Hostage to fear

[Spacetime]

As it has come up here, I thought I'd mention this:

Even if Jesus really did come back from the dead, it proves nothing about the rest if the claims in the bible. It doesn't prove there is a god, it doesn't prove he is God, and it doesn't make anything he said true. All it would be is an example of a very strange phenomena, as yet unexplained.

It's also worth noting that "the ressurection" is suspected by scholars to be a later addition to the text; the original ending simply has a guy spreading the rumour Jesus has risen after the empty tomb is discovered.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16

You are clearly very well read and familiar with the bible and its history. This is a great defence against apologetics looking to claw you back, as has already been demonstrated in this thread! I've noticed a trend of atheists knowing more about the bible than Christians. Kind of ironic on many levels...

It shouldn't be surprising though.  What should be ironic is that the core doctrinal sources of this system (Christianity) are the very thing that make it not work.  I know... I'm going full-eAtheist on you... but there's real evidence that Christians haven't "read their own book" or investigated their own faith.  If they had... why have so many of them not read the Didache or "The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles"?  Even if I were drunk on sola scriptura... you'd think I'd at least be curious about what those guys said.  But... ....nope.

Now I'm not claiming to be remotely conversant on that literature with real historians or theologians, but I've at least read it.  Studied what's in it to the degree that it would reach it's logical conclusion.  But that's very difficult to do...........

..........Here's why.  When your God is leather-bound.... and "he" tells you fairy tales that you can believe are fairy tales, it's difficult to convince yourself that any other source of fairy tale would offer anything relevant.  That most modern Western Christians haven't read the Didache is evidence that they think the bible is bullshit.  That modern Western Christians, for the most part, haven't read the Early Church Fathers is evidence that they are more skeptical than their apologists and clergy (who know of these problems with the faith, but do not address them on Sundays... because empty pews don't pay).

Regarding the resurrection... the Apostles Creed sums up Christian belief.  Ask a Christian to really take a look at it in a text document and delete the parts that they *really* don't believe... none of them would be Christians in the doctrinal sense.

You're absolutely right!

---

Of course they would. But that IS the kind of miracle that Jesus performed, but despite that, you're walking away from Him. Why?

So God thought it relevant to reveal his truths in the form of miracles at one time, but not anymore? We don't deserve this sort of proof because we've lived beyond the one generation of believers that were supposed to see the fulfillment of Christian prophecy in the first have of the 1st century? If you're going to tell me that you believe that prophecy was fulfilled when the Jewish temple was destroyed... you will admit you're, at least in part, a preterist. You very seriously don't want to go down the road of preterism, especially when it comes to your doctrine of hell.

But to answer your question directly... because he gave me secondary sources as a proof, which isn't proof of any kind.[/quote]

But multiple eyewitnesses attested to the fact that it actually happened.

And who were they? The anonymous authors of the gospels? The ones whose names had to be written in the margins so that their authority could take seed, when they didn't write them in the first place? Oh... holy tradition says "Mark wrote the Gospel of Mark". Where's the evidence?

Now, if the disciples simply made up the story to win converts, why were they willing to die for something they knew was not true? When a gun was put to their heads, why didn't at least one of them say, "Okay, enough. I admit it...we made the whole thing up."
Lots of people are willing to die for what they believe in, but no one dies for what they know to be false. The disciples knew the resurrection was true, and they were willing to die for what they knew.

Negative ghost rider, the pattern is full. You cannot appeal to that argument when so many Manichaeans (your church called them heretics) were willing to die for their beliefs also. Let's turn up the "time" on this argument of yours and come to present day... fundamental Islamic suicide bombers. They get credit too? Your argument is ... fundamentally flawed. /sigh/ Dude. Stop. I'd ask "can't you see it"... but I was you when I was in my infancy of understanding about the world around us.

I disagree. I think God has told us why. Through the scriptures, through Sacred Tradition*** and through the Church.

BOOM! And there it goes. I was wondering when it would happen, but didn't suppose it would be this early. Sacred tradition verses holy tradition. Look it up.

But several people in this forum have specifically expressed the resentment that they would feel if they knew God was watching them all the time. Christopher Hitchens was very clear about this.

But you're talking to me... and I'm not several people. Thanks for noticing.

Sort of a field manual or textbook of some sort? Yeah, that might have been helpful.

Might have been helpful? Are you so far disconnected from your own species that you fail to see the certainty that a field guide from your omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent god would have done a better job of saving humanity? Either you've never left your own country or you've done so on a mission from god with 10 very watchful and suspicious members of your church.

OR (and I'm just spitballing here) maybe God could inspire a book that deals with some of the bigger issues we face in the few years we have here in preparation for the ETERNITY to come.

What bigger issues could we face than medical and scientific understanding about ourselves and the world around us? Eternity? You see, eternity is a manifestation of your God though. Shouldn't eternity be perfect? Or is there a hiccup in your theology that leads to the dead end of theodicy?

I'm gonna go with that.

Please don't. For your own sake.

No you see... he could empower us to prevent those things through his infinite knowledge, and his "unmistakable" presence (obvious to everyone) would be something worthy of worship.  His book could have empowered us... but instead, we get to learn how much whores love big penises and larger than average quantities of ejaculate (Ezekiel 23:20).  Instead we get to learn how pissy the most perfect man can be when a fig tree has no fruit (Matthew 21).  Instead we get to learn about just how primitive we were as a primates when it came to our female counterparts (Timothy 2:11).

Is that all you have gotten out of your reading of scripture? When is the last time you read the NT cover to cover?

Clearly you have no understanding of reductio ad absurdum. Clearly. But nice try.

The reason I came to an atheist forum is this; most atheists want to see people make rational decisions to increase their health and wellbeing, theists want people to get back in the pew... but only after apologizing for getting up in the first place.

Baloney. I want to see people make rational decisions by becoming Catholics.

Sorry, mate. Believing that a man was clinically dead for 3 days and came back to life is irrational. Loving the entity that suggests stoning your children because of disobedience is good, then still loving him after he changes his mind later, only after sending his only begotten son to be horribly tortured.... irrational. But it doesn't matter if those things are irrational... because they are also wicked.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uWMOZ0vaCY

You're conflicting and torturing children with your irrational, wicked doctrines. And you're defending this. Wake up, brother... Wake... up.