Proof of Christianity

[pineapplebunnybounce]

@Locke, the fact that you think our behaviour supports the existence of jesus ... I'm not even going to start.

Actually, on second thought ... Mind explaining all the contradictions people have mentioned thus far? Want to enlighten us atheists and help us see the light?

[Minimalist]

... Then why do you all spend so many hours a day on these forums, trying to disprove God?

I sit here waiting for some god-fearing asshole to wander into my crosshairs.

Otherwise.... I never think about your silly god or any silly gods. Humanity should have outgrown that nonsense millenia ago.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

With the meager evidence, frequent scapegoating and excessive flaming I've gotten from the general community of atheists here, I've become more convinced that Jesus is Lord, and more convinced that most people really aren't willing to look at all the facts and make a clear, informed decision. Like you, they'd rather cling to what they want to be true, and use scapegoating, mockery, and circumlocution to make themselves feel better, hiding in groups of like-minded people to draw confidence.

So are you going to address my argument?

I'll make it simple.

If you had to choose from two possibilities behind the resurrection, which one would you choose and why?

1. Jesus was really God, he died for mankind's sins, and was raised again on the third day and then went up to heaven in front of his disciples.

or

2. Jesus was an alien pretending to be God, he pretended to die for man's sins, with advance alien technology was made too look dead, and then created the illusion that he was raised from the dead and then an alien spaceship pulled him up to the sky with a tractor beam.

Which is more reasonable? Why?

[Bad Wolf]

... Then why do you all spend so many hours a day on these forums, trying to disprove God?

We don't try to disprove god, infact we aren't even trying to deconvert people. We just want people to think for themselves and for them to develop critical thinking skills, you are a very good example of the type of person I aim at

[Captain Colostomy]

...and thus the last temptation of Locke was over. He had resisted Satan, and could safely return to preach the good news to all the dumb schmucks at his prayer group.

He was here to test his faith, folks. Which in his mind means holding his nose while simultaneously plugging his ears.

Another victory for Jeebus.

[Bad Writer]

How in the fuck does one disprove what can't be proven?

By the way, he used the word circumlocution wrong. We tend to speak pretty straight-forward here and don't use superfluous words to find the meaning of something.

[Captain Colostomy]

How in the fuck does one disprove what can't be proven?

By the way, he used the word circumlocution wrong. We tend to speak pretty straight-forward here and don't use superfluous words to find the meaning of something.

I find your dialectic verklempt of sustenance.

[CleanShavenJesus]

I've become more convinced that Jesus is Lord, and more convinced that most people really aren't willing to look at all the facts and make a clear, informed decision. Like you, they'd rather cling to what they want to be true, and use scapegoating, mockery, and circumlocution to make themselves feel better, hiding in groups of like-minded people to draw confidence.

[Bad Writer]

Now I want a White Russian.

[Vicki Q]

this would be the question of why the Early Church got started with the beliefs that it did.

Then read Bart Ehrman's "Lost Christianities" and find out.

I've read other material by Bart Ehrman, and he is one of the best anti-Xian writers; however I haven't read this one, and I wonder what different material this book would bring. Given that I'm unlikely to have read it by any time soon, could you do a summary?

(Debate by summary. The academic equivalent of cheap pizza.)

---

@Vicki, the fact that you believe despite not having seen it with your own eyes is proof that people would believe if they're told something happened. And there goes your argument.

I'm at all sure I've understood your argument. However, my reply to what I think it is would be that the disciples made clear claims that they witnessed the events, and observation, rather than any invention, is much the best explanation for the emergent beliefs in the form that they are. Or to put it another way, if they were going to create stuff about Jesus, it would be very unlikely to look like material that is coherent with C1 Judaism, yet is shockingly different.

For example, if you believed in resurrection at all in C1 Israel, you thought it would happen to everyone at the instigation of the Kingdom of God. The idea that one person should be resurrected in advance of that universal resurrection would be thought...bizarre in the extreme. It's all much more likely to have come from something they saw.