrapha. No lost works, either, please. Josephus was interpolated (as it was submitted by the grand liar Eusebius: Iraneus & Origen never cited said paragraph).
Oh, & we can exclude Tacitus, as well as Suetonius (Tacitus was citing 1 ‘Chrestus’, & Suetonius was given to hyperbole, witness his description of the birth of a phoenix). Oh, & Pliny’s letter to Trajan is asking for guidance in dealing w/Xtians, no allusion to JC ever existing.
Did I miss anything?
RA
Congrats on actually bringing one into the fold! You should get an atheist emblem to put on your helmet!
HMDK
Nothin’ says lovin’ like sumpin’ from the oven! “specially if one cooks in the bedroom.
Sarcasm duly note and much appreciated, as I sling it myself.
HeatheNZ
A belated “Binity” smirk! Loved the anagrams, too.
Reluctant, Karen… ah…
my heart swells with fear and my brain cringes in the truest throes of reason. Ich Bin Ein Disciple!
Sorry, I’m just a drunken, happy Viking from the frozen (or rather, rain-sodden), north. Denmark lies down to sleep, yet I, on my birthday, cast out all companionship to blather incomprehensibly here.
Reluctant: Nope, haven’t read Ingersoll yet, apart, of course, from yer scattered quotes, but ’tis first… or at least third…. on my agenda.
And Karen:
Ah, should I ever claim thy bussom
I’d certainly evolve on thy…?!#”
Eh, but let’s not go -there- quite yet, eh? No.
The Enemies are legion and they command the world like Devils.
We must ever beware!
4Him
Whenever you get back from picking up the kids…you never did say how you were “helping” the l_esbians in your youth group. How about elaborating?
The word for gay girls isn’t allowed!
karen: Ummm….don’t wear helmets. Helmet hair & all that (what little hair I possess, anyway). Do I get a free toaster?
The ‘fold’? Hmmmm…that expression might get the theisters frothing at the mouth. I hope so.
More of a club than a fold, I think…
reluctantatheist
Prove to me that King Edward I ever lived. Give me external proof- but no documentation from historians. You are picking and choosing who you want to believe based on your beliefs now. Atheists say that they are open-minded. They are just as closed-minded as us christians.
If you are going to knock out every historian that we have on record, then I am wasting my time.
As Jesus said:Matthew 10:14
If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.
Shaking the dust now,
4Him
HairlessMonkeyDK: aye, Reason, she’s a fierce & harsh mistress, is she not? Locked in the throes of logic, no slack, no shinny, no shackles! Freedom is for the freethinkers, perhaps? No, it is for all.
Ich bin ein Atheist, mein freund. Octolieber, Gott in Himmel, Schweiz und glauben!
4him: “If you are going to knock out every historian that we have on record,”
Well, lessee….
Philo Judaeus, for 1, 1st century, lived in Jerusalem. Seneca, for another. Another 39 Roman historians, no peep. Cite someone, say, oh, maybe those Greeks who came to worship at the end of John? Oh, thasright, no names.
Multiple EXTERNAL attestations. Note that I didn’t knock out your historians, my dear. They did.
Pre-emptive strikes aren’t quite so nice, when you’re on the receiving end, are they?
Hearsay isn’t acceptable in a court of law, under certain stipulations. Documents are acceptable. Acts of Nicodemus were deemed a forgery in the 4th century.
Produce something, say, from Philo. I would accept that.
Keep shakin’ it, darlin’.
4him:
“They are just as closed-minded as us christians.”
Well, nice of you to be honest about yourself.
I’m very open-minded, thank you. I want solid proof. Not a load of unsubstantiated hearsay from internal sources (isn’t that what everyone says about the Mormons? How suspicious that only Smith’s family members were privy to the ‘vision’?).
FYI, I approached the whole subject, not from “It’s wrong!” or “It’s right!”, I approached it from “Let’s take a look and see.”
I’m watching. Convince me.
RA
“Frothing theisters” sounds like a christian rock band! Ha!
Sorry, all out of toaters…how ’bout a nice fridge magnet?
HMDK
Ah, my brave Viking! I’m old enough to be your mother, so let’s not go there!
Reluctant: Righto!
And what do we see:
4Him:
“Prove to me that King Edward I ever lived. Give me external proof- but no documentation from historians. You are picking and choosing who you want to believe based on your beliefs now. Atheists say that they are open-minded. They are just as closed-minded as us christians.”
Aha! (Read the rest of this post in a Blackadder tone of voice, yet remember that it does not disqualify the statements themselves… Seatbelts buckled? OK!):
Hello Hot4HimWhoISNotToBeNamed:
In your post logical fallacies abound.
For starters, that historians AREN’T PREDOMINANTLY CHRISTIAN! which, of course they -are-, but hey don’t let reality stop you from making a point that has no merit.
And the Bible?
The only PROOF you can point to is THE BOOK ITSELF!
That is a circular argument, which,
by its very nature implies belief BEFOREHAND.
You cannot prove that the earth revolves around the sun,
without also proving THE EXISTENCE OF THE SUN