Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 07:47 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

I've told my story numerous times, on here. Suffice to say, I am hard core atheist. To say "I don't know" is not in my makeup. There are simply too many arguments against gods and no evidence of any kind for them.


Well...there is as much evidence for the existence of gods as there is evidence against the existence of gods...almost none...and all of very, very dubious probative value.

And just as you realize there are arguments against gods...there certainly are arguments for gods. None of which, seem even close to conclusive on either side.

So...what is a "hard-core atheist?"
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 07:48 am
@Wilso,
Wilso wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

I've told my story numerous times, on here. Suffice to say, I am hard core atheist. To say "I don't know" is not in my makeup. There are simply too many arguments against gods and no evidence of any kind for them.


I consider "I don't know" one of the most intellectually honest things a person can say. Whereas "god did it" is an act of unadulterated intellectual cowardice.


I certainly agree with the first part of that comment, Wilso. I have some reservations about the second part…but that does not detract from the strength of the first.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 08:04 am
Quote:
Farmerman said: NO RELIGION CAN PRODUCE ANY VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE OF ITS GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT and cannot, similarly, evidence anything to underpin its credo other than "hearsay" from supposed patriarchs and Apostles

The verdicts in many modern court cases are decided by a careful weighing up of the facts by the jury, often relying on purely circumstantial evidence.
Same with Christianity, the circumstantial evidence is OVERWHELMING that a guy called Jesus existed, there were thousands of eyewitnesses.
Even the Koran says he was a miracle man because it dare not claim he never existed, and likewise even the medieval Jewish 'Toledot Yeshu' (Life of Jesus) manuscript has to admit it.
In short, Jesus was TOO BIG to have been a myth..Smile

John Glenn once said from space- "To look out at this kind of creation out here and not believe in God is to me impossible, it just strengthens my faith"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/John-Glenn_zps2f7c8414.jpg~original
Frank Apisa
 
  -1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 08:14 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Farmerman said: NO RELIGION CAN PRODUCE ANY VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE OF ITS GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT and cannot, similarly, evidence anything to underpin its credo other than "hearsay" from supposed patriarchs and Apostles

The verdicts in many modern court cases are decided by a careful weighing up of the facts by the jury, often relying on purely circumstantial evidence.
Same with Christianity, the circumstantial evidence is OVERWHELMING that a guy called Jesus existed, there were thousands of eyewitnesses.
Even the Koran says he was a miracle man because it dare not claim he never existed, and likewise even the medieval Jewish 'Toledot Yeshu' (Life of Jesus) manuscript has to admit it.
In short, Jesus was TOO BIG to have been a myth..Smile

John Glenn once said from space- "To look out at this kind of creation out here and not believe in God is to me impossible, it just strengthens my faith"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/John-Glenn_zps2f7c8414.jpg~original



First you had the eyewitness testimony of the Roman army garrison...(none of which you could establish)...and now you the testimony of thousands of eyewitnesses...only two or three of whom you could even come close to establishing. Even Paul NEVER saw Jesus.

Why do you try this nonsense? Are you trying to make your side of the issue seem frivolous?
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 08:55 am
Quote:
Frank Apisa said:@RF- First you had the eyewitness testimony of the Roman army garrison...(none of which you could establish)...and now you the testimony of thousands of eyewitnesses...only two or three of whom you could even come close to establishing. Even Paul NEVER saw Jesus.

That's the spirit muchacho, keep clutching at them straws to try to score points off your old uncle Romeo..Smile
(And cheer up, your golfing season will start soon enough)
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/clutch-straw_zps7bf7b57f.jpg~original

Fact is Matt ch 27 contains the Jesus trial transcript when Pilate delivers the "Not guilty" verdict, and also contains the "he was the son of God" statement of the Centurion and his troops..Smile
As for bounty hunter Paul, he was knocked off his feet by a blast that blinded him, but he was still able to hear and talk to Jesus who warned him about the naughty step (Acts ch 9)..Smile
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 09:17 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Frank Apisa said:@RF- First you had the eyewitness testimony of the Roman army garrison...(none of which you could establish)...and now you the testimony of thousands of eyewitnesses...only two or three of whom you could even come close to establishing. Even Paul NEVER saw Jesus.

That's the spirit muchacho, keep clutching at them straws to try to score points off your old uncle Romeo..Smile
(And cheer up, your golfing season will start soon enough)
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/clutch-straw_zps7bf7b57f.jpg~original

Fact is Matt ch 27 contains the Jesus trial transcript when Pilate delivers the "Not guilty" verdict, and also contains the "he was the son of God" statement of the Centurion and his troops..Smile
As for bounty hunter Paul, he was knocked off his feet by a blast that blinded him, but he was still able to hear and talk to Jesus who warned him about the naughty step (Acts ch 9)..Smile


So...what you are saying is that you cannot substantiate the claim about the Roman army garrison...or the "thousands of eyewitnesses"...

...but that you are not going to acknowledge it, because despite all this "I am a Christian" nonsense, you really do not have the character to fess up.

Okay...I get that. Wink

Jesus would have been very disappointed with that, Romeo!
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 09:47 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
I have values similar to yours, but i wouldn't say they rise to the level of a religion.

As I said, it's a philosophical concession. When I discussed these things with philosophically-inclined friends in college, my initial position was that I had no religion. They objected that even I believe in a few things I can't prove, and that these things taken together constitute my religion, whatever they are. I had no good argument against this, and it didn't matter enough to argue about, anyway. Saying "I don't have much of a religion" rather than "I don't have any religion" is, as we say in Germany, no spike off my cown.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 12:08 pm
Quote:
Frank Apisa said:@RF- So...what you are saying is that you cannot substantiate the claim about the Roman army garrison...or the "thousands of eyewitnesses"...
...but that you are not going to acknowledge it, because despite all this "I am a Christian" nonsense, you really do not have the character to fess up.
Okay...I get that.
Jesus would have been very disappointed with that, Romeo!

My my, we are in a grouchy mood today aren't we mate, you're definitely showing 'golf withdrawal symptoms'! Hey there are some good computer golf simulations around, so get one to tide yourself over til the season starts..Smile
As for the thousands of eyewitnesses, how many would you like?
There were at least 750,000 people in Jesus's home ground of Judaea and adjacent areas, but that figure rockets to 3 million if we include areas a little further afield.
The size of the Roman garrison is unknown; several thousand is a reasonable estimate.
Like i've said before, all in all that's a lot of eyewitnesses..Smile

"Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness" (Matt 9:35)
http://imageshack.us/a/img694/8567/8tcv.jpg
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 12:44 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Frank Apisa said:@RF- So...what you are saying is that you cannot substantiate the claim about the Roman army garrison...or the "thousands of eyewitnesses"...
...but that you are not going to acknowledge it, because despite all this "I am a Christian" nonsense, you really do not have the character to fess up.
Okay...I get that.
Jesus would have been very disappointed with that, Romeo!

My my, we are in a grouchy mood today aren't we mate, you're definitely showing 'golf withdrawal symptoms'! Hey there are some good computer golf simulations around, so get one to tide yourself over til the season starts..Smile
As for the thousands of eyewitnesses, how many would you like?
There were at least 750,000 people in Jesus's home ground of Judaea and adjacent areas, but that figure rockets to 3 million if we include areas a little further afield.
The size of the Roman garrison is unknown; several thousand is a reasonable estimate.
Like i've said before, all in all that's a lot of eyewitnesses..Smile

"Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness" (Matt 9:35)
http://imageshack.us/a/img694/8567/8tcv.jpg



http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/humour-blague/clown-jonglerie/vil2_joker.gif
neologist
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 01:54 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Are you poking fun at Romeo?

For shame! Laughing
Setanta
 
  2  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 02:16 pm
@Thomas,
Your friends were displaying the blind-faith absolutism of the religionists. If one wants to argue it, there is absolutely no certainty in anything. Blind faith is a belief with no evidence (i.e., the basis of religion). What you have given as your two-tenet religion is based on a burden of evidence, even if it cannot appeal to absolute certainty--and some evidence is way ahead of the no evidence of blind faith. Belief based on a reasonable burden of evidence is to blind-faith religion as an automobile is to a skateboard.
hingehead
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 02:22 pm
@Setanta,
I think the existence of a plethora of religions is an inductive proof against the existence of gods, certainly for monotheism. Atheism is much more logically consistent. Thomas might ask his friends what evidence they used to pick their particular god. Did they shop around as much as they would for a car? Or a skateboard?
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 02:24 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

Are you poking fun at Romeo?

For shame! Laughing


He apparently thinks he can access the eyewitness accounts of the Roman army garrison at the purported time of Jesus.

He apparently thinks he can access the eyewitness accounts of "thousands" of people back in those days.

I'd like to see him name 10...any combination of the two asserted groups.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 02:25 pm
@hingehead,
That's an interesting thought! I remember a research done some decades ago about people and how they buy cars. Many decide to buy a car on a whim without any research, but will spend hours deciding on which tv to buy.

There doesn't seem to be much relationship between the importance of choice and how much time one spends to evaluate it.

This would be an interesting topic for another thread.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  2  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 02:27 pm
I'm late to this topic, and I'm sure how to describe my beliefs. It's ridiculous to assume atheists are amoral just as it is to assume born agains are pillars of the community. The BTK killer was an active member of his church. There's a columnist for the Washington Post who wrote that his father was an atheist, and when he was very young he asked his Dad where do we go when we die? His father answered, I don't know, where were you before you were born?
I love that statement. But having said that, I still hedge my bets, I do find comfort in prayer, but total discomfort with a group of people holding hands, praying out loud.
Advocate
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 03:08 pm
@glitterbag,
I get a kick out of agnostics. It is not that they are unsure that there is a god, it is hedging their bets just in case.
glitterbag
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 03:14 pm
@glitterbag,
That was meant to say I don't know how to describe my belief system. I don't consider myself agnostic, and I don't believe there is one true religion. I don't proselytize and I don't pay attention when someone else try's to shape my core beliefs.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 03:33 pm
@Advocate,
Advocate wrote:

I get a kick out of agnostics. It is not that they are unsure that there is a god, it is hedging their bets just in case.


That is nonsense.

There is no bet to hedge.

The fact is that most agnostics are agnostics because they do not know if a god exists...or if there are no gods.

anonymously99
 
  0  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 03:46 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
I get a kick out of agnostics. It is not that they are unsure that there is a god, it is hedging their bets just in case.


Quote:
The fact is that most agnostics are agnostics because they do not know if a god exists...or if there are no gods.


You've lost me.
Setanta
 
  1  
Mon 17 Feb, 2014 05:30 pm
@hingehead,
Well, of course, cars are a dime a dozen as far as quality goes, that's just vanity. A skateboard, however, must not only reliably protect you from injury, but it speaks volumes about your taste and your coolth. Gods---same as a used cars.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Atheism
  3. » Page 406
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 05/17/2025 at 06:30:03