Aaron 123, awesome post.
A non-belief is most certainly a belief. You believe there is no God. Hmmmm.... i think :-)
This still strikes me as a strange statement. Would not
collecting stamps count as a hobby? Would "off" count as a TV channel?
I would consider the remains of Jesus Christ in sight for all to see as sufficient evidence. Bone, marrow, documented, authenticated papers that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did not rise from the dead. No resurrection, no belief. It's as simple as that.
It's nice to see that you've laid down one possible bit of evidence that might sway you otherwise. Though I have to ask; if Jesus was completely fictional (as in; a made-up character, thus, no bones to speak of) what would be sufficient evidence in that context?
Evidence of GOD, let me ask a basic question..why do you not accept the bible as a historical document when it has been proven to be very accurate. I will get one of many sources for you soon.
The main reason is the god character himself. I do think aspects of the bible may be based on historical events, albit embellished in many cases. However, the god character is one I have yet to see evidence of existence for.
I look forward to your sources.
GOD does respect your right to choose. But he holds us accountable for our choices. Not a novel concept in our world. hell is not his wish, but he is just, and that is the consequence of non-belief. Don't look at me, I didn't make the rules.
I don't really have too much to say here, as this is something I hear fairly often. Though different people expresses this with different "volume". Some spoke loudly of endless pain and torment, some spoke softly of "seperation" from god. Do you go for the "endless pain and torment" idea, or the "seperation" idea? (though what "seperation" means, I'd imagine differs on the person) Right now, I think my existence will cease to be once I die. However, I don't think there's any way of knowing for sure. Perhaps there is a 'heaven and hell' thing awaiting us. Or perhaps the afterlife is much different than what we'd expect. Perhaps we'll be reincarnated into a new body. Perhaps some of us will become ghosts. Or... we may cease to be. There's no surefire way of knowing.
perhaps I am in for a surprise. I apologize if I made a bad assumption. What is your background? I do realize there are many people who have turned from the faith, so I probably should have not made that statement.
Actually, I am one of those that have "turned from the faith", and there are some other here that are likewise. The background and reasoning will be different for everybody, so I can only speak for myself. My reasonings had nothing to do with anger or fustration at my parents or church, or god or Jesus. I think the pastors I grew up with were very nice people. They often spoke of expressing kindness and love towards others. I simply realized there wasn't any soild reasons to believe in this religion, or any others. For more details, this fourm's parent site is a great place to look. Have you read through it yet? If not, I'd suggust you do so. At the very least, you'll learn more about our thought process.
Typing too fast and not thinking first I reckon.
I'm totally with you there! Sometimes, I type something, then an hour or two later, I realized I could've come up with something far better. It can be fustrating sometimes...
I don't pretend to know everything about something as complex as the bible. I'm not professing to be an expert. I'll leave that up to GOD.
Well, I can't agree with the last sentence, but I do with the rest. (that is; I don't really consider myself an expert on the book, or its long and complex history)
Just because Josephus is disputed, doesn't mean his writings are inaccurate.
Actually, the issue isn't that his
writings are inaccurate, but that his words about Jesus may have been added in by someone else.
And Wikipedia? Cmon now....
You don't have to take the wikipedia's words for it. That page has dozens of links to other web sites and essays on the subject. I don't know if there are any books dedicated to the subject, but I guess it's possible.
Not hard to find people who disagree about the simplest of life's details. In fact, I think to get the real picture, you need to take all the evidence into account. I believe once you do that, it becomes quite clear that the resurrection and life of Christ is concrete. The individual gospels, historians, they all paint the picture. As for a man god, mere men don't rise from the dead. Would be interested to see what evidence has guided your thought process.
The weakness of using the gospels as evidence is that they are not independent sources. They are christians writings, forming the basics (or perhaps 'bread and butter' is more accurate) of that belief system. Independent historians has more weight, I would say. I've seen other people using a list of historians that talk about Jesus or christianity. However, those lists tends to be unimpressive, as most of the historians listed are well after Jesus' time (they're usually from the 2nd century or late 1st century). What I'd like to see is a long list of historians from when Jesus lived, and how they talk about/seen Jesus and the things he did. That would convince me that the man existed at that time, and that he did at least some
of the things attributed to him. I probably won't be convinced of his divine miracles at that point, but hey, one step at a time!
As for tacitus and the gospels, they were written with less of a time gap then any of other accepted historical figures of the time. You believe in Hannibal right? yet the time between his events and the documented proof was well beyond the gap in time found in the bible events describing Christ. And John? he was with Christ. Is that disputed? probably. But that's hardly a surprise. But there are just as many scholars who are confident that he is that John. In fact, the bible holds up very well when compared to most historical evidence of that time. Did I explain that well??? perhaps not. I am not the most gifted of communicators.
Actually, I'm not familar with Hannibal, so I don't feel qualified to comment on this part. I'll have to leave this up to others.
Is it fair for me to assume that the bible is a huge problem for the Athiest?
I don't understand the question.
For some reason, it is disregarded as some novel devised by man? To what end?
I do not see the bible as inspired by/the word of an actual divine, supernatural being. I do, however, see it as a collection of books, reflecting the culture and times it was written in. In that sense, the bible is nothing to be discarded. By reading it, we can gain insight on the values and beliefs of a certain group of people in a particualr region of the world. By studying it, we can see how their ideas changed over time. In that sense, it is a extremely important cultural artifact. One that should be preserved for future generations to study.
I can't follow the logic but am eager to find out what specific problems you have with it.
Great! Hope you learn something.
Cheers!! God Bless You!!
I think you know how I feel about the last part, but the sentiment is nice just the same.