• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why I am Not a Christian

TrueScotsman said:
lazy ^
Click to expand...

Look who's talking. You wouldn't even life a finger to click on a particular link that had information you requested, that I had found for you. In Post # 183 you wrote this:

"Write something up yourself! I don't have time to read yet another link."

Lazy hypocrisy.
 
In Post #250 the citation should have read, "The Case for Miracles," pages 133-134
 
Logicman said:
Look who's talking. You wouldn't even life a finger to click on a particular link that had information you requested, that I had found for you. In Post # 183 you wrote this:

"Write something up yourself! I don't have time to read yet another link."

Lazy hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
Gish Gallop fallacy. Look at my contributions to this thread(what I actually authored) and compare it with yourself. I read and watched the first few things, but when I saw zero effort and links which would take me all week to refute I knew you were a bad faith lazy actor.

Learn to represent your own arguments and don't call people lazy when they won't point by point refute your 220 pieces of evidence. I'm sick of lazy apologists using this fallacy, and I'm no fool to fall for it.

Educate yourself:
Gish gallop - Wikipedia
 
Logicman said:
The studies you cited were on "distant intercessory prayer." Dr. Brown (mentioned in my previous post) noted in her review of one such progressive study on patients with rheumatoid arthritis, published in the Southern Medical Journal" in 2000, where "They found no effects for distant intercessory prayer; however, they did find that patients experienced statistically significant improvement with direct-contact prayers, compared with patients who only received medical treatment." Jesus often laid hands on those he healed (i.e. Luke 4:40, etc.).

There are other factors in play. Healings by prayer are often clustered in certain geographical areas where there are movements of God (the Azuza Street Revival in Los Angeles is one such example), and more significantly in third world countries where the Gospel is making new inroads and where the Holy Spirit is moving with healings, etc., to reinforce Gospel teachings. You see that not only in the Gospels but also in the Book of Acts. Dr. Brown conducted studies in Mozambique where there had been many miracles reported, and in one study she conducted there, there were "significant visual improvements across the group." "In fact, Brown reported, "the average improvement in visual acuity was more than tenfold." - The Case for Christ, pages 133-134.

Finally, it's important that the intercessory prayer group have anointed Christians who believe in the healing power of God, as opposed to other groups of individuals who do not have a particular unction for healing prayer. The two studies I cited had Christians in the intercessory prayer group. Your study didn't even mention who was praying.

So, you have to take into account a number of factors in assessing these types of studies.
Click to expand...
What an utter load of nonsense, this is why religion and science don't mix one bit. Want to prove the power of prayer, grow back a limb, or raise someone from the dead after 3 days. Otherwise the biological mystery of someone recovering is just yet another god of the gaps, because correlation does not equal causation.
 
TrueScotsman said:
Argument #3 | More Complex Explanations of Reality

With advances in recent science, our picture of reality has been changing quite substantially. The days of reducing everything down to its fundamental particles is over, advances in the Philosophy of Science-Biology have yielded a much more complex ontology to the universe. That over the historical timeline of the universe, matter has evolved based upon the movement and structure of particles. Carbon became the basis of life because of the interactions of its structure with other atoms, but the molecules and subsequent proteins produced by these atoms have features and functions which are novel to that scale and not discernible merely by an analysis of the functions and properties of the component parts.

The brain is an area where the mode of thinking is especially helpful. One could explain the activity of the brain in a totally reductive way, observe the blood transporting oxygen and nutrients throughout, witness the releasing and reuptake of neurotransmitters, etc. But this explanation will not be sufficient to explain what functions the brain is performing. The brain is a neurophysiological structure, which is subdivided into smaller structures such as the Thalamus which is really also subdivided into even smaller structures with more discreet functions. Is human language really equipped to explain such complex interactions, such as the ones going on in our brain?

The mind itself is I think an emergent function of the brain, which is to say it is the emergent function of a symphony of complex scales of interaction. There are many functions of the brain that we are not actively conscious of as well, that is because the brain was built by evolution and the brain was not originally "designed" to be a consciousness machine.

Why does someone need a mythology, when we have reality. That human beings are stardust, that we who are alive are uniquely occasioned to witness this emergent universe, and that civilization and culture is a construction of mankind. Longing for another world I think deprecates this life, which is the only thing certain that this life is true and real. Why would one give control away over that one life, and hope for another one in some existence one is totally uncertain of?
Click to expand...

If you need an example of a straw man argument you need look no further than that last paragraph.
 
it's just me said:
If you need an example of a straw man argument you need look no further than that last paragraph.
Click to expand...
Naked assertion, let's see you demonstrate it. Religions provide origin stories which are no longer needed, and afterlifes that deprecate the value of this life.
 
TrueScotsman said:
Gish Gallop fallacy. Look at my contributions to this thread(what I actually authored) and compare it with yourself. I read and watched the first few things, but when I saw zero effort and links which would take me all week to refute I knew you were a bad faith lazy actor.

Learn to represent your own arguments and don't call people lazy when they won't point by point refute your 220 pieces of evidence. I'm sick of lazy apologists using this fallacy, and I'm no fool to fall for it.

Educate yourself:
Gish gallop - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Precisely.

"I'm going to overwhelm you with hours upon hours of links, which there is no evidence to suggest I ever read any of them, and only took me 10 seconds to cut and paste. And to counter my 10 seconds of input, will require that you immerse yourself for the next several hours in material I myself don't appear to have read, of which I can then proudly declare "victory" when you decline to do so."


OM
 
Omega Man said:
Precisely.

"I'm going to overwhelm you with hours upon hours of links, which there is no evidence to suggest I ever read any of them, and only took me 10 seconds to cut and paste. And to counter my 10 seconds of input, will require that you immerse yourself for the next several hours in material I myself don't appear to have read, of which I can then proudly declare "victory" when you decline to do so."


OM
Click to expand...
The fact he calls me lazy, based upon our current commitments of time to this thread indicates his sincerity level.
 
TrueScotsman said:
Want to prove the power of prayer, grow back a limb, or raise someone from the dead after 3 days.
Click to expand...

Strange, out of all the things believers pray for, no one goes out of their way to pray for the restoration of lost limbs. So much for "faith".


OM
 
TrueScotsman said:
What an utter load of nonsense, this is why religion and science don't mix one bit. Want to prove the power of prayer, grow back a limb, or raise someone from the dead after 3 days. Otherwise the biological mystery of someone recovering is just yet another god of the gaps, because correlation does not equal causation.
Click to expand...

You know, if you had the first clue about Christianity and the power of God you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself with this hog wash.

And if you think the resurrection accounts in the Gospels didn't happen, then show me why so many people lied or were fooled by it in the New Testament? You don't even have a credible theory about that either, do you?!

Like I've said before, the long, long list of people in the New Testament and in extra-Biblical writings, etc. who would have to be liars, charlatans, etc., is now way too long (and unsupported by any credible evidence on the part of skeptics) to be believable.
 
Omega Man said:
Strange, out of all the things believers pray for, no one goes out of their way to pray for the restoration of lost limbs.


OM
Click to expand...

I literally just talked to 17,005 believers. Every single one of them mentioned restoring lost limbs.

Strange, but there they were.
 
Omega Man said:
Precisely.

"I'm going to overwhelm you with hours upon hours of links, which there is no evidence to suggest I ever read any of them, and only took me 10 seconds to cut and paste. And to counter my 10 seconds of input, will require that you immerse yourself for the next several hours in material I myself don't appear to have read, of which I can then proudly declare "victory" when you decline to do so."

OM
Click to expand...

You know, if you guys had ever done a decent job on your due-diligence homework for Jesus Christ, etc., to begin with then people wouldn't have to be here trying to jump-start and educate you.
 
Logicman said:
You know, if you guys had ever done a decent job on your due-diligence homework for Jesus Christ, etc., to begin with then people wouldn't have to be here trying to jump-start and educate you.
Click to expand...

Even crappy teachers provide an education.


OM
 
Logicman said:
You know, if you had the first clue about Christianity and the power of God you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself with this hog wash.

And if you think the resurrection accounts in the Gospels didn't happen, then show me why so many people lied or were fooled by it in the New Testament? You don't even have a credible theory about that either, do you?!

Like I've said before, the long, long list of people in the New Testament and in extra-Biblical writings, etc. who would have to be liars, charlatans, etc., is now way too long (and unsupported by any credible evidence on the part of skeptics) to be believable.
Click to expand...
It isn't remarkable to me that people in the First Century would believe just about anything, I think it's more likely this event was like any other than it defining the 93 billion light year universe. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, the alleged authors who some of which were alleged eye witnesses, alleged an event and reactions of other alleged individuals whom we should now base our entire worldview off of? You regard the New Testament in too high esteem, you think the ECFs are reliable (they aren't), and there is really no robust evidence to think people near to the events authored them. If god wants to prove himself by raising someone from the dead today after 3 days, then be my guest, but David Hume pretty much killed ancient miracle claims a long time ago.

If one accepts the circular logic of actually thinking the majority of the Bible is actually historical and tells it as it is. Sadly, we will never know exactly what happened, unlike the creation of modern religions who all espouse similar claims.

"Trust what these dudes wrote" is all your argument amounts to.
 
Rogue Valley said:
It's been my experience that people need/seek hope. Hope that tomorrow will be better than today.

This compulsive need also extends to thoughts beyond this life. Religions claim to fill this niche, and provide the sustenance of hope.

I'm an agnostic, but I can also appreciate the unique dynamics of a hope-fulfilling-afterlife.
Click to expand...

Well said. We are likely the only species on this planet who are aware of our own mortality. If you read history, human life, as rich as it is, has often been harsh and short. Belief in something better beyond this existence has great appeal. However, inventing a heaven for those who behave within a set of confining rules, and a disastrous, punishing hell for those who don't, is a travesty coming from those in power in order to maintain that power and control over the thoughts and actions of others, and I find that mindset despicable.
 
HonestJoe said:
Argument #0 - I don't believe in God. :cool:
Click to expand...

I only have one argument, and it goes like this:

All of our major religions make the following claims:

1. My faith is the one true faith.
2. My chruch is the one true church.
3. My god is the one true god.

Since that can't all be right, the simplest explanation (Occam's Razor) is that they are all wrong.

I'll stick with science. Unlike religion, science doesn't claim to have all the answers. Science simply looks for those answers. I prefer incomplete knowledge to absolute belief.
 
TrueScotsman said:
It isn't remarkable to me that people in the First Century would believe just about anything, I think it's more likely this event was like any other than it defining the 93 billion light year universe. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, the alleged authors who some of which were alleged eye witnesses, alleged an event and reactions of other alleged individuals whom we should now base our entire worldview off of? You regard the New Testament in too high esteem, you think the ECFs are reliable (they aren't), and there is really no robust evidence to think people near to the events authored them. If god wants to prove himself by raising someone from the dead today after 3 days, then be my guest, but David Hume pretty much killed ancient miracle claims a long time ago.

If one accepts the circular logic of actually thinking the majority of the Bible is actually historical and tells it as it is. Sadly, we will never know exactly what happened, unlike the creation of modern religions who all espouse similar claims.

"Trust what these dudes wrote" is all your argument amounts to.
Click to expand...

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"?

First of all, the bar that skeptics like you place on Gospel events is so high that it's not only unreasonable but impossible to meet.

Secondly, the real bar should be the preponderance of the evidence - and that which offers the best, logical explanation for unusual events.

Also, it's not only early Christians and church fathers who wrote about and believed in the miracles of Jesus, but there were hostile sources who mentioned them too. For example, the Jewish Talmud said,

"On (Sabbath eve and) the eve of Passover Jesus the Nazarene was hanged and a herald went forth before him forty days heralding, 'Jesus the Nazarene is going forth to be stoned because he practiced sorcery (magic) and instigated and seduced Israel to idolatry."

So now you have to expand your list of those who lied about Jesus to include his enemies and detractors, LOL!!
 
Idiometer said:
I only have one argument, and it goes like this:

All of our major religions make the following claims:

1. My faith is the one true faith.
2. My chruch is the one true church.
3. My god is the one true god.

Since that can't all be right, the simplest explanation (Occam's Razor) is that they are all wrong.

I'll stick with science. Unlike religion, science doesn't claim to have all the answers. Science simply looks for those answers. I prefer incomplete knowledge to absolute belief.
Click to expand...

Why do they all have to be wrong? Why can't there be one that is right?
 
Logicman said:
Also, it's not only early Christians and church fathers who wrote about and believed in the miracles of Jesus, but there were hostile sources who mentioned them too. For example, the Jewish Talmud said,

"On (Sabbath eve and) the eve of Passover Jesus the Nazarene was hanged and a herald went forth before him forty days heralding, 'Jesus the Nazarene is going forth to be stoned because he practiced sorcery (magic) and instigated and seduced Israel to idolatry."

So now you have to expand your list of those who lied about Jesus to include his enemies and detractors, LOL!!
Click to expand...

There are several Yeshu's (a very common name) mentioned in the Talmud; Yeshu the Sorcerer being only one of them. This particular Yeshu was stoned and hanged (not crucified), had only 5 disciples (not 12; and none of them with the same name as those outlined in the Bible), who themselves were then executed. IF ANYTHING, this could indeed be documentary evidence of the ACTUAL JESUS, the one whom the Gospel narrative is merely based upon. What is known is that a Jesus existed, but nobody knows for certain any longer who he was. All that is left is the derivative biblical Jesus.


OM
 
TrueScotsman said:
Naked assertion, let's see you demonstrate it. Religions provide origin stories which are no longer needed, and afterlifes that deprecate the value of this life.
Click to expand...

No, you provide me with people who are as simple minded as the ones you describe. I used to read some a guy on another forum who used to say "why don't you guys just live your lives", as if we don't. We don't worship the gods as if we are Pagans in Roman time, we order our lives according to wisdom that has shown over and over again, to be true. Is this a problem for you?

Oh, and by the way, the "problem of evil" thing has been done to death.
 
Omega Man said:
There are several Yeshu's (a very common name) mentioned in the Talmud; Yeshu the Sorcerer being only one of them. This particular Yeshu was stoned and hanged (not crucified), had only 5 disciples (none of them with the same name as those outlined in the Bible), who themselves were then executed. IF ANYTHING, this could indeed be documentary evidence of the ACTUAL JESUS, the one whom the Gospel narrative is merely based upon. What is known is that a Jesus existed, but nobody knows for certain any longer who he was. All that is left is the derivative biblical Jesus.

OM
Click to expand...

"hanged" was a synonym for being crucified.

Sanhedrin 43a notes: “On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged."

Show me the evidence of when your "Yeshu the sorcerer" was killed on the eve of Passover?
 
Logicman said:
"hanged" was a synonym for being crucified.
Click to expand...

And "stoned" was a synonym for being scourged? :lamo

In either event, this is strong documentary evidence to suggest the biblical Jesus was a derivative.


OM
 
Omega Man said:
And "stoned" was a synonym for being scourged? :lamo

In either event, this is strong documentary evidence to suggest the biblical Jesus was a derivative.

OM
Click to expand...

Your Yeshu was stoned and hanged? Killed him twice did they? LOL!
 
Logicman said:
Your Yeshu was stoned and hanged? Killed him twice did they? LOL!
Click to expand...

According to the very text you yourself cited. Perhaps you should first try reading the material you cite.


OM
 
it's just me said:
No, you provide me with people who are as simple minded as the ones you describe. I used to read some a guy on another forum who used to say "why don't you guys just live your lives", as if we don't. We don't worship the gods as if we are Pagans in Roman time, we order our lives according to wisdom that has shown over and over again, to be true. Is this a problem for you?

Oh, and by the way, the "problem of evil" thing has been done to death.
Click to expand...
So you can't demonstrate it is a Straw man, got it. And your dismissal of the PoE argument is probably a testament to your education on the subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom