A blog where I discuss intelligent issues and discuss rationality, logic, evidence and my non belief in sky daddies.
Saturday 31 October 2009
Faces in places
people tend to see faces in all kinds of places and so maybe thats how the resurrection myth started. And maybe thats why xians think they sometimes see jebus (particuarly in pieces of toast etc)
6 comments:
johnny
said...
Mike, people don't carry on for toast. They don't die for toast. Even if one or two were irrational enough to die for toast, once they were martyred, a strong message would be understood by the rest. (not to mention the fact that Thomas did not believe.... images in toast don't ask you to feel the wounds from crucifixion)
There are other things too, Mike... In the time the Gospel accounts were written, a woman's testimony would have been regarded as useless. The accounts would not have named the woman as the first to have seen the risen Christ. Remember, the gospel accounts were written within the lifetime of those who opposed and crucified our Lord. (Saul of Tarsus persecuted early Christians) They knew the Christian claim that Jesus rose from the dead... don't you think it would have been an effective strategy to present the (dead) body for an early end to Christianity? And, if you respond by saying, "xians stole the body", then you have refuted your toast theory.
There are quite a few other reasons that indicate that the disciples were not lying, mistaken, victims of a hoax. Many reasons that attest to the truthfulness of the historicity of the Resurrection.
For someone who has a "lack of belief", you go to extreme hoop jumping to make your position believable to yourself.
If you are actually interesting in honestly exploring the evidence, let me know, i'll point you to some avenues of investigation.
Feel free to examine the verses that i omit. I'm going to just touch on a few for sake of brevity...
1Co 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 1Co 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
Your atheism does not acknowledge sin, per se, but claims that you can be a good person without God (which begs several questions), however, with no objective morality, was Hitler a good person? What about Saddam Hussein, who was recently executed for his crimes against humanity? If there is no objective morality, what crimes were actually committed? And why would he have to pay the ultimate penalty for doing "wrong"?
What about on a more individual level... maybe a bit less severe--
Have you ever stolen something and gotten away with it? Maybe a pirated song from the internet or an illegal copy of a movie. (i'm not asking you to answer me, but ask & answer this to yourself)
What about cheating without getting caught? Hurt someone?
Would you agree that these things and things like them, are not good things? Now, do you think that an atheist can be good? (God's existence not withstanding)
What about the other way... has anyone ever stolen from you and you weren't able to find out who dunnit or recover you stuff? Has anyone ever broken something of yours and got away scot free?
If God does not exist, can you explain to me how any of these things are actually wrong?... especially if they were accomplished without penalty?
Does an atheistic worldview justify penalty for wrongdoing? If God does not exist, why hang Hussein? Or, for that matter, why not hang anyone we want to hang, even if they could possibly be 100% innocent of anything?
It's funny that you think a Christian is irrational for belief in God. And that you think the answer to Jesus resurrection is that "people see things... sometimes in toast".
Whether you believe me or not, your claims that Christians are fooled by halucinations; that Christians are not honest; that Christians are not smart.... all these claims are variations that boil down to claiming Christians to be less than moral... but your atheism does not have a moral standard in order to judge morals. And as such, you have no logical, rational reason to hold anyone accountable for anything (if you were to be consistant within your world view).
Nearly all the answers have been more serious than your objections. I apologize if you miss the points, even if many times i oversimplify to the level of silliness. No insult intended.
I am an intelligent young man who likes spreading evidence and reason. I have won employee of the year 5 times showing my excellence and happen to know more about th bible than your average xian.
6 comments:
Mike, people don't carry on for toast.
They don't die for toast.
Even if one or two were irrational enough to die for toast, once they were martyred, a strong message would be understood by the rest.
(not to mention the fact that Thomas did not believe.... images in toast don't ask you to feel the wounds from crucifixion)
There are other things too, Mike...
In the time the Gospel accounts were written, a woman's testimony would have been regarded as useless. The accounts would not have named the woman as the first to have seen the risen Christ.
Remember, the gospel accounts were written within the lifetime of those who opposed and crucified our Lord. (Saul of Tarsus persecuted early Christians) They knew the Christian claim that Jesus rose from the dead... don't you think it would have been an effective strategy to present the (dead) body for an early end to Christianity?
And, if you respond by saying, "xians stole the body", then you have refuted your toast theory.
There are quite a few other reasons that indicate that the disciples were not lying, mistaken, victims of a hoax. Many reasons that attest to the truthfulness of the historicity of the Resurrection.
For someone who has a "lack of belief", you go to extreme hoop jumping to make your position believable to yourself.
If you are actually interesting in honestly exploring the evidence, let me know, i'll point you to some avenues of investigation.
God Bless you Mike.
johnny
Good morning Mike,
Feel free to examine the verses that i omit. I'm going to just touch on a few for sake of brevity...
1Co 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
1Co 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
Your atheism does not acknowledge sin, per se, but claims that you can be a good person without God (which begs several questions), however, with no objective morality, was Hitler a good person? What about Saddam Hussein, who was recently executed for his crimes against humanity? If there is no objective morality, what crimes were actually committed? And why would he have to pay the ultimate penalty for doing "wrong"?
What about on a more individual level... maybe a bit less severe--
Have you ever stolen something and gotten away with it? Maybe a pirated song from the internet or an illegal copy of a movie. (i'm not asking you to answer me, but ask & answer this to yourself)
What about cheating without getting caught?
Hurt someone?
Would you agree that these things and things like them, are not good things?
Now, do you think that an atheist can be good? (God's existence not withstanding)
What about the other way... has anyone ever stolen from you and you weren't able to find out who dunnit or recover you stuff?
Has anyone ever broken something of yours and got away scot free?
If God does not exist, can you explain to me how any of these things are actually wrong?... especially if they were accomplished without penalty?
Does an atheistic worldview justify penalty for wrongdoing?
If God does not exist, why hang Hussein?
Or, for that matter, why not hang anyone we want to hang, even if they could possibly be 100% innocent of anything?
It's funny that you think a Christian is irrational for belief in God. And that you think the answer to Jesus resurrection is that "people see things... sometimes in toast".
Whether you believe me or not, your claims that Christians are fooled by halucinations; that Christians are not honest; that Christians are not smart.... all these claims are variations that boil down to claiming Christians to be less than moral... but your atheism does not have a moral standard in order to judge morals.
And as such, you have no logical, rational reason to hold anyone accountable for anything (if you were to be consistant within your world view).
God Bless,
johnny
Ooops, sorry... here's the rest so you can read in context.
1 Corr 15:12-26
johnny
Hi Mike,
I hope you're still alive and in good health.
Just dropping a line cuz i'm wondering...
1)Have you run out of objections yet?
2)Are there any objections you would like to revisit, that you feel were not answered good enough?
3)Are you ready to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?
God Bless,
johnny
why would i want to accept somebody who never even existed as my saviour?
i havent run out of objections its just that you xians have not even tried to offer serious answers to them
Nearly all the answers have been more serious than your objections. I apologize if you miss the points, even if many times i oversimplify to the level of silliness. No insult intended.
johnny
Post a Comment