Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-06-2015, 09:14 AM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 09:06 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(22-06-2015 03:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, you gave an incorrect definition of eyewitness.

Bullshit. I said that Paul spoke to eyewitnesses of Jesus and the Resurrection (Peter & James), and then you ignorantly asked do we have books of Peter and James...and I pointed out to you that we do, a point at which you ignored and began this current "eyewitness" rant, which you are also wrong about.

This is what happens when you are so damn quick to attack without knowing what you are talking about, your ignorance ends up getting exposed by the likes of a superior intellectual like myself Big Grin

So I ask again, does being wrong all the time bother you?

There is no evidence that those books are eyewitness accounts; the authorship is unknown.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
23-06-2015, 04:22 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
let me try to explain to Wail of the Child what a witness testimony is. Lets say a man alive at the time of jesus was lucky enough to physically see one of these alleged miraculous events, THEN, goes and writes it down. THAT would be eyewitness testimony. What is NOT eye witness testimony is some jackass born after the death of jesus and the disciples, who begins to write down hearsay he gathers from alleged eyewitnesses years later who tell marvelous tales of magical events....this is called HEARSAY. Get it?

Further debunked when no one of a contemporary perspective bothered to record these magical events either.....Consider well that is odd, perhaps Justus who lived in Galilee? Nope, perhaps reknowned historian philo of alexandria? nope, not only did he fail to record any of these magical events like zombie invasions, resurrecting self proclaimed saviors and global darkness midday....in fact, he doesnt even mention jesus...almost like he didnt exist...Consider or was so insignificant, he didnt bother. Yes

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
23-06-2015, 07:04 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 09:14 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence that those books are eyewitness accounts; the authorship is unknown.

Then the authorship of all writings of antiquity are unknown. Unless you were there when they wrote it, you don't know who wrote shit, do you?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 07:28 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 07:04 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-06-2015 09:14 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence that those books are eyewitness accounts; the authorship is unknown.

Then the authorship of all writings of antiquity are unknown. Unless you were there when they wrote it, you don't know who wrote shit, do you?

There are writings that are referenced or attested to in other writings, providing evidence of authorship.

There are no such attestations for the writings 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
23-06-2015, 07:39 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 04:22 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  let me try to explain to Wail of the Child what a witness testimony is. Lets say a man alive at the time of jesus was lucky enough to physically see one of these alleged miraculous events, THEN, goes and writes it down. THAT would be eyewitness testimony.

Paul met and spoke with eyewitnesses to Jesus and his Resurrection (Peter and James). You can keep on trying to sweep that shit under the rug all you want, but it isn't going anywhere.

(23-06-2015 04:22 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  What is NOT eye witness testimony is some jackass born after the death of jesus and the disciples, who begins to write down hearsay he gathers from alleged eyewitnesses years later who tell marvelous tales of magical events....this is called HEARSAY. Get it?

Paul wasn't born after Jesus' death. So this is actually a nonsense straw man you are setting up here.

(23-06-2015 04:22 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Further debunked when no one of a contemporary perspective bothered to record these magical events either.....Consider well that is odd, perhaps Justus who lived in Galilee? Nope, perhaps reknowned historian philo of alexandria?

So for Jesus to NOT have these men write ANYTHING about him, Jesus surpassed all of these men when it comes to the glory of his name, and the legacy after his death.

The average Joe Schmo walking down the street may not know Justus, or Philo of Alexanderia...but I garandamntee the average Joe Schmo knows Jesus.

So in other words, Jesus didn't need those "other" guys writing things about him. The plan was for the Gospel to spread far beyond first century Palestine...and it did, despite those other guys having not wrote anything about him.

Look at the legacy of Jesus, and look at the legacy of those other cats and you tell me who could have used the "extra penmanship" Laugh out load

(23-06-2015 04:22 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  nope, not only did he fail to record any of these magical events like zombie invasions, resurrecting self proclaimed saviors and global darkness midday....in fact, he doesnt even mention jesus...almost like he didnt exist...Consider or was so insignificant, he didnt bother. Yes

The name of Jesus and his glory spread regardless of whether those other guys wrote anything about him. Honorable mentions from Justus and Philo just isn't needed, GWOG.

As Jesus would probably tell you..."thanks, but no thanks" Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 07:42 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 07:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  There are writings that are referenced or attested to in other writings, providing evidence of authorship.

All of those other writings could have been lying. Ohh, you accept by faith that those other writings are true???

(23-06-2015 07:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  There are no such attestations for the writings in the Bible.

The question is; Are there good reasons to believe that the Gospels were written by either disciples, or friends of the disciples? The answer is...yes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 07:47 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 07:39 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  The plan was for the Gospel to spread far beyond first century Palestine..

You're absolutely correct. The question is who's plan? Consider

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2015, 08:20 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 07:42 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-06-2015 07:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  There are writings that are referenced or attested to in other writings, providing evidence of authorship.

All of those other writings could have been lying. Ohh, you accept by faith that those other writings are true???

It's called corroborating evidence.

Quote:
(23-06-2015 07:28 PM)Chas Wrote:  There are no such attestations for the writings in the Bible.

The question is; Are there good reasons to believe that the Gospels were written by either disciples, or friends of the disciples? The answer is...yes.

No, there is no good reason to believe that as there is evidence to the contrary.

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
23-06-2015, 08:40 PM (This post was last modified: 23-06-2015 08:43 PM by Worom.)
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
Alright I've had enough, I originally started this thread and have watched you start a debate, it is time for me to respond.

(17-06-2015 08:23 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Happy in a finite life on earth. Unhappy in an infinite life in hell. Oh, and that isn't a threat by the way, either.

Funny it certainly sounds like a threat. Also Prove that Hell exists.

(18-06-2015 05:26 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  My belief in hell is based on the background information I have regarding the Historicity of the Resurrection, which affirms Christianity...and you already know how that goes Big Grin

The Bible is not proof, there is no proof of the resurrection in any other text, again Prove that the resurrection actually happened.

(18-06-2015 10:31 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Then there is no evidence that Caesar was stabbed.

Yes there is and here is my evidence. Multiple books all confirming the same event by multiple authors that meet the requirements to be considered historical documents, That and we found the actual place that the assassination happened so theres that. This is only a small sampling by the way.
http://www.livescience.com/23900-julius-...vered.html
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...o/44*.html
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...s*.html#78
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...r*.html#61
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Ro...ml#XXXIIII

(19-06-2015 11:30 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 05:21 AM)Chas Wrote:  Other than the eyewitness accounts? Consider
Quote:Paul had eyewitness accounts, too. Peter and James (brother of Jesus). Not to mention the eyewitnesses that were alive during the time Paul wrote 1 Corinthians 15:3-7...but that kind of shit doesn't count, does it?

No it doesn't, the earliest this would have been written would have been 25 years after the alleged resurrection event and we don't know if Paul actually wrote the thing, and the writing style of 1 Corinthians reads as a creed, there is no mention of time or location either and includes statements of faith. And since a creed is a profession of faith it is not evidence. Also our oldest copy is 150 years after the date it was supposed to have been written. A lot can happen in 150 years of copying and recopying where things could have been inserted, especially since 1 Corinthians has a different writing style.
(19-06-2015 11:30 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 05:21 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no reason to accept the veracity of a book of myths

You are begging the question, which is fallacious. You are assuming the Bible is a "book of myths", when every word in it COULD be true. Unless you can prove that the Resurrection (or anything else recorded in the book) is a myth, then you are making an unsupported assertion.

Since the bible doesn't meet the standards of evidence for a historical document, then this isn't a fallacious argument. Here are the requirements of a historical document.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_analysis

When these methods are applied to the Bible it fails miserably

(19-06-2015 11:30 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 05:21 AM)Chas Wrote:  that is unsupported by external evidence.

You are erraenously concluding that the Bible needs to be "supported" by external sources. The Bible could be true regardless of whether or not it is backed up by any outside books or sources, and that is not even to say that there is no eternal evidence Big Grin

See Above

(19-06-2015 11:35 AM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 09:01 AM)ThatAtheistChick Wrote:  I used to hate it when I was having a debate with someone and I couldn't defend my position with anything except the bible tells me so. I'd have this big ole awkward silence which really meant, "I know I do not make a lick of sense right now." Being the only bible thumper in an atheist family, this happened often!

Not that there is anything necessarily wrong with "cus the bible tells me so", I mean after all, it is only the Word of the Living God *caps for emphasis*, of course Big GrinBig Grin

Prove it

(19-06-2015 06:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 03:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  Paul was not contemporaneous - he was not an eyewitness.

Paul was contemporary in the sense that he lived during the time of Jesus, despite having not met him...but that isn't the issue...I said that he met eyewitnesses of Jesus and the Resurrection account, two of which were Peter and James.

This is not a primary source as he didn't witness the event, secondary sources (hearsay) have strict requirements to be accepted. Which the Bible also fails miserably at.

(19-06-2015 06:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 03:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, the conclusion follows from the lack of evidence and the absurd events described.

The conclusion also follows from the lack of evidence in favor of evolution, and also the "absurd events" described by the theory, you know, the whole reptile-bird stuff..stuff that you never saw happened but claimed it did.

There is a massive mountain of evidence for evolution, you are giving a statement from personal incredulity which is you don't understand it or find it difficult to understand therefore you think it's wrong.

(19-06-2015 06:22 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 03:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  Of course it needs to be supported to be accepted as true. Since it is not, it is just stories.

Ok, and based on the evidence that has been presented to me, I think it is supported.

(19-06-2015 03:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  You believe that a book without any verification is true. That is absurd.

I believe based on historical evidence.

What historical evidence? I have yet to find any.

(19-06-2015 06:35 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 03:58 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Name one eyewitness account of jesus, just one....

Paul, who lived during the time of Jesus AND the disciples, and met with Peter, apostle of Jesus, and James, brother of Jesus, met with eyewitness' of Jesus. I don't know how many times I have to say this, between you and Chas.

This is not a primary source as he didn't witness the event, secondary sources (hearsay) have strict requirements to be accepted. Which the Bible also fails miserably at.

(19-06-2015 06:35 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 03:58 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  The bible IS a book of myths.

Unsupported assertion. Is Chas your understudy? You guys are the kings of unsupported assertions.

It's not an unsupported assertion, the Bible fails the requirements to be considered a historical document, ergo a book of myths and stories. And therefore not evidence.

(19-06-2015 06:35 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(19-06-2015 03:58 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  As I have schooled you before, if you remove the pseudepigrapha, allegorical stories, parables, fiction, fantasy, and forgery you wouldn't have much left. Exodus never happened, global flood never happened, moses never existed, noah never existed, jesus's alleged resurrection was never witnessed....an empty tomb does not a resurrection make. Keep up cartilage of the brain, you are slipping back even further with every ignorant, biased, misinformed, ineducable post you make.

More unsupported assertions, yayyy Thumbsup Tell ya what, GWOG...lets just take this stuff on a point by point basis...now which one of this topics or subtopics within the Resurrection realm would you like to get intellectually spanked on??

Go ahead, I am even letting you choose the topic. Am I a nice guy or what?

See Above

(23-06-2015 07:04 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(23-06-2015 09:14 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is no evidence that those books are eyewitness accounts; the authorship is unknown.

Then the authorship of all writings of antiquity are unknown. Unless you were there when they wrote it, you don't know who wrote shit, do you?

See above for how the historical accuracy of documents is determined.

“We can judge our progress by the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers, our willingness to embrace what is true rather than what feels good.”
― Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Worom's post
23-06-2015, 09:09 PM
RE: Much Happier now that I'm an Atheist
(23-06-2015 07:47 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  You're absolutely correct. The question is who's plan? Consider

Ummm, God's plan, perhaps? Just an accurate shot in the dark here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: