Christians. Could you be wrong?

[vodkafan]

Can you explain your thought process.

I could but it's breaktime and my relief shift is here....later

[FatAndFaithless]

No. We have theists that defend their beliefs all the time on here, many of them are very well-spoken and bring ethical or philosophical arguments to support their beliefs. While most of us find their conclusions unconvincing, for the vast majority of the time, they argue honestly, address the refutations of their points, and construct reasonable syllogisms. You are dishonest (maybe unintentionally) in your arguments. You flat out assert that nothing will change your mind. You lack even the most basic knowledge of what we bring up, and you lack the most basic knowledge of the evidence you claim supports you. You ignore points that we raise, and when challenged on your blatantly false assertions (remember that time you claimed there were 24000 manuscripts that were contemporary to the life of Jesus and proved the New Testament?), you literally just act like it never happened.

I addressed the point about the 24000 thing I am willing to believe I made a mistake.

Only when I pressed you hard on it, which revealed that you were literally only accepting that claim on face value with no intellectual investigation at all when the blatant falsity was bare to see. Not to mention immediately after that you keep going on making baseless assertions and reassuring us that nothing with ever change your mind.

[C4RM5]

So what you are saying is that I should be banned because I am defending my believes.

No, but you should be banned if you continue to just baselessly deny everything said to you, and repeatedly assert yet more unjustified nonsense.

We have a thing called rule one here. It's that you need to actually converse, rather than go "nuh uh!" over and over.

So what was your original point. I do accept that I do not know a lot in the topic, and I really regret mentioning it. My point was some thing along the lines of believing in a second had account. Even if it wasn't written in the disciples lifetime it was written soon after.

---

Can you explain your thought process.

I could but it's breaktime and my relief shift is here....later

Maybe later.

[Esquilax]

So what was your original point. I do accept that I do not know a lot in the topic, and I really regret mentioning it. My point was some thing along the lines of believing in a second had account. Even if it wasn't written in the disciples lifetime it was written soon after.

Decades after. And it was an account of a lifetime so amazing that one would expect there to be contemporary accounts.

Oh, and since when do we accept ancient testimony of magic as truthful, even if it was first hand?

That's the important part: we don't accept testimony of the kind of things the Jesus claims present even if they happened yesterday, and there's a reason for that. Aside from the fact that you really want the bible to be true, there's nothing to separate it from the magic claims of other gods, nor to make it any more convincing than contemporary alien abduction accounts.

[Mudhammam]

Even if it wasn't written in the disciples lifetime it was written soon after.

Pretend all of the Gospels were written in 35 A.D.

Okay now. That would make any of its metaphysical claims more believable... um.. how?

[Cyberman]

Minor point, but if they were written after the disciples' lifetimes, that sort of knackers the contention of them being eyewitness accounts.

[Simon Moon]

My point was some thing along the lines of believing in a second had account. Even if it wasn't written in the disciples lifetime it was written soon after.

Here's the thing.

You could go interview (first hand) 1000's of living people all over the world, that sincerely believe they were abducted by aliens. There are even multiple people that claim they were abducted together.

These are people alive today. Not second hand, not hearsay from friends and relatives.

Do you believe they were actually abducted by aliens? Or do you think that it might be more likely that they experienced some sort of natural event that they misinterpreted? Or hallucinated?

Why do the Biblical supernatural events become more believable when they are written in ancient texts, decades or more after the alleged events, by superstitious, tribal people, with way less understanding of the universe than we have, with no way to be verified?

[vodkafan]

Can you explain your thought process.

I'm back. OK let me put it another way. Over the years since the bible was written (or even just since Christianity started) lots of evidence has arisen that disagrees with the biblical worldview. We know much more now about physics and the universe and the natural world.
I think you would agree that the bible is under attack from all directions. It takes an increasingly more and more narrow minded person to ignore plausible and testable models in favour of having faith in a millenia old book. the bible is the lie and the illusion. You are seeing the illusion because you want to see it. Your mind is in shackles. Let me tell you, once you let it go..man it's like a huge weight gets lifted off when you don't have to carry that bible baggage around any more. And you see the world and people for what they really are. Flawed, but human. Try it dude! Be free!

[Lucanus]

"You can't be free without god! You'll be slave to sin!"

War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength

[C4RM5]

My point was some thing along the lines of believing in a second had account. Even if it wasn't written in the disciples lifetime it was written soon after.

Here's the thing.

You could go interview (first hand) 1000's of living people all over the world, that sincerely believe they were abducted by aliens. There are even multiple people that claim they were abducted together.

These are people alive today. Not second hand, not hearsay from friends and relatives.

Do you believe they were actually abducted by aliens? Or do you think that it might be more likely that they experienced some sort of natural event that they misinterpreted? Or hallucinated?

Why do the Biblical supernatural events become more believable when they are written in ancient texts, decades or more after the alleged events, by superstitious, tribal people, with way less understanding of the universe than we have, with no way to be verified?

I do noy reqlly know if they have been abducted by aliens, I know it is claimed to have happened I have just never meet anyone with these claims.
You can never truely understand what someone else has experienced, therefore I don't know whether they have or have not experienced an abduction. You have to agree it is hard to understand some ones expeřience without having the same experiences.

To be honest I am not sure how to answer the last paragraph, I would say it is trust based, but I am not sure.

---

Can you explain your thought process.

I'm back. OK let me put it another way. Over the years since the bible was written (or even just since Christianity started) lots of evidence has arisen that disagrees with the biblical worldview. We know much more now about physics and the universe and the natural world.
I think you would agree that the bible is under attack from all directions. It takes an increasingly more and more narrow minded person to ignore plausible and testable models in favour of having faith in a millenia old book. the bible is the lie and the illusion. You are seeing the illusion because you want to see it. Your mind is in shackles. Let me tell you, once you let it go..man it's like a huge weight gets lifted off when you don't have to carry that bible baggage around any more. And you see the world and people for what they really are. Flawed, but human. Try it dude! Be free!

I agree the Bible is under attack from all angles. I don't really ignore scientific theory, but there are examples when natural process do not excatly follow the theory. I don't think I would ever be able to or want to let go of my belief. I think I would feel vulnerable without God. I believe I see the beauty of the world, it is amazing. I also see people for who they are. I don't judge people by their beliefs but by chadacter and personality. I feel weighed down when I sin but my religion gives me a positive view on life.