Saw this question on r/atheism today.

[Charles Kozierok]

I already did. Read the history of the Catholic Church -- rules, laws, made-up holidays, inquisitions, crusades, and so forth. It's about control of the masses and has been since pretty close to the start -- do what we tell you and you go to heaven, don't and you go to hell, and if we can force you to do what we want, we will.

 

[Ausm]

Just wondering if this would make the average Joe a Serial Killer?

 

[zsdersw]

No...I won't give you a break. You've spent a good deal of time in this thread talking about the irrationality of others...while being totally oblivious to your own. Please answer the question.

You don't consider the threat of eternal damnation, misery, and despair.. imposed by Christianity (and other religions, but Christianity in this example).. to be among the more ominous of "sticks" used in human history?

 

[Retro Rob]

The source that is presenting a claim is the source that is responsible for supporting that claim with evidence. The Bible has presented many claims, without any evidence. Nobody can say with absolute confidence that the things in the Bible did NOT happen, but we can certainly say there is essentially no evidence to support the things that supposedly happened.

Oh, I beg to differ. There are people who claimed that things in the Bible didn't happen, that it was fabricated in some parts, and guess what? All you here is "maybes" or "possiblies" in their defenses. Speculation and assumption isn't a valid defense.

Other than that, I agree with you.

 

[Retro Rob]

Do you believe that Star Wars Ep I is real? If I was to claim that the script for that movie is real would you accept that? There really was a boy who was immaculately conceived to fulfill the prophecy and bring balance to the force. You're with me right? Jesus was real. Anakin Skywalker was real. We're good right? No need for any kind of proof. I said so. You said so. Everyone's happy? The problem is that I don't believe that and I think someone who does is an idiot. You can't just make shit up and call it real. You have to prove it.

If you can prove to me Anakin is real, I'd believe it. If not, I simply won't.

However, I think I'd have a burden to satisfy if I were to say "he's not real". If I went a step further and published a book asserting he's not real, I would think I'd have to prove it.

However, unlike Anakin, Jesus has cooberative support among scholars - what some don't agree with is his miracles. Anakin has none.

 

[LunarRay]

To the believer, the Torah, Bible, Koran or whatever IS the Authority. To them their Authority is axiomatic! No other proof or evidence is needed, well, perhaps to those who assign Infallibility to a leader (past or present) who defines their reference material to be the Authority nothing else is needed.

The non believer has no authority to speak of other than the expert opinion, objective testing and other empirically derived evidence that may conflict with the believer's interpretation of the authority (or agreement among the believers as to what the authority should be interpreted to mean).

From the viewpoint of either how can the other ever agree on anything that conflicts? To do so places the one into the same category as the other... One loses faith or the other gains faith...

I don't see anything happening other than an attempt to convert the other into belief consistent with their view to what is authoritative...

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You don't consider the threat of eternal damnation, misery, and despair.. imposed by Christianity (and other religions, but Christianity in this example).. to be among the more ominous of "sticks" used in human history?

Of course it's an ominous stick...but you've apparently missed my point. Charles believes that "a bunch of powerful people realized they could use to control all of the other people through a combination of fear, guilt, false hope and intimidation." All I asked him was the factual basis for this belief that he actually knows the ulterior motives of those who decided which writings would be used in the bible.

His rationality is in question. And I make this point not so much to criticize him...but to make him aware of one of the most significant vagarities of the human condition...which applies to all...including him.

 

[OCNewbie]

Oh, I beg to differ. There are people who claimed that things in the Bible didn't happen, that it was fabricated in some parts, and guess what? All you here is "maybes" or "possiblies" in their defenses. Speculation and assumption isn't a valid defense.

Other than that, I agree with you.

It's essentially impossible to prove that anything that is said to have happened that long ago did NOT happen. Anything goes basically. Therefore the fact that you can't prove it didn't happen, in no way bolsters the likelihood that it DID happen.

You can show that evidence that would be expected to have survived to this point is not present, and therefore that reduces the likelihood something happened, but that still doesn't exclude all possibility.

Essentially, the Bible, or ANY book from that era, can claim whatever it wishes without a chance of being proven false.

 

[Ausm]

If you can prove to me Anakin is real, I'd believe it. If not, I simply won't.

However, I think I'd have a burden to satisfy if I were to say "he's not real". If I went a step further and published a book asserting he's not real, I would think I'd have to prove it.

However, unlike Anakin, Jesus has cooberative support among scholars - what some don't agree with is his miracles. Anakin has none.

Can you prove God is real?

 

[OCNewbie]

However, unlike Anakin, Jesus has cooberative support among scholars - what some don't agree with is his miracles.

The same goes for Islam's Muhammad.

 

[Retro Rob]

The same goes for Islam's Muhammad.

I never said he didn't.

 

[sandorski]

Oh, I beg to differ. There are people who claimed that things in the Bible didn't happen, that it was fabricated in some parts, and guess what? All you here is "maybes" or "possiblies" in their defenses. Speculation and assumption isn't a valid defense.

Other than that, I agree with you.

If you want to know about Fabrications, one clear fabrication is the story about Jesus being tested where they bring to him an Adulterous woman. The whole segment of him writing in the dirt doesn't exist in any of the existing manuscripts from the first few centuries. It was added in later.

One of the Gospel's Resurrection tales also doesn't exist in the earliest known manuscripts. It too was added in later.

 

[zsdersw]

Of course it's an ominous stick...but you've apparently missed my point. Charles believes that "a bunch of powerful people realized they could use to control all of the other people through a combination of fear, guilt, false hope and intimidation." All I asked him was the factual basis for this belief that he actually knows the ulterior motives of those who decided which writings would be used in the bible.

His rationality is in question. And I make this point not so much to criticize him...but to make him aware of one of the most significant vagarities of the human condition...which applies to all...including him.

Was that who he was referring to or was he talking about other religious officials like priests, bishops, cardinals, and those who had direct influence over and control of people?

 

[OCNewbie]

I never said he didn't.

There's nothing within you that finds any problems with how many parallels Jesus draws with Muhammad? Or the parallels between the Bible and the Quran? Or the fact that there have been other prophets and books out there that essentially use the same formula?

 

[zsdersw]

If you can prove to me Anakin is real, I'd believe it. If not, I simply won't.

However, I think I'd have a burden to satisfy if I were to say "he's not real". If I went a step further and published a book asserting he's not real, I would think I'd have to prove it.

However, unlike Anakin, Jesus has cooberative support among scholars - what some don't agree with is his miracles. Anakin has none.

You'd have to be pretty dense to say that the demand for evidence of what's written in the Bible isn't centered around the miracles and other supernatural stuff mentioned in the Bible.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Was that who he was referring to or was he talking about other religious officials like priests, bishops, cardinals, and those who had direct influence over and control of people?

Here's his entire quote for context...I think he was pretty damn clear what he meant...but I could be wrong.

No, some guy who lived decades after Jesus died claimed that he said that, and then wrote it down, and some other guys who also never knew Jesus wrote down some similar claims, and then they were passed around, and copied, and miscopied, and translated, and mistranslated, and then put into a big book that a bunch of powerful people realized they could use to control all of the other people through a combination of fear, guilt, false hope and intimidation.

And that brainwashing based on a book of dubious origins and with absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support it, was passed down from generation to generation, eventually brainwashing your parents or other authority figures you trust into believing it, and then they programmed you.

Edit: Rereading...I think you're right zsdersw. But my point remains.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

His rationality is in question.

Anything can be questioned.

In this case, you're trying to question my rationality as a distraction from the reality that your religion is based on mythology.

The history of Christianity is well-documented, and I'm not going to spend an hour summarizing it all here. For centuries the church had an iron grip over just about everything that happened in societies where it existed. Over time the control has lessened, but is still there in many ways.

The core of it has always been the heaven/hell carrot/stick.

 

[Retro Rob]

You'd have to be pretty dense to say that the demand for evidence of what's written in the Bible isn't centered around the miracles and other supernatural stuff mentioned in the Bible.

I well know this.

No one can prove/disprove these miracles by "reapeating" them. They are obviously outside the realm of science because they defy science and what's natrual.

Basically, if someone has reason to believe the Bible and trust it, they accept what's in it.

Like I said earlier this thread, no one makes decisions or believes things on totally complete, entirely full evidence. Its a fact that we simply won't get it all the time.

We take what we have, determine whether or not its sufficient, and go from there. You and many others fail by assuming, incorrecty, that I or others take it entirely on FAITH without investigating anything.

This is where you're wrong.

 

[randomrogue]

You and many others fail by assuming, incorrecty, that I or others take it entirely on FAITH without investigating anything.

This is where you're wrong.

Ok what facts do you base it on?

 

[zsdersw]

We take what we have, determine whether or not its sufficient, and go from there. You and many others fail by assuming, incorrecty, that I or others take it entirely on FAITH without investigating anything.

This is where you're wrong.

How do you determine whether or not it is sufficient?

 

[Retro Rob]

How do you determine whether or not it is sufficient?

Simple.

Google, other secular writings, archaeological findings, hotistorical land marks etc.

I weigh it against what's written, and go from there. I'm not going to get into specifics because quite honestly, it won't matter here.

Just giving you an FYI since you asked.

 

[zsdersw]

Simple.

Google, other secular writings, archaeological findings, hotistorical land marks etc.

I weigh it against what's written, and go from there. I'm not going to get into specifics because quite honestly, it won't matter here.

Just giving you an FYI since you asked.

What evidence in any of those resources is there for miracles and other supernatural claims?

 

[Juddog]

Simple.

Google, other secular writings, archaeological findings, hotistorical land marks etc.

I weigh it against what's written, and go from there. I'm not going to get into specifics because quite honestly, it won't matter here.

Just giving you an FYI since you asked.

By the way, you never answered my direct question to you earlier.

How do you determine which portions of the Bible were real, actual events, versus which are simply parables?

 

[Retro Rob]

What evidence in any of those resources is there for miracles and other supernatural claims?

We can't repeat them. We have to rely on reliable testimony.

As far as the eye-witnesses are concerned that saw these things, it depends if they're credible, or if they exaggerated them, or outright lied.

As far as I've researched, all I mainly here is that they violate natural laws so people wont believe them.

IMO, with some things, the evidence could have been destroyed or lost. We examine the creditbility of the writes/eye-witnesses, and decide if they're believable or not.

Can't be more clear than that.

 

[sandorski]

Seems related to thread