Why do people still believe in Jesus and Christianity?

[Dutch Uncle]

Inversion fallacy.

Wasted bandwidth 1A

 

[Ross Dolan]

You're wrong. You're creating a false equivalency here.

Atheism and theism are not equal. Atheism is the result of observing the world around us. Theism is fairy tales about how we wish the world to be. There is no observable phenomenon that makes us wonder if there is a god or gods. In fact, asking if there is a god is an unjustified question because there's absolutely nothing to compel us to even ask it. It's like asking if "the Force" is real, or if Peter Pan's Neverland is real.

Michael, one of the possibilities of the REALITY of existence...is that gods exist.

You are asserting "there is no GOD."

YOU bear the burden of proof for that assertion.

As for your, "There is no observable phenomenon that makes us wonder if there is a god or gods"...well, perhaps you are not the curious type. But most intelligent people are...and there is nothing wrong with "wondering" if a god exists or not.

It appears, in fact, that a vast majority of the smartest people who have ever lived on this planet have "wondered" about it.

Aristotle wondered about it. Thomas Aquinas wondered about it. Isaac Newton wondered about it. Albert Einstein wondered about it, Carl Sagan wondered about it. Steven Hawking wondered about it. Neal deGrasse Tyson wonders about it.

If you are going to make an assertion like "There are no gods" be prepared to substantiate it, because that is your obligation in a discussion of this sort.

 

[Bill]

It's been obliterated by scholars for over a hundred years. We know that Jesus himself is most likely pure myth.

Thanks for the thread.

Good to see a good healthy discussion, well represented & participated in........

Some food for thought:

WHY SCIENCE DOES NOT DISPROVE GOD
BY AMIR D. ACZEL ‧ RELEASE DATE: APRIL 15, 2014

Mathematician Aczel (A Strange Wilderness: The Lives of the Great Mathematicians, 2011, etc.) debated atheist Richard Dawkins in 2010. Here, he presents his arguments, and prominent atheists, Dawkins above all, do not come out well.

Aczel wins the rematch by the infallible technique of misstating his opponent. Science cannot “disprove” anything; only mathematicians do that. Scientists gather evidence and weigh it. While evidence (i.e., arguments) favoring God’s absence exists, in the end, disbelief is a matter of opinion. However, there’s no denying that the “new atheists,” like other pugnacious militants from the tea party to Islamic activists, favor vivid arguments that stretch the truth

 

[votebiden]

Thanks for the thread.

Good to see a good healthy discussion, well represented & participated in........

Some food for thought:

WHY SCIENCE DOES NOT DISPROVE GOD
BY AMIR D. ACZEL ‧ RELEASE DATE: APRIL 15, 2014

Mathematician Aczel (A Strange Wilderness: The Lives of the Great Mathematicians, 2011, etc.) debated atheist Richard Dawkins in 2010. Here, he presents his arguments, and prominent atheists, Dawkins above all, do not come out well.

Aczel wins the rematch by the infallible technique of misstating his opponent. Science cannot “disprove” anything; only mathematicians do that. Scientists gather evidence and weigh it. While evidence (i.e., arguments) favoring God’s absence exists, in the end, disbelief is a matter of opinion. However, there’s no denying that the “new atheists,” like other pugnacious militants from the tea party to Islamic activists, favor vivid arguments that stretch the truth

Science deals with physical nature. So unless God is a physical object, science has nothing to say.

 

[Bill]

Prove it

 

[TexanManWithPlans]

Michael, one of the possibilities of the REALITY of existence...is that gods exist.

You are asserting "there is no GOD."

YOU bear the burden of proof for that assertion.

As for your, "There is no observable phenomenon that makes us wonder if there is a god or gods"...well, perhaps you are not the curious type. But most intelligent people are...and there is nothing wrong with "wondering" if a god exists or not.

It appears, in fact, that a vast majority of the smartest people who have ever lived on this planet have "wondered" about it.

Aristotle wondered about it. Thomas Aquinas wondered about it. Isaac Newton wondered about it. Albert Einstein wondered about it, Carl Sagan wondered about it. Steven Hawking wondered about it. Neal deGrasse Tyson wonders about it.

If you are going to make an assertion like "There are no gods" be prepared to substantiate it, because that is your obligation in a discussion of this sort.

So everything I wrote went over your head.

 

[TexanManWithPlans]

Science deals with physical nature. So unless God is a physical object, science has nothing to say.

There is nothing "beyond" the physical.

 

[votebiden]

There is nothing "beyond" the physical.

Sure. I did not say there is something "beyond." But there is something different from the physical.

The qbit, the quantum bit, is a physical particle which necessarily contains information. Quantum mechanics shows that there is not purely physical event.

 

[TexanManWithPlans]

Sure. I did not say there is something "beyond." But there is something different from the physical.

The qbit, the quantum bit, is a physical particle which necessarily contains information. Quantum mechanics shows that there is not purely physical event.

Lol. Just stop.

 

[votebiden]

Lol. Just stop.

Look, you are just a dumb fucking asshole. Clearly you are here to antagonize and troll. Buzz off.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

I love it when lib'ruls feed on their own.....

 

[votebiden]

I love it when lib'ruls feed on their own.....

It is called debate. Something you fascists know nothing about.

 

[Into the Night]

You seem to be putting words in my mouth.

I wrote nothing which could remotely be construed to suggest that the physical matter and energy in the universe must conflict in any way with the higher truths held by Buddhists, Christians, Jews, or indigenous American shamans.

Lie. You wrote exactly that. Like usual, you are denying your own arguments.

 

[Into the Night]

The thing about a higher truth, an ultimate reality, or the meaning of life - if they exist - is that we will never find out what it is.

Scientific knowledge is always provisional.

Reason has its limitations.

Our cognitive capacity is limited - we are just evolutionarily evolved smart chimpanzees.


But it is the search for knowlege and higher truth is the fun part - it is what makes us truly human.

There is no absolute 'reality'.

 

[Into the Night]

No. That's not how it works.

That is how it works. You made a positive statement. The burden of proof is on you.

 

[votebiden]

There is no absolute 'reality'.

Agree with that.

 

[Into the Night]

You claim something exists. Why is it my burden to disprove your claim?

Lie. You claimed something does not exist. That is a positive statement. The burden of proof is on you.

 

[Into the Night]

I'm not saying we can understand it. But whatever the REALITY of existence is...it IS.

I doubt any Homo sapiens will ever know the REALITY of existence...but as I said, whatever it is, it is.

Existence is not reality. It is logic. See the Proof by Identity. If something exists, it simply exists. ?A->A.

 

[Ralph]

The 'Scriptures' are real, the Man-God ... debatable.

There is "no debate". How does your LACK OF FAITH effect "my" faith? It does not as I have tested the scriptures and came to the objective conclusion (through the testimony of direct witnesses provided in the text of the scriptures, in a prima facie manner that have not been debunked as of today) that Jesus was and remains the Christ of prophecy (God Incarnate) sent to earth (not to preform miracles and feed the poor, overthrow a Roman Totalitarian regime) but to fulfill the requirements of the Old Law (having been born of a woman, born under the law) while following the Old Law to the letter in not sinning once (It took GOD incarnate to accomplish what man alone could not...live void of sinning in the very letter of the law)....His last recorded words, "IT IS FINISHED", meaning His death ushered in a new testament of grace...between God and Man, a new covenant, the last and final covenant........Break it at your own peril....dismiss that covenant, its your free will and you must live with the consequences of your decisions.

Until someone can disprove the records of those who were direct eyewitness to the events recorded in scripture.....the scriptures remain unbroken. A court determines guilt on the eye witness testimony of at least 3 individuals......the scriptures are filled with dozens of direct eyewitness testimonies. Prove those testimonies to be in error.....I will stand corrected.

 

[Into the Night]

You're wrong. You're creating a false equivalency here.

Fallacy fallacy. You made a positive statement. The burden of proof is upon you.

Atheism and theism are not equal.

Nobody ever said otherwise. Off topic.

Atheism is the result of observing the world around us.

WRONG. Data is the result of observing the world around us. You are not an atheist. You belong to the Church of No God. You are a theist.

Theism is fairy tales about how we wish the world to be.

WRONG. Fiction is fairy tales about how we wish the world to be.

There is no observable phenomenon that makes us wonder if there is a god or gods.

No? Consider that religion uses supporting evidence. Science does not.

In fact, asking if there is a god is an unjustified question because there's absolutely nothing to compel us to even ask it.

No? Explain the Sun and how it rises regularly each day in terms that do not involve space or present day knowledge. It's easy to claim the Sun as supporting evidence that there is a god, providing the Sun each day to warm and light the Earth.

It's like asking if "the Force" is real, or if Peter Pan's Neverland is real.

Both are real. The Force exists as an aspect of the Star Wars fictional story written by George Lucas. Peter Pan's Neverland exists as a location described in a fictional story written by J.M. Barrie.

You cannot prove whether any god or gods exist (as anything but an object of an argument) or not. You cannot determine whether any god or gods are fiction or not. Circular argument fallacy (fundamentalism). Argument of ignorance fallacy.