Does a God exist?

[dyresand]

If a god existed it simply doesn't care about ant's running around on a ball of mud.
But in this case does a god exist more than likely one or more doesn't exist.

[SteveII]

Hearsay (note the spelling) is a pejorative term that describes EVERY historical document. You are attempting to make an exception to the normal standards of assessing historical documents because the content includes miracles.  Your argument is circular. 

As long as you realize you are on shaky philosophical ground, believe whatever you want. Just don't lecture me and other Christians how superior your 'thinking' is.

Lol this from the guy who believes in magic. My thinking isn't especially remarkable, but yours is just plain retarded. I'm still not completely sure you aren't just a troll taking the piss.

See, you're really not interested in thinking deeply about these things. You seem only interested in restating your opinion that you are superior because of your inch-deep, mile-wide list of objections you cut and pasted from somewhere. This is evidenced by the fact that whenever holes are pointed out in your reasoning, you change the subject or just resort to answers like above. 

You may also be confused on my reasons for answering your posts. It is an intellectual exercise that I enjoy and it is NOT to convince you or anyone of anything. You will NOT hurt my feelings or change my mind with ad hominem attacks--although it does speak to character.

[Pat Mustard]

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.

Still trollin' I see.

[Excited Penguin]

troll - make a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.

Care to explain that, then?

[Pat Mustard]

You initially claimed that your belief in the NT miracles was different from that of other miracle stories.  You seem to be treading water here.  How are you different in your belief in the miracles of Jesus than other believers in the incredible?

1) Content of the NT is internally consistent within itself and with the OT. 
2) More historical support for more actual documents written by more than one person
3) Historical support of first century church
4) Person of Jesus is a compelling figure
5) Observations of personal effect of Jesus in the lives of other people
6) Personal experience.

1) No it is not. In the beginning of the book, there are two different creation myths neither of which is compatible with the other. An internally consistent book wouldn't display such a contradiciton.
2) There is no historical support for what is written in the bible.
3) There is no historical support for a church before the 2nd century CE
4) Person of Carrot Ironfoundersson is a compelling figure, person of Gandalf the Grey/White is a compelling figure, person of Zororaster is a compelling figure, person of Gulliver Foyle is a compelling figure. That doesn't stop any of them from being completely fictional creations.
5) We can observe the "personal effect" of Moses, Vishnu, Thor &c in people too. But yet you don't believe in the religions those figures are supposed to profess.
6) Anecdote is not evidence. Plural anecdotes don't make evidence.

So in conclusion, you have no reasons for believing in miracles, apart from your prior bias towards believing in miracles.

[pocaracas]

Steve, my boy... you are wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotheology

https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_sherme...anguage=en

First, you intuitively believe, then you consciously acknowledge that belief.... your "choosing to believe" purports to this second stage... or some other that comes later.

The NT delves in circular logic there, wouldn't you think?
Here's a marvelous tale that happened.... And here's the tale of the people who believed in the marvelous tale.
Certainly, no reason to think they'd be lying... -.-'

Specially, when you know that "the early church" was no such thing... I think Minimalist will eventually lecture you on that, but [spoiler alert] it was mostly made up in the second century [/spoiler alert].

Sure... there were Essenes in the first century who may have seen their long awaited Teacher arisen in the person of Jesus... (note the "may" - there's nothing of consequence written about this).


Tell me, did the authors of the Vedas claim to have knowledge that they didn't really have?
Did the authors of the Egyptian book of the dead claim to have knowledge that they didn't have?
(should I go on for other authors of other religious texts from other religions?.... I'm sure I can come up with a few... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_text)

Did/do they all hold false beliefs? How shocking!!  

I'm not seeing how either one of those links support your conclusion. Do you "intuitively believe" or have an intuition based on your existing knowledge? If you have to intuitively believe everything prior to a proper belief, how would you ever learn something new?

Oh... you need something a bit more serious?
How about this?:
https://books.google.pt/books?id=a1ueBAA...in&f=false

Learning involves information flowing to you.
After you have acquired that info (or while you're still acquiring it), you form an intuitive opinion of it... and then rationalize it.

Believing the NT authors is certainly not circular.

I don't think that's what was being said...
Believing in the NT stories because of other NT stories that claim that the first NT stories were accurate is...ok.. not circular... but fallacious.

I won't see what Minimalist has to say on the subject but are you taking the position that the early church did not exist? Then you must believe in the vast conspiracy theory. On what basis do scholars think that to be the case?

Tell me, what is the oldest known piece of writing that mentions this Early church? What is the oldest known piece of writing by a member of this early church?
The list in here might help:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Church_Fathers

Also... are you aware of how many "early churches" existed?
have a read:
https://books.google.pt/books?id=URdACxK...&q&f=false

By what logic do you discount the truth of 27 different text because you can find stray texts that were not true in other times and other places? Each text has to stand up to scrutiny on its own merit.

huh? Other texts that were not true?

Let's look at those 27, then.
Why are the Essenes, the third most numerous jewish "class" in Jerusalem, not mentioned in any of them?
The Essenes... those that preached a message so close to what the apostles and Jesus supposedly preached that it boggles the mind! Why were they left out of the NT?
No reason to lie...

Read more... specially the section on "Moreh ha-Zedek":
http://www.shareintl.org/archives/M_emer...eacher.htm
"
The Teacher of Righteousness is called in Hebrew Moreh ha-Zedek -- one entrusted with the Law and sent by God to lead his people in the way of truth. The root word zedek is also found in "Melchizedek" -- the King of Righteousness, and in "Sons of Zadok" -- Righteous Priests. In the spring of 1950 Andre Dupont-Sommer, Professor of Semitic Languages and Civilizations at the Sorbonne, presented to the academic community a paper about the Moreh ha-Zedek which caused a sensation.

"Jesus," he claimed, "appears in many respects as an astonishing reincarnation of the Teacher of Righteousness. Like the latter, he preached penitence, poverty, humility, love of one's neighbor, chastity.... Like him, he was the Elect and the Messiah of God.... Like him, he was the object of the hostility of the priests.... Like him, he was condemned and put to death. Like him he pronounced judgment on Jerusalem, which was taken and destroyed by the Romans for having put him to death.... Like him, he founded a Church whose adherents fervently awaited his glorious return.... All these similarities -- and here I only touch upon the subject -- taken together constitute a very impressive whole."

It must be emphasized that Dupont-Sommer never suggested the Teacher of Righteousness was Jesus, but called him a prototype.
"

Hence why I initially said that the "early church" could have been an evolution of the Essene cult.

[Veritas_Vincit]

Lol this from the guy who believes in magic. My thinking isn't especially remarkable, but yours is just plain retarded. I'm still not completely sure you aren't just a troll taking the piss.

See, you're really not interested in thinking deeply about these things. You seem only interested in restating your opinion that you are superior because of your inch-deep, mile-wide list of objections you cut and pasted from somewhere. This is evidenced by the fact that whenever holes are pointed out in your reasoning, you change the subject or just resort to answers like above. 

You may also be confused on my reasons for answering your posts. It is an intellectual exercise that I enjoy and it is NOT to convince you or anyone of anything. You will NOT hurt my feelings or change my mind with ad hominem attacks--although it does speak to character.

You're saying I don't want to think deeply?

Have you thought deeply about the possibility that magical rainbow unicorns exist? I mean, why would people lie about there being magical rainbow unicorns Steve, huh?! Do you realise that if we believe in the Unicorns, their rainbow magic will allow is to live forever in the magical world of stardust?

You think you're so superior with your Jesus - like Jesus would win in a fight against a Unicorn. Yeah right.

[vorlon13]

Haven't mentioned in a while that pig God Fletcher Christian accused Captain Bligh of worshiping . . .

[RoadRunner79]

You initially claimed that your belief in the NT miracles was different from that of other miracle stories.  You seem to be treading water here.  How are you different in your belief in the miracles of Jesus than other believers in the incredible?

1) Content of the NT is internally consistent within itself and with the OT. 
2) More historical support for more actual documents written by more than one person
3) Historical support of first century church
4) Person of Jesus is a compelling figure
5) Observations of personal effect of Jesus in the lives of other people
6) Personal experience.

I think you are doing well Steve, and maintaining your composure a lot better than I could.   I always take it as encouraging, when the arguments are ignored, and those opposing start attacking your character, and using poisoning the well tactics.  Just about anything can be dismissed, with a hyper-skeptical approach, and it's why it is not pragmatic to hold consistently. 

It's kind of fun, just to spectate!  As I said, you are maintaining yourself better than I would.  By now, I would have went POE, and started using their same arguments against evolution.  It's not as productive, but I like watching them back pedal and use circular reasoning.

[SteveII]

See, you're really not interested in thinking deeply about these things. You seem only interested in restating your opinion that you are superior because of your inch-deep, mile-wide list of objections you cut and pasted from somewhere. This is evidenced by the fact that whenever holes are pointed out in your reasoning, you change the subject or just resort to answers like above. 

You may also be confused on my reasons for answering your posts. It is an intellectual exercise that I enjoy and it is NOT to convince you or anyone of anything. You will NOT hurt my feelings or change my mind with ad hominem attacks--although it does speak to character.

You're saying I don't want to think deeply?

Have you thought deeply about the possibility that magical rainbow unicorns exist? I mean, why would people lie about there being magical rainbow unicorns Steve, huh?! Do you realise that if we believe in the Unicorns, their rainbow magic will allow is to live forever in the magical world of stardust?

You think you're so superior with your Jesus - like Jesus would win in a fight against a Unicorn. Yeah right.

Thanks for proving my point.