Why I AM an Atheist ...
-
Actually you don't need to see the physical earth to guess that the earth is round.Originally posted by Ironside:[i have not seen the physical earth, this earth of ours as indeed round and spherical. I only believed them because of some testimony of some realiable FIRSTHAND WITNESSES-those who were able to circumnavigate the world and those who have gone into space and saw it FIRSTAHAND that it is indeed round. It is the same way with the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ]
There are some indications:
1. Ships disappear over the horizon
2. The shadow (on the moon) during a lunar eclipse
and so on ..
The ancient Greeks and others already knew the Earth is round. This guy - Eratosthenes - even tried to calculate the circumference of the Earth. You can find this bit of trivia in any good maths textbook. -
Originally posted by Ironside:
you really should join al qaeda.
Because the Lord Jesus confirms it is the truth.
Why do I believe in Jesus?
Because He rose from the dead.
Why do I believe that He rose from the dead?
Because of the witness and testimony of reliable and credible [b]FIRSTHAND EYEWITNESSES. they have their affidavits written in the Bible [gospels]
What does the Resurrection prove?
It proves that Jesus Christ is indeed God's annointed Savior.
NOTE: Intelligent and experienced atheists do not try to write off the Resurrection as some fanciful ideas of some fanatic. That it is a myth and a product of a wild imagination of some votaries of Christ. They know it is a dumb arguement to use.
What they do is attack the credibility of the Gospel records. That it is inaccruate and has some errors in it.
Their are other amazing stories in other religions about their respective gods but they [the writers of it] do not claim to be a FIRSTHAND WITNESS.
In the courts of law they are just tantamount to hearsay.
Courts need FIRSTHAND WITNESSES.
[i have not seen the physical earth, this earth of ours as indeed round and spherical. I only believed them because of some testimony of some realiable FIRSTHAND WITNESSES-those who were able to circumnavigate the world and those who have gone into space and saw it FIRSTAHAND that it is indeed round. It is the same way with the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ]
I think it was a guy named Morisson who had it in mind to prove the REsurrection as a myth. In order to do this he must destroy the sturdy evidence that Christians have, the Gospel records.
In the end, he ended up becoming a Christian. The evidence was just to overwhelming.
Somebody wants to destroy Christianity? Prove the Resurection as false.
[/b]
excellent calibre for a suicide bomber. -
the greeks actually had some idea about what the scientific method was about. thier inventions and philosophy actually placed the greek culture head and shoulders above any others.Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually you don't need to see the physical earth to guess that the earth is round.
There are some indications:
1. Ships disappear over the horizon
2. The shadow (on the moon) during a lunar eclipse
and so on ..
The ancient Greeks and others already knew the Earth is round. This guy - Eratosthenes - even tried to calculate the circumference of the Earth. You can find this bit of trivia in any good maths textbook.
contrast that against the dark ages in europe, what with the superstition and all... -
science actually works the other way. A theory is generally accepted until disproven.Originally posted by Icemoon:So the way to beat them is to use exegesis. If you can sufficiently convince everyone why your interpretation is better, you now have the truth.
Edit - this is how science works also. You have nature as the book. If your theory can explain more things, you now have [a better approximation to] the truth.
christianity hangs on to values which have been disproven, time and time again, insisting that it's the truth.
which dosen't affect people in general but it's can get quite annoying. -
I disagree somewhat.Originally posted by nomood:science actually works the other way. A theory is generally accepted until disproven.
christianity hangs on to values which have been disproven, time and time again, insisting that it's the truth. which dosen't affect people in general but it's can get quite annoying.
A theory is generally accepted with the understanding that it is still an approximation to the truth.
Furthermore it is vague when we say a theory is generally accepted. So it is accepted to do what? Do we know the limitations?
By the way, what are the values which have been disproven time and time again? -
Since we are now on theories ..
How do you classify theories which are not experimentally verified? Are these theories accepted? -
Agree.Originally posted by nomood:the greeks actually had some idea about what the scientific method was about. thier inventions and philosophy actually placed the greek culture head and shoulders above any others.
contrast that against the dark ages in europe, what with the superstition and all...
The Greeks differs from more advanced civilizations like Babylonia in at least one respect - rational inquiry. They seek to understand the why, which gives birth to science.
But knn .. this guy called Aristotle came in and brought science to a halt, almost. An intellectual dead end. And with the publicaton of Ptolemy's Almagest, the geocentric view of the solar system persisted for many centuries. -
Not a fair comparison.Originally posted by nomood:you really should join al qaeda.
excellent calibre for a suicide bomber.
The ends of an Islamic extremist is himself - to put him in the ranks of martyrs and enjoy the company of many virgins.
The ends of a Christian fundamentalist is to glorify God and follow his mandate - to bring the gospel to all nations.
If you bomb people to death, they won't be able to hear the gospel => they are going to, erm, hell? -
yes.Originally posted by Icemoon:Since we are now on theories ..
How do you classify theories which are not experimentally verified? Are these theories accepted?
theory of relativity in particular stands out. At its point of inception, it was not experimentally verified, but it fitted all other known equations.
also, you'd remember how we were taught that light travels in a straight line? That was a scientific observation, and were good for most assumptions. When it was eventually proved that light (or photons) paths are affected by the density of its surrounding objects, all theories and its associated branches which were based on the earlier assumptions were nullified, or had a clause added to it (assuming light travels in a straight path) -
Just to name one, which is easy to discussOriginally posted by Icemoon:I disagree somewhat.
A theory is generally accepted with the understanding that it is still an approximation to the truth.
Furthermore it is vague when we say a theory is generally accepted. So it is accepted to do what? Do we know the limitations?
By the way, what are the values which have been disproven time and time again?
creationism & evolution, one of the most hotly contested topic.
Initially, charles darwin was prosecuted based on spreading "false lies" and "slander" against the church. They cited that there was no proof of evolution, despite his observations.
Cue to modern day, present bacterial evolution which has been observed in real time. Evolution has also been observed in some species, (i can't remmeber which one, i'll tell you later after i google for it) but still, no, the bible is correct. biological specimens DO NOT evolve.
I don't have a problem with creationism - In fact, I stand in the middle ground regarding this issue, since it was never disproved. What i can't stand is how they insist on blinding themselves with the bible DESPITE the overwhelming evidence. Humans were created as we were? The neanderthal fossils predate any known fossils of the modern man.
===
i do apologize for such a sweeping statement. should have backed it up with examples. sorry for the confusion.... -
it's not unlike the way christians believe the only way to heaven is through christ. Someone else observed quite correctly, blind faith = brainwash. They are not that dissimilar in that respect. All they need is a wayward leader to point them in the wrong direction.Originally posted by Icemoon:Not a fair comparison.
The ends of an Islamic extremist is himself - to put him in the ranks of martyrs and enjoy the company of many virgins.
The ends of a Christian fundamentalist is to glorify God and follow his mandate - to bring the gospel to all nations.
If you bomb people to death, they won't be able to hear the gospel => they are going to, erm, hell?
irregardless, the 'excellent calibre' i was referring to was his self justification and circular argument on why he believes in jesus.
truth => jesus => truth
and on and on and on.... -
Yes, special relativity owned its origin to Maxwell's equations which cemented the belief that light is a wave.Originally posted by nomood:yes.
theory of relativity in particular stands out. At its point of inception, it was not experimentally verified, but it fitted all other known equations.
also, you'd remember how we were taught that light travels in a straight line? That was a scientific observation, and were good for most assumptions. When it was eventually proved that light (or photons) paths are affected by the density of its surrounding objects, all theories and its associated branches which were based on the earlier assumptions were nullified, or had a clause added to it (assuming light travels in a straight path)
However, I have to remind you that Einstein was never awarded a nobel prize for his work on relativity.
And you know the reason why lah.
Put it this way - even if you fit all known equations, it is still maths. It won't become physics until the first prediction becomes verified. -
Did a historical Jesus exists?
May i quote Josh MacDowell?
There are still many people today who make the claim that Jesus never existed, that He was only a mythical character.
Bertrand Russell puts it this way, “I may say that one is not concerned with the historical question. Historically, it is quite doubtful whether Christ ever existed at all, and if He did we do not know anything about Him, so I am not concerned with the historical question, which is a very difficult one. I am concerned with Christ as He appears in the Gospels” (Why I Am Not a Christian, p. 11, note 8].
However, those who make such an accusation are certainly not historians, but are surprisingly ignorant of the facts.
The New Testament contains twenty-seven separate documents which were written in the first century a.d. These writings contain the story of the life of Jesus and the beginnings of the Christian church from about 4 b.c. until the decade of the a.d. nineties.
The facts were recorded by eyewitnesses, who gave firsthand testimony to what they had seen and heard. “What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the Word of Life” (I John 1:1, NASB).
Moreover, the existence of Jesus is recorded by the Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, who was born in a.d. 37, “Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles.
“He was (the) Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those who loved him at the firs did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day” (Antiquities, XVIII, III).
Although this passage has been contested because of the reference to Jesus being the Christ and rising from the dead, the fact of His existence is not in question.
Cornelius Tacitus (a.d. 112), a Roman historian, writing about the reign of Nero, refers to Jesus Christ and the existence of Christians in Rome (Annals, XV, 44). Tacitus, elsewhere in his Histories, refers to Christianity when alluding to the burning of the temple of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. This has been preserved by Sulpicius Severus (Chronicles 30:6).
There are other references to Jesus or His followers, such as the Roman historian, Seutonius (a.d. 120) in Life of Claudius, 25.4, and Lives of the Caesars, 26.2, and Pliny the younger (a.d. 112) in his Epistles, X. 96.
This testimony, both Christian and non-Christian, is more than sufficient to lay to rest any idea that Jesus, in fact, never existed. In light of the evidence, it is absurd to hold such a view. We know more about the life of Jesus than just about any other figure in the ancient world. His birth, life, and death are revealed in much more detail than most ancient figures whose existence is taken for granted by historians.
After examining the evidence about the life of Christ from contemporary sources apart from the New Testament, Roderic Dunkerley concluded, “In none of these various testimonies to the fact of Christ is there any slightest hint or idea that he was not a real historical person.
“Indeed it has been argued—and I think very rightly—that myth theories of the beginnings of Christianity are modern speculative hypotheses motivated by unreasoning prejudice and dislike. ‘It would never enter anyone’s head,’ says Merezhovsky, ‘to ask whether Jesus had lived, unless before asking the question the mind had been darkened by the wish that he had not lived’” (Roderic Dunkerley, Beyond the Gospels, pp. 29, 30). -
Originally posted by Icemoon:
Josephus did not even mention the resurrection?
Your whole argument is circular.
The testimonies are not corroborated outside the bible.
Do we have testimonies from Caiphas, Pilate, Herod etc.?
[b]Josephus did not even mention about the resurrection.[/b]
3. (63) Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them [b]alive again the third day,[/b] as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Josephus, F. 1996, c1987. The works of Josephus : Complete and unabridged. Includes index. (Ant XVIII, iii 3). Hendrickson: Peabody
Josh MacDowell on circualr reasoning
A charge that is frequently leveled against the Bible is that Christians argue in circles. The charge goes that Christians claim the Bible is the inspired Word of God and, as a proof of this contention, they quote a passage from the Bible that says so.
This type of argumentation is known as begging the question, or circular reasoning. Nothing is proved in this type of argumentation. It is based on assuming something to be true, using that assumption as fact to prove another assumption and using the “proved” assumption to prove your original assumption!
Some Christians (and many non-Christians!) do argue in circles, but about the Bible they certainly donÂ’t need to.
Instead of assuming the Bible is the Word of God, we can begin by demonstrating that the Scriptures are basically reliable and trustworthy historical documents. This is confirmed by applying the ordinary test of historical criticism to the Scriptures.
Once it is established that the Bible is a valid historical record, the next point is realizing that Jesus Christ claims to be the unique Son of God and that He bases this claim on His forthcoming resurrection from the dead.
Next, we examine the evidence for the resurrection contained in this historic document and find that the arguments overwhelmingly support the contention that Christ has risen from the dead. If this is true, then He is the unique Son of God as He claimed to be. If He is indeed God, then He speaks with authority on all matters.
Since Jesus considered the Old Testament to be the Word of God (Matthew 15:1–4; 5:17, 18] and promised His disciples, who either wrote or had control over the writing of the New Testament books, that the Holy Spirit would bring all things back to their remembrance (John 14:26), we can insist, with sound and accurate logic, that the Bible is God’s word. This is not circular reasoning. It is establishing certain facts and basing conclusions on the sound logical outcome of these facts. The case for Christianity can be established by ordinary means of historical investigation. -
by Josh MacDowell
Did Jesus actually rise from the dead? Does it really matter whether He did or didnÂ’t?
Ronald Gregor Smith gives a typical reply, “So far as historicity is concerned… it is necessary to explain: We may freely say that the bones of Jesus lie somewhere in Palestine. Christian faith is not destroyed by this admission.
“On the contrary, only now, when this has been said, are we in a position to ask about the meaning of the resurrection as an integral part of the message concerning Jesus” (Secular Christianity, London, Collins, 1966, p. 103).
Contrary to this point of view, it does matter to Christianity whether or not it is true that Christ came back from the dead, because Christianity stands or falls on the resurrection of Jesus Christ (I Corinthians 15:12–19). If Jesus did not come back from the dead, then the Christian faith crumbles.
Fortunately, one of the most well-attested events in the ancient world is the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. When confronted by the religious leaders of His day, Jesus was asked for a sign to demonstrate that He was the promised Messiah.
He answered, “An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign shall be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet; for just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matthew 12:39, 40, NASB).
The sign of the resurrection was meant to set Jesus apart from anyone else who ever lived, and it would designate Him the Son of God (Romans 1:4).
The accounts of His appearances are recorded for us by eyewitnesses to whom Jesus appeared alive over a forty-day period after His public crucifixion.
As the scriptural account sets forth, to these “he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3, KJV).
Writing about a.d. 56, the apostle Paul mentions the fact that more than 500 people had witnessed the resurrected Christ at one time and most of them were still living when he wrote (I Corinthians 15:6). This statement is somewhat of a challenge to those who might not have believed, since Paul is saying that there are many people yet living who could be interviewed to find out if Christ had indeed risen.
The historical evidence is more than sufficient to satisfy the curiosity of the honest inquirer. This can be seen not only by the positive defense that can be made for the case for the resurrection, but also by the lack of any evidence for an alternative explanation. The theories attempting to give an alternative explanation to the resurrection take more faith to believe than the resurrection itself.
Frank Morrison, who was an agnostic journalist, attempted to write a book refuting the resurrection of Christ. After much investigation, his opinion changed and he became a believer in Jesus Christ. This is how Morrison described what happened to him:
“This study is in some ways so unusual and provocative that the writer thinks it desirable to state here very briefly how the book came to take its present form. In one sense it could have taken no other, for it is essentially a confession, the inner story of a man who originally set out to write one kind of book and found himself compelled by the sheer force of circumstances to write another.
“It is not that the facts altered, for they are recorded imperishably in the monuments and in the pages of human history. But the interpretation to be put on the facts underwent a change” (Who Moved the Stone? Preface, Zondervan, 1971).
Morrison discovered that Christ was publicly put in the tomb on Friday, but on Sunday morning the body was missing. If He did not rise from the dead, then someone took the body. There are three interest groups that could possibly have taken the body: the Romans, the Jews, or the disciples.
The Romans would have had no reason to steal the body, since they wanted to keep the peace in Palestine. The idea was to keep the provinces as quiet as possible, and stealing the body of Christ would not accomplish this objective.
The Jews would not have taken the body, because the last thing they wanted was a proclamation of the resurrection. They are the ones who asked for the guard, according to Matthew 27.
The disciples of Jesus had no reason to steal the body, and if they did, they later died for something they knew to be untrue. Moreover, the religion which they proclaimed emphasized telling the truth and not lying. Their actions would have been inconsistent with that which they knew to be true and commanded others to follow.
The other reasonable explanation is that Christ has risen, and the eyewitnesses make it plain this is the case. The disciples of Jesus may not have been as sophisticated as twentieth century man in the realm of scientific knowledge, but they surely knew the difference between someone who was dead and someone who wasnÂ’t.
As Simon Peter said, “For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty” (II Peter 1:16, NASB). -
but you can examine their testimonies.Originally posted by Icemoon:One word - si3 wu2 dui4 zeng4.
That is, the FIRSTHAND WITNESSES cannot even be cross-examined.
-
Who is the source of your information my friend about this Erastosthenes?Originally posted by Icemoon:Actually you don't need to see the physical earth to guess that the earth is round.
There are some indications:
1. Ships disappear over the horizon
2. The shadow (on the moon) during a lunar eclipse
and so on ..
The ancient Greeks and others already knew the Earth is round. This guy - Eratosthenes - even tried to calculate the circumference of the Earth. You can find this bit of trivia in any good maths textbook.
Why do you believe the information he has given you about Erastosthenes? Have you cross-examined him? -
The focus is not on the person, but that the technique had existed during ancient times.Originally posted by Ironside:Who is the source of your information my friend about this Erastosthenes?
Why do you believe the information he has given you about Erastosthenes? Have you cross-examined him?
One assumption made by the technique was that Earth is round. -
In the first place, you are not even sure who made those testimonies. At least in police station you know who made the the testimony right?Originally posted by Ironside:but you can examine their testimonies.
And police station testimony different, 'cos that one is Q&A session in front of police officer. -
Originally posted by Ironside:
Please prove the authenticity first.
[b]Josephus did not even mention the resurrection?
3. (63) Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them [b]alive again the third day,[/b] as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Josephus, F. 1996, c1987. The works of Josephus : Complete and unabridged. Includes index. (Ant XVIII, iii 3). Hendrickson: Peabody[/b]
As in number of extant manuscripts, earliest manuscripts etc.
Christians like to boast about the number of biblical manuscripts, but sneer at other historical manuscripts.
So now I deflect the problem back to them.
-
interesting that you mentioned this. i was discussing this with some others in another forum 5 mins agoOriginally posted by Icemoon:Please prove the authenticity first.
As in number of extant manuscripts, earliest manuscripts etc.
Christians like to boast about the number of biblical manuscripts, but sneer at other historical manuscripts.
So now I deflect the problem back to them.
anyway,
Testimonium Flavianum
The following passage appears in the Greek version of Antiquities of the Jews xviii 3.3, in the translation of William Whiston:
3.3 Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
As usual with ancient texts, the surviving sources for this passage are Greek manuscripts, all minuscules, the oldest of which dates from the 9th century. It is likely that these all derive from a single exemplar written in uncial, as is the case with most other ancient Greek texts transmitted to the present in medieval copies, and have come down through the hands of the church. The text of Antiquities appears to have been transmitted in two halves — books 1–10 and books 11–20. But other ad hoc copies of this passage also exist.
There are also citations in other writers of antiquity.
The first to cite this passage of Antiquities was Eusebius, writing in about 324, who quotes the passage in essentially the same form.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus
sorry for using Wiki. too late and too lazy to search through a proper database.
external link to the same passage to corroborate wiki
http://www.studylight.org/his/bc/wfj/antiquities/view.cgi?book=18&chapter=3 -
anyway, i'll share some other stuff i got from the other forum i was talking abt since we are talking abt manuscripts
Written Earliest M.S. No. of M.S.
Plato 427-347BC 900AD 7
Caesar 100-44BC 900AD 10
Tacitus 100 AD 1100AD 20
Pliny 100 AD 850AD 7
New Testament 50-100AD 350AD 1300
As a disclaimer i do not know the authencity of this info. so pls read it with a pinch of salt.
nowadays need to qualify everything when posting at EH -
For our own good. God didn't make you a researcher for nothing.Originally posted by ben1xy:nowadays need to qualify everything when posting at EH
The bible (1Thess 5:21) admonishes us to "test everything". May I suggest this extends to non biblical truths as well? -
Originally posted by ben1xy:As usual with ancient texts, the surviving sources for this passage are Greek manuscripts, all minuscules, the oldest of which dates from the 9th century. It is likely that these all derive from a single exemplar written in uncial, as is the case with most other ancient Greek texts transmitted to the present in medieval copies, and have come down through the hands of the church. The text of Antiquities appears to have been transmitted in two halves — books 1–10 and books 11–20. But other ad hoc copies of this passage also exist.
Actually one of the most convincing challange is why the passage is so short.
As a Jew, Josephus like quite bochup that someone has fulfilled the prophecies. If you read Antiquities, it is basically a history of the Jews right? The appearance of Jesus and his resurrection should be the culmination of the whole book, but Josephus just qing1 miao2 dan4 xie3 dai4 guo4 qu4.
unless he is telling us resurrection is the norm of the day. -
my faith and my occupation requires me to agree with uOriginally posted by Icemoon:The bible (1Thess 5:21) admonishes us to "test everything". May I suggest this extends to non biblical truths as well?