"I was a christian", theist argument.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-10-2015, 11:52 AM (This post was last modified: 12-10-2015 12:02 PM by Tomasia.)
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 09:57 AM)Chas Wrote:  Which of us believes without evidence? That would be you.Drinking Beverage

Which of us believes the views of historians, including secular ones, in regards to the existence of Jesus is based on faith (belief without evidence, as it's commonly defined here)? It would appear that according to you that a belief that Gautama Buddha, or Mohammad, or even St. Paul, James, etc.. existed, are sort of like believing in God's existence.

I also wonder if in your view, if we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say any opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were one interpretation of them would be no more accurate than another?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 12:03 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 09:07 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 08:37 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  The irony of a theist claiming someone's thinking is muddled and that they are confused and deluded, is almost too much.

The fact that a dishonest theist is on an atheist site doing it, is utterly unsurprising. Drinking Beverage

Yes I know, for you any person who believes in God is delusional and confused.

Tomasia - Since the word "delusional" is thrown around quite a lot here, could you give your definition or criteria around what is a delusion or delusional view/thought?

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 12:10 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 11:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 09:57 AM)Chas Wrote:  Which of us believes without evidence? That would be you.Drinking Beverage

Which of us believes the views of historians, including secular ones, in regards to the existence of Jesus is based on faith (belief without evidence, as it's commonly defined here)? It would appear that according to you that a belief that Gautama Buddha, or Mohammad, or even St. Paul, James, etc.. are sort of like believing in God's existence.

I also wonder in your view, if we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say any opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were no interpretation of them would be any less accurate than another?
Evidence gains credibility when it comes from first-hand unbiased sources, that is not the case for Jesus. There were historians during the lifetime of supposed miracle Jesus, yet there are no first hand unbiased records from that time. So from the records that are there, we can be sure that historians were told of accounts of a certain Yeshua by some people, however there is no way to ascertain the validity of said accounts.


Also if I do give you that there was probably a Yeshua person who was crucified alongside hundred s of other crucifixions during that period. That in no way adds validity towards the biblical Jesus.


Belief in Abraham Lincoln is believable based on the evidence we have.
Belief in Abraham Lincoln the Vampire Hunter would however require a whole lot more evidence than the former

Similarly, existence of a person named Yeshua or whatever, doesn't automatically validate Yeshua the demon-hunter.

[Image: 004.sig]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aoi Magi's post
12-10-2015, 12:14 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 12:10 PM)Aoi Magi Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 11:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Which of us believes the views of historians, including secular ones, in regards to the existence of Jesus is based on faith (belief without evidence, as it's commonly defined here)? It would appear that according to you that a belief that Gautama Buddha, or Mohammad, or even St. Paul, James, etc.. are sort of like believing in God's existence.

I also wonder in your view, if we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say any opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were no interpretation of them would be any less accurate than another?
Evidence gains credibility when it comes from first-hand unbiased sources, that is not the case for Jesus. There were historians during the lifetime of supposed miracle Jesus, yet there are no first hand unbiased records from that time. So from the records that are there, we can be sure that historians were told of accounts of a certain Yeshua by some people, however there is no way to ascertain the validity of said accounts.


Also if I do give you that there was probably a Yeshua person who was crucified alongside hundred s of other crucifixions during that period. That in no way adds validity towards the biblical Jesus.


Belief in Abraham Lincoln is believable based on the evidence we have.
Belief in Abraham Lincoln the Vampire Hunter would however require a whole lot more evidence than the former

Similarly, existence of a person named Yeshua or whatever, doesn't automatically validate Yeshua the demon-hunter.

You're not the first person to point this out to him Drinking Beverage

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 12:20 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 12:14 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 12:10 PM)Aoi Magi Wrote:  Evidence gains credibility when it comes from first-hand unbiased sources, that is not the case for Jesus. There were historians during the lifetime of supposed miracle Jesus, yet there are no first hand unbiased records from that time. So from the records that are there, we can be sure that historians were told of accounts of a certain Yeshua by some people, however there is no way to ascertain the validity of said accounts.


Also if I do give you that there was probably a Yeshua person who was crucified alongside hundred s of other crucifixions during that period. That in no way adds validity towards the biblical Jesus.


Belief in Abraham Lincoln is believable based on the evidence we have.
Belief in Abraham Lincoln the Vampire Hunter would however require a whole lot more evidence than the former

Similarly, existence of a person named Yeshua or whatever, doesn't automatically validate Yeshua the demon-hunter.

You're not the first person to point this out to him Drinking Beverage

No harm in trying, right? Big Grin

[Image: 004.sig]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aoi Magi's post
12-10-2015, 12:22 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 11:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 09:57 AM)Chas Wrote:  Which of us believes without evidence? That would be you.Drinking Beverage

Which of us believes the views of historians, including secular ones, in regards to the existence of Jesus is based on faith (belief without evidence, as it's commonly defined here)? It would appear that according to you that a belief that Gautama Buddha, or Mohammad, or even St. Paul, James, etc.. existed, are sort of like believing in God's existence.

You haven't really understood a thing I've posted, have you. Dodgy

The belief that someone existed on whom a legend is based is not at all like believing that the person described by the myth existed.

It really doesn't matter whether a preacher named Jesus existed, the Jesus described in the Bible almost certainly didn't; there is no evidence that he did.

The same goes for Mohammed.

Quote:I also wonder if in your view, if we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say any opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were one interpretation of them would be no more accurate than another?

You really don't understand what evidence is, do you. Facepalm

There exists no extra-Biblical evidence, or even corroboration, of the Jesus as described in the Bible.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
12-10-2015, 01:00 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 12:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 11:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Which of us believes the views of historians, including secular ones, in regards to the existence of Jesus is based on faith (belief without evidence, as it's commonly defined here)? It would appear that according to you that a belief that Gautama Buddha, or Mohammad, or even St. Paul, James, etc.. existed, are sort of like believing in God's existence.

You haven't really understood a thing I've posted, have you. Dodgy

The belief that someone existed on whom a legend is based is not at all like believing that the person described by the myth existed.

It really doesn't matter whether a preacher named Jesus existed, the Jesus described in the Bible almost certainly didn't; there is no evidence that he did.

The same goes for Mohammed.

Quote:I also wonder if in your view, if we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say one opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were one interpretation of them would be no more accurate than another?

You really don't understand what evidence is, do you. Facepalm

There exists no extra-Biblical evidence, or even corroboration, of the Jesus as described in the Bible.

I'm just trying to understand whether or not we can draw reasonable conclusions/opinions from "no evidence" as you put it. So to repeat the question again:

"If we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say one opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were one interpretation of them would be no more accurate than another?"

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 01:11 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 01:00 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 12:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  You haven't really understood a thing I've posted, have you. Dodgy

The belief that someone existed on whom a legend is based is not at all like believing that the person described by the myth existed.

It really doesn't matter whether a preacher named Jesus existed, the Jesus described in the Bible almost certainly didn't; there is no evidence that he did.

The same goes for Mohammed.


You really don't understand what evidence is, do you. Facepalm

There exists no extra-Biblical evidence, or even corroboration, of the Jesus as described in the Bible.

I'm just trying to understand whether not we can draw reasonable conclusions from "no evidence" as you put it. So to repeat the question again:

"If we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say any opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were one interpretation of them would be no more accurate than another?"

It comes down to opinion if there is no evidence of any particular hypothesis.
If, however, there is evidence that one could reasonably expect to be there but is not, that counts against that choice.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 01:22 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 12:10 PM)Aoi Magi Wrote:  
(12-10-2015 11:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Which of us believes the views of historians, including secular ones, in regards to the existence of Jesus is based on faith (belief without evidence, as it's commonly defined here)? It would appear that according to you that a belief that Gautama Buddha, or Mohammad, or even St. Paul, James, etc.. are sort of like believing in God's existence.

I also wonder in your view, if we're dealing with "no evidence" here, and it's just a matter of opinion, could we say any opinion is more reasonable than another opinion? Or would it be like interpreting ink blots, were no interpretation of them would be any less accurate than another?
Evidence gains credibility when it comes from first-hand unbiased sources, that is not the case for Jesus. There were historians during the lifetime of supposed miracle Jesus, yet there are no first hand unbiased records from that time. So from the records that are there, we can be sure that historians were told of accounts of a certain Yeshua by some people, however there is no way to ascertain the validity of said accounts.


Also if I do give you that there was probably a Yeshua person who was crucified alongside hundred s of other crucifixions during that period. That in no way adds validity towards the biblical Jesus.


Belief in Abraham Lincoln is believable based on the evidence we have.
Belief in Abraham Lincoln the Vampire Hunter would however require a whole lot more evidence than the former

Similarly, existence of a person named Yeshua or whatever, doesn't automatically validate Yeshua the demon-hunter.

A belief in Yeshua, the failed Jewish messiah claimant, and cult leader and apocalyptic preacher, who went around preaching about the Kingdom of God, who was the source of a variety of parables, and sayings, attributed to him the Gospels, who was crucified by the Romans, and gave rise to the Christian movement, who served as basis of the Gospel writings, and NT beliefs, who had a brother named James, etc.... doesn't require you to believe any of the supernatural stuff attributed to him.

Anyone more than a belief that Ceaser was a historical person requires you to belief he was born of a virgin. Or that Buddha was a historical person, requires you to believe the variety of miracles associated with him.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 01:23 PM
RE: "I was a christian", theist argument.
(12-10-2015 01:11 PM)Chas Wrote:  It comes down to opinion if there is no evidence of any particular hypothesis.
If, however, there is evidence that one could reasonably expect to be there but is not, that counts against that choice.

You still didn't answer the question. Can one opinion be any more reasonable than another opinion, on a matter for which there is "no evidence" as your put it?

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: