Quote:He isnt the one who sacrificed Jesus, the real God did.

I should jump all over you for that, TC but, in fact, all you are doing is inventing your own god which is what every religion has done since the beginning of human thought. Why should I deny you your particular fantasy?

(May 2, 2010 at 1:16 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:He isnt the one who sacrificed Jesus, the real God did.

I should jump all over you for that, TC but, in fact, all you are doing is inventing your own god which is what every religion has done since the beginning of human thought. Why should I deny you your particular fantasy?

Well no i believe in the God of the New Testament, a god of love and peace, and when i look at the God from the Old testament it is clear that they are not the same being. I believe in the NT God because to me, the Gospels depict a true story, and the fact that the Church has existed for 2000 years, being the longest existing organization in the world, is to me a testimony of that.

You can disprove some of the facts written in the Old Testament. However there is no disproval of what is written in the New Testament. I know it is physically highly unlikely, but it has not be proven to be impossible.

And before you talk about unicorns and fairies, there is no "evidence" for them as there is for Jesus in the form of the Gospels.

There is no evidence for any Supernatural godly Jesus even if there is evidence for him as an ordinary bloke who thought he was a messiah.

Quote: I believe in the NT God because to me, the Gospels depict a true story, and the fact that the Church has existed for 2000 years, being the longest existing organization in the world, is to me a testimony of that.

That's a complete non-sequitur. Not evidence. Why do you think that the fact the Church is popular and has existed for 2000 years is evidence that the claims are in any way true? You act as if the truth can be voted on! It doesn't work like that.

EvF

The gospels are not "evidence." They do not even agree among themselves.

They are propaganda and further they show evidence of having been tampered with to suit the needs of the power structure.


You are in danger of dropping into Delusion-ville, here.

TC, you claim that the gospels and a church lasting 2000 years is proof of god/christ.
I claim it is THE example of SUPERSTITION, as defined in my Chambers dictionary thus:-

" a deep-rooted but unfounded general belief ".

As I stated previously, you simply WANT to believe in the supernatural.

(May 2, 2010 at 4:20 pm)bozo Wrote: TC, you claim that the gospels and a church lasting 2000 years is proof of god/christ.
I claim it is THE example of SUPERSTITION, as defined in my Chambers dictionary thus:-

" a deep-rooted but unfounded general belief ".

As I stated previously, you simply WANT to believe in the supernatural.

Indeed, bozo. Using that kind of "reasoning"

Quote:Ancient Egyptian religion encompasses the various religious beliefs and rituals practiced in ancient Egypt over more than 3,000 years, from the predynastic period until the adoption of Christianity in the early centuries AD. These beliefs centered on the worship of multiple deities who represented various aspects of nature, ideas and functions of power, expressed by the means of complex and varied archetypes.

Egyptian religion is more true than xtianity by a factor of 1/3.

And, let's be clear about something. Xtianity was "adopted" because of Imperial Edict not because it convinced many people with its bullshit story.

(May 2, 2010 at 4:43 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

(May 2, 2010 at 4:20 pm)bozo Wrote: TC, you claim that the gospels and a church lasting 2000 years is proof of god/christ.
I claim it is THE example of SUPERSTITION, as defined in my Chambers dictionary thus:-

" a deep-rooted but unfounded general belief ".

As I stated previously, you simply WANT to believe in the supernatural.

Indeed, bozo. Using that kind of "reasoning"

Quote:Ancient Egyptian religion encompasses the various religious beliefs and rituals practiced in ancient Egypt over more than 3,000 years, from the predynastic period until the adoption of Christianity in the early centuries AD. These beliefs centered on the worship of multiple deities who represented various aspects of nature, ideas and functions of power, expressed by the means of complex and varied archetypes.

Egyptian religion is more true than xtianity by a factor of 1/3.

And, let's be clear about something. Xtianity was "adopted" because of Imperial Edict not because it convinced many people with its bullshit story.

You misinterpreted what i said: i dont mean that because a lot of people believe in it for a long time it is true. I mean that the fact that the Church has lasted 2000 years shows its godly origins. No other organization has ever lasted that long, not even the great roman empire.

TC, I really don't think longevity is the issue! Nothing lasts forever.
You claim " godly origins " in support of what amounts to superstition.

(May 2, 2010 at 5:14 pm)True Christian Wrote: You misinterpreted what i said: i dont mean that because a lot of people believe in it for a long time it is true. I mean that the fact that the Church has lasted 2000 years shows its godly origins. No other organization has ever lasted that long, not even the great roman empire.

What about other religious organizations that have lasted just as long or longer than Christianity? You could just as well apply your argument to other popular religions. Just because atheism wasn't as popular enough so many years ago to form organizations doesn't mean that atheism isn't a more reasonable position on the universe. It's not as if Christianity became so popular as a pacifist in the first place: how is the Catholic's history with violent methods of spreading their 'word' supposed to make sense in a religion that now proposes that you turn the other cheek when in conflict? Do you ever stop to think that if people are gullible now, they were more gullible 2000 years ago when communication was so limited?

(May 2, 2010 at 5:20 pm)bozo Wrote: TC, I really don't think longevity is the issue! Nothing lasts forever.
You claim " godly origins " in support of what amounts to superstition.

Nothing lasts forever...except God

and for now you have no reason to say that the Church will not last for as long as mankind exists, because Christianity is still on the rise, not in Europe but in other parts of the world like Africa or South America.

_________

On another subject, i have decided to revise one of my previous positions about Christianity, and the Crusades were the reason of that change: i now agree that it has objectively done more harm than good in the world in the past because it was used for wrongful purposes.

However, i maintain that in today's world, Christianity has more of a beneficial effect.

---

(May 2, 2010 at 5:40 pm)The_Flying_Skeptic Wrote:

(May 2, 2010 at 5:14 pm)True Christian Wrote: You misinterpreted what i said: i dont mean that because a lot of people believe in it for a long time it is true. I mean that the fact that the Church has lasted 2000 years shows its godly origins. No other organization has ever lasted that long, not even the great roman empire.

What about other religious organizations that have lasted just as long or longer than Christianity? You could just as well apply your argument to other popular religions. Just because atheism wasn't as popular enough so many years ago to form organizations doesn't mean that atheism isn't a more reasonable position on the universe. It's not as if Christianity became so popular as a pacifist in the first place: how is the Catholic's history with violent methods of spreading their 'word' supposed to make sense in a religion that now proposes that you turn the other cheek when in conflict? Do you ever stop to think that if people are gullible now, they were more gullible 2000 years ago when communication was so limited?

Give me another organization that has lasted this long. Not even religious, any system that has lasted over 2000 years.

Ill wait