There were many eye witness accounts of Christ. They are written down too. But those are just cast aside. Oh...and many many very reputable witnesses at that.Originally Posted by Varenne Rodin
There were many eye witness accounts of Christ. They are written down too. But those are just cast aside. Oh...and many many very reputable witnesses at that.
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
What do you think those things are?
People in desert cultures eating shrooms and peyote without the benefits of greater education.
Do you discount ancient Chinese traditions and teachings? How or why do you think Christianity is any more valid?
That is where my faith comes in, just as you use your faith to believe in a chaotic big bang that produced intricate order.
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
This is silly. Individual eye witness accounts are admissable in courts of law, which consider very carefully what does and what does not constitute "evidence". I don't doubt that eye witness accounts are not certain "proof" -- but why do they "mean absolutely nothing"?
"You can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it." -- G.K. Chesterton, noted Catholic and Christian apologist. Logical proofs are merely restatements of the postulates, in different words.
Well if that's not projection I don't know what is. Bien, denying evolution at this point is a mere step away from affirming the geocentric model. And I don't think learned experts who dedicate years to research should be dismissed as "the masses."
On one hand we have thousands of biologists with phds who've gathered mounds of evidence, and on the other we have you.
Some of the eye witness accounts in the bible have been discredited. Some were stories taken from pagans. Most were taken from Judaism. Many Jews stated over and over that these were fables used to raise children with decent morals. Fables.
Where are the eye witness accounts today? Dead people don't testify. Would a person claiming to be a prophet be taken seriously in a court of law today? Absolutely not. People lie. People write stories. People attempt to collect followers for personal and financial gain.
Read my other posts. My eye witness account of a pimped out Jesus sounds like nonsense, right? I certainly hope no one turns my nonsense into a religion.
Bottom line, theism does not HAVE to be believed. It is an attack to attempt to deny atheists the freedom to shun your fantasies.
Ah, but God could be very powerfully impossible, contradictory, and anything you'd like in existence and being. Are you blind? Don't you see that everyday? I think you are still trying to be funny.
I didn't suggest that eye witness accounts were proof, but that they constitute "evidence".
Let me ask you: Would you believe your own eyes?
I usually call him Jesupiter because of the unmistakable parallel with Socrates, although the latter occurred under the hegemony of an Olympian state. Crucifixion was not popular; hemlock was the menace. In those days the magnum testament farts still came from oracles. Jesupiter could not apologize to the state because the state makes him appear as God in a man’s form. But, like Socrates, Jesupiter marches voluntarily to trial and the cross, equivalent to the hemlock but more violent and public.
There was however a problem with responsibility regarding Socrates. For what God of the Olympian collection could have taken the authorship of his creation? Well, there was the chief, Jupiter, but he did not have absolute authority. So the ultimate responsibility for the assassination of Socrates had to be taken by the state. That was not a pleasant aspect of the divine comedy of the day, and it was not effective torture in the satirical makeup of propositions. It was necessary for the state to pass judgment.
Then came the conquest of the Jews and the study of their religion. They had been able to postulate messianic democracy and had been able to sell it well. The result was a civilization superior to anyone previously undertaken by any state. The Romans figured that if the Jews were able to sell the possible coming, they should be able to sell the actual one. The difference between Socrates and the new guest was that the latter was an act of God the father. And he was sold as God the son.
Master Jesus had unsurpassable abilities. He could cure the paraplegics better than Oral Roberts, and even restore sight to the psychosomatic blind. He was not only a mustard seed that could move mountains, but also an expert in the dynamics of density. He was the first case to realize that density changed with impact. It is a mistake to think that he walked on water because there were unseen rocks under the surface. He could have done easily because he had x-ray vision far more advanced than Clark Kent. But he also had the ability to trot with supersonic speed, turning water into a firm wall without the use of some medium such as starch to make it denser before proceeding. He would have been better in travelling through swamps, and much faster than the Pygmies of the forests of Africa, as Isabel Allende depicted in her Forest of the Pygmies. No one could beat Jesus at anything, because no one went to the father except through him. No one could compete against him in any extraordinary event, not even marching voluntarily and superdignified to the cross.
There would have to be very convincing proof. Again, exceptional claims demand exceptional evidence.
I frequently believe my own eyes or, rather, I trust them when they're viewing things easily viewed by the whole of the world. Ocean waves, for example. I've seen them many times. I've felt the water and the push and pull of the sea. I've ridden on boats. The water has been photographed and filmed above and below. I don't think there are many people who would tell you that oceans don't exist.
There are many people who would tell you we have never seen god. In saying this, I'm not saying there isn't a god, but he didn't make himself known, he didn't tell us who to hate and who to love and how to live. If he had, he still could. He could come back and give us refresher courses that would fit our changing world.
See "The Tree of Life" movie if you want to better understand that stories of man, while very special, are too small to be relevant to our universal situation. It made me want to be more kind to others.
Last edited by Varenne Rodin; 12-19-2011 at 07:09 PM.
No she's not. You posted pictures of stones that were supposed to be compelling evidence, and when people pointed out that they were false, you either outright ignored them, or said they were wrong and should prove it, even though you're the one that posted the pictures. And then you blab about people needing to post good evidence for evolution when all you've done is posted a link to an underwhelming video and pictures of fraudulent stones. It's laughable.
Except when it comes to Jesus, of course.
And the first ad hominem goes to . . . BienvenuJDC!I bet that you would have joined with the flat earth and the geocentric people if you lived in that time....yeah, you seem the type.Bravo, sir!
"Tree of Life", was far from suggesting that "stories of man, while very special, are too small to be relevant to our universal situation." I would say that "Tree of Life" suggested that stories of man are both very special and revealing of universal truths.
The first? I don't think so...And the first ad hominem goes to . . . BienvenuJDC!
Oh, and I posted the pics, others made undocumented claims that they weren't authentic. Is it my responsibility to verify their claim? Again...I don't think so...
Les Miserables,
Volume 1, Fifth Book, Chapter 3
Remember this, my friends: there are no such things as bad plants or bad men. There are only bad cultivators.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
