Does a God exist?

[Silver]

The theistic standard is based on emotion, not logic.

[robvalue]

That's a good way of putting it. Feeling things to be true. It's not reliable for accurate results. But it's very useful for confirmation bias.

[Veritas_Vincit]

Steve are you related to Karl Pilkington?

I'm already spoon feeding it to you, I can't blend it any smoother than this. You are like the Knight in Monty Python where he's had he arms and legs cut off and he's still saying "Come on, I'll bite you!"

I don't care how many people supposedly said they saw a miracle. I don't care if 1000 people came up to me today and told me they saw a 'miracle' - it doesn't prove that a miracle happened.

Even if I thought I saw a miracle, I would be more likely to conclude that it was either a coincidence, or I was either tricked, drugged or otherwise hallucinating, because it is infinitely more likely.

I hate to have to break it to you, but magic isn't real. Neither is Santa, neither is the tooth fairy. And neither is God, or magic Jesus.

So if a 1000 people told you that a man who was crucified 3 days earlier rose from the dead and they saw him and spoke to him, you would not believe them?

Ever heard of a coma?

I would not believe that it was a miracle. If I was presented with enough evidence I may accept that a very unusual biological event had taken place. And you know what? If I couldn't explain how it happened, I would give the correct answer which is "I don't know." If you don't know how something happened, that doesn't mean it's magic, it means you don't know... Yet. Then you can find out.

If we just said "it's magic" every time something happened that we didn't currently have an explanation for we really would still be living in the dark ages.

[GrandizerII]

If you think his point was that these individuals resembled Christian narratives beyond the point that both involve incredible claims of miracles and other incredible acts, then I think you must have approached his article with a great deal of bias.  It appears you missed his point completely.

I understood the point Carrier was trying to make: people are gullible. My point was that I felt the circumstances surrounding these examples were stretches. For example, Apollonius - other than the Adana Inscriptions, written around 220AD, 200 years after the guy, we know next to nothing. So when Philostratus wrote it, he would have had access to the gospels and the life of Jesus. Read the Historical Fact part of the Wiki articles. 

In addition, what has changed til today? People still believe all kinds of things and will follow anyone who offers hope or a better ____.

If only you were aware of your cognitive bias here. It's clear to me that you need Jesus to be true. Thus, the special pleading.

[robvalue]

I wouldn't care how many people told me something. It only shows what they believe to be the case. It doesn't mean they are correct.

If it's a mundane, unimportant claim, I'll accept it as evidence no problem. But if it's something extraordinary, something not even previously known to be possible, then no amount of anecdotes is sufficient evidence.

And what has someone coming back to life got to do with god anyway? Total non sequitur.

[Veritas_Vincit]

The fact that this has debate has gone on so long is just more evidence in support of my original post about the real reasons that religious people hold on to their beliefs and won't admit when they are wrong.

[robvalue]

The real reasons are, in my opinion, based on emotion and programmed thinking. Everything else is rationalisations, to make themselves feel like this is not the case.

Some people have admitted this, and I respect them for doing so.

They honestly might not know the real reasons they believe though.

[SteveII]

So if a 1000 people told you that a man who was crucified 3 days earlier rose from the dead and they saw him and spoke to him, you would not believe them?

Ever heard of a coma?

I would not believe that it was a miracle. If I was presented with enough evidence I may accept that a very unusual biological event had taken place. And you know what? If I couldn't explain how it happened, I would give the correct answer which is "I don't know." If you don't know how something happened, that doesn't mean it's magic, it means you don't know... Yet. Then you can find out.

If we just said "it's magic" every time something happened that we didn't currently have an explanation for we really would still be living in the dark ages.

So, really you are saying miracles cannot happen. I thought that was your main objection to the NT. Therefore I was right, you claim God does not exist because there is no evidence, miracles would be the most obvious evidence, miracles don't count because they cannot happen, your are arguing in circles. The rest of your list is simply cover because its really not plausible that that many people were mistaken or lying.

[Excited Penguin]

A God does, in fact, exist. I recently came to that conclusion. I just can't lie to myself and others anymore.

I can't demonstrate it, sorry, that's not how it works. You just have to believe, you have to have faith. I'm not trying to preach, just telling it like it is. There's no evidence involved, it's simply something you have to feel in a sense.

[Edwardo Piet]