God is Imaginary

1246718

Replies

  • Brunner26_2
    Brunner26_2 Posts: 1,152
    You have no evidence for the existence of a God. No one does. That's why it's called "faith".
    I believe Jesus is the son of God. I believe what Jesus taught us when he walked the earth. I believe he was crucified, died, and rose again. I believe the stories passed down generation to generation going back to the eyewitnesses to Jesus' life. Those who followed him and those who didn't. I wasn't alive during the Civil War, but I believe what was written and the stories passed down. So, I have faith in both events in history.

    The two events are completely different. We have artifacts from the civil war, photographs, and historical documents (which the bible is not). They're also from completely different eras of human intelligence. Isn't it a little strange that the miracles stopped when people started becoming more educated and writing things down?
  • Bahet
    Bahet Posts: 1,254 Member
    You have no evidence for the existence of a God. No one does. That's why it's called "faith".
    I believe Jesus is the son of God. I believe what Jesus taught us when he walked the earth. I believe he was crucified, died, and rose again. I believe the stories passed down generation to generation going back to the eyewitnesses to Jesus' life. Those who followed him and those who didn't. I wasn't alive during the Civil War, but I believe what was written and the stories passed down. So, I have faith in both events in history.

    Proof is about WAY more than seeing something with your own eyes. I can believe in fairies and wizards. That doesn't make them real. I can disbelieve in the Holocoust. That doesn't mean it wasn't real. So far you haven't given any proof that doesn't amount to te exact same thing that can be said about hobbits and orcs.

    Also, if you need religion in order to have morals then you have no morals. Being good because it's the right thing to do is a far better statement on the quality of your character than to say you are good because you don't want to go to hell. As to who/what dictates morals if you have no religion I really don't understand what is so confusing about that. My parents taught me morals and values. Society did too. Religion played a part for me because I was raised Catholic. My kids haven't been raised with any religion though. They learned their morals based on what my husband and I have taught them and what they have seen and the society we live in.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    Proof is about WAY more than seeing something with your own eyes. I can believe in fairies and wizards. That doesn't make them real. I can disbelieve in the Holocoust. That doesn't mean it wasn't real. So far you haven't given any proof that doesn't amount to te exact same thing that can be said about hobbits and orcs.
    As I stated, I believe in the prophets, that Jesus is the son of God, and all the stories passed down by his apostles and those who knew him and witnessed his life. From everything I have experienced in life and everything I have studied and read about God, I believe in His existence. I haven't read or experienced anything that would lead me to believe otherwise. And I've done a lot of studying.
    Also, if you need religion in order to have morals then you have no morals.

    Pretty sure I never said this. How can you claim to say who does and does not have morals?
  • Brunner26_2
    Brunner26_2 Posts: 1,152

    As I stated, I believe in the prophets, that Jesus is the son of God, and all the stories passed down by his apostles and those who knew him and witnessed his life. From everything I have experienced in life and everything I have studied and read about God, I believe in His existence. I haven't read or experienced anything that would lead me to believe otherwise. And I've done a lot of studying.

    Can you please elaborate on why you believe what you believe? You said you've done a lot of studying. What are some of the major points?
  • dandrews010
    dandrews010 Posts: 253 Member
    Honestly, I think religion is a crutch people need. There needs to be 'something else' for many people, and I guess it also provides some additional meaning to their lives.

    Rather than a story which was written YEARS after the event, it's best to deal in actual facts. And the facts are all for evolution. And not an evolution 'that god created'. I'm not against believing in a religion, it would be super if there was a god, but until it is something more than a fairytale with NO PROOF then I'll have to keep believing there isn't.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    until it is something more than a fairytale with NO PROOF then I'll have to keep believing there isn't.

    Do you really believe Christianity is nothing more than say Cinderella, Snow White, and any other fairy tales? Why is it that millions of people for thousands of years would believe in this fairy tale?

    Do you believe in love? There is no actual proof of love. You have to have faith and believe that someone lives you- even if they do wonderful things for you. There is no proof.
  • dandrews010
    dandrews010 Posts: 253 Member
    Love is a chemical reaction.

    And people believe in religion because people always want to believe, they need to believe. Life is too scary otherwise. I get it, I mean whats the alternative - an existence where when we die, its done. Like now, we have an extremely plausible theory, backed up with evidence, about how the world came to be, and how we came to be. People would still prefer to believe the story rather than the facts.

    Why should people believe something which they have never witnessed? Not only that, but nobody they know has witnessed it. Nobody for 2013 years has witnessed it apparently, and even then it was written years after it was over. And actually, who decided what made up the bible? Because many gospels were rejected were they not? So how do we know we have actually got the real version of this story? 'Faith' is a wonderful thing, and everybody is entitled to it, but when it directly impacts on innocent peoples lives, yes it bothers me.

    And how far back has religion set humanity? Back in the day, anybody who was close to progressive thinking was discredited, locked up and killed. It literally put us centuries behind the curve.

    Like I say, if anything credible comes around, I would be the first to change my stance, but at the minute I just can't do it based on nothing.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    Self-existent is the same as what I said. Why is it logical to think that God always existed but the universe did not?

    Now if Big Bang Theory is true that means the universe as we know it did have a beginning. But I've heard plenty of theories about multiple universes existing almost as if soap bubbles, theories of a universe that continually expands and contracts upon itself, etc. etc. Different ways of theorizing that the universe, in way, always existed or is self-regenerating.

    Saying, "No. It's not possible for the universe to always exist on it's own." while believing in a creator who has always existed on his own is just double talk to me.

    If the universe always existed.. well to borrow a phrase I know you won't like.. it cuts out the middle man. Like this: "The universe had to come from somewhere, God created it. Where did God come from? God always existed." Ok, the universe always existed. Simpler and more logical answer."

    Plus I'm not completely sold that something can't come from nothing. There's a whole lot of life on this planet that wasn't here before. Yes the materials were here, but even scientists still haven't been able to recreate what it was that gave that first one celled organism "life". When people choose to see God's hand in that, well I certainly don't fault them. (I fault them when they think God poofed one dude and one woman into existence in some garden with talking snakes).

    Hmmm. Maybe a different approach. There is nothing about the universe that leads me to believe that it is self-existent. Astronomy tells us that the universe had a beginning (including space and time). If you say the universe always existed (putting aside the best evidence of science), one still must ask what is the source of the eternal movement of the universe. From all we can tell, the universe is governed by entropy which involves the movement towards disorder and the death of the universe. Eternal motion needs an eternal mover, something that the universe is unable to account for. It is more rational to believe that the changing, expanding universe with finite energy is the result of a creative power that is self-existent.

    Further, if the universe is infinite in its duration (i.e., it has existed for an infinite amount of time), then how did we get to this moment? For instance, what if you had to do an infinite number of things before you could leave your house? When would you leave? Never, of course. You can never reach the end of an infinity. If an infinite number of moments preceded this moment, we would not be here. In other words, the idea of an infinite past for the universe of time and space is irrational.

    Theories about multiple universes are groundless from a scientific perspective. They are inherently unprovable and are purely speculative. The primary motive for proposing them, it seems, is to avoid the conclusion of the existence of God. Besides, saying that this universe is caused by another universe only prolongs the problem since the same questions can be asked about the universe that caused this one, etc. Such theories strike me as wishful thinking that doesn't really solve anything.

    I say that it is unreasonable to say this universe "exists on its own" because the properties or attributes of the universe show us that it needs an explanation beyond itself (that's why people propose multiple universe theories, they know this one does not explain itself!). If this universe needs an explanation beyond itself then it follows that there must be a different kind of reality upon which this one depends that is self-existent. Multiplying universes like this one only delays this conclusion.

    Again, saying the universe always existed is not only contrary to science but it simply does not make sense for the reasons I've already mentioned. If we discover God as the necessary cause of a dependent universe that does not explain itself, it doesn't make sense to go on to ask what is the cause of God. God is, by definition, uncaused. There must be an uncaused reality and the universe is not a good candidate for that status.

    "Nothing" cannot be the cause of something. Nothing has no explanatory power. How can that which has no existence be the reason or cause of something that has existence? This sounds like nonsense to me. It seems like your last paragraph concedes that it is plausible to believe that life involves a causal act of God. This is obviously more reasonable than saying that "nothing" is the cause of it.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    Can you please elaborate on why you believe what you believe? You said you've done a lot of studying. What are some of the major points
    I am a Catholic Christian who believes that reason is a gift from God and therefore there are no real contradictions between what I believe by faith and what I discover through reason. I have a wide range of interests in theology and philosophy (as well as other disciplines). I find that my Christian faith is central to my life, enriches everything I do, and provides a meaningful framework and context for living a happy life. I respect others and their unique journeys but I also love what I believe and so I like to share it with others and try to help them have a clear understanding of what Christianity professes. Beyond that, I have to leave it to others to make their own decisions. I don't think I'm "judgmental" in that I respect others as people but do believe we can be respectfully critical of our arguments and reasoning processes. I believe our intellect and freedom are gifts from God and that we are responsible for using them properly.

    If I keep sharing specifics things that I believe this will get far too long. Maybe these points give some insights into a few things that mean a lot to me.
  • Bahet
    Bahet Posts: 1,254 Member
    Millions of people for thousands of years believe in Allah too. Millions of people for thousands of years believe there is no God. You have yet to offer any proof at all. "I believe" isn't proof it's faith and no more proof than "I believe in wizards" is proof of magic.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    Millions of people for thousands of years believe in Allah
    Really? Allah is the Arabic word for God. What they mean by God is the same thing that mean about my God. Islam as a historic religion began with Mohammed in the 7th century AD, so not "thousands of years ago".
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,979 Member
    So you are saying that a maladjusted species is part of a greater cosmic plan? This just seems to be a cop out answer.

    There are so many questions I have about God's plan. Why do we have maladusted species? Why do we have diseases, starving children, pedophiles, rapists, homeless, poverty? These things that all seem so horrible to us should be "fixed" by someone who is all powerful. Right? So, I try to wrap my brain around this as best I can.

    My children help me do this. My daughter said when she's an adult and has her own money, she will buy all the junk food she can. She doesn't understand why parents, who have the ability to buy whatever food we want, would buy healthy foods. My son says when he has kids, they'll never be punished, they'll be able to watch whatever they want. There will be no "mean" things like grounding and punishments. He doesn't understand why parents who have all the control in the house would want their kids to be miserable.

    Then I think about the good in this world that comes from all the seemingly bad things. How would we be grateful for good health if there were no bad health? How would we have charity in our hearts if there was no one in need? What would this journey on earth be like if everything was perfect? Why have schools because God can just make everyone educated. Why have jobs when God can just make everything free? Why have homes when God can make the weather so perfect that we don't require shelter?

    Because I can't grasp all of God's plan/intentions, as my children cannot grasp mine, I have to trust. I trust God to know what's best for this journey, just as I ask my children to trust me in what's best for them.
    If this god has a plan, then it's been prelayed out, which means this god knows our destiny already which then trumps free will. I've always thought that that statement was odd.............god has a plan for you..............:laugh:

    A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • TheRoadDog
    TheRoadDog Posts: 11,788 Member
    Well, Thanks. I'm backing out now. I got the "proof" I needed and that is that no one has definitive "proof:; just "belief" or "faith". Those two terms in no way, shape or form provide proof.

    I believed in the Easter Bunny and Santa. I had faith that if I put my tooth under my pillow that the Tooth Fairy would replace it with a quarter in the middle of the night.

    Religion is just another fairy tale and the bible is just another book utilized to scare people into being "good". Geppeto didn't magically transform a puppet into a little boy. He was lonely and had a psychosis.
  • Brunner26_2
    Brunner26_2 Posts: 1,152
    To wineplease: Your ideas about science are way off.

    1. Astronomy does not deal with the origins of the universe. That's cosmology.
    2. The universe as we know it had a finite beginning, the big bang. That doesn't mean there was nothing before that. We just don't know, and people are trying to figure it out.
    3. The idea of multiple universes is one hypothesis, but it's not the theory of the universe. It's definitely based in science. People way smarter than you or me are working on the models based in physics.
    4. Trying to find the origin of the universe is not about trying to disprove god. It's about trying explain our existence based on what we can actually measure.
    5. Speculation is not a bad thing. It's we how new ideas and hypothesis that can actually be tested. Religion is way more speculative than science anyway.

    You're trying to argue about ideas you don't even understand. You're claiming that ideas that at least have some basis in observable phenomena are baseless and irrational, while there's exactly zero scientific evidence that any deity has actually ever existed.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    Well, Thanks. I'm backing out now. I got the "proof" I needed and that is that no one has definitive "proof:; just "belief" or "faith". Those two terms in no way, shape or form provide proof.I believed in the Easter Bunny and Santa. I had faith that if I put my tooth under my pillow that the Tooth Fairy would replace it with a quarter in the middle of the night.

    Awwwww, don't leave now, RoadDog. I want to explore this with you.

    There are many very intelligent, respected people who in their mature, adult life have come to believe in the existence of God. Mortimer Adler, Chuck Colson, Edward Feser, and even Anthony Flew (one of the most prolific atheists who came to believe in a god through the theory of intelligent design), and many others. These people came to accept God or Christian faith through much study and in their mature lives.

    I've not met one mature, resepctable, intelligent person who in their adult life has become to believe in the tooth fairy, Easter Bunny, or Santa. Have you?
  • vim_n_vigor
    vim_n_vigor Posts: 4,089 Member
    .
  • TheRoadDog
    TheRoadDog Posts: 11,788 Member
    @wineplease

    Someone on MFP, a very good Christian, sent me a message, questioning me. Here is my reply to that person. Verbatim.

    "I believe that the "Big Bang" theory is a viable supposition based on, but not proven by, physics. At best it is only theoretical, but it makes more sense than believing that an omnipotent being is in control of the universe. Knows all, sees all. I believe in evolution.

    Don't misunderstand me in how I feel about those that do believe in God. If you believe and you live by those beliefs, then I have respect for you and support you in your beliefs. I think you are one of those people that I respect and believe in. I just don't believe in the same things you do.

    I have great disdain to those who use religion and the beliefs of others to their own profit and purpose. Such as televangilists, etc. And when an Organization, such as the Catholic Church, Mormons, many Christian Faiths, etc. puts the good of that organization before the well-being of the individual, then I believe they are using their own organization as a tool or weapon against those that do not go along with their doctrines.

    You and I are not that different. I believe that the 10 Commandments is a good set of guidelines to follow. I just don't believe that God handed this rulebook down to man. Man wrote it.

    Contrary to my appearance and perceived demeanor, I treat every indivdual with respect and deference. I would not impose myself or my beliefs on another. I am very well read, intelligent and thoughtful. Thee is not much likelihood that anyone would see a bad side of me unless they did something that invited that side of me into their life.

    We still Buddies?

    Mike "

    If a person lives their life and is true to their beliefs and doesn't infring on others, I will stand up for them every time.

    And, by the way, my wife and I hold different beliefs, but have the same goals.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    To wineplease: Your ideas about science are way off.
    1. Astronomy does not deal with the origins of the universe. That's cosmology.
    2. The universe as we know it had a finite beginning, the big bang. That doesn't mean there was nothing before that. We just don't know, and people are trying to figure it out.
    3. The idea of multiple universes is one hypothesis, but it's not the theory of the universe. It's definitely based in science. People way smarter than you or me are working on the models based in physics.
    4. Trying to find the origin of the universe is not about trying to disprove god. It's about trying explain our existence based on what we can actually measure.
    5. Speculation is not a bad thing. It's we how new ideas and hypothesis that can actually be tested. Religion is way more speculative than science anyway.
    You're trying to argue about ideas you don't even understand. You're claiming that ideas that at least have some basis in observable phenomenaare baseless and irrational, while there's exactly zero scientific evidence that any deity has actually ever existed.

    1.I was thinking of Cosmology as a subset or species of the broader category of the study of the universe (Astronomy). It is common to see cosmological considerations in books on general astronomy.

    2.Science is incapable of dealing with the question of “Before the Big Bang.” This is a philosophical and theological matter. Prior to the emergence of physical laws, time and space, etc., science lacks the categories with which to analyze or test theories. One must resort to other kinds of analysis.

    3.Multiple universe theories are inherently unscientific insofar as they cannot be tested. By definition “another universe” is one that is inaccessible to our universe. Any proposal based on the assumption of multiple universes is pure conjecture and hypothetical with no imaginable “test.”

    4.I am convinced that many of those who propose multiple universes, infinite universes, etc., are motivated by a desire to find a purely natural or physical explanation of the cosmos. Their commitment to materialism is at least implicitly a rejection of an immaterial/spiritual explanation of origins. In that sense, it is based on an attempt to reject God (even if such is not stated explicitly).

    5.Regarding religion being speculative, there is a very long tradition of philosophical reflection on God, creation, etc. Looking at ancients like Plato and Aristotle (and countless others) quickly dispels the idea that belief in God has no strong foundations in clear, rational thought.

    6.I might know more about these ideas than you think. In any case, to say there is “zero” scientific evidence for the existence of a deity confuses a few things. First, I never said that the issue of God’s existence is a scientific question. I do think there are scientific realities that are profoundly suggestive of theistic conclusions but the discovery of God transcends the scientific method. The scientific method is good at studying certain features of the world but fails in respect to others. For instance, the scientific method is based on certain assumptions or presuppositions that it cannot demonstrate but must use in order to proceed (e.g., reliability of sense perception, regularity of nature, validity of inductive and deductive logic). Also, science is powerless to answer questions like, “What is the moral thing to do?” “Does my life have any meaning?”
  • Bahet
    Bahet Posts: 1,254 Member
    Yes, I know Allah means God but most people disagree that it's the Christian version of God. I find it humorous that you are getting picky about "thousands of years" with a difference of a few centuries when the Bible wasn't even written until around that time and there weren't "millions of followers for thousands of years" until well after that.

    Regardless of all that you don't seem to understand the questions people are asking. Let's try it this way - convince me that there is a God. "I believe" isn't proof. It it were then there's a God, a Goddess, Zeus, aliens, unicorns, wizards, and Big Foot. Show me your proof. Not your opinions. Show me how your God is any more real than unicorns and wizards.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    Regardless of all that you don't seem to understand the questions people are asking. Let's try it this way - convince me that there is a God. "I believe" isn't proof. It it were then there's a God, a Goddess, Zeus, aliens, unicorns, wizards, and Big Foot. Show me your proof. Not your opinions. Show me how your God is any more real than unicorns and wizards.

    I never said "I believe" is proof. I'll offer you what I consider proof, knowing you'll still choose not to believe.

    The life of Jesus is proof of the existence of God. Jesus came down from heaven in fulfillment of the scriptures. We have historical witnesses to his life, teachings, and miracles. You may not like that things weren't written down at the time, but that was not the culture then. They passed down historical data word of mouth, generation to generation. Look at the evidence of credibility of those eyewittness accounts. People died for their claims of Jesus rising from the dead and ascending into heaven. People don't let themselves be killed over something they know to be a hoax.

    Let's look at the logic of the story of the resurrection. We know Jesus died on a cross. People witnessed this. We know Jesus' dead body was wrapped and placed in a tomb and closed off by a huge boulder. The outside of the tomb was guarded by Jesus' followers AND by those who didn't believe he was the son of God. "Something" happened, and his body was missing from the tomb. Let's see what makes more logical sense (even if our brains can't fully grasp it). Why would the Jews take Jesus' body? They could have ended Christianity right there by showing they had his body. Why would his disciples take his body and then die over a hoax? I could sit here and claim all day that I saw a ghost. If I hadn't really seen one, I certainly wouldn't repeat the claim if a gun was held to my head. It's amazing to me that these people didn't change their stories just to save their lives. That's how much they believed. Let's say Jesus wasn't really dead, but some drug was used to stop his heartbeat and make him appear dead. How'd he get out of the tomb with all those people standing guard? Can you offer any logical explanation for the resurrection? I've yet to find one, and I've looked.

    As with all historical data, we must look at the evidence of credibility. The highest order would be eye witnesses.
  • Brunner26_2
    Brunner26_2 Posts: 1,152
    Regardless of all that you don't seem to understand the questions people are asking. Let's try it this way - convince me that there is a God. "I believe" isn't proof. It it were then there's a God, a Goddess, Zeus, aliens, unicorns, wizards, and Big Foot. Show me your proof. Not your opinions. Show me how your God is any more real than unicorns and wizards.

    I never said "I believe" is proof. I'll offer you what I consider proof, knowing you'll still choose not to believe.

    The life of Jesus is proof of the existence of God. Jesus came down from heaven in fulfillment of the scriptures. We have historical witnesses to his life, teachings, and miracles. You may not like that things weren't written down at the time, but that was not the culture then. They passed down historical data word of mouth, generation to generation. Look at the evidence of credibility of those eyewittness accounts. People died for their claims of Jesus rising from the dead and ascending into heaven. People don't let themselves be killed over something they know to be a hoax.

    Let's look at the logic of the story of the resurrection. We know Jesus died on a cross. People witnessed this. We know Jesus' dead body was wrapped and placed in a tomb and closed off by a huge boulder. The outside of the tomb was guarded by Jesus' followers AND by those who didn't believe he was the son of God. "Something" happened, and his body was missing from the tomb. Let's see what makes more logical sense (even if our brains can't fully grasp it). Why would the Jews take Jesus' body? They could have ended Christianity right there by showing they had his body. Why would his disciples take his body and then die over a hoax? I could sit here and claim all day that I saw a ghost. If I hadn't really seen one, I certainly wouldn't repeat the claim if a gun was held to my head. It's amazing to me that these people didn't change their stories just to save their lives. That's how much they believed. Let's say Jesus wasn't really dead, but some drug was used to stop his heartbeat and make him appear dead. How'd he get out of the tomb with all those people standing guard? Can you offer any logical explanation for the resurrection? I've yet to find one, and I've looked.

    As with all historical data, we must look at the evidence of credibility. The highest order would be eye witnesses.

    We actually don't know that anybody died for their beliefs. We have stories about people who died for their beliefs, that as you say, had been passed down from generation to generation before they were ever written down. Stories change over time. Why is the description of Jesus in the Christian bible more accurate than the description of Jesus in the Quran?
  • doorki
    doorki Posts: 2,576 Member
    Regardless of all that you don't seem to understand the questions people are asking. Let's try it this way - convince me that there is a God. "I believe" isn't proof. It it were then there's a God, a Goddess, Zeus, aliens, unicorns, wizards, and Big Foot. Show me your proof. Not your opinions. Show me how your God is any more real than unicorns and wizards.

    I never said "I believe" is proof. I'll offer you what I consider proof, knowing you'll still choose not to believe.

    The life of Jesus is proof of the existence of God. Jesus came down from heaven in fulfillment of the scriptures. We have historical witnesses to his life, teachings, and miracles. You may not like that things weren't written down at the time, but that was not the culture then. They passed down historical data word of mouth, generation to generation. Look at the evidence of credibility of those eyewittness accounts. People died for their claims of Jesus rising from the dead and ascending into heaven. People don't let themselves be killed over something they know to be a hoax.

    Let's look at the logic of the story of the resurrection. We know Jesus died on a cross. People witnessed this. We know Jesus' dead body was wrapped and placed in a tomb and closed off by a huge boulder. The outside of the tomb was guarded by Jesus' followers AND by those who didn't believe he was the son of God. "Something" happened, and his body was missing from the tomb. Let's see what makes more logical sense (even if our brains can't fully grasp it). Why would the Jews take Jesus' body? They could have ended Christianity right there by showing they had his body. Why would his disciples take his body and then die over a hoax? I could sit here and claim all day that I saw a ghost. If I hadn't really seen one, I certainly wouldn't repeat the claim if a gun was held to my head. It's amazing to me that these people didn't change their stories just to save their lives. That's how much they believed. Let's say Jesus wasn't really dead, but some drug was used to stop his heartbeat and make him appear dead. How'd he get out of the tomb with all those people standing guard? Can you offer any logical explanation for the resurrection? I've yet to find one, and I've looked.

    As with all historical data, we must look at the evidence of credibility. The highest order would be eye witnesses.

    Are you implying that no other religion had people die for their faith? Including the multiple other messianic movements of that era. Including the Jews killed as heretics during the Spanish Inquisition? Why are their sacrifices less valid?
  • Gilbrod
    Gilbrod Posts: 1,216 Member
    For the record, I believe in God. No one can prove God and other scientific beliefs. No one can prove all the scientific theories. That's why they're theories. Someone mentioned miracles. Look for people and doctors who claim to have had something, or diagnosed someone with a certain ailment. Then they're miraculously healed. Then people will say "the mind is a powerful thing." Life is like those choose your own adventure books. You want to believe, great. You don't, great! You get to choose. You have athiests who have never believed and all of a sudden, they're believers. Ever asked one why? Look em up. I am sure they will be happy to tell you. Does it really bother people that much that someone else beliefs, though not being forced upon you, are not in line with someone elses? In the end, we'll only know once we're worm food.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    We actually don't know that anybody died for their beliefs. We have stories about people who died for their beliefs, that as you say, had been passed down from generation to generation before they were ever written down. Stories change over time.
    Exactly. We have historical data from people who witnessed this. Before historical data was actually written down, people still knew how to make sure historical facts were passed down. They were far more skilled at verbally "recording" history than we are now. I haven't really read much of the story change over time. Have you? There are stories in my family that we've never written down. My great-grandmother told the stories to my grandmother. She told them to my mother. My mother has told them to me, and I've shared them with my children. When my great-grandmother was alive, I asked her about many of these stories and they hadn't changed. We really are capable of passing down history via verbal communication.

    Why is the description of Jesus in the Christian bible more accurate than the description of Jesus in the Quran?
    Have you read both? If so, you know the glaring differences. What makes most logical sense to me with everything else I've read, is the description of Jesus in the bible. Obviously there are plenty of people who disagree with me.
  • doorki
    doorki Posts: 2,576 Member
    We actually don't know that anybody died for their beliefs. We have stories about people who died for their beliefs, that as you say, had been passed down from generation to generation before they were ever written down. Stories change over time.
    Exactly. We have historical data from people who witnessed this. Before historical data was actually written down, people still knew how to make sure historical facts were passed down. They were far more skilled at verbally "recording" history than we are now. I haven't really read much of the story change over time. Have you? There are stories in my family that we've never written down. My great-grandmother told the stories to my grandmother. She told them to my mother. My mother has told them to me, and I've shared them with my children. When my great-grandmother was alive, I asked her about many of these stories and they hadn't changed. We really are capable of passing down history via verbal communication.

    Why is the description of Jesus in the Christian bible more accurate than the description of Jesus in the Quran?
    Have you read both? If so, you know the glaring differences. What makes most logical sense to me with everything else I've read, is the description of Jesus in the bible. Obviously there are plenty of people who disagree with me.

    There are plenty of histories and books from that era. The Romans were prodigious writers of histories and the such. No outside sources allude to the divinity of Jesus. They mention that he existed and was killed but that is about it. There are also plenty of Hebrew writings from that era as well. Why do we think that Christianity would rely on an oral tradition in a time of letters?
  • Brunner26_2
    Brunner26_2 Posts: 1,152
    Have you read both? If so, you know the glaring differences. What makes most logical sense to me with everything else I've read, is the description of Jesus in the bible. Obviously there are plenty of people who disagree with me.

    I haven't read either. But as they are both thousand-year-old religious texts that deal with magic, so to me they hold the same credibility.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    I haven't read either. But as they are both thousand-year-old religious texts that deal with magic, so to me they hold the same credibility.

    Ahhhh. So, all of your thoughts, opinions, and decisions on this subject are not via any personal education.
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    There are plenty of histories and books from that era. The Romans were prodigious writers of histories and the such. No outside sources allude to the divinity of Jesus. They mention that he existed and was killed but that is about it. There are also plenty of Hebrew writings from that era as well. Why do we think that Christianity would rely on an oral tradition in a time of letters?

    I was specifically referring to the disciples/apostles of Jesus.
  • doorki
    doorki Posts: 2,576 Member
    There are plenty of histories and books from that era. The Romans were prodigious writers of histories and the such. No outside sources allude to the divinity of Jesus. They mention that he existed and was killed but that is about it. There are also plenty of Hebrew writings from that era as well. Why do we think that Christianity would rely on an oral tradition in a time of letters?

    I was specifically referring to the disciples/apostles of Jesus.

    So you are more willing to accept an ancient game of telephone during a relatively literary era over the myriad of other texts?
  • wineplease
    wineplease Posts: 469 Member
    So you are more willing to accept an ancient game of telephone during a relatively literary era over the myriad of other texts?

    You have to realize that they were skilled at communicationg history this way. It was far more sophisticated than that of what you'd think of as the telephone game.