Was Jesus a God or a man?

[The Grand Nudger]

One might make such an assumption, but it would be bereft of integrity. If you assume something, and upon further review that assumption doesn't pan out -it is the assumption that comes under the axe, not any and all evidence to the contrary of the assumption. To do, as you have done(and as you propose you would do), and refuse to modify the assumption would be to explicitly announce that the assumption was more important than whatever truth it may be used to reveal.

[Hezekiah]

I agree there is a difference between what I believe and what is true. But I believe that it is true for me.

Truth is not a vanity plate. There is no list of what is true with your name on it, just for you. You're equivocating, perhaps unintentionally, between various usages of the word.

That was a promise, not a suggestion.

Rephrase? I'm not doubting your sincerity. Merely explaining that if you are sincere in the one claim, the other cannot simultaneously be true. When people give you shit about integrity - this is is the sort of thing they are referring to Hez. People are assuming that you're smart enough to have realized this without any help - but just in case, when you've gone down this route, people have taken the time to lay it out for you. -And yet you persist......

I don't know much about the Odin god to say accurately. But assuming it's nothing like the Christian God I'd answer, no.

Then the existence of a god is not a requirement for faith. There are people who do have faith in Odin. In the same way, the existence of god is not required for your faith. Not in Asatru, not in christianity, and not - specifically, to you.

Ah! I think see what you mean! (Correct me if I'm wrong but) You're saying faith does not have to be put in the existence of god, Asatru, Christianity or myself in order to exist. Faith simply is?

And I'm sorry I come across with poor integrity. I thought integrity had to do with being honest with you and myself. I'm trying to be open and honest, I just think I'm not doing a good job at communicating my thought process.

[The Grand Nudger]

No, I'm saying that any given god does not have to exist for any given believer to have faith in it. We've agreed that this is the case with Odin and Asatru...now.....

And in Christianity, God has to exist in order for faith to exist.

....do you see the problem?

[Hezekiah]

No, I'm saying that any given god does not have to exist for any given believer to have faith in it.

Ah! Ok. I see what's going on here. I would agree that yes, people can believe in any given god and that the god does not have to exist for them to have faith in it.

But from the inside looking out, that person who is putting faith in said god could not have done it if that given god did not create and give them the ability to have faith.

So yes, I see truth in the point you are making.

[The Grand Nudger]

But from the inside looking out, that person who is putting faith in said god could not have done it if that given god did not create and give them the ability to have faith.

Truth is not a vanity plate. Yes, they can do it - and they do - this much can be seen "from the inside" as easily as it can be "from the outside".

[Esquilax]

I never claimed it was. My claim is "I don't know". There are many religious people w/o good morals, ex. Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, etc..

My opinion of atheist come from their behavior and NOTHING else. No different from y'all's opinion of xtians, you don't like their prejudice, self righteous BS.

My only contact with atheist is forums like this. It seems to me you have become "like" your enemy, no god/s necessary!!!hock:

Don't know what would make you say that, really. Kinda hard to argue with such a vague statement, but given that I was responding solely to your point about Price's work and what it implies about altruism, this is probably a digression.

You all think you're soooooooooo smart but yet you can not see YOU are making things worse, not better. It's just one more god opinion to argue about.

How do you know I'm making things worse, and not better? How do you know anything about me, about any of us? And if you don't know us, on what are you basing this accusation?

If you were really smart you would know that we have barely scratched the surface of the universe. Explain dark matter, sense you are so smart.

Tell me where the stuff came from that caused the big bang!

You don't know, do ya?

I've never claimed to know everything, or even most things. I don't need to know everything to know you're wrong a given thing, however. Where is this even coming from?

Tell me why things just stopped evolving?

They didn't, and you are wrong to say they did. Life is constantly evolving in little ways, generation by generation, over the timescales necessary for evolution to occur, which can often be fairly long. If you want to see it happening in action, just look at the growing number of antibiotic-resistant bacteria out there. They've evolved that way.

You gotten your flu shot yet? Know why you need a new one every year? Because the virus evolves.

Life is a mystery. That is the only truth at this time. It is science that's going to destroy us with their deadly inventions, nuclear bombs and all kinds of pollutants full of carcinogens. Just like religion, science brings us good things and bad, that's human nature.

Science is also the only method by which we can develop defenses to all of those things, just saying.

It's okay to be atheist. It's not okay to be jerks. Geeze. It's okay to be a Christian just don't be a jerk. It's okay to be what ever you want except a jerk.

Who was being a jerk? Criticizing your argument isn't the same thing as being mean, and frankly I think I was pretty level headed there. If you were saying evolution couldn't be real because of what you supplied, then that would be the logical fallacy I pointed out. That's me trying to improve your argumentation by showing you where it might be weak; do you really feel that the only way people can be nice to you is by constantly agreeing with you?

I did provide a link sooooooooooooo, I don't think I screwed up anything. Try again.

You did provide a link, but you misinterpreted the information therein. What Price produced was a theory that explained altruistic behavior in terms of the survival advantage that it presents, that allowed it to become a trait in our population's genetics. He did not prove that altruism doesn't exist, but rather why it does exist: the conclusion some came to from that was that altruism is biologically generated and is truly just a naturally selected- ultimately mechanical- instinct driven by our need to propagate our species, and that because of this it isn't as valuable or morally right as it appears. My response is first and foremost that things don't need to be magical to carry value, and also that that interpretation of what altruism is doesn't jive with the definition of the word; natural selection is an unconscious pressure, not a state of mind. It may have shaped our capacity for altruism, but we still choose to make altruistic choices, no matter how our instinctive positive reaction to those choices came to be there.

[FatAndFaithless]

Apparently disagreeing with Rogue = being a jerk. Rogue even claims to know just what the scriptures are really saying.

[Tonus]

Oh no, not at all, I didn't mean to communicate that. Just that Jesus WAS Human, therefore I can appropriately subject him to human standards. But God is not human, he is a far from human, and human standards and thought wouldn't be applicable without the aspects of being a human being.

Depending on your beliefs, Jesus was just a human shell inhabited by the spirit of god or a god-like being. In which case you are basing your judgment on his outward appearance and not the kind of person he was.

I can understand the "might makes right" argument when applied to a being of incalculable power, someone we cannot bring to justice and who therefore gets to make and break the rules. But that's a far cry from giving in and claiming that he is perfect, or good, or just, or loving. Those words mean something, and if we apply them to someone who acts contrary to them we strip them of that meaning.

Nor do I see why such a being would ever mask his true nature or hide relevant or important knowledge or information from those who can do nothing to hinder him in any way. There is no reason for god to be mysterious, or to have some "higher" plane of understanding that eludes us, under which his actions are loving or just or good. In our day to day lives we abhor deception, especially deception designed to get us to trust someone whose motives are unclear or counter-productive. Why excuse god when he does it on such a massive scale?

[Rogue]

1.They didn't, and you are wrong to say they did. Life is constantly evolving in little ways, generation by generation, over the timescales necessary for evolution to occur, which can often be fairly long. If you want to see it happening in action, just look at the growing number of antibiotic-resistant bacteria out there. They've evolved that way.

2.You gotten your flu shot yet? Know why you need a new one every year? Because the virus evolves.

3.Science is also the only method by which we can develop defenses to all of those things, just saying.

4.Who was being a jerk? Criticizing your argument isn't the same thing as being mean, and frankly I think I was pretty level headed there. If you were saying evolution couldn't be real because of what you supplied, then that would be the logical fallacy I pointed out. That's me trying to improve your argumentation by showing you where it might be weak; do you really feel that the only way people can be nice to you is by constantly agreeing with you?


5.You did provide a link, but you misinterpreted the information therein. What Price produced was a theory that explained altruistic behavior in terms of the survival advantage that it presents, that allowed it to become a trait in our population's genetics. He did not prove that altruism doesn't exist, but rather why it does exist: the conclusion some came to from that was that altruism is biologically generated and is truly just a naturally selected- ultimately mechanical- instinct driven by our need to propagate our species, and that because of this it isn't as valuable or morally right as it appears. My response is first and foremost that things don't need to be magical to carry value, and also that that interpretation of what altruism is doesn't jive with the definition of the word; natural selection is an unconscious pressure, not a state of mind. It may have shaped our capacity for altruism, but we still choose to make altruistic choices, no matter how our instinctive positive reaction to those choices came to be there.

1.Then give me an example of human evolution in the past 10,000 years. Looks to me like bacteria are smarter than humans.
Since you failed to do so...I digress

2.Yes I do know that, but thanks for making sure.

3.Science makes bombs that science must defend us from. Interesting sure enough.

4.Almost every body here unless you want to add mockery to Good Manners. There are hardly any direct questions and NO helpful criticism. Just a bunch of goofing off. No I don't but I put that right back to you. The person, you, that came up with #3, I do not need help from. Maybe I can help you. Yea how does that make you feel. I bet you're mad now. I apologize.

5.You left out the part about the atheist scientist, Price, becoming Christian because of his work. I'm pretty sure his mathematical equation was published. That's how he earned respect in the scientific community, no? If the math is never wrong then altruism does not exist. It's been a while since I read the , Price, story but certain things that makes ya hummmmm, you remember. I remember being very sad at the answer to Price's equation. He did commit suicide.

Let's don't drive ourselves mad over it. Peace.

---

I have to give Tonus props. That was stimulating. Thanks.

[The Grand Nudger]

The ability to digest dairy and wheat. Those are two big ones. Blue eyes...there's another for ya. These are satisfying because we see them, they make a noticeable impression. Truth be told -you- have laid the groundwork for evolution in your own lifetime. You are not a carbon copy of your parents, you are not even a carbon copy of who you once were. Once you have children, you'll add these changes to the snapshot of human genetics at the population level. How well expressed whatever inheritable mutations you possess will be in 10k years is beyond me to predict, of course- but by reference to the above....and all of the blue eyed grilled cheese eating peoples of the world....you can see how prevalent a mutation may be after 10k years or so (digestion was more recent than that, btw - still isn't very well expressed in the overall human population, hence gluten allergies and lactose intolerance - course....blue eyes may be on their way out).

Evolution isn't a matter of intelligence Rogue, it's simply a matter of change. Bacteria can change quickly because they live, reproduce, and die quickly. They have more opportunity to change, as a population, relative to human beings.

Quick q - do you have wisdom teeth? I don't, not -as in- they haven't come in yet, as in.....they never formed (and given my age....never will). We're losing them, at the population level-even though many individuals (the majority) still have them (the number of wisdom teeth that form in that larger demographic varies from individual to individual from 1-4...trending downwards).