Prove that jesus is imaginary in less than 5 minutes

[Achilles]

Sorry! I am a little tired. I guess that I will start over then. I want to point out that I am a non-denominational Christian. I don't go to 'church' very much, but I read the Bible a lot, and try my best to live by the Word of God. Why not Judaism or Islam for example, I don't agree with all* that is taught in those religions. I am simply a Christian. That is all that I think that I can say on that part....

 

(*)= it certainly ranges!

So are you saying that you agree with all of christianity?

 

Also, how extensively have you studied these other religions? Read the qu'ran or the old testament? Attended their mosques and synagogues?

 

If not, then I think you understand what it means to select something arbitarily.

 

That is you. Others will answer differently.

Your arguments are becoming increasingly slippery. At some point this may threaten your credibility and some people may decide that you have nothing honest to contribute to the dialog.

 

I guess that you could say that about you believeing that Jesus isn't real.

You've completely ignored the point in order to introduce an unrelated argument.

Acknowledging that there is no evidence for something does not require one to hold a belief. There is no evidence for the existence of a man named jesus. That isn't something that I choose to believe. That is reality.

 

I think that we might not be on the same page. What do you mean by "is your selection arbitrary"?

From Merriam-Webster:

3 a: based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something

You've selected to be a christian because it is convenient or because you prefer it, not because it is true or because you've determined that it is better than the existing alternatives by some rigorous process of elimination.

 

They could be. I (probably you too) don't think that they are real, though.

Why not? You have just as much evidence for your religion as these yet you accept one but dismiss the others. You recognize that every other belief system is silly on some level...except the one that you call your own.

 

Well Achilles, Christianity, as well as all of those other religions, is a fairly faith based religion. I don't quite know if you understand this.

I understand it perfectly. The point that I keep raising and that you are doing an excellent job of consistently ignoring is that doesn't make it true.

 

Faith is required for all of them. That means the one you believe in is not special.

 

Well, I know for myself that they would be a false idol.

This is why theists get such a bad rap.

 

You just acknowledged that the other religious figures could be real. You acknowledge that all religions require faith. But yet when I ask you a simple question, you profess to know something that you just got finished admitting that you couldn't know.

 

Some of us are already doing that.

I promise you that no one has even come close to starting.

 

I am sure that you would view it as another "excuse" that this man has made.

Yes, if you offer up another excuse, then I will acknowledge it as such. You either have an answer or you do not. I suspect that we both know that you do not. My fear is that you will spend more time finding a way to ignore that than considering what that means.

 

Again, I have stated my thoughts on that.

Indeed but opinions are cheap to produce. Arguments have worth.

 

I think that I will have to leave this discussion pretty soon. It seems to most that my views are irrational and irrelevent, so I don't really see the need to continue discussing this.

I'm saddened to hear you say that. I'll continue to hold out hope for you anyway

 

Thank you for the discussion though. I happen to enjoy them.

Take care until next time.

[ET Warrior]

That is you. Others will answer differently.

You know people who would call friends to come over and hang out, and if they never saw them would actually believe that said friends came over?

[EnderWiggin]

Perhaps if you drank a lot of the beer before they arrived?

 

_EW_

[Vikinor]

Bleh, religious debates. What I really don't get is, why are a lot of Atheists dead set on proving religions(mostly from what I've seen Christianity) wrong? As long as the religion is not being forced on them, then leave it alone. My opinion is the same towards Christians and people of other religions. Beleive what you want to beleive, but do NOT force it on anyone that does not want it.

 

I was raised Roman Catholic. In the Catholic faith you are somewhat supposed to convert others in order to "save them." Now I can understand this a bit. I could understand converting a person who has no faith and is not sure of what they beleive in. However, when you try to convert people who already beleive something different, that's where you should stop. When I was younger I would try to convert my father, who is an Atheist. Now that my ideas have changed my father and I can have simple discussions about religion. We both beleive that people should beleive whatever they want to beleive and as long as it doesn't harm anyone else then it's fine.

 

After my confirmation in the Catholic church, I started to not beleive in it. I thought the whole concept of one God wasn't quite right for an entire universe. In a way, I became a Pagan and then an Atheist. I do beleive that Jesus existed. I also beleive that Muhammad and Buddha existed. Beleive what you want to beleive, but mostly try to keep it to yourself. There is no reason in trying to prove someone's religion wrong or right.

 

Also, I thought that video was just stupid. I've heard better arguements.

[Achilles]

Bleh, religious debates. What I really don't get is, why are a lot of Atheists dead set on proving religions(mostly from what I've seen Christianity) wrong?

Because no one holds their beliefs in a vacuum. What other think and believe can and does have an impact on all of us.

 

Beleive what you want to beleive, but do NOT force it on anyone that does not want it.

When milions of people go into a voting booth and vote against individual rights such as abortion or life-saving scientific research such as embryonic stem cell research because of their religious beliefs isn't that "forcing it on others"?

 

I was raised Roman Catholic. In the Catholic faith you are somewhat supposed to convert others in order to "save them." Now I can understand this a bit. I could understand converting a person who has no faith and is not sure of what they beleive in. However, when you try to convert people who already beleive something different, that's where you should stop.

Please help me understand how this is not a double-standard. It's okay to try to convert those without a religious belief, however those without a religious belief are somehow wrong for wanting point out that such beliefs are irrational?

 

There is no reason in trying to prove someone's religion wrong or right.

I wholeheartedly disagree for the reasons that I provided above and more.

 

I've heard better arguements.

As have I, but you always have to consider your audience when making your case.

[Vikinor]

Anything anywhere is always going to have an impact on others. What you need to ask yourself is "Is this impact negative?" In a way voting could be considered forcing beleifs upon others, but you are trying to tie religion with politics. There is a separation of Church and State which must be recognized. Vote against abortion if you feel it is truly murder, morally wrong and all those other arguements, not because your church told you it is wrong.

 

I didn't state that it was okay to want to convert those without a religious beleif. Just that I don't find it that wrong to convert those who have NO BELEIF. I think education is sacred and some is better than none, even if it is possibly wrong and biased. For me having some education eventually led me into researching other religions. I may not beleive those religions, but I still like to understand them and know why they beleive what they do. I didn't mean that it is okay to convert those who do not beleive in a God or gods. Them not beleiving in a God or gods is their beleif right there. That there is no God. I don't think that some Christian, Muslim or Jew should come up to you and try to change your views and I don't think that you should do it to others.

 

Just to avoid any miscommunication, I am not saying that you do in fact try and change others views.

[Achilles]

Anything anywhere is always going to have an impact on others. What you need to ask yourself is "Is this impact negative?" In a way voting could be considered forcing beleifs upon others, but you are trying to tie religion with politics.

I'm doing that? Hmmm.

 

There is a separation of Church and State which must be recognized.

People voting their religious beliefs doesn't apply to constitutional restrictions placed on the government.

 

Vote against abortion if you feel it is truly murder, morally wrong and all those other arguements, not because your church told you it is wrong.

It would be nice if all people were that rigorous with their thinking. I have very little reason to believe that even a statistically significant number of us are.

 

I didn't state that it was okay to want to convert those without a religious beleif. Just that I don't find it that wrong to convert those who have NO BELEIF. I think education is sacred and some is better than none, even if it is possibly wrong and biased. For me having some education eventually led me into researching other religions. I may not beleive those religions, but I still like to understand them and know why they beleive what they do. I didn't mean that it is okay to convert those who do not beleive in a God or gods. Them not beleiving in a God or gods is their beleif right there.

You're contradicting yourself.

 

That there is no God. I don't think that some Christian, Muslim or Jew should come up to you and try to change your views and I don't think that you should do it to others.

I appreciate you wanting to share your counsel, however until you can present an argument that doesn't contradict itself, I'm afraid I won't be able to find your case persuasive.

 

Just to avoid any miscommunication, I am not saying that you do in fact try and change others views.

I challenge them with the intent to change. I don't think I can deny that.

 

But you are correct that I do not try to force others to one particular belief or another.

 

Take care.

[Vikinor]

I don't want to get on your bad side or anything, but it appears to me that you simply wrote off some of the things I said by calling them contradictory. I will admit that I could have worded them better. I will do that now.

 

Religion is in it's own sense a form of education. It is certainly biased and is quite possibly wrong. I would not see the harm in educating someone who has no knowledge of the subject as long as you educate them beyond what you beleive. I wouldn't say it is wrong for a Christian, Muslim or Jew to try and convert someone who has no knowledge of the issue, but they also should give the other religions and ideas a fair chance and thus allowing the person to make his or her own decision on what they beleive. Of course most people probably could not educate this said person beyond what they beleive because of lack of knowledge and understanding.

 

You are correct that the people can still vote towards their religious beleifs, but what are you trying to prove? Disproving a religion will stop this? No, that won't work. They just need to be educated of the others perspectives and keep open minds. My mother is a hardcore devout Catholic woman. I really dislike this. I have gotten in numerous arguements with her about other religions and ideas. She is very conservative and is against abortion basically just because her church is.

 

People need to be educated from all perspectives and all the different viewpoints, so that they can decide for themselves.

[EnderWiggin]

Because no one holds their beliefs in a vacuum. What other think and believe can and does have an impact on all of us.

 

When milions of people go into a voting booth and vote against individual rights such as abortion or life-saving scientific research such as embryonic stem cell research because of their religious beliefs isn't that "forcing it on others"?

 

Extremely good point. Thank you for posting it, Achilles.

 

I don't want to get on your bad side or anything, but it appears to me that you simply wrote off some of the things I said by calling them contradictory. I will admit that I could have worded them better. I will do that now.

 

Hmm. If you're making contradictory statements it kind of negates your argument. You can't have it both ways. You can't fault Achlles for not arguing back both sides.

 

_EW_

[Vikinor]

Extremely good point. Thank you for posting it, Achilles.

 

 

 

Hmm. If you're making contradictory statements it kind of negates your argument. You can't have it both ways. You can't fault Achlles for not arguing back both sides.

 

_EW_

 

 

I agree, but it wasn't contradictory to me. That's why I tried to put it in better words. He didn't argue the side, he just called it contradictory, so I tried to clear things up. I hope it makes more sense now.

[Achilles]

I don't want to get on your bad side or anything, but it appears to me that you simply wrote off some of the things I said by calling them contradictory. I will admit that I could have worded them better. I will do that now.

Let's have a look:

Just that I don't find it that wrong to convert those who have NO BELEIF.

Them not beleiving in a God or gods is their beleif right there.

If it is wrong to try to change someone's belief and if the position that there is no god is a belief (a premise I strongly disagree with), then trying to convert someone that believes that there is no god contradicts your first position that trying to convert someone that already has a belief is wrong. I hope that helps to clarify.

 

Religion is in it's own sense a form of education. It is certainly biased and is quite possibly wrong. I would not see the harm in educating someone who has no knowledge of the subject as long as you educate them beyond what you beleive.

So when you attempt to convert non-christians you make sure to include equal time for mormonism, scientology, satan worship, each of the pagan pantheons, ancestor worship, buddhism, the flying spaghetti monster, invisible pink unicorns, fairies, druidism, etc?

 

Or do you spend most of your time talking about how great your religious tradition is?

 

I wouldn't say it is wrong for a Christian, Muslim or Jew to try and convert someone who has no knowledge of the issue, but they also should give the other religions and ideas a fair chance and thus allowing the person to make his or her own decision on what they beleive.

So would you say that parents that raise their children within a specific religious tradition are acting inappropriately? Considering that children are especially vulnerable because they have not yet developed the critical thinking skills necessary to adequately question what they are being told, might you say that they are being exploited?

 

Of course most people probably could not educate this said person beyond what they beleive because of lack of knowledge and understanding.

Indeed.

 

You are correct that the people can still vote towards their religious beleifs, but what are you trying to prove?

That people need to use reason, not superstitious wishful thinking, to make important decisions.

 

Disproving a religion will stop this?

Note: no one can "disprove" religion as it cannot be tested. Therefore the question, as it is worded, is not useful.

 

To the spirit of the question: Yes, I absolutely believe that foregoing irrational thinking in order to adopt rational thinking will absolutey result in rational decisions. No more "garbage in, garbage out", as it were.

 

No, that won't work. They just need to be educated of the others perspectives and keep open minds. My mother is a hardcore devout Catholic woman. I really dislike this. I have gotten in numerous arguements with her about other religions and ideas. She is very conservative and is against abortion basically just because her church is.

The defense rests, Your Honor

 

People need to be educated from all perspectives and all the different viewpoints, so that they can decide for themselves.

Indeed they do, but we also need to have a culture that just says no to BS.

 

The following is one of my favorite quotes from the author Sam Harris:

The president of the United States has claimed, on more than one occasion, to be in dialogue with God. If he said that he was talking to God through his hairdryer, this would precipitate a national emergency. I fail to see how the addition of a hairdryer makes the claim more ridiculous or offensive.

 

Extremely good point. Thank you for posting it, Achilles.

My pleasure. Thank you for the kudos.

 

I agree, but it wasn't contradictory to me. That's why I tried to put it in better words. He didn't argue the side, he just called it contradictory, so I tried to clear things up. I hope it makes more sense now.

My apologies. One of my many faults is that I tend to assume that if I point out an error in reasoning that the person I am conversing with will be able to see how the reasoning is wrong if I stop to point it out. Hopefully by pointing out the two conflicting statements and expanding on how they contradict one another I have helped to alleiviate any confusion.

 

Please feel free to ask me to slow down and try again if ever I say something that doesn't make sense. I'll do my best to explain what I'm saying.

 

Thanks.

[M@RS]

Achilles, to help with this "debate" look up and watch the movie "Before the Harvest" You might like it...

[Achilles]

Achilles, to help with this "debate" look up and watch the movie "Before the Harvest" You might like it...

???

[EnderWiggin]

Achilles, to help with this "debate" look up and watch the movie "Before the Harvest" You might like it...

 

 

I hope you don't actually mean that article... and there are no entries with that title in IMDB, either.

 

_EW_

[Achilles]

That article was the only thing Google gave me

 

(I also checked IMDb and found nothing).

[Vikinor]

Let's have a look:

If it is wrong to try to change someone's belief and if the position that there is no god is a belief (a premise I strongly disagree with), then trying to convert someone that believes that there is no god contradicts your first position that trying to convert someone that already has a belief is wrong. I hope that helps to clarify.

 

So when you attempt to convert non-christians you make sure to include equal time for mormonism, scientology, satan worship, each of the pagan pantheons, ancestor worship, buddhism, the flying spaghetti monster, invisible pink unicorns, fairies, druidism, etc?

 

Or do you spend most of your time talking about how great your religious tradition is?

 

So would you say that parents that raise their children within a specific religious tradition are acting inappropriately? Considering that children are especially vulnerable because they have not yet developed the critical thinking skills necessary to adequately question what they are being told, might you say that they are being exploited?

 

Indeed.

 

That people need to use reason, not superstitious wishful thinking, to make important decisions.

 

Note: no one can "disprove" religion as it cannot be tested. Therefore the question, as it is worded, is not useful.

 

To the spirit of the question: Yes, I absolutely believe that foregoing irrational thinking in order to adopt rational thinking will absolutey result in rational decisions. No more "garbage in, garbage out", as it were.

 

The defense rests, Your Honor

 

Indeed they do, but we also need to have a culture that just says no to BS.

 

The following is one of my favorite quotes from the author Sam Harris:

 

 

My pleasure. Thank you for the kudos.

 

My apologies. One of my many faults is that I tend to assume that if I point out an error in reasoning that the person I am conversing with will be able to see how the reasoning is wrong if I stop to point it out. Hopefully by pointing out the two conflicting statements and expanding on how they contradict one another I have helped to alleiviate any confusion.

 

Please feel free to ask me to slow down and try again if ever I say something that doesn't make sense. I'll do my best to explain what I'm saying.

 

Thanks.

 

 

I agree with a lot of what you have said. You still don't seem to be understanding what I said about converting though. I do not think that anyone should try and convert Atheists because I view Atheism as a religion. The person has chosen to beleive in no God or gods and they don't need anyone coming up to them and saying "Do you accept Jesus Christ as your savior?"

 

I was saying that I wouldn't see it as wrong to try and convert someone who has no beleif at all. As in someone who has never really given religion much of a thought. That way they can take what they hear and do as they wish with it. It may lead them into following that religion or into researching others.

 

I would not know about converting non-christians because I do not do it. I also don't think I would approve of Christians coming up to me and trying to convert me. I respect what they beleive and all I ask is that they respect what I beleive. If I did try to convert and or educate people on a religion then I think I would try to cover Mormonism, Scientology, fairies etc.

 

The parents raising their children is tricky. I would say that I am partially thankful for being raised Catholic because it lead me to research other beleifs, to keep an open mind and to learn more. I try to keep an open mind on that what I beleive may or may not be wrong.

[Achilles]

You still don't seem to be understanding what I said about converting though.

I think I do understand, but that does not mean that I agree.

 

I do not think that anyone should try and convert Atheists because I view Atheism as a religion.

Okay, that's fine, however that does not mean that it is. It is legally categorized as such by the Federal goverment for the purposes of religious discrimination.

 

However atheism has no traditions, no centeral tenants, no dogma, no places of worship, no holidays/days of observance, et cetera.

 

Everything that we could use to identify something as a religion is completely missing from atheism.

 

The person has chosen to beleive in no God or gods and they don't need anyone coming up to them and saying "Do you accept Jesus Christ as your savior?"

I completely agree, but I'm not sure what this has to do with your initial critique of my being critical of religion.

 

I was saying that I wouldn't see it as wrong to try and convert someone who has no beleif at all.

Because your categorizing a lack of belief in a god or gods as a belief, I'm having difficult comprehending what "someone who has no belief at all" would look like. Babies is about the best thing I can come up with.

 

As in someone who has never really given religion much of a thought.

Would they be wearing a funny hat or maybe a special shirt or something to help us identify who they are? How would you know who it's safe to talk to and who it isn't?

 

I would not know about converting non-christians because I do not do it.

Didn't you say earlier that you tried to convert your father?

 

I also don't think I would approve of Christians coming up to me and trying to convert me. I respect what they beleive and all I ask is that they respect what I beleive. If I did try to convert and or educate people on a religion then I think I would try to cover Mormonism, Scientology, fairies etc.

Kudos for your objectivity, sir. Unfortuantely I think you would agree that a vast majority of your fellow human beings would not be so enlightened.

 

The parents raising their children is tricky. I would say that I am partially thankful for being raised Catholic because it lead me to research other beleifs, to keep an open mind and to learn more.

Do you have a more definitive answer?

[Vikinor]

Ah, you are right. I tried to convert my father a very long time ago. I do no such thing to anyone anymore. I don't know how to identify those who "have no religion." I just remember a while back some kids on my bus were debating religions and when someone asked this one boy what he beleived he said "I don't know. I haven't thought about it much." I guess the only way those who try to convert people would know would be by talking to people.

 

I do agree that most human beings would not be as enlightened.

 

Sorry, I don't have a more definitive answer about the parents. Maybe one day when I have my own children and if you're still around here, I will have a better answer.

[Achilles]

Sorry, I don't have a more definitive answer about the parents. Maybe one day when I have my own children and if you're still around here, I will have a better answer.

You don't have to wait. You can start thinking about that now so that you don't have to make up your mind then.

 

You seem to feel pretty strongly that no one's views should be pushed on others. Why shouldn't that same consideration be extended toward children?

 

It is possible that you can teach your children to be polite, respectful, moral, people without having the threaten them with hell or bribe them with heaven?

[Vikinor]

Those are some very good points you have there.

 

I strongly agree with the not threatening of hell. That's one thing that made me turn away from Christianity. It seems to be based too much on guilt and fear.

 

If you look at it from another perspective, the concept of heaven and hell is too black and white. If God is all knowing and understanding then he would be able to understand why certain people just can't beleive in his existence and why people have broken commandments for a specific cause. Such as a poor man stealing food for his family.

 

I guess what I'll do is teach my children about all of the different religions, beleifs and philosophies and then let them decide for themselves.

[Achilles]

Those are some very good points you have there.

I appreciate the kudos

 

I strongly agree with the not threatening of hell. That's one thing that made me turn away from Christianity. It seems to be based too much on guilt and fear.

Wait, you did say that you are a roman catholic right?

 

If you look at it from another perspective, the concept of heaven and hell is too black and white. If God is all knowing and understanding then he would be able to understand why certain people just can't beleive in his existence and why people have broken commandments for a specific cause. Such as a poor man stealing food for his family.

And if god created everything, then that would include hell itself and the rules that send you there, right? There's one to think about.

 

I guess what I'll do is teach my children about all of the different religions, beleifs and philosophies and then let them decide for themselves.

That's one way to do it (and possibly even the best way to do it). Another would be not to teach them about any of them (until they are old enough to start asking questions on their own). My 2 cents.

 

Thanks for your post.

[Vikinor]

I appreciate the kudos

 

Wait, you did say that you are a roman catholic right?

 

That's one way to do it (and possibly even the best way to do it). Another would be not to teach them about any of them (until they are old enough to start asking questions on their own). My 2 cents.

 

Thanks for your post.

 

 

I was raised in the Roman Catholic faith. I drifted away from them after my confirmation. I may go back to the church or I might just keep going the way I am now.

 

Yeah, I think waiting for them to be old enough to comprehend, understand and ask questions about what they are learning is also another good way. Lucky for me I've got at least three to five years to think about it.

[Achilles]

Yeah, I think waiting for them to be old enough to comprehend, understand and ask questions about what they are learning is also another good way. Lucky for me I've got at least three to five years to think about it.

Cool.

 

So are we good regarding why atheists "insist on proving other religions wrong" (to use your terms)?

[Vikinor]

I suppose so. Fun debate.

[Achilles]

I agree.

 

Take care.