Are you an atheist? (1 Viewer)

[Galaxiom]

“Newly-Found Document Holds Eyewitness Account of Jesus Performing Miracle.” The article then goes on to explain that a modern historian made a remarkable discovery while searching through the archives of the Vatican.

“An Italian expert studying a first century document written by the Roman historian Marcus Velleius Paterculus that was recently discovered in the archives of the Vatican, found what is presumed to be the first eyewitness account ever recorded of a miracle of Jesus Christ.

Blah blah blah. Presumed is the key word. There is no provenience for the document. It just mysteriously appears in the Vatican.

Fakes abound. The Shroud of Turin, The Tomb of Jesus' brother, etc etc etc.

 

[ConnorGiles]

OK, now we have established a man named Jesus lived at the same time period the Bible says he did, was hated and feared by the roman church ( the Bible says this a s well)and was therefore crucified because of the Church . Is this right??????? if so, then the Bible which is religious contains all the stories of the the miracles he performed and I would consider them to be true.

My,My you would hold that book so close it would cloud your judgement.

My name is Edward and I live in a big house with an almost empty room (Only filled with a wardrobe) during the war, I have 1 brother and 2 sisters. By your logic since I covered most of the points, Narnia would be on the other side of the Wardrobe.

Jesus died somewhere around 33-36 AD. There are twenty-seven books in the New Testament (all put together around 300AD) most all of them written around 50-60 AD. Now thirty years is a long time to write a book but even today with all of our technology, it takes several years to write one.

To be honest, Wives tales last that long - Just as chinese whispers change via every person it surpasses. I could safely say that the story was over exagerated somewhere along the lines. 30 years is a long time.

Unless this "Evidence" can be backed up and vouched for via other documents then what tears it away from being another wives tale?

Did the child's mother ever vouch for this?

You see Bladerunner, I'm afraid the distinct lack of credible evidence really doesn't even push a remotely persuasive case to me.

 

[ConnorGiles]

Blah blah blah. Presumed is the key word. There is no provenience for the document. It just mysteriously appears in the Vatican.

Fakes abound. The Shroud of Turin, The Tomb of Jesus' brother, etc etc etc.

Should we slip some of our own documents into Vatican, Your hand-picked choice

I will be visiting there in 2 weeks time

 

[Galaxiom]

What parts of Genesis are we talking about here. Genesis I or Genesis II or both?

Chapter one is Chronological and Chapter 2 is from mans perspective.

Oh come on Blade. You are supposed to the the one who knows the Bible. I'll give you hint. I mentioned the third day, fourth day and fifth day. Does that sound "chronological" or "man's perspective"?

Why does it matter anyway? All you are doing is trying to avoid the question by distraction.

Please begin by explaining how it would be that the plants were created before the Sun.

The fruiting trees and the flowering plants are totally biologically different and were created at different times.

Too bad you didn't take more notice of Biology than Bible Studies. (Though I am not sure you paid much attention there either.)

"Flowering plants" is the common terminology for plants known as Angiosperms. If you observe fruiting trees you will see that the fruits are invariably preceded by flowers.

Anyway, if you had read Genesis 1:12 you would know that all plants were created on the third day. The day before the Sun, Moon and stars were created.

Funny how atheists know more of the Bible than most of the religious.

 

[Galaxiom]

my name is edward and i live in a big house with an almost empty room (only filled with a wardrobe) during the war, i have 1 brother and 2 sisters. By your logic since i covered most of the points, narnia would be on the other side of the wardrobe.

:d :d :d :d :d :d :d :d

Oh well it looks like there are still problems with Chrome and the board.

They were laugh icons.

colon & capital D but they turned to lower case on posting. At least the carriage returns are back on IE11.

 

[AnthonyGerrard]

I received a Top Secret (TS/SCI, technically) clearance from the US government a few years back for my job.

So yes, you could say a competent investigator has gone through my background with a fine-toothed comb.

Which is moot. If you want to find evidence of me killing someone, it's up to you to find it.

Interestingly, in this exchange, I am the atheist (there's not a single piece of evidence), while you have taken the role of the theist (just because there's no evidence whatsoever, it doesn't mean you're not a spree-killer! Maybe you just need a better investigator!). I find that rather amusing.

Precisely - and you used a absence of evidence argument to support your "theist" side. Rather than a evidence of absence.


I'm out now - theist or atheists all over the world are using their time far more sensibly than we are here argueing the toss over semantics on the tinterweb.

 

[ConnorGiles]

:d :d :d :d :d :d :d :d

Oh well it looks like there are still problems with Chrome and the board.

They were laugh icons.

colon & capital D but they turned to lower case on posting. At least the carriage returns are back on IE11.

How dare you use that browsers name here "IE" *Hisses".

 

[Frothingslosh]

Precisely - and you used a absence of evidence argument to support your "theist" side. Rather than a evidence of absence.

My entire point there was that absence of evidence can be used to prove that something doesn't exist. It's how we know there are no unicorns (despite what the bible says), fire-breathing dragons, or purple hairy lightning bolts - there is no evidence of any of them ever having existed.

 

[Bladerunner]

I would only have to scroll back a few pages maybe not even that.

You are guilty of the quote I mentioned, Evidence is Evidence. Evidence is needed to prove fact.

You proclaim facts without evidence which disproves your fact as an opinion.

yeah I heard you rhetoric and what I heard is: If there is no positive proof beyond a doubt for or against a subject then by the very laws of nature it has to be false.

Did I get this right...........

Blade

 

[ConnorGiles]

Until proven otherwise,

That's how Evidence of Absence and Propositional Logic works.

 

[Bladerunner]

I wouldn't count on a book wrote by Roman Catholics who were brought up in religious schools to be a non-bias source. I would like to hear these facts via someone without the religious bias.

I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence, Evidence of Absence sadly for you "IS" Evidence.

and we just got through and proved the book (Bible) was retransscribed to a level of integrity that if done today without a computer and word processor would be hard to match. Out of 800 dead sea scrolls there were 200 of which contained religious books of the past and these match word for word (-17 words) what is kept (where-ever they keep them) for prosperity. I guess you do not believe these are credible either?

Is this guy not credible? I mean the discoverer. You trust Steven Hawkins---yes when he tells you the THEORY of evolution, relativity, etc. and the physics it brought with it. p.s. a THEORY is not proven either and is just one step above a Hypothesis.

Yet, here you go and discredit a piece that was found, published and to my knowledge was not discredited by anyone other that those that say the same as you do.

It is sad!

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

I wouldn't count on a book wrote by Roman Catholics who were brought up in religious schools to be a non-bias source. I would like to hear these facts via someone without the religious bias.

I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful.

Absence of Evidence is not Evidence, Evidence of Absence sadly for you "IS" Evidence.

Evidence of Absence: What is this mumbo-jumbo piece of crapola. What does it even mean ........You would make a good politician my friend.


"I'm not saying "A" Jesus never lived. I'm sure he did. But the Jesus to which you refer. Highly doubtful. ".............If you read the book yuo will discover that it is this Jesus that went through the same obstacles as the Jesus in the Bible did and that this Jesus did indeed have a multitude of followers. In fact, he is the most celebrated man in the history of mankind.

Keep in mind before these previous post, Jesus did not exist in your eyes and probably still does not.

Come-on put 2 and 2 together. you do it all the time in the scientific ring.

I have given you article after article and for one reason or another it has not been good enough. It reminds me of a sci-fi thriller where a computer (far advanced to ours) would not accept anything from the outside that might suggest that it had made even the tiniest mistake, finally had to turn the damn thing off before it killed everybody. As with you and the other DEFOUT Atheist, no article nor anybody regardless of their knowledge, learned capabilites nor the statute among their piers, etc. is going to be good enough for you to have even the tiniest doubt concerning your Idealology concerning religion and the Christian faith. I say Christian because the two others were written well after 300 AD and conveniently included copies of the original five books, only rewritten to the advantage of their religion. A topic for later post.



Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Blah blah blah. Presumed is the key word. There is no provenience for the document. It just mysteriously appears in the Vatican.

Fakes abound. The Shroud of Turin, The Tomb of Jesus' brother, etc etc etc.

You ended the wording to early. "Presumed to be the FIRST eyewitness" There could be more and we have not found them yet. The same with all the quirks and electrons, etc.out there running around. We have yet to find them all but we make theories that and in todays world, these theories become a hard fact?????????? SO would you in scientific worlds call this a good theory....Yes....NO



Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Anyway, if you had read Genesis 1:12 you would know that all plants were created on the third day. The day before the Sun, Moon and stars were created.

Funny how atheists know more of the Bible than most of the religious.

Genesis 1:1,2 states......".In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (2)And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

This included everything in the Universe plus he was here on earth doing the creating personally.

Genesis 1:4,5 states........ "And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness (5)and God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."

So there was light from which the grasses, herbs and fruit trees flourished and reseeded themselves on the third day.

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

My entire point there was that absence of evidence can be used to prove that something doesn't exist. It's how we know there are no unicorns (despite what the bible says), fire-breathing dragons, or purple hairy lightning bolts - there is no evidence of any of them ever having existed.

The only problem here is that evidence, the Bible is discarded as nothing when it has been around for thousand of years 'in almost perfect to the letter' from the oldest manuscripts we have to the newest.

I believe I heard arguements in the scientific realm that more or less said 'just because we cannot see it, does not mean it is not there' (translated to "absence of evidence")

One other point, there are a lot of other places than the Catholic Church that own or have in their possession old manuscripts like the dead sea scrolls, etc. Some of you are letting your hatred for the Catholic Church cloud your judgements about the Bible much like a teen a boys judgement is clouded by his brain between his legs.


Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

I would only have to scroll back a few pages maybe not even that.

You are guilty of the quote I mentioned, Evidence is Evidence. Evidence is needed to prove fact.

You proclaim facts without evidence which disproves your fact as an opinion.

THe theory of Relativity is the same,,,,,,,,no without fact it is an opinion.

Therefore the creation by God should at least be a theory and not a false hood. If you do that, of course you Atheist agenda goes away/

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

Until proven otherwise,

That's how Evidence of Absence and Propositional Logic works.

Then everything we scientifically theorize about the Universe is false.

Blade

 

[Galaxiom]

.So there was light from which the grasses, herbs and fruit trees flourished and reseeded themselves on the third day.

So the Bible there was light without the Sun or stars and you expect it to be taken as a credible authority?

I repeat what I said earlier about the inability of the faithful to think critically.

 

[Bladerunner]

So the Bible there was light without the Sun or stars and you expect it to be taken as a credible authority?

I repeat what I said earlier about the inability of the faithful to think critically.

He created everything the first day including the Sun, Moon stars and everything else in the universe and beyond. In Genesis 14 through 16 he was not creating that which had already been created. "Let it be" does not mean created.

It only repeated what he had done. Pay attention to the 'and' word before every verse. This means that it was one thought process. He created the Heavens and the Earth..............and.....and...and......etc. etc.

That is the key.. Genesis 1: 1,2 "the first day". Are we now on the same page my friend?

Blade

 

[Bladerunner]

one other point I need to make.


1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Why was the earth in darkness????????????Look to Job 38:4-9
"When I made a cloud its garment, And thick darkness its swaddling band"

therefore he let the light in through the clouds. Now you might ask why I did this? Job was written around 600BC or about 600 years after God gave Moses the first five books of the Bible. These books (the Tora) were put together and written around 400BC.

What I am trying to say that the Bible has many authors living far after the events happened yet they describe the initial events to the letter. Who would have thought about putting to pen the above verse that would clarify something that happened thousands of years before and only spoke of 600 hundreds of years prior to it writing unless it came from someone who knew what HE had done and was still around to tell someone.!!!!

Blade