Is Religious Faith Just Wishful Thinking?

MayCaesar

I do not think it even provides comfort and a sense of purpose in life. I have come to think that so-called "god-shaped hole" people refer to is a product of faith-based thinking in the first place. Someone who has not been raised in a community of faith, like me, has never had that "hole", never needed any fantasy stories to fill my life with purpose: there are things in life that I have found give me joy and satisfaction, and pursuing them is what my life is about. Pure empiricism got me there, as it gets billions other non-religious people.

What religion does do is say, "There are things in this world much more important than your life, and your life must be dedicated to servicing them" (and religion is not the only kind of ideology that does that; collectivism, in particular nationalism or socialism, does the same). So the person stops pursuing his own joy and happiness, and starts pursuing something that he has been convinced his duty is. The purpose has not been given, but replaced - from a rational one to an irrational one. Religion has not given to the person something, but taken away something and substituted it with an inferior version. Now the person is afraid of losing that inferior version, for he has been convinced that the alternative to it is no version, not a superior version. The comfort here is completely illusory.

Now, there are certainly people who feel that their life is devoid of meaning. Then religious people tell them, "If you adopted a religion, you would find meaning in the service to god, spirits, or whatever your religion venerates". But it is like telling a person who does not have any hobbies, "Hey, start using heroin! It will give you something to do in your spare time!" Sure, it will do that - but why choose one of the worst solutions to the problem (and one that has endless negative side effects), when good ones are available?

I posted in another thread some examples of the "broken window fallacy", and I think that the idea that religion gives one a sense of purpose is another one of them. People focus on what religious people claim their religion gives them, forgetting to consider what the world view they could have accepted instead of religion could have given them. Now they have lost the ability to acquire the latter, but it was conveniently forgotten when celebrating their religiosity.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@JulesKorngold ;  Religion is not based in faith...Religions like Islam, Judaism, Catholicism, are based in a works doctrine where the individual seeks a relationship with a particular deity via self-righteousness, efforts to conform to a set of rules or laws sufficiently in order to ingratiate themselves with said deity.

Christianity is the only "faith based" system in existence that teaches the truism that human kind is not capable of working or striving sufficiently to please Elohim (Genesis 1:1); this, due the Adamic sin-nature (Romans 5:12) but that Elohim, Himself, provides the Path to intimate relationship with Him through self-less love demonstrated by Messiah Jesus on a Roman Cross some 2000-years ago (John 3:16).

There are demonically-rooted "religions" which also display great "faith" in that they tout a rejection of any deity yet believe that all things present within the Realm of Time in nature manifest from nothing which exploded...this is the greatest "faith" of all.

 

just_sayin

It seems to me the atheist is the one who has to have incredible faith.  My faith in Christianity is based on the historical evidence of the life and resurrection of Jesus.  Even the enemies of Jesus admitted he performed miracles - both Jewish and Roman historians acknowledge this.  There are several witnesses of Jesus resurrection - one source dates to within 18 months of the resurrection.  The witnesses seem credible, and the details provided are not ones that one would make up for a fake story - such as Jesus dying by crucifixion or that the first witnesses were women.  The conviction and martyr of these first witnesses seems in keeping with their sincerely held belief that they had seen Jesus resurrected.

In other threads I have provided evidence of miracles.  A nameless atheist on this site said he would believe in miracles if I could provide evidence of someone losing a limb and then it grew back.  Well, it just so happened I knew of such a miracle - the miracle of Calanda.  This particular miracle is very well documented with Spain's king having had his own royal record keeper question witnesses under oath and preserved their testimony.  Hundreds of people offered to testify, however this was deemed excessive and 24 were chosen.  Of these 24 - 2 were the doctor's that sawed off the man's leg, 2 others were in the employee of the hospital were he spent the winter recovering from the amputation, and 2 were medical doctor's who performed a physical on the man after his leg reappeared one night while he slept, about 2 years after the amputation.  Other witnesses were those who knew the man prior to the amputation, during the time he had only one leg, and after his leg was restored.  The records of his surgery and hospital stay were put into evidence during the hearing.  The king's on official record keeper certified the testimonies.  For rational people, that's evidence, but to the atheist, no amount of evidence matters.  Their God denial is a faith claim, and no amount of historical evidence, testimony, video, witnesses, medical reports will be enough.  One atheist, even proposed the evil twin referee theory.  And of course @MayCaesar sung the science of the gaps chorus louder than the Mormon Tabernacle Choir could sing the Hallelujah Chorus.  

Atheists make claims all the time that the facts and science just don't agree with.  Some claim that the universe came from nothing.  Just how much stuff can you fit in 0 space?  To some atheists - the answer is everything.  A common claim of atheists is that life came from non-life.  Can they prove this?  Nope, in fact, there are lots of known problems with the steps of chemical evolution that would be needed at each stage to just get to a single celled organism that could reproduce itself.  Does millions of failed experiments to create life from non-life dissuade the faithful atheist?  Of course not.  There faith is not driven by logic or evidence.  Some atheists will claim that the finely tuned universe we live in is just random chaos.  When confronted with the astronomical odds of such a universe, the atheist just says 'meh' and assumes in faith that chaos created a universe that the odds of it happening randomly are at least 1 in 10^123 power.  

While I can admire the blind faith, that completely ignores facts and science, I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

Bogan

You have to have "faith" to be an atheist?    Hahahaha!   Nice bit of reverse logic there, "just-sayin."

Factfinder

@just_sayin

I see...

Joeseph

Relgious faith is a comfort blanket for the believer anything they don't comprehend they just appeal to magic , or if its uncomfortable they resort to " god works in mysterious ways" ..........

just_sayin

@Joeseph
For the resurrection of Jesus there are eye witnesses.  Tell me, how many eye witnesses to life coming from non-life?  Speak up.  How many eye witnesses did you say?  Zero????  Again, I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

just_sayin

Bogan said:

You have to have "faith" to be an atheist?    Hahahaha!   Nice bit of reverse logic there, "just-sayin."

Bogie,  thank you.  For my belief in Jesus' resurrection - I can point to evidence - an empty tomb, eye witnesses accounts, accounts from non-believers of the first eye witnesses conviction that Jesus rose from the dead, and the conviction and martyr's of the eye witnesses who refused to claim that Jesus had not risen from the dead.  When I ask atheists for the evidence of his faith that life came from non-life, I'm told to just take it on faith.  No eye witness accounts that life came from non-life.  

MayCaesar

I once had a great conversation with a Japanese geisha who was very serious about Shintoism. Her argument, in retrospective, makes perfect sense to me: it was to the effect of, "When we believe in something immaterial hard enough and act as if it exists, the difference between it existing and non-existing vanishes". To her, the spirits in the Shinto is not an accurate description of reality, but rather a way to frame it so as to provide prescriptions to humans, and acting on those prescriptions, the humans then validate this framing. Call it a self-fulfilling prophecy, or a placebo - but used somewhat intentionally.

This actually is not entirely different from what people do in physics: the models they develop do not pretend to describe the world "as it is", but, rather, provide a framework for making calculations and predictions. Whether an electron "actually exists" or not is more of a philosophical question, but we know that if we assume that it exists and derive its various properties through theoretical calculations and empirical observations, then we get a very powerful tool at our disposal.

The difference, of course, is that physical models do provide those predictions, while "intentional Shintoism" does not. But, at least, at the first approximation the approach is quite sound. And yes, it is wishful thinking - but a particular kind, one that is grounded in some reasonable psychological assumptions.

That is different from faith, however. Here the geisha has a clear understanding that the "spirits" do not exist outside of her fantasies: she just finds these fantasies to be very helpful in thinking about the world (some would call it a delusion, but I think we all do something like this, just in a more structured manner). I actually used to think that all religious people did exactly that: even at the age of 6 I could not believe that someone would take all this stuff very seriously. To this day I struggle to comprehend how it is possible for an adult to believe that "god" literally exists.

Faith is a different beast: it is a genuine confusion between fantasy and reality. When taking something on faith, the person considers it to be true in a very literal sense: he does not have a rational reason to assume it to be true, but he discards his rational thinking and employs purely wishful thinking. "I have faith that god exists" is essentially equivalent to "I want god to exist, therefore he must exist". It is very deep confusion of one's desire and reality. It is not very different from someone saying, "I want to be a billionaire, therefore I must be a billionaire".

The difference is that, in case of the billionaire, when you try to act as if you are one and buy a $100m penthouse, you will be quickly brought to reality. But when you try to act as if god exists, because of how vague the consequences of god's existence are, you do not get many reality checks - and those that you do get (such as when you pray hard to god to save your dying son, yet your son still dies) are too inconsistent to destroy your faith, and you can always explain them away with, "god must have a plan that is beyond my understanding".

The geisha does not get reality checks either, because what she does is not description, but framing. To her Shinto spirits are more of a metaphor. That is the kind of religion I can get behind, and it is what I see when looking at other religions charitably. I look at the Shinto temples and the cool rituals in them, people on a high spiritual path, doing long walks in beautiful gardens and pondering deep questions of life.

If religion was always just this - cool traditions and rituals, community service and spiritual practice - then I could totally get behind that. If, instead of donning plate armor and marching for months to kill "infidels" in some faraway desert, it meant building beautiful gardens and taking long romantic walks in them.

Joeseph

@just_sayin

Do you also believe all other resurrection myths?

• Tammuz, the Spring God of Mesopotamia. ...
• Osiris, the Egyptian God of Death of Agriculture. ...
• Outwitting Death in Ancient India. ...
• Bodhidharma and His Single Shoe. ...
• Odin's Sacrifice (to Himself) ...
• Quetzalcóatl: Resurrection in Mesoamerica

Why who's talking about life coming from non life?

Hilarious the way your god was magically always there and needs no further explanation , now that's what's called a faith based belief.

just_sayin

Joeseph said:

@just_sayin

Do you also believe all other resurrection myths?

• Tammuz, the Spring God of Mesopotamia. ...
• Osiris, the Egyptian God of Death of Agriculture. ...
• Outwitting Death in Ancient India. ...
• Bodhidharma and His Single Shoe. ...
• Odin's Sacrifice (to Himself) ...
• Quetzalcóatl: Resurrection in Mesoamerica

Why who's talking about life coming from non life?

Hilarious the way your god was magically always there and needs no further explanation , now that's what's called a faith based belief.

Hey, thanks for serving up a question for me to knock out of the park.  I appreciate it.  If you were little @Dee I would make cracks about your interest in the god who literally had his manhood eaten by a minnow.  Little @Dee was a phallically challenged person who was always getting into fights on the site and got kicked off.  Gotta feel bad for the guy.  

Anyway, I would first point out, your list includes a lot of myths about people who are never claimed to be truly resurrected like Jesus.  For example, Oisiris is killed by Set and his body dismembered.  He remains in the realm of the dead.  Therefore he was not resurrected.  Tammuz is brought back from the dead by Demons and his consort annually.  That means he dies every year too, as the demons reclaim him each year.  Jesus arose and remained alive.  Definitely a different claim.

Now, are there eye witness accounts for the physical resurrection of these people, like Jesus?  No, there is not.  We have written records from James, Jude, Peter, John and Matthew.  Further, we know several of these witnesses are mentioned in histories by Jewish and Roman historians (James, Peter, John, and Matthew are all mentioned as real historical individuals).  And does your list of people have other historically verified witnesses whose testimony is recorded by someone else (Mark, Luke, and Paul)?  No, they don't.  There are stories, but no one claims to have physically witnessed their resurrections.

Does your list have early historical attestation for the historical event - for example 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is an early Christian creed that is said to not be more than 18 months later than the resurrection - it mentions James, Peter, and the apostles in it as witnesses.  No, there isn't any of that for the list you provided.

Does your list contain people who are written about in histories from other groups and cultures?  For example there are historical references to Jesus healing, teaching, crucifixion by Pilate, and his disciples belief that he rose from the dead.  There are even references by enemies of Christianity that claim he arose and showed his nail scarred body to his disciples: 

“Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Phlegon as quoted by Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59)

Are there any examples of non-believers of your list of people, claiming that they actually arose from the dead - confirming details from other physical historical witnesses?  I didn't think so.

I believe the account of Jesus death and resurrection is credible
1) There are multiple credible witnesses
2) There is early attestation of the event
3) The behavior of the disciples suggests they truly believed Jesus was physically resurrected
4) Non-believing Jewish and Roman historians give lots of affirming evidence that Jesus was a real person who was crucified by Pontius Pilate, performed miracles, was a teacher, that his disciples worshipped him as if he were a god, and that the disciples claimed he was resurrected.
5) Even enemies of Christianity made arguments about Jesus that affirm the resurrection.  Phlegon for example uses Jesus miracles, including his resurrection, in his argument against Jesus.  
6) The accounts contain historically verifiable details - that Jesus was placed in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb.  That Mary Magdalene was one of the first witnesses of the resurrection.  In addition to mentioning Joseph of Arimathea - a member of the Jerusalem council, it also mentions Nicodemus assisting in the burial of Jesus - another member of the Jerusalem council.  The accounts also portray crucifixion accurately from other historical sources of the day.  

None of those elements are in your other accounts.

I had asked earlier for an atheist to please provide the eye witness who has seen life come from non-life.  I haven't heard that name yet, and so I must assume there is no one.  Further, since it is safe to say that since the theory of evolution was put forth more than 100 years ago that there may have been a million or more experiments done to create chemical life and none have worked.  I'd say that is evidence against the faith claim of abiogenesis.  I'm sure the faithful who still cling to the fable will disagree.  However, as I pointed out at the beginning, I can point to eye witnesses for Jesus' death and resurrection, while the atheist holds to a faith claim, without eye witness support and without scientific proof of concept.  

Factfinder

just_sayin said:

@Joeseph
For the resurrection of Jesus there are eye witnesses.  Tell me, how many eye witnesses to life coming from non-life?  Speak up.  How many eye witnesses did you say?  Zero????  Again, I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

Produce said witnesses for cross-examination, otherwise it's hearsay. Oh, 'zero' you can produce?

Joeseph

@Factfinder

Exactly , Just lying makes up stuff when cornered .

He keep asking  Atheists to defend arguments they aren't making , I know May has called him on his persistent lying in the past yet he continues.

Joeseph

@just_sayin





Just Lyin , starts as usual with his childish opening comments thinking in some way he's making a :"brilliant" point.

Wow! You start out by saying god had his manhood eaten by a minnow ......oooookay ......then you rant and rave about Dee .....he really nailed a job on you you mention him every second post.

Don't stress it to much I will continue schooling you, BTW you never " knock it out of the park" all you ever do is make nonsense up and lie.

Show me the signed statements from Roman non believers saying they interacted with a resurrected Jesus?

Speak up son we cannot hear you?

Show me the list of Jewish and Romsn  "historians " signed statements stating they interacted with Jesus after his death?

What's that? You have none ? 

Show me signed statements from any of your so called witnesses to the resurrection?

You have nothing , Nada,  zilch.

So bring it on a signed statement from the hundreds  you are  claiming regarding  interaction with Jesus after his death? 

BTW stop lying I never claimed Jesus didn't exist the only claim I made was that like credible historians I believe he most likely lived but was just a wandering Rabbi who's own mother thought was mad.

Why are you asking me to back up claims by other Atheists you go get them Atheists that are upsetting you so much.

Regards Evolution whats that got to do with a belief in God?

If Evolution was proved false it still won't prove your god for you.

BTW only a handful of assorted uneducted nuts think Evolution is false , Evolution is regarded as fact by all but the loony brigade

It's hilarious you  ask everyone to defend arguments they are not nor ever make yet you refuse to explain how you god just happened to be always there ....your whole argument is " cos we say so" .

So yet again the only one still making faith claims is you.

So let's have these hundreds of signed witness accounts you keep bragging about but strangely cannot post up.

just_sayin

@Factfinder
Produce said witnesses for cross-examination, otherwise it's hearsay. Oh, 'zero' you can produce?

Hearsay evidence means that it comes from a source that is not the eye witness.  However, we have several eye witnesses who wrote about Jesus and the resurrection:

His brothers - their accounts can be found in the books of James and Jude
His disciples - Peter (1 and 2 Peter), Matthew (Matthew) and John (John, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Revelation)

Not only do they affirm the resurrection, but they also affirm other incidents found in the gospels.  

So their testimony is not hearsay, but eye witness testimony.  It is further supported by those who affirm that these eye witness accounts did in fact make those claims -
Luke, Mark - John Mark is claimed to be writing from the accounts directly from Peter, Luke admits he is drawing from multiple sources
Clement of Rome - knew Peter and was ordained by him.  He affirms that Peter proclaimed that Jesus was literally resurrected
Roman and Jewish historians also affirm that the disciples believed Jesus rose from the dead

Now do you have eyewitness testimony of the universe coming from nothing?  I didn't think so.  Do you even have hearsay evidence of someone who knew someone who saw the universe come from nothing?  I didn't think so.  Your faith is all you have.

Do you have eyewitness testimony from someone who saw say the first instance of life coming from non-life?  I didn't think so.  Do you even have hearsay evidence of someone who knew someone who saw life come from non-life?  I didn't think so.  Your faith is all you have.

Again, I just don't have the faith to be an atheist.

just_sayin

Joeseph said:

@Factfinder

Exactly , Just lying makes up stuff when cornered .

He keep asking  Atheists to defend arguments they aren't making , I know May has called him on his persistent lying in the past yet he continues.

Are you arguing that no atheist has ever argued that the universe came from nothing or that life came from non-life?  I just don't think that is correct.  I know several atheists who have indeed made those arguments. 

just_sayin

@Joeseph
Just Lyin , starts as usual with his childish opening comments thinking in some way he's making a :"brilliant" point.

Wow! You start out by saying god had his manhood eaten by a minnow ......oooookay ......then you rant and rave about Dee .....he really nailed a job on you you mention him every second post.

I only mention little @Dee when I am reminded of guys with, well, little ds.  Even though I don't think God approves of the lifestyle, I felt bad for little @Dee when his boyfriend left him claiming that Dees little d was so small it was like having sex with a girl. Even you should feel bad for the guy.

Show me the signed statements from Roman non believers saying they interacted with a resurrected Jesus?

Speak up son we cannot hear you?

Show me the list of Jewish and Romsn  "historians " signed statements stating they interacted with Jesus after his death?

What's that? You have none ? 

Show me signed statements from any of your so called witnesses to the resurrection?

What a silly argument.  Claiming that I have no non-believer eye witness accounts of Jesus resurrection so the resurrection didn't happen is foolish because it ignore the evidence of the eye witnesses.  Its not my fault that the eye witnesses became believers in Jesus.  We have several of their signed letters:  James, Jude, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 3 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3rd John for example.  

Further, Matthew was a tax collector and would have been employed by Rome - we have his eye witness account also.  

We do have several sources from Jewish and Romans who were non-believers about Jesus:

Josephus
Tacitus
Mara bar Sarapion
Seutonius
The Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Thallus
Phlegon of Tralles
Celsus
There are some other minor references also

Still waiting for your signed eye witness accounts of how the universe came from nothing or eyewitnesses seeing life from from non-life.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@JulesKorngold ;

The greatest faith of all is believing that the supernatural World which engulfs our senses 24/7 is the product of nothing which exploded....you people i.e., atheists-secular humanists are evil and mindless servants of Satan.

Joeseph

@just_sayin

Are you arguing that no atheist has ever argued that the universe came from nothing or that life came from non-life? 

You really are that st-pid that it has to be spelled out to you that I don't represent these Atheists you're annoyed at.


I just don't think that is correct.  I know several atheists who have indeed made those arguments. 

Well good for you go get them Atheists that are annoying you ,I gave you this advice on your last post but you  being you pretending otherwise just confirms what a dishonest pr-ck you are.

Joeseph

@just_sayin






I only mention little @Dee when I am reminded of guys with, well, little ds.  Even though I don't think God approves of the lifestyle, I felt bad for little @Dee when his boyfriend left him claiming that Dees little d was so small it was like having sex with a girl. Even you should feel bad for the guy.


 I am reminded of guys with, well, little ds

Well if that's your thing , you go for it ........maybe you could pay for a male prostitute to satisfy your need for larger men......Just sayin .....lol




What a silly argument.  Claiming that I have no non-believer eye witness accounts of Jesus resurrection so the resurrection didn't happen is foolish because it ignore the evidence of the eye witnesses.  Its not my fault that the eye witnesses became believers in Jesus. 

Yet I never made that claim , you're caught lying yet again.

Produce these hundreds of signed accounts ......run along now and gather them up, should be easy .......whats that? Oh you cannot find them.


We have several of their signed letters:  James, Jude, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 3 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3rd John for example.  

Post them up then should be easy.

Further, Matthew was a tax collector and would have been employed by Rome - we have his eye witness account also.  

Where are the signed eye witness accounts ? Post them up.

We do have several sources from Jewish and Romans who were non-believers about Jesus:

POST THEIR SIGNED ACCOUNTS  UP 

Josephus
Tacitus
Mara bar Sarapion
Seutonius
The Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Thallus
Phlegon of Tralles
Celsus

POST UP THEIR SIGNED STATEMENTS.

There are some other minor references also

Is there indeed.

Still waiting for your signed eye witness accounts of how the universe came from nothing

Why? I've never claimed that.


 or eyewitnesses seeing life from from non-life.

I've never claimed that either so attempting to lie your way out doesn't work regarding your purely faith based claims.

just_sayin

Joeseph said:

@just_sayin

Are you arguing that no atheist has ever argued that the universe came from nothing or that life came from non-life? 

You really are that st-pid that it has to be spelled out to you that I don't represent these Atheists you're annoyed at.


I just don't think that is correct.  I know several atheists who have indeed made those arguments. 

Well good for you go get them Atheists that are annoying you ,I gave you this advice on your last post but you  being you pretending otherwise just confirms what a dishonest pr-ck you are.

I never claimed to be speaking about you.  When someone stares at their own "navel" for too long, they tend to think everything is about them.  

Joeseph

@just_sayin


I never claimed to be speaking about you. 

You asked me .....Are you arguing that no atheist has ever argued that the universe came from nothing or that life came from non-life? 

You just post up lie after lie and lose track of them.


 When someone stares at their own "navel" for too long, they tend to think everything is about them.  


That certainly seems to be the case where you are concerned you cannot even remember what you said you're  that dense then when caught ( yet again) lie.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

YOUR DUMBFOUNDED QUOTE AGAIN RELATING TO THE WRITERS OF THE PRIMITIVE DEATH CULT CHRISTIAN BIBLE: "For the resurrection of Jesus there are eye witnesses.  Tell me, how many eye witnesses to life coming from non-life?  Speak up.  How many eye witnesses did you say?  Zero????  Again, I just don't have enough faith to be an atheist."


HEADS UP BIBLE FOOL, the Gospel of Mark dates from c. AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90, and John AD 90–110. Despite the traditional ascriptions, most peered reviewed scholars hold that all four are anonymous and most scholars agree that none were written by eyewitnesses!

Your serial killer JESUS AS GOD let his Jewish creation nail his sorry a*ss to the cross, showing that he was a "weak god" to begin with, therefore he died at approximately 30 AD!  Now, do the simple math of when the "alleged" named bible writers shown above wrote their chapters, Whereas it was 36, 55, 60 AND 80 YEARS subsequent to Jesus being "hung!"  That is like Neil Armstrong landing upon the moon in July 20, 1969, and it was not mentioned until 36 to 80 years later!  GET IT BIBLE FOOL?  Eyewitnesses, NOT!


Just_sayin, yes, as we all can see, you want to take over RICKEYHOLTSCLAW'S position in being the number one Bible STU-PID fool of the Religion Forum, we get it, okay?





.

21CenturyIconoclast

@just_sayin

You have embarrassingly ran away from this biblical axiom that you have to be a JEW to be a Christian since May 9th of this year as shown in the link below;

https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/180361/#Comment_180361

1. What is your problem, TO SCARED to even try and address BIBLICAL FACTS in my post linked above?

2. Is it what you "thought you knew, you didn't" in respect to my revealing post above, therefore you had to go again into hiding with Rickey?

3. You don't want to be a JEW like the Bible tells you because they are experiencing anti-semetic acts against them?

4. You like to show Jesus that he is wrong and in proposing that you have to be a JEW as I have shown in my post in question above?

5. You don't realize that Jesus is watching you run away from his exact INSPIRED WORDS, within the scriptures (Hebrews 4:13)?

WAITING FOR YOUR RESPONSE THIS TIME IN FRONT OF THE MEMBERSHIP, DON'T RUN AWAY LIKE RICKEYHOLTSCLAW DOES!

BEGIN:

.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast ; If you were cognitively able to state a debatable premise...we could debate but you're too ignorant and too lost and blind.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast ;  The publication of a writing does not denote a fallacy or detract from the notes and records attained at the time of incident. The Scriptures come to you via the Holy Spirit, not the mind of men or their efforts.

Factfinder

just_sayin said:

@Joeseph
Just Lyin , starts as usual with his childish opening comments thinking in some way he's making a :"brilliant" point.

Wow! You start out by saying god had his manhood eaten by a minnow ......oooookay ......then you rant and rave about Dee .....he really nailed a job on you you mention him every second post.

I only mention little @Dee when I am reminded of guys with, well, little ds.  Even though I don't think God approves of the lifestyle, I felt bad for little @Dee when his boyfriend left him claiming that Dees little d was so small it was like having sex with a girl. Even you should feel bad for the guy.

Show me the signed statements from Roman non believers saying they interacted with a resurrected Jesus?

Speak up son we cannot hear you?

Show me the list of Jewish and Romsn  "historians " signed statements stating they interacted with Jesus after his death?

What's that? You have none ? 

Show me signed statements from any of your so called witnesses to the resurrection?

What a silly argument.  Claiming that I have no non-believer eye witness accounts of Jesus resurrection so the resurrection didn't happen is foolish because it ignore the evidence of the eye witnesses.  Its not my fault that the eye witnesses became believers in Jesus.  We have several of their signed letters:  James, Jude, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 3 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3rd John for example.  

Further, Matthew was a tax collector and would have been employed by Rome - we have his eye witness account also.  

We do have several sources from Jewish and Romans who were non-believers about Jesus:

Josephus
Tacitus
Mara bar Sarapion
Seutonius
The Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Thallus
Phlegon of Tralles
Celsus
There are some other minor references also

Still waiting for your signed eye witness accounts of how the universe came from nothing or eyewitnesses seeing life from from non-life.

I hope you realize just how stoopid that is. Between those 9 people there isn't even a chapter's worth of writing about the supposed greatest show on earth for even the sloppiest of fiction authors.. 

Factfinder

In answer to the op, yes it is wishful thinking. Who doesn't want to live forever in paradise? "Forever" however is incomprehensible and a god who holds petty grievances like "you didn't idolize me" as a reason for eternal punishment is human, not 'god' like.

MayCaesar

@Factfinder

I have asked the guy before about the accounts of thousands of witnesses testifying to having seen ghosts or aliens in flying saucepans - no coherent reply.

Shows that this theological rubbish is only sustainable when one ignores 99% of data, and when the social costs for believing it are not very high. If the situation was reversed and, say, belief in ghosts was very common, but belief in resurrection of Jesus was akin to belief in Hitler having fled to a hidden base in Antarctica - then this guy would be with the same level of conviction arguing for the need in ghostbusters.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@MayCaesar ; @Factfinder ; I believe what Jesus and the Holy Spirit have provided in the Canon of Scripture...I can now therefore "see" whereas before, I was blind.

Factfinder

RickeyHoltsclaw said:

@MayCaesar ; @Factfinder ; I believe what Jesus and the Holy Spirit have provided in the Canon of Scripture...I can now therefore "see" whereas before, I was blind.

We generally understand that. Just find it more helpful to operate in truth and reality instead.

 

RickeyHoltsclaw

@Factfinder ; Your quotes don't notify me of your stup-idity...again, please use @RickeyHoltsclaw when you want my attention to your idi-ocy...otherwise, I'm not notified...it's not that I'm "running"...I've not been properly notified of your arrogance and atheistic stup-idity; therefore, no response....PLEASE TRY HARDER?

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

@Factfinder

I have asked the guy before about the accounts of thousands of witnesses testifying to having seen ghosts or aliens in flying saucepans - no coherent reply.

Shows that this theological rubbish is only sustainable when one ignores 99% of data, and when the social costs for believing it are not very high. If the situation was reversed and, say, belief in ghosts was very common, but belief in resurrection of Jesus was akin to belief in Hitler having fled to a hidden base in Antarctica - then this guy would be with the same level of conviction arguing for the need in ghostbusters.

What a dishonest tale from May.  First, had Jesus appeared as a ghost the disciples might have been amazed and started and surely they would have told others, however, it would have meant to them that Jesus was dead and not resurrected.  Seeing a ghost is one thing.  Seeing a guy come back from the dead, is a whole other level.  There are some important differences in stories of ghosts and aliens than what the eye witnesses of Jesus resurrection claimed :
1)  The eye witnesses knew who Jesus was before he died and arose from the dead.  Some had spent years with him.  Some were his family.  He wasn't some vague splotch on an out of focus picture to them.
2) The eye witnesses saw him die on the cross. They saw him stabbed in the side.  The took the body down - and Joseph of Arimathea, along with Nicodemus prepared the body and placed it in a tomb.  So the witnesses had a very good reason to believe he was dead.  That differs from brief glimpses of something out of the corner of your eye that you can't be sure you actually saw it.
3) The eye witnesses had multiple encounters with Jesus after his resurrection.  The gospels mention at least 11 instances where people saw Jesus in both Jerusalem and Galilee.  Their interactions involve eating meals with him, touching his scars in his hands and side, and conversations with him.  That differs from ghost sightings in several ways: multiple interactions, over a 70 mile radius, having audible conversations with Jesus, and physically touching him.   That's some big differences.
4) The eye witnesses refused to change their story under penalty of death to them and their families.  I wonder how many of the ghost and alien watchers would be willing to say 'you know what, it might not have actually happened that way' if their lives or their families were on the line.  I think you might see a lot of uncertainty from them, which you didn't from the eye witnesses of Jesus' resurrection.  

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

1) Some people knew the people the ghosts of whom later haunted their house. Some were their family.

2) The eye witnesses saw their family members lay in a coffin. They saw the coffin closed. Then they saw those ghosts floating around.

3) 11 instances is pretty laughable versus thousands upon thousands of ghost-seeing accounts spanning millennia and thousands of cultures.

4) This seems to be a pure speculation: "I wonder" is not an argument. I do agree that most of them would express more uncertainty given that belief in ghosts is largely ostracized - but if "Ghostism" was as big a religion as Christianity, then it would be very different. Ghosts are part of some of the religions in south-east Asia (Thailand and Myanmar), and deeply religious people there would argue as convincingly for the realness of those as Christians do for the realness of Jesus' resurrection.

Your arguments do not sound particularly convincing. The claim of Jesus' resurrection seems to firmly fall under the category of thousands upon thousands of phenomena people testify to, and features far fewer witness accounts than some. 

One example comes from Russia: there one of the popular superstitions is that whistling inside buildings is bad because it attracts evil spirits. Do people literally believe in evil spirits? Not quite. It is more of, "Whatever the truth behind this is, our ancestors have established beyond reasonable doubt that something terrible happens when you whistle inside a building, so you should not do it". And witness accounts there go back to the Kievan Rus and are described in countless historical documents.

Of course, anyone with a iota of sanity knows it to be nothing more than an element of folklore. But, again, if there was an Anti-Whistling Church with millions followers, then people would be quite a bit more vocal and take the claim far more seriously.

My observation is that a lot of American Christians simply do not know much about the rest of the world. They think Christianity somehow special because that is what they grew up around. In reality, there have been thousands of systems of beliefs of this kind throughout history and around the globe. I do not know how much you have traveled around the US, but if you spent even a couple of years living, say, in a Muslim-majority country, you would get a very different perspective on religion than what you have now.

Europeans are generally more exposed to religious diversity, given how much they travel around the continent and interact with different cultures. As a result, as one esteemed gentleman said, "The Church of England is a bunch of atheists trying to convince themselves that they are religious".

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

@just_sayin

1) Some people knew the people the ghosts of whom later haunted their house. Some were their family.

2) The eye witnesses saw their family members lay in a coffin. They saw the coffin closed. Then they saw those ghosts floating around.

3) 11 instances is pretty laughable versus thousands upon thousands of ghost-seeing accounts spanning millennia and thousands of cultures.

4) This seems to be a pure speculation: "I wonder" is not an argument. I do agree that most of them would express more uncertainty given that belief in ghosts is largely ostracized - but if "Ghostism" was as big a religion as Christianity, then it would be very different. Ghosts are part of some of the religions in south-east Asia (Thailand and Myanmar), and deeply religious people there would argue as convincingly for the realness of those as Christians do for the realness of Jesus' resurrection.

Your arguments do not sound particularly convincing. The claim of Jesus' resurrection seems to firmly fall under the category of thousands upon thousands of phenomena people testify to, and features far fewer witness accounts than some. 

One example comes from Russia: there one of the popular superstitions is that whistling inside buildings is bad because it attracts evil spirits. Do people literally believe in evil spirits? Not quite. It is more of, "Whatever the truth behind this is, our ancestors have established beyond reasonable doubt that something terrible happens when you whistle inside a building, so you should not do it". And witness accounts there go back to the Kievan Rus and are described in countless historical documents.

Of course, anyone with a iota of sanity knows it to be nothing more than an element of folklore. But, again, if there was an Anti-Whistling Church with millions followers, then people would be quite a bit more vocal and take the claim far more seriously.

My observation is that a lot of American Christians simply do not know much about the rest of the world. They think Christianity somehow special because that is what they grew up around. In reality, there have been thousands of systems of beliefs of this kind throughout history and around the globe. I do not know how much you have traveled around the US, but if you spent even a couple of years living, say, in a Muslim-majority country, you would get a very different perspective on religion than what you have now.

Europeans are generally more exposed to religious diversity, given how much they travel around the continent and interact with different cultures. As a result, as one esteemed gentleman said, "The Church of England is a bunch of atheists trying to convince themselves that they are religious".

LOL.  May, you seek to minimize what even atheist historians will admit about Jesus death and resurrection:
1) Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem by crucifixion by Pontius Pilate
2) Jesus was buried in a tomb
3) Jesus' disciples claimed to have seen Jesus bodily resurrected - they claim to have spoke to him, ate with him, touched him
4) The disciples were transformed by what they experienced.

When Jesus first appeared resurrected he did so to women.  That's a detail that would not have helped to spread a fake agenda.  Most of Jesus' appearances occur with groups of people and these details appear in multiple sources.  Some lone individual doesn't come back and say that while they were sleeping, Jesus probed them.  Further, the disciples story stayed the same over time.  We know this from Paul whose letters reference 2 different meetings in Jerusalem with James and Peter with about 14 year gap between them where he specifically lays out what he understands the gospel message to be and he says they agreed with him and did not add to it.  Paul, always associated the gospel with the resurrection as evidenced by the early Christian creed in 1 Corinthians 15:3-7, which is dated to within 18 months of the resurrection.  

The evidence for Jesus resurrection seems historically credible:
1) The witnesses are credible
2) There are multiple witnesses
3) There are embarrassing details included that would not have been other wise
4) Non-Christian sources corroborate many of the details
5) And there is very early attestation of the event (the Christian Creed I mentioned is within 18 months of the event). 

I have no expectation that your faith will be shattered by facts and evidence, so please know my comments are more for those who may read this with an open mind. 

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

I do not seek to "minimize" the mentioned historical facts. These facts simply do not imply that Jesus was resurrected, just like the countless historical facts respecting testimonies of the Thai villagers seeing floating heads of dead widows do not imply that those floating heads existed.

I do want to comment on your "open mind" claim. I have studied a large variety of folklore, superstitions and religions, as impartially as I could: I was interested in how those came to be given the history of the region. It is interesting, for instance, to explore what caused the Thai folklore to be so dark and gritty, while the Scandinavian folklore to be so glorious and honor-focused.

Do you see embracing one religion and focusing on it as a sign of having a more open mind, than studying as many of these as possible?

It seems like an Orwellian redefinition of the term to me, but I may be wrong.

21CenturyIconoclast

@RickeyHoltsclaw

OUR NUMBER ONE BIBLE STU-PID FOOL RICKEY'S QUOTE: " I believe what Jesus and the Holy Spirit have provided in the Canon of Scripture...I can now therefore "see" whereas before, I was blind."
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/182434/#Comment_182434


YES, most importantly Rickey can now see what Jesus has provided to him in the Canon of Scripture, where Jesus commanded the murdering of innocent INFANTS AND SUCKLING BABIES, and as Rickey admitted, now he can "see" where before he was "blind," praise the baby killer Jesus!

"This is what the lord almighty said: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; BUT SLAY both man and woman, INFANT AND SUCKLING, ox and sheep, camel and  ox.” (1 Samuel 15:3)

As shown, Rickey is still RUNNING AWAY from this biblical axiom in the post/link below!
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/182489/#Comment_182489



RUN RICKEY, RUN AWAY FROM THE TRUTH ABOUT YOUR DEPLORABLE JESUS AS
GOD WHO MURDERED INFANTS AND SUCKLING BABIES!



.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast ;  Jesus does not murder babies or suckling infants...that is the domain of your father, Satan.

21CenturyIconoclast

@RickeyHoltsclaw

YOUR LYING QUOTE IN FRONT OF JESUS AND THE MEMBERSHIP!!!: "@21CenturyIconoclast ;  "Jesus does not murder babies or suckling infants...that is the domain of your father, Satan."
https://www.debateisland.com/discussion/comment/182561/#Comment_182561


Here, let me digress back into a grade-school environment to hopefully help you understand your own primitive Bronze and Iron Age bible, ready?

Here is the verse in question where you are calling your Jesus a in your quote above where he did murder INFANTS AND SUCKLING BABIES!!!!

"This is what the lord almighty said: "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; BUT SLAY both man and woman, INFANT AND SUCKLING, ox and sheep, camel and  ox.” (1 Samuel 15:3)

1. The first sentence shown above in the verse in question specifically states; "THIS IS WHAT THE LORD ALMIGHTY SAID" which equals Jesus as the Lord Almighty! (Matthew 22:43-45)  STOP!

2. What did the lord almighty Jesus state to do? Jesus said to slay both man and woman, INFANT AND SUCKLING, ....... STOP!

3. When Jesus as god stated to SLAY INFANT AND SUCKLING (BABY), then who is responsible for murdering them? YES, JESUS YOU DUMBFOUNDED PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN BIBLE FOOL!


Rickey, seriously, you should make an appointment with a psychiatrist because your acceptance of your primitive faith of Christianity, and where you try in vain to defend it, is making you delusional, stoopid, irrational, and dumbfounded to the extremes with your LYING quote above! 


The Atheists are truly sorry that we outright OWN YOUR BIBLE STU-PIDITY, AND YOUR CHRISTIANITY, SO GET USED TO THIS FACT IF YOU ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO FREQUENT THIS RELIGION FORUM AT YOUR EMBARRASSING EXPENSE!









.

JulesKorngold

Mark Twain:  Faith is believing what you know ain't so.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@21CenturyIconoclast ; Ad nauseam....Elohim - Jesus - is a Warrior....He is in a war of unfathomable and unconscionable relevance and the destruction of the pagan tribes that sought Israel's compromise with the pagan gods of Baal and Molech was essential to the eschatological fulfillment of Messiah through Judah and the Gospel and the Great Commission subsequent Golgotha. Yes, Jesus IS Elohim...and He is a Warrior and His Kingdom is not of this Earth....and the war that rages around us and through us did not find its genesis in Time or on this Earth.

Factfinder

@just_sayin

Hearsay evidence means that it comes from a source that is not the eye witness.

Another form of hearsay is called "your word against mine". The gospel authors were not signed by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The writings were attributed to them by the early church some 200 years after the so called witnessed events and are told from a narrator's perspective. There are no original texts to verify what is claimed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Evangelists#:~:text=In Christian tradition, the Four,the four canonical Gospel accounts.

You are trying to claim science informs you your faith is true but you can't have it both ways. If you know god is true because science points to it, then it's not faith. If you claim the Christian faith then it's not evidential knowledge as nothing in science points to any god that is known. Appealing to ignorance in a body of evidence or knowledge and calling it god or assuming god did it, is just childish and unconvincing which reveals weakness in your faith. Because if god were true and you correct, you would have convinced us by now according to your god...

Luke 21:15:   For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.

All three paths you've chosen to argue your position contain flaws in logic which are easily resisted so that means god isn't real or it has rejected you. Something to think about.

MayCaesar

I still would like to hear a coherent answer from someone believing that god's commands are to be obeyed - on whether they would obey the divine command to murder someone. I mean, a real answer. Not the Petersonian, "What do you mean by 'answer'?" Literally, during your next prayer god talks to you and tells you, "Grab a knife and go and murder your neighbor Jim". Would you do it?

In case it is unclear, it is a multiple choice question, with the following answers:

A ) Yes.

B ) No.

C ) I am too dishonest to answer this.

21CenturyIconoclast