(August 16, 2016 at 12:57 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 12:44 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Why are you assuming that these documents are unbiased and thus objectively truthful?  These people were trying to build and spread a religion, correct?

Why would you want to build and spread a religion that was based on what you knew to be false? Is there any evidence or hint that might be the case in the 8-9 authors of the NT? The core belief of Jesus coming back from the dead is hardly an event to be mistaken or 'biased' with.

Because religion is power, especially in the ancient world?  And Jesus' resurrection is exactly the kind of event that fits the bill.  It's the ultimate "My messiah is better, more powerful than yours" trump card.

You cannot be this naive.

(August 16, 2016 at 12:04 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 11:43 am)Crossless1 Wrote: So it's our job to show that your unfalsifiable claim is not true? That old game again?

Actually, no. That is not what the argument achieves. It simply removes the charge that belief in God is irrational, unjustifiable, or unwarranted. While it contributes to a cumulative argument for the existence of God, it does not prove it.

It also demonstrates that my experience-based belief in the flying-purple-people-eater is as equally rational, justified, and warranted as your belief in God. That doesn't taste so good going down, does it?

(August 16, 2016 at 12:50 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Because you have failed to make them so.  This isn't the first time that these things have been asserted on these boards, or by you.  I'm not going to humor the weekly reset Steve.  As ever, the drums sound retreat immediately, and the plebs burn the fields on their way out.  "Well, we don't/can't know".  OFC we can, don't be ridiculous....you're the one who decided to bring godman down to earth, after all.

That's ridiculous. I cannot make something 'untrue' because you do not believe the evidence that exists. I never said anything about 'we don't/can't know'. I believe the evidence and you don't. Is there a reason that the NT events could not be true despite the accounts?

(August 16, 2016 at 11:37 am)bennyboy Wrote: Here's the thing that for me sinks you entirely-- you have a nearly impossible 2-step process: 1) claim that your intuitions and feelings represent knowledge of reality; 2) demonstrate that the intuitions and feelings of dozens of other cultures and thousands of subcultures do NOT represent knowledge of reality. That you will achieve that second step seems highly unlikely to anyone who isn't already a Christian.

Pshhh...SO. EASY.

1. They do because some philosophers say they do

2. The Bible

*bam* drops mike

[emoji56]

(August 16, 2016 at 12:58 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: And we're back to the "they really really believed it" excuse.

I simply responded to an attempt to suggest that the people who wrote the NT were mistaken or biased and pointed out there is no evidence for this so therefore...find another reason not to believe what the writers wrote.

(August 16, 2016 at 1:08 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 12:58 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: And we're back to the "they really really believed it" excuse.

I simply responded to an attempt to suggest that the people who wrote the NT were mistaken or biased and pointed out there is no evidence for this so therefore...find another reason not to believe what the writers wrote.

You like idea of surrendering you life for possible eternal servitude under the God.

Many people dislike such idea of eternal servitude because they would have to choke their earthly happines for invisible reward.

(August 16, 2016 at 12:57 pm)SteveII Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 12:44 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: Why are you assuming that these documents are unbiased and thus objectively truthful?  These people were trying to build and spread a religion, correct?

Why would you want to build and spread a religion that was based on what you knew to be false? 

Are you serious?

(August 13, 2016 at 9:52 am)mh.brewer Wrote:

(August 12, 2016 at 11:20 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: Guys, guys...Scientology is the real religion.

Understand?

All hail Xenu.

Please remove your thetan from my ass.

You'll have to take more auditing classes first.

(August 16, 2016 at 1:00 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:

(August 16, 2016 at 12:57 pm)SteveII Wrote: Why would you want to build and spread a religion that was based on what you knew to be false? Is there any evidence or hint that might be the case in the 8-9 authors of the NT? The core belief of Jesus coming back from the dead is hardly an event to be mistaken or 'biased' with.

Because religion is power, especially in the ancient world?  And Jesus' resurrection is exactly the kind of event that fits the bill.  It's the ultimate "My messiah is better, more powerful than yours" trump card.

You cannot be this naive.

Can you back this theory up with an ounce of historical data that supports it? Please be sure to include the point at which people started to benefit from perpetuating a new, yet false religion. 

This is another example of dopey theories being repeated enough that people begin to believe they have merit--just because--"it must be so because I've seen this argument so used so many times.