Why would going up the mountain, taking a look, and then telling someone about it, be a logical fallacy? You cannot prove whether the God of the Christians exists or not, many theologians and philosophers accept this. You can prove that Zeus doesn't exist, because no such being that matches his description exists on mountain Olympus. This isn't a matter of reasoning, it's a fact. What does this have to do with what you're talking about?
According to Homer, Zeus lived on mountain Olympus. Since people have gone there and found no person matching the description of Zeus, one may safely say that Zeus doesn't exist. Judging by the fact that most of the greek mythology deals with gods that are mere humans with some superhuman qualities, and that many descriptions of gods conflict with each other, one can safely say that the ancient greek religion is a myth, i.e. it has little to do with reality and more to do with an attempt by humans to satisfy human needs or deficiencies.
Disbelief is warranted when the evidence is against a proposition. Since you cannot prove whether God exists or not using logic, saying that He doesn't exist is a logical fallacy.
About witchcraft, you may ask several self-proclaimed witches about their knowledge. If you find out that it doesn't correspond with reality, you'll have reasons to doubt their knowledge, yet you still won't be able to say that witchcraft is a lie, because there's always the possibility that these weren't real witches. Personally, I don't really care, as I don't need anything they offer, so I wouldn't bother any more than that.
Dogma is by definition a proposition that doesn't stem from rational reasoning, so disbelief in God is a dogma. It's actually very simple, I cannot understand why people try (and fail) to prove otherwise. Also, the dogma "God doesn't exist" is a declaration of faith in itself. A hallmark of religion is faith in a specific doctrine, which you just demonstrated. One may, of course, argue that lack of temples etc. means that you aren't a religious person; in the narrow sense of the word he would be correct. However, you still demonstrate one hallmark of religion, one that scientists always try to, and never succeed in, abolishing.
All it "proves" (as if a single study could ever prove anything) is that simply believing that you have had a religious experience is largely meaningless. If you replace the "religious experience" with any other experience in the world, do you still trust your conclusion? Do you realize that what you say, for repeated experiments, renders every human accomplishment, even reality itself, a mere fantasy?
Do you forget that God created the human? Doesn't this make some relation between them evident? Why do people revert to alien creature theories that aren't supported by anything at all and are scientifically extremely improbable?
Darby, I'm sorry, I mistook you for a sane person, I regret ever addressing to you. No rational person in the world would refer to obvious and inconclusive propaganda sites as the one you mention, and give it more credit than the writings of several scholars, among which is the Berkeley professor I mentioned previously. About the historical validity of the Bible, everything mentioned in it has been historically verified, except for the miracles, some would say, and some events like the mass murder of children etc., according to scholar reviews (The Biblical Archaelology Review among others). That they haven't been verified doesn't mean they didn't happen! You're being irrational from the beginning, get a grip on yourself!
I won't discuss how you claimed (you did claim this!) that a Flying Spaghetti Monster has more evidence in support of its existence, as such conversation enters the realm of the surreal; what I reasonably suggest is that you cannot, by any rational means, prove that God doesn't exist, you cannot claim that Christianity is the root of all evil on this planet, that faith is nothing to be afraid of, if it's exercised critically, and finally,now that I have answered all these questions to you, you no longer have the right to claim that you don't know these things. After you made it evident that pure hatred is the root of all of your conviction...
In any case, nobody asks comedians to substantiate their claims. They're just jokes. Jokes about religion should not be different. As I said above, if that's how you feel, not much can be said. I doubt, though, that anything reasonable can be said about anything at all in this fashion.
Please point me to the relevant peer-reviewed journal showing this to be the case!! Do you need peer confirmation that the sun rose this morning?
If you believe that Chuck Norris is responsible for what you say, I cannot convince you for the opposite, yet I can argue that it makes more sense.
So there are very few to no Christians in the world then? Christians are the minority in world's population. There are very few persons actively willing to follow Jesus' teaching in my experience, most of the so-called Christians are such only by name. What I was referring to is that telling someone to do good deeds for fear that he would end up in hell shouldn't be anticipated to have any result, as the person already knows that when he commits sin. A person that doesn't know this simple fact doesn't know much about Christianity.
You do know that since they stopped spreading their faith by torture and murder That's an outright lie. You should know better since the last time we discussed this. Stop consuming this propaganda!
it's all about getting the little kids when they're too young to be able to decide about that, and then brainwash them, right? You are partially correct in this, the problem is that any alternative is far worse. Of course, any person can dismiss Christianity without any consequence that he cares about, so this still isn't much of a problem.
Now on for the masterpiece!
The way Christians will totally contradict themselves and then just doublethink it away is a truly frightening example of the depth of delusion. Darby, you amaze me. You continuously try to prove that pigs can fly and every other claim that makes no sense, as it is based on absolutely nothing but your own convictions and wishes. I have demonstrated this fact repeatedly, yet you still insist. I don't know what can make you think reasonably and you give me no help. Your hatred against Christians is misguided; many of them are to blame for some of the things you say, yet none of them in general is responsible for your problems regarding reality. If you have anything constructive and reasonable to say, feel free, otherwise I have no time to waste, I'm sorry.
Sure it is. Remember things are true or false based solely on what you wish was true. No sanity, evidence or even common sense required. Darby, you seem to think that you're the only rational or sane person on earth. You're wrong.
I'd like to see you try. It's much easier for you to just lie though. Saves time on thinking. Here we go again. Unless you specify exactly where my lie is, I will refrain from answering to your provocative and insulting "arguments". Your ability to think rationally isn't demonstrated by these arguments anyway.
Yet the unassailable fact is that there is as much *or more* evidence for the FSM than there is for Jesus the man, let alone the loony fairy tales. Your ignorance seems to be inversely proportional to your intelligence (this is a conclusion, not like what you tried to prove last time). Before you engage in lying again, check what wikipedia has to say on the matter. By the way, could you possibly think of any reason that an excerpt of an article on the matter by Berkeley professor of history Alice Whealey disappeared from the page a month ago? The specific excerpt states that the general consensus among scholars is that Josephus did in fact mention Jesus in his writings. Scholars, in a few words, say you're wrong, something that doesn't surprise me much. One more thing: what's the evidence that supports that the FSM, whose existence you claim is supported by more evidence than Jesus', exists?
However, you can say with complete accuracy that there is no evidence whatsoever that there ever was a Jesus or that he said anything, let alone the various old fairy tales edited together by scum with a vicious agenda which constitutes the bible. Anyone who asserts that this quote is true has no relation whatsoever to reason, science and, in the end, reality. Even ardent atheists admit that Jesus is a historic person. You're wrong again, the propaganda you adhere to leads to a dead-end.
You see, that's why a lot of people hate Christians. So many of you guys lie all the fucking time about really obvious stuff. Now for the moment of truth. Can I interpret this as you hating the Christians? It reasonably follows from all I have heard from you. You apparently hate them for "lying", as you put it, that they observe and learn things about their life that you're unable to. What seems obvious to you has numerous times proven completely false, illogical or merely fantasy. Base your assumptions, conclusions and line of thought on a solid basis, not your emotional urges, and you'll learn how the things that you regard as "fairy tales" and equivalent to logical exercises, like the FSM, are much more important than that. I am sorry that so-called Christians are probably the ones to blame for some of your valid conclusions in the previous conversation, yet your judgement of Christianity shouldn't depend on their behaviour alone, but also on how compatible it is with your personal beliefs. Also, critically examining the propaganda regarding Christianity that you're exposed to would help a lot to this end, which is the truth, not my wishes or beliefs or anything regarding anyone else.
and using the following defenition for extort also : to gain especially by ingenuity or compelling argument I highly doubt such a definition is correct or appears in a standard dictionary. By your definition, you right now are extorting me! Where did you get that definition from?
Members of an organised religion are often asked as part of their membership to give time (in the way of voluntary work) and money (in the way of donations) to the organisation. This is coupled with the fact that members are often told that failure to continue their membership will lead to some fairly adverse consequences (eternal damnation etc..). As such it could be said that failure to participate and continue your membership, and provide work or funds as appropriate will lead to negative consequences from the head of that organisation ($deity). I don't know what you think Christianity is, I've never heard of such things before. Are you sure you're referring to Christians?
Some of the Televangelists that I have seen (I found some insane Church TV channels when trying to find decent Internet TV - hey I'm in the UK you don't see much stuff like that over here) should be guilty of something (probably not extortion though) I cannot answer this one, you may be right.
it is also fairly likely that the person in question is not aware of the fraud or the extortion, that is especially true with cults and could be true in the context of religion. The post I replied to was referring to the "fact" that religions in general extort people. Not only that, it was modded up to +5, so people think he was right. I simply asked what that assertion was based on, no answer has been given yet. Now you're trying to say that I may be extorted without my knowledge when I try to help other people, without offering any evidence at all! In the same fashion I can claim lots of things about you being extorted by some organization for buying things etc. This doesn't make sense. Also, you propose this as a possibility, while the person I replied to was absolutely certain. Where this certainty comes from is anybody's guess.
Anyway, that said, I don't think that normal mainstream religion can be compared to Scientology in this regard (or any other), nor would I agree that there is much in the way of extortion or fraud going on inside organised religion in general. I agree, that was my point.
I should say I am not religious, as such I see quite a large proportion of religious beliefs as something of a fraud (in fairly lose terms), albeit one perpetuated in good faith by generally good people, who believe in what they are doing. There is nothing inherently wrong with that as long as it doesn't cause harm to others, something most world religions seem to espouse now, but have been poor at in the past. I agree wholeheartedly as well. Just don't forget the distinction between the one who follows the teaching of Jesus (a Christian) and someone who says so. This way it's easy to conclude that many priests, bishops and popes aren't Christians (in the narrow sense, the only one that is reasonable in my opinion) and things begin to make sense.
First, they start by telling you how fantastic that Jesus guy was, how he was, like, the son of God and everything. Then, they explain how YOU (personally, if not literally) fucked the guy over and nailed him to a tree. If any Christian is doing exactly as you described, that's against the teaching of Jesus. He said that a person should decide himself whether he wants to follow Him or not. If you don't trust that they're telling the truth, then don't follow them. In any case, what you say is far from my experience.
After piling on the guilt over that, only then do they bring out the money jar, with the implication that you can redeem yourself by donating to the church. No one has ever told me such a thing. If they had, I would have objected to that strongly. I mainly feel guilt for what I have done to myself and others, so the money jar is meant to help others, not relieve my guilt (I feel guilt because I did something I shouldn't, helping someone doesn't undo what I did). Christians relieve their conscience by confession and firm decision to do as God wants, people that tell you to help the poor to make yourself feel better don't know much about Christianity. You should try to help people, because that's what God wants and God's will is shown to people through their conscience, not because someone else tells you so.
I understand that lots of priests, bishops and popes have done things that Christians aren't allowed to do, however that doesn't mean much for the substance of their faith (the teaching of Jesus specifically). The problem with the teaching of Jesus is that it's true. I can prove that the airplanes you say don't exist, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is irrelevant and most likely fiction (it has every possible quality that justifies it being a human-made contraption), that fairies don't exist etc. yet I cannot say that what Jesus said is a lie or fiction.
I've seen this written many times, your intention may be to provide:
An expression to mock Christians without any real argumentative (i.e. based on reason) value
A cynical way to describe reality
In the former case, not much can be said, as children occasionally do that and try to provoke others in any way possible. In the latter case, your expression doesn't depict reality, as Jesus Christ wasn't levitating (He was walking like an ordinary human, He once demonstrated His power to thwart gravity to His students) and wasn't a zombie, since zombies don't have will, soul and are stupid. Could you please provide the source of this "joke"?
In your previous post, you wrote that religions in general
welcome you in and then extort you.
As a general rule, sex before marriage is totally OK, no matter what any preacher or good book says What is the extortion in my case is my question.
there won't be any rapture What does some rapture have to do with this?
The problem with it is that it's pretty irrelevant. It may be useful as a mockery device for some people who think that it matters or that it's clever, however it is so vague and indeterminate, that it doesn't make sense to take it seriously.
I'm not quite sure I understand your point. The fact is that almost every event mentioned in the Bible has been historically verified. Aren't you aware that the Bible is historically accurate to a large degree? The wikipedia article includes the peer reviewed references as well.
References abound - here's one winner: "It still moves". From your link:
At the time of Galileo's trial, the dominant view among theologians and philosophers was that the Earth is stationary, indeed the center of the universe. You may be aware that this was based on a literal interpretation of the Bible and it was later found to be wrong. That is, the interpretation was wrong, the Bible doesn't say that the (physical) position of the earth is at the centre of the universe, the theologians, the Roman-Catholic Church, philosophers and Aristotle himself were saying that the earth was at the centre of the universe for some reason that reflected their ignorance and interests at the time. This has everything to do with human disbelief and feeling of safety and nothing to do with the Christian faith itself. It's good that the pope finally realized that he shouldn't interpret the Bible as he saw fit and no longer interferes with what the science says and does.
In the long run, religious explanations have repeatedly yielded to the supremacy of tolerance, reason and science, and they ever will. My knowledge confirms the opposite: if you exclude the erroneous interpretations by the Roman-Catholic Church and others, most of what the Bible says has been experimentally verified, including the promises that Jesus himself gave (the Bible as interpreted by the ones that were able to do so, the Church Fathers, more than 5 centuries ago). What is your evidence?
Only because the scientific methods doesn't allow made up hogwash to be considered 'facts'. Are you saying that whatever most of the civilized world has believed in for over 2000 years is a lie? Any evidence for that?
The debate occurs because people who believe fairy tails want to dictate to every one else how the world works. I know that God is exactly as described in the Bible, that's a fact for me just like other facts I'm aware of. I certainly don't want to dictate this to anyone, although most advances in science support perfectly my belief. You're free to believe what you want, why are you attacking Christians?
Keep your make believe invisible man crap to yourself, and everybody will be fine. Why should I stop telling others the truth and not you? Are you an authority of some sort?
The more we understand the universe around us, the bigger God gets. Is this why Nietzsche once said that God is dead? Or was it that he knew less than us today?
Of course the bigger Gods gets, the more the bible becomes a collection of stories by men, and then edited by a council of people, and not the direct word of God. Can you provide the slightest shred of evidence that the bible has any kind of errors that would support your claim? In contrast, most Christians and scholars are aware that the theology based on the bible has withstood 2000 years of scholastic and relentless scrutiny completely unharmed, can you demonstrate any human construction that has lasted that long?
God is self-existent. The universe isn't because He created it. It's not a matter of sense or logic, that's just the way things are. If you're trying to use logic to verify whether God exists or not, you're trying in vain, as philosophers and theologians found out long ago. I hope this helps.
During Jesus's life, he was fairly unimportant. No, He wasn't. He did enough to make the Jewish priests and authorities of the time worry that He would incite a revolution. The authorities crucified Him and the priests report Him as a heretic in the Talmud. I wouldn't regard a person that is mentioned in 3 different religions as "unimportant".
Saviors and "Sons of God" like him weren't uncommon, and there were several others making similar claims and performing "miracles". Any evidence?
the controversy is whether or not his existence is important or not. I would say that the fact that our calendar is based on the date of birth or crucifixion of Jesus is enough to regard Him as important.
The events that came afterward were obviously important since it spawned a powerful religion, The religion started when He started teaching.
Slashdot Mirror
According to Homer, Zeus lived on mountain Olympus. Since people have gone there and found no person matching the description of Zeus, one may safely say that Zeus doesn't exist. Judging by the fact that most of the greek mythology deals with gods that are mere humans with some superhuman qualities, and that many descriptions of gods conflict with each other, one can safely say that the ancient greek religion is a myth, i.e. it has little to do with reality and more to do with an attempt by humans to satisfy human needs or deficiencies.
Disbelief is warranted when the evidence is against a proposition. Since you cannot prove whether God exists or not using logic, saying that He doesn't exist is a logical fallacy.
About witchcraft, you may ask several self-proclaimed witches about their knowledge. If you find out that it doesn't correspond with reality, you'll have reasons to doubt their knowledge, yet you still won't be able to say that witchcraft is a lie, because there's always the possibility that these weren't real witches. Personally, I don't really care, as I don't need anything they offer, so I wouldn't bother any more than that.
Dogma is by definition a proposition that doesn't stem from rational reasoning, so disbelief in God is a dogma. It's actually very simple, I cannot understand why people try (and fail) to prove otherwise. Also, the dogma "God doesn't exist" is a declaration of faith in itself. A hallmark of religion is faith in a specific doctrine, which you just demonstrated. One may, of course, argue that lack of temples etc. means that you aren't a religious person; in the narrow sense of the word he would be correct. However, you still demonstrate one hallmark of religion, one that scientists always try to, and never succeed in, abolishing.
Well, people perceive physical reality using their brains, the rest follows from here.
Do you forget that God created the human? Doesn't this make some relation between them evident? Why do people revert to alien creature theories that aren't supported by anything at all and are scientifically extremely improbable?
I'm sorry, Darby, I'm afraid I mistook you for someone else.
Darby, I'm sorry, I mistook you for a sane person, I regret ever addressing to you. No rational person in the world would refer to obvious and inconclusive propaganda sites as the one you mention, and give it more credit than the writings of several scholars, among which is the Berkeley professor I mentioned previously. About the historical validity of the Bible, everything mentioned in it has been historically verified, except for the miracles, some would say, and some events like the mass murder of children etc., according to scholar reviews (The Biblical Archaelology Review among others). That they haven't been verified doesn't mean they didn't happen! You're being irrational from the beginning, get a grip on yourself!
I won't discuss how you claimed (you did claim this!) that a Flying Spaghetti Monster has more evidence in support of its existence, as such conversation enters the realm of the surreal; what I reasonably suggest is that you cannot, by any rational means, prove that God doesn't exist, you cannot claim that Christianity is the root of all evil on this planet, that faith is nothing to be afraid of, if it's exercised critically, and finally,now that I have answered all these questions to you, you no longer have the right to claim that you don't know these things. After you made it evident that pure hatred is the root of all of your conviction...
may God have mercy upon all of us.
If you believe that Chuck Norris is responsible for what you say, I cannot convince you for the opposite, yet I can argue that it makes more sense.
Now on for the masterpiece! The way Christians will totally contradict themselves and then just doublethink it away is a truly frightening example of the depth of delusion. Darby, you amaze me. You continuously try to prove that pigs can fly and every other claim that makes no sense, as it is based on absolutely nothing but your own convictions and wishes. I have demonstrated this fact repeatedly, yet you still insist. I don't know what can make you think reasonably and you give me no help. Your hatred against Christians is misguided; many of them are to blame for some of the things you say, yet none of them in general is responsible for your problems regarding reality. If you have anything constructive and reasonable to say, feel free, otherwise I have no time to waste, I'm sorry.
I understand that lots of priests, bishops and popes have done things that Christians aren't allowed to do, however that doesn't mean much for the substance of their faith (the teaching of Jesus specifically). The problem with the teaching of Jesus is that it's true. I can prove that the airplanes you say don't exist, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is irrelevant and most likely fiction (it has every possible quality that justifies it being a human-made contraption), that fairies don't exist etc. yet I cannot say that what Jesus said is a lie or fiction.
- An expression to mock Christians without any real argumentative (i.e. based on reason) value
- A cynical way to describe reality
In the former case, not much can be said, as children occasionally do that and try to provoke others in any way possible. In the latter case, your expression doesn't depict reality, as Jesus Christ wasn't levitating (He was walking like an ordinary human, He once demonstrated His power to thwart gravity to His students) and wasn't a zombie, since zombies don't have will, soul and are stupid. Could you please provide the source of this "joke"?Does that include Christianity based on the teaching of Jesus?
I'm a Christian and wasn't aware that I was being extorted, what do you base your assertion on?
The problem with it is that it's pretty irrelevant. It may be useful as a mockery device for some people who think that it matters or that it's clever, however it is so vague and indeterminate, that it doesn't make sense to take it seriously.
I'm not quite sure I understand your point. The fact is that almost every event mentioned in the Bible has been historically verified. Aren't you aware that the Bible is historically accurate to a large degree? The wikipedia article includes the peer reviewed references as well.
God is self-existent. The universe isn't because He created it. It's not a matter of sense or logic, that's just the way things are. If you're trying to use logic to verify whether God exists or not, you're trying in vain, as philosophers and theologians found out long ago. I hope this helps.