NationStates Jolt Archive

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

That is just stupid.

Um, how would disproving any of those things make us 'win'? I happen to believe all of them, although there have been claims that Shakespear wasn't really the author of his plays. What does any of that have to do with atheism?

Um, how would disproving any of those things make us 'win'? I happen to believe all of them, although there have been claims that Shakespear wasn't really the author of his plays. What does any of that have to do with atheism?
Reality is a fickle mistress.

Sorry, but I lent my time machine to a friend of mine, and he got lost some time in Ancient Greece.

Well, now! I don't know what to say, you've shown me the light. Oh, god be praised.

Those are all things that we know for a fact happened. We do not know for a fact that anything in the Bible happened.

The strange, illogical, comparison you are trying to make won't work.

Sorry, but I lent my time machine to a friend of mine, and he got lost some time in Ancient Greece.
I lost a few hours once in a bathhouse...it seemed like ancient Greece.

Those are all things that we know for a fact happened. We do not know for a fact that anything in the Bible happened.

The strange, illogical, comparison you are trying to make won't work.
Well, considering the old testiment is, at it's core, a history of the jewish people, I don't think that one will fly too well. It does have a core of truth at it's center, wrapped around with mythology.


Like the Aeneid. Very much like that.

are you suggesting that because i cant provide incontrovertible evidence that napoleon invaded spain (from my home here in new mexico), i have to believe the story of noah and the flood because its equally as likely to be true??

that doesnt make much sense

How about you prove Maxwell's Equations?

Extra points and a Nobel Prize if you manage to disprove them and overturn all accepted understanding of electromagnetism.

And don't freak out when your computer dies.

Ok this poits to a disturbing trend I've seen in religion. People are wither right winged fanatics or atheists. What happened to the moderates? Anyway this is a pointless topic because it is impossible to prove anything. Its called the law of uncertanty. Look it up.

A great deal of the content of the Bible is historical fact and is not disputed by anyone of note. There is no question that Pontius Pilate existed, for example. His retirement mansion still exists in Spain, you can tour it. We know many of the events are true, but that still doesn't prove or disprove the magic and voodoo bits. I could write a story using newspaper articles to fill the pages with facts, and still insert a god character who tells the characters to act a certain way, and I could write in burning bushes or pillars of flame if I wanted. It's those little bits that we cannot really prove (or disprove, for that matter).

While I appreciate the point you're trying to make, I think you should ask yourself: how is this line of conversation edifying to anyone? 1 Corinthians 8:1

I lost a few hours once in a bathhouse...it seemed like ancient Greece.

I lost my time machine while visiting Ketchikan Alaska during the 1970s. It is an interesting State, fires everywhere. The whole thing is constantly ablaze. I also lost my wife in Alaska. We were walking around the local village they called a city when one of the local matadors came out of his tree igloo and tossed out a bunch of old scimitars and guillotine blades. A fairly large portion landed on my wife, snuffing her out rather quickly. I will never go back there again.

Well, considering the old testiment is, at it's core, a history of the jewish people, I don't think that one will fly too well. It does have a core of truth at it's center, wrapped around with mythology.
I remember reading something that contested an awful lot of what is accepted as "fact" in the Old Testament. Especially the Israelites in Egypt. That was the major one. There may be a tiny element of fact in the Old Testament, but I reckon there is too much mythology surrounding it for it to really be considered a true historical sourse. And the fact that it is pretty much the only source for alot of what it says doesn't help it either. There's not much to corroborate it.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

So?

Well, considering the old testiment is, at it's core, a history of the jewish people, I don't think that one will fly too well. It does have a core of truth at it's center, wrapped around with mythology.


Like the Aeneid. Very much like that.
yes exactly very much like that

i dont know a thing about the aeneid but i am familiar with the iliad

there were greeks.....there were jews
there were trojans.....there were romans
there was agamemnon....there was st paul
was there an achilles? ....was there a jesus?...no way to know.
was there an oddyseus?... was there a moses? ....no way to know

did the gods really torment cassandra with foresight that no one believed?....did god really torment job? probably not

why do these christians insist on throwing their beliefs on us...i dont care what u believe in and u shudnt care what i believe in. live ur own life u twat!

[--snip--

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"
--snip--

Well, I tend to think that 2000 years ago is pretty ancient.

Ok this poits to a disturbing trend I've seen in religion. People are wither right winged fanatics or atheists. What happened to the moderates? Anyway this is a pointless topic because it is impossible to prove anything. Its called the law of uncertanty. Look it up.
One can be an atheist and a right wing fanatic at the same time.

One can be an atheist and a right wing fanatic at the same time.

Its called Objectivism (also known as Ethical Egoism).

The premise of the original post is faulty. Just because the historical items, wars, kings, etc are no easier or harder to disprove than Napoleon's conquest of Spain doesn't mean that the "miracles" in the bible ever happened. Wars, invasions, monarchs, that stuff isn't why people doubt the veracity of the bible. It's all that stuff about raising the dead and human life appearing six in six days that makes it a book of fairy tales.

why do these christians insist on throwing their beliefs on us...i dont care what u believe in and u shudnt care what i believe in. live ur own life u twat!

Oh, that's really insightfull. :rolleyes: Look, I'm not sure what this guy is trying to prove, but your post is by far the most absurd in this thread. If Christians believe they've found the truth and if you don't accept that truth that you will end up burning in hell for all eternity, what kind of horrible person would they be not to want to tell you?

why do these christians insist on throwing their beliefs on us...i dont care what u believe in and u shudnt care what i believe in. live ur own life u twat!
I'll throw a belief on you: use correct spelling and grammar! That goes for everyone. Maybe the threads would be a bit more rational if the language were a bit less atrocious.

I can understand people whose first language is not english having some problems with spelling and usage, but even they realize that "u" is not "you" and that the first word in a sentence should be capitalized.

One can be an atheist and a right wing fanatic at the same time.
I ment religiusly conseritive not politicly
not all christians want to push beliefs on people.
I respect all religions except for those weird little cults that spring up now and then, but all major religions start up as cults....

Oh, that's really insightfull. :rolleyes: Look, at not sure what this guy is trying to prove, but your post is by far the most absurd in this thread. If Christians believe they've found the truth and if you don't accept that truth that you will end up burning in hell for all eternity, what kind of horrible person would they be not to want to tell you?

It's up to me if I want to burn in hell, right?
Here's how I see it: I can choose to a) live my life however I want to, at the risk of being burned in hell OR b) live my life by the rules of the bible, at the risk of wasting my entire existence praying and abstaining from what I want to do.
The choice is clear to me. In my opinion, it's a greater risk to squander something that is for certain than to waste the oppertunity to (possibly) get something greater. But nobody has to agree with me.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

This argument, whilst a new one to me, goes right up there with Thomas Aquinas on the "Stupid Arguments" list.

Seriously, there is evidence to suggest Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliet. There is no evidence that there is/was a God, or that this being created the Earth in 6 days.

Here's an idea, have actual facts to back up your statement instead of dumbass examples, christianity was actually the last religion of the 'ancient' world, unless I'm mistaken, and I'll believe in what I want to believe in and you believe in what you do.

The thing about Longhorn's scenarios is that none of them require the active intervention of a god or other supernatural entity. They all happened in the 'natural' world. They are all events that while they can't be duplicated exactly (Napoleon is after all dead) similar events have occured throughout history and can still happen today. Hitler invaded Poland, Tolstoy wrote War and Peace, and so on.

As for Bible stories, they do require the existence of a god and a supernatural world. When claims like that are put forth you need extraordinary evidence to back them up; I won't accept the oral history of four thousand year old goat-herders as any sort of objective proof.

What exactly do you mean by "undeniable proof"? We've found historical records and other evidence that supports all of those things, and since we don't have time machines just yet, that will have to do. Otherwise, no history (save very recent history) has any validity at all.

It's up to me if I want to burn in hell, right?
Here's how I see it: I can choose to a) live my life however I want to, at the risk of being burned in hell OR b) live my life by the rules of the bible, at the risk of wasting my entire existence praying and abstaining from what I want to do.
The choice is clear to me. In my opinion, it's a greater risk to squander something that is for certain than to waste the oppertunity to (possibly) get something greater. But nobody has to agree with me.
Rules of the bible, I think you mean commandments, and those are really misinterperated anyway, thou shalt not kill...yet theres something in the bible that says you can wtf?...Don't believe everything you read, especially since there is really no proof to say the bible wasn't written by 'heretics' or Romans.

part one
So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

If you told me those things, I'd say that you were ignorant of recorded and thoroughly-documented history. Whether the ignorance were willful or due simply to a profound lack of education would have to be determined by further conversation.

I'm glad you're not being predjeduce. I take it that it would be a bad thing.

Christianity started about 2,000 years ago, which by most counts would make it an ancient religion. The same could be said of many religions. Certainly, nobody would call any religion that started more than 500 years ago recent. Perhaps antique would be more acceptable?

This argument, whilst a new one to me, goes right up there with Thomas Aquinas on the "Stupid Arguments" list.

Seriously, there is evidence to suggest Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliet. There is no evidence that there is/was a God, or that this being created the Earth in 6 days.


Wow, you can only pick one of those to defend your case? And how do you know that for sure, were you there when he wrote it? I don't believe the earth was created in 6 human days either but I certanly do believe there is a god. I have no evidence, you say? The very fact we exist is a miracle in and of itself, and if there were at least no guiding hand in evolution, one little mistake and either we are not here or we are seriously fucked up compared to what we are now, there is just too much room for error.

It's up to me if I want to burn in hell, right?

Me- Yes

Here's how I see it: I can choose to a) live my life however I want to, at the risk of being burned in hell OR

Me- Absolutelly

b) live my life by the rules of the bible, at the risk of wasting my entire existence praying and abstaining from what I want to do.

Me- No, rules have nothing to do with salvation. If you believed there was a Allmighty, Allpowerful God would you really consider talking to Him a waste of time? If you believed that Jesus is who He said He is and did for you what Christians believe would you want to do those same thing?

The choice is clear to me. In my opinion, it's a greater risk to squander something that is for certain than to waste the oppertunity to (possibly) get something greater. But nobody has to agree with me.

Again, that's your choice. I just hate when people don't try to understand an issue from the other side's point of view. "What if" is by far the most insightful question known to man.

What exactly do you mean by "undeniable proof"? We've found historical records and other evidence that supports all of those things, and since we don't have time machines just yet, that will have to do. Otherwise, no history (save very recent history) has any validity at all.

Nothing has validity, if one thinks about it. This whole world could be a giant holograph. But the majority of people believe that it is not. The matter boils down to faith and where people place it: some choose to have faith in the idea that scientific and historical facts are valid, others choose to have faith in God. Science is more logical to me, so that is where I put my faith.

Rules of the bible, I think you mean commandments, and those are really misinterperated anyway, thou shalt not kill...yet theres something in the bible that says you can wtf?...Don't believe everything you read, especially since there is really no proof to say the bible wasn't written by 'heretics' or Romans.

Yeah, I meant the commandments mostly. I don't really know much about the bible, never having read it, but I know a lot of religious people who refuse to do things, claiming it's against the principles of their religion.

Nothing has validity, if one thinks about it. This whole world could be a giant holograph. But the majority of people believe that it is not. The matter boils down to faith and where people place it: some choose to have faith in the idea that scientific and historical facts are valid, others choose to have faith in God. Science is more logical to me, so that is where I put my faith.
The Earth could also be enclosed in a sphere. *old 18 or 19th century belief on the earth*

Nothing has validity, if one thinks about it. This whole world could be a giant holograph. But the majority of people believe that it is not. The matter boils down to faith and where people place it: some choose to have faith in the idea that scientific and historical facts are valid, others choose to have faith in God. Science is more logical to me, so that is where I put my faith.

You are, of course, operating under the premise that science, history, and God contradict each other. I would disagree, but I don't want to get into that debate because I don't have the time as I am going to be leaving in a few minutes.

Again, that's your choice. I just hate when people don't try to understand an issue from the other side's point of view. "What if" is by far the most insightful question known to man.

You have a point. Some people will enjoy religious things, and they're lucky, because they get to "have their cake and eat it too," to abuse a cliche.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

lol that's friggin funny. and you have a very good point. for all you who simply dismiss this thread as stupid and leave, you're missing out on a valuable piece of opposition! the fact is, we can't really prove any of these things ever really happened. and people who believe in the bible can't find undeniable proof that any of that ever happened. both sides pretty much believe what they're told.

well done!

Wow, you can only pick one of those to defend your case? And how do you know that for sure, were you there when he wrote it? I don't believe the earth was created in 6 human days either but I certanly do believe there is a god. I have no evidence, you say? The very fact we exist is a miracle in and of itself, and if there were at least no guiding hand in evolution, one little mistake and either we are not here or we are seriously fucked up compared to what we are now, there is just too much room for error.


... and that's just what happened on myriards of other solar systems in millions of other galaxies. Our existence is no miracle, it's a matter of propability. If you have an infinite number of star systems, you have an infinte number of possibilities for life to develop. So it happened on ours, so what? If it hadn't happened here, we all just wouldn't be here, but maybe in Anromeda or M-13. It's what's called coincidence.

both sides pretty much believe what they're told.


That's a powerful observation.....

Yeah, I meant the commandments mostly. I don't really know much about the bible, never having read it, but I know a lot of religious people who refuse to do things, claiming it's against the principles of their religion.
I went to 'private' school for 6 years, I think they shoved enough of their theories *even though said they were fact* down my throat, and basically threw me out when I wouldn't pray for a sick kid, I have read the bible, its nothing special at all when you get right down to it, the revelation chapter/book, is reverred to as the truth to some, its as truthful and accurate as Nostrodamus' riddles, saying there will be a whore that will hypnotize or something the world by sexuality...thats already happening, but when hasn't that been happening?

... and that's just what happened on myriards of other solar systems in millions of other galaxies. Our existence is no miracle, it's a matter of propability. If you have an infinite number of star systems, you have an infinte number of possibilities for life to develop. So it happened on ours, so what? If it hadn't happened here, we all just wouldn't be here, but maybe in Anromeda or M-13. It's what's called coincidence.



I think its more luck actually.....

That's a powerful observation.....Not only is it that, its also proof of idiocy and or lack of knowledge on the subject to make a decent argument.

im trying to say, that all we have is written documents.
both the Bible and Napolean's accomplishments are just written, otherwise you cant prove it, or can you?
come on, make me some links for proof, and i WILL deny them with decent logic.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

So you don't believe in the Qu'ran? So you don't believe in the Bagvadh-Gita? So you don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

The difference about all the statements you quoted is that they CAN be falsified one day. People question that Shakespeare wrote any of his plays and attribute them to Sir Francis Bacon instead. Just as an example.
Most of the statements of the bible cannot be proven either way, neither true nor false.
You're comparing apples with oranges here...

im trying to say, that all we have is written documents.
both the Bible and Napolean's accomplishments are just written, otherwise you cant prove it, or can you?
come on, make me some links for proof, and i WILL deny them with decent logic.
You mean more written documents, i.e. bible crapola.

lol that's friggin funny. and you have a very good point. for all you who simply dismiss this thread as stupid and leave, you're missing out on a valuable piece of opposition! the fact is, we can't really prove any of these things ever really happened. and people who believe in the bible can't find undeniable proof that any of that ever happened. both sides pretty much believe what they're told.

well done!
Yeah, but some things are more believable than others. For example you meet two people tonight.

Person number one claims to be a combat veteran.

Person number two claims to have served in Napoleon's army.

Which one is more believable, the one who says he was in a war or the one who claims to be hundreds of years old?

Wow, you can only pick one of those to defend your case?

Well, what would be the point of going through every single one?

And how do you know that for sure, were you there when he wrote it?

No, but there is definite records testyfying to that fact.

I don't believe the earth was created in 6 human days either but I certanly do believe there is a god. I have no evidence, you say? The very fact we exist is a miracle in and of itself,

Why is it a miracle?

and if there were at least no guiding hand in evolution, one little mistake and either we are not here or we are seriously fucked up compared to what we are now, there is just too much room for error.

Chance, my friend, chance. We are only here becasue we got lucky. Yes, if things were different we may not have been here, but we are.

Roll 25 dice. Eventually you'll get 25 sixes.

lol that's friggin funny. and you have a very good point. for all you who simply dismiss this thread as stupid and leave, you're missing out on a valuable piece of opposition! the fact is, we can't really prove any of these things ever really happened. and people who believe in the bible can't find undeniable proof that any of that ever happened. both sides pretty much believe what they're told.

well done!

exactly, thank you!!!
now for that proof...

I went to 'private' school for 6 years, I think they shoved enough of their theories *even though said they were fact* down my throat, and basically threw me out when I wouldn't pray for a sick kid, I have read the bible, its nothing special at all when you get right down to it, the revelation chapter/book, is reverred to as the truth to some, its as truthful and accurate as Nostrodamus' riddles, saying there will be a whore that will hypnotize or something the world by sexuality...thats already happening, but when hasn't that been happening?

The Book of Revelation is a really unfair example. There is not even two denominations that agree with each other over it. I personally believe the "whore" represents the Antichrist's promise of peace and world unity coupled with a one world religion (don't tell me that wouldn't be appealing), but again that's a debate that has been going on for centuries and we're not going to settle it in this thread.

The Book of Revelation is a really unfair example. There is not even two denominations that agree with each other over it. I personally believe the "whore" represents the Antichrist's promise of peace and world unity coupled with a one world religion (don't tell me that wouldn't be appealing), but again that's a debate that has been going on for centuries and we're not going to settle it in this thread.

Erm... so not all of the bible is irrefutable truth then, is that what you're saying? Just selected parts?

The Book of Revelation is a really unfair example. There is not even two denominations that agree with each other over it. I personally believe the "whore" represents the Antichrist's promise of peace and world unity coupled with a one world religion (don't tell me that wouldn't be appealing), but again that's a debate that has been going on for centuries and we're not going to settle it in this thread.
Nothing will ever be solved, unless god comes to earth or we get our hands on Homer Simpsons mathematical equation that there isn't a god lol.

Erm... so not all of the bible is irrefutable truth then, is that what you're saying? Just selected parts?

I'm saying that the truth is to big for us to completely grasp. If any minister, or denomination tell you they've got it all right turn around and walk away. (unless there's a wall behind you)

And I'm not even going to justify it by arguing with the poster.

lol that's friggin funny. and you have a very good point. for all you who simply dismiss this thread as stupid and leave, you're missing out on a valuable piece of opposition! the fact is, we can't really prove any of these things ever really happened. and people who believe in the bible can't find undeniable proof that any of that ever happened. both sides pretty much believe what they're told.

well done!

Aside from thousands and thousands of independent accounts offering independent corroboration of the historical events, storehouses full of contemporary government records, and more artifactual evidence than can be stored in the Smithsonian, you have a point.

All of modern history is just a conspiracy. The earth is only about 15 years old. You heard it here first.

exactly, thank you!!!
now for that proof...
do we have to dig up the remains of french soldiers in spain with our own little spaces to provide you with proof?

i find the "you cant prove it yourself and i cant prove it myself" theory of history to be sophistry.

We all know that Noah let the animals on his ark 2 by 2 don't we?

NO: 'Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens (Genesis 7 v2 )'

We all know that 'Thou Shalt not Kill' is one of the commandments.

NO: The first set of commandments (with the other diverse laws) were cast down by Moses "he cast the tables out of his hands and brake them beneath the mount" Exodus 33 v19. After Moses saw the Golden Calf and all that. Moses returned up Mount Sinai and God gave him a Second Set of Commandments!!! (Exodus 34 v 10 to 28) ending in the v28 'And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments'. (my italics) I particularly like the one about cooking a kid in his mother's milk!!!

'Believers' manage to quote the Bible to suit the situation needed. MOST people have not read the book, and many of those who have 'read' it are told what bits to read. (Before quoting the New Testament make sure you understand everything that Paul was going on about!!!)

The Bible is a true historical document, a marvellous history of the Hebrew people and of the early Christians. There is some great mythology that equals and sometimes exceeds Greek, Hindu, Norse mythology (amongst others). It must be taken however as a primary source with equal standing as say Homer, Suetonius, the Venerable Bede, and Geoffrey of Monmouth to name a few.

do we have to dig up the remains of french soldiers in spain with our own little spaces to provide you with proof?

i find the "you cant prove it yourself and i cant prove it myself" theory of history to be sophistry.
yes, yes you do ;)
and to another post above,how do you know how big the truth is?

yes, yes you do ;)
and to another post above,how do you know how big the truth is?
well then, since you would never accept any proof that we would be able togive, how about we move on to the second part and YOU prove the bible correct by using your own standards of proof?

Christians never proved the stuff they preach, so I don't see why atheists should have to prove that their non-backed-up-claims are false.

The way I see it is that a person either has a faith-based view of the universe or a reason-based one.

It's really pretty pointless trying to debate the existence of God, since each side of the debate doesn't recognize the validity of the other side's way of thinking.

Not that I'd want to debate with people who can't even be bothered to spell "Atheist" correctly.

well then, since you would never accept any proof that we would be able togive, how about we move on to the second part and YOU prove the bible correct by using your own standards of proof?

ok im sorry, you make your links to your internet proof, and ill tell you why it cant be true. i havent even started part 2.

part one
So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...

<snip>

I'd say good on you, you should be free to believe whatever you want.

I WIN.

im trying to say, that all we have is written documents.
both the Bible and Napolean's accomplishments are just written, otherwise you cant prove it, or can you?
come on, make me some links for proof, and i WILL deny them with decent logic.

The Illiad is a written document. It is backed up by archeology, there really was a Troy, there really was a war in the city, there really was a King named Agamenon. Does that mean that Posidon and Athena took part in that war?

Christians never proved the stuff they preach, so I don't see why atheists should have to prove that their non-backed-up-claims are false.

The way I see it is that a person either has a faith-based view of the universe or a reason-based one.

It's really pretty pointless trying to debate the existence of God, since each side of the debate doesn't recognize the validity of the other side's way of thinking.

Not that I'd want to debate with people who can't even be bothered to spell "Atheist" correctly.

I'd very nearly agree with you - the only difference between us, I think, is that I'd say that asking people to choose between faith and reason is like asking them to choose between medicine and interpretive dance. They aren't meant to do the same thing. They don't address the same principles. They occasionally talk about the same topics, but when either side is being sensible, they aren't really asking or answering the same questions.

Of course, both sides occasionally act very silly. How else could one explain the first post in this thread? Asking someone to submit proof for or against the existence of an omnipotent being that doesn't care to be proven is a fool's game. One either thinks it might be, or one doesn't; by definition, it would not be possible to prove its existence or non-existence.

Electing to believe in a higher power does not prevent one from exercising reason in one's life. Reason itself dictates that we accept our inability to prove or disprove, and make our guesses or follow our hunches as we will.

I'd say good on you, you should be free to believe whatever you want.

I WIN.
you cheated, that is against the rules, now prove.(not the rules, because i know the rules, i made them)

The Illiad is a written document. It is backed up by archeology, there really was a Troy, there really was a war in the city, there really was a King named Agamenon. Does that mean that Posidon and Athena took part in that war?

im alot more willing to believe in Zeus, than no God at all.

and also, thanks for pointing out there is more than Christianity, ill prove those too, including greek mythology. ohh yeah, part 2(when i cank make it will be real fun :rolleyes:

I think he's absolutely write, I can't prove our existence, so we must not exist. Therefore, I am god.

you cheated, that is against the rules, now prove.(not the rules, because i know the rules, i made them)

Ah I just ignored your silly game and straight up and completely pwned your point instead.

You see, you want us atheists to prove something happened, to show the difficulty in proving something "beyond a doubt." On the other hand, you undoubtedly believe this will be +1 towards your Biblical proof of God's existence, which is completely without logic.

And don't pretend like that's not what you're trying to do here, otherwise you wouldn't direct the question to atheists.

I think he's absolutely write, I can't prove our existence, so we must not exist. Therefore, I am god.

I call dibs on demigod one two three dibs, dibs.

you cheated, that is against the rules, now prove.(not the rules, because i know the rules, i made them)

Sir, your arguements are inane sophistry.

im alot more willing to believe in Zeus, than no God at all.

and also, thanks for pointing out there is more than Christianity, ill prove those too, including greek mythology. ohh yeah, part 2(when i cank make it will be real fun :rolleyes:

So why should I believe in Yahweh, but not Prometheus? (My favorite of the Greek Gods, actually a Titan but anyway...) Maybe they're all true and Yahweh was lying when He said He was the only God. (Ooo, the scandal)

All the things that Longhorn country supposedly denies has happened and has been proven to have happened.

With the exception of Napoleon conquring Spain. Napoleon never really managed to conqure that country, just occupy it for a time (and place his brother on the throne). His forces where eventually driven out by the Spanish resistence and the Duke of Wellington.

I'd very nearly agree with you - the only difference between us, I think, is that I'd say that asking people to choose between faith and reason is like asking them to choose between medicine and interpretive dance. They aren't meant to do the same thing. They don't address the same principles. They occasionally talk about the same topics, but when either side is being sensible, they aren't really asking or answering the same questions.

Of course, both sides occasionally act very silly. How else could one explain the first post in this thread? Asking someone to submit proof for or against the existence of an omnipotent being that doesn't care to be proven is a fool's game. One either thinks it might be, or one doesn't; by definition, it would not be possible to prove its existence or non-existence.

Electing to believe in a higher power does not prevent one from exercising reason in one's life. Reason itself dictates that we accept our inability to prove or disprove, and make our guesses or follow our hunches as we will.

This person deserves a hug.

ok im sorry, you make your links to your internet proof, and ill tell you why it cant be true. i havent even started part 2.
ok im going with THIS paper because it has both a memoir of someone who served in spain and letters to/from wellington as primary sources.

http://www.archives.lib.soton.ac.uk/wellington/pdfsforall/penin_esdaile_ed.pdf

of course i already accept the archaeological evidence that certain parts of the bible are "true". meaning im pretty sure they found a palace of either king david or king solomon. that means to me that they are pretty much proven to have existed. that does not, however, prove that david killed goliath with his trusty slingshot.

All the things that Longhorn country supposedly denies has happened and has been proven to have happened.

With the exception of Napoleon conquring Spain. Napoleon never really managed to conqure that country, just occupy it for a time (and place his brother on the throne). His forces where eventually driven out by the Spanish resistence and the Duke of Wellington.
that seems pretty much like conquering to ME. if you can sit someone on the throne, you win. that wellington eventually drove him out is not withstanding in my book.

that seems pretty much like conquering to ME. if you can sit someone on the throne, you win. that wellington eventually drove him out is not withstanding in my book.

Conquest and occupation are similar but different. Napoleon conqured Spain as much as the U.S. has conqured Iraq. For something to be conqured it has to be successful incorporated.

Conquest and occupation are similar but different. Napoleon conqured Spain as much as the U.S. has conqured Iraq. For something to be conqured it has to be successful incorporated.
then did napoleon conquer ANYTHING? he lost it all in the end.

"Oh, crap. Somebody made a good arguement for Christianity! Lets all dismiss it, quick!"

This person deserves a hug.

Awfully obliged. Do let me know where to collect it.

Sir, your arguements are inane sophistry.

Thank God the art of civil and beautifully phrased disdain is not yet dead.

Longhorn, do consider your position carefully. In choosing to fight the "prove an event thoroughly documented to have occurred really happened" battle, you're putting yourself in the company of Holocaust deniers and other ranting zealots incapable of discerning the difference between an absence of proof and their own inability to grasp the concept of "balance of evidence."

"Oh, crap. Somebody made a good arguement for Christianity! Lets all dismiss it, quick!"

Quite to the contrary. I would gratefully welcome a good argument on the topic, and have done my modest best to supply it. The opening post, however, is the sort of thing of which any religious person with an ounce of brains or spirit would be heartily ashamed.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!
Firstly Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet, that was written by Christopher Marloe. But that's not the point.

I am going to assume that you believe the entire Athiest arguement can be summed up by "prove God exists". It is not. Agnostics believe that because the existence of God cannot be proven, they have better things to do with their time. Atheists do not believe in God at all and generally have their own personal reasons for their belief, much like you do for your Theist stance.

ok im going with THIS paper because it has both a memoir of someone who served in spain and letters to/from wellington as primary sources.

http://www.archives.lib.soton.ac.uk/wellington/pdfsforall/penin_esdaile_ed.pdf

of course i already accept the archaeological evidence that certain parts of the bible are "true". meaning im pretty sure they found a palace of either king david or king solomon. that means to me that they are pretty much proven to have existed. that does not, however, prove that david killed goliath with his trusty slingshot.

i only skimmed over it, but i have to say, either another war with the french involved, spanish imigrant to Britain, or, best of all other fictional literature. If the Athiest dont Believe the Aurthors of the Bible, i dont have to believe this so called "solider"

Firstly Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet, that was written by Christopher Marloe. But that's not the point.

I am going to assume that you believe the entire Athiest arguement can be summed up by "prove God exists". It is not. Agnostics believe that because the existence of God cannot be proven, they have better things to do with their time. Atheists do not believe in God at all and generally have their own personal reasons for their belief, much like you do for your Theist stance.

i said Agnostics included.

A great deal of the content of the Bible is historical fact and is not disputed by anyone of note. There is no question that Pontius Pilate existed, for example. His retirement mansion still exists in Spain, you can tour it. We know many of the events are true, but that still doesn't prove or disprove the magic and voodoo bits. I could write a story using newspaper articles to fill the pages with facts, and still insert a god character who tells the characters to act a certain way, and I could write in burning bushes or pillars of flame if I wanted. It's those little bits that we cannot really prove (or disprove, for that matter).

Well said.

OK, what is it called when someone presents a proposition, challenges others to prove or disprove it even though he has no intention of accepting any other viewpoint, just so he can mock other opinions?

OK, what is it called when someone presents a proposition, challenges others to prove or disprove it even though he has no intention of accepting any other viewpoint, just so he can mock other opinions?

Trolling?

OK, what is it called when someone presents a proposition, challenges others to prove or disprove it even though he has no intention of accepting any other viewpoint, just so he can mock other opinions?

Sophistry. The refusal to accept any commonly agreed grounds of argument. It's the equivalent of arguing that war is good because the world needs fewer humans anyway. Yes, if one refuses to grant that human life has any value, one can make that argument. It proves and achieves nothing. It's a cheap party trick.

i only skimmed over it, but i have to say, either another war with the french involved, spanish imigrant to Britain, or, best of all other fictional literature. If the Athiest dont Believe the Aurthors of the Bible, i dont have to believe this so called "solider"
but the difference is that the whole story of the peninsula war is told by myriad different authors, there are thousands of letters from various participants, hundreds from wellington alone. there is also archaeological evidence in the form of places that were talked about in the reports, letters, dispatches etc from the war, plus excavations of graves and battle sites.

for the book of .... job...for example, there is ONE author and no other evidence. for the book of genesis, no one knows the author and no archaeological evidence of most sites mentioned can be found. egypt being a big exception.

even in the new testament, the letters of peter and paul dont refer back to the gospels as books in existance that cover the life of jesus. while certain characters from the new testament are almost certain to have existed because independant evidence of them exists (st peter, pontius pilate, king herod) jesus himself is (not suprisingly to me since he wasnt socially important in his own time) not independantly verified.

Trolling?

That too ;)

but the difference is that the whole story of the peninsula war is told by myriad different authors, there are thousands of letters from various participants, hundreds from wellington alone. there is also archaeological evidence in the form of places that were talked about in the reports, letters, dispatches etc from the war, plus excavations of graves and battle sites.

for the book of .... job...for example, there is ONE author and no other evidence. for the book of genesis, no one knows the author and no archaeological evidence of most sites mentioned can be found. egypt being a big exception.

even in the new testament, the letters of peter and paul dont refer back to the gospels as books in existance that cover the life of jesus. while certain characters from the new testament are almost certain to have existed because independant evidence of them exists (st peter, pontius pilate, king herod) jesus himself is (not suprisingly to me since he wasnt socially important in his own time) not independantly verified.

........... and then you go on to list differnt Bible aurthors,
P.S. ive always been taught Genisis= Moses.

you can sophistry me when i find my links. havent looked yet, but i look forward to it.

Let Me put it this way so you freaking understand there is no god even if you have back up i refuse to belive your evidence its my right as an ameriacn maybe i view hell as a kinder place than heaven because if so im sure god's heaven from the teachings of christianity i've learned from my childhood isnt my heaven. if god was standing on my face he might just have a little faith but until you can send me back in time and show me the "begining" i dont belive i have no faith your a sucker to believe in all these preachers making money off your stupidity. i've seen many a show about the apocolypse and you know what the non-christain mayans end the world at 2012 but you christians had a firm belief that it was goning to end at 1867 see where that got ya im still here and yammering on about how stupid you are with these historical fact as we call them you say dont exist becuase of lack of evidence they may not but the results of these acts are seen today unlike the bible where most every thing that happened doesnt have a modern result. if you dont belive these events occoured thats your opinion and your entitled to it so have fun!

........... and then you go on to list differnt Bible aurthors,
P.S. ive always been taught Genisis= Moses.
i didnt get your point.

i dont see any evidence that moses really existed and there is some fairly credibly evidence that moses is a story borrowed from other religions.

Let Me put it this way so you freaking understand there is no god even if you have back up i refuse to belive your evidence its my right as an ameriacn maybe i view hell as a kinder place than heaven because if so im sure god's heaven from the teachings of christianity i've learned from my childhood isnt my heaven. if god was standing on my face he might just have a little faith but until you can send me back in time and show me the "begining" i dont belive i have no faith your a sucker to believe in all these preachers making money off your stupidity. i've seen many a show about the apocolypse and you know what the non-christain mayans end the world at 2012 but you christians had a firm belief that it was goning to end at 1867 see where that got ya im still here and yammering on about how stupid you are with these historical fact as we call them you say dont exist becuase of lack of evidence they may not but the results of these acts are seen today unlike the bible where most every thing that happened doesnt have a modern result. if you dont belive these events occoured thats your opinion and your entitled to it so have fun!

we'll see whos stupid when im right.
im the opposite, i believe there is a God if not a Cristian one, maybe even the Greeks or Romans were right! i refuse to believe oterwise.
now join the game.

i didnt get your point.

i dont see any evidence that moses really existed and there is some fairly credibly evidence that moses is a story borrowed from other religions.

Yeah, very much like Noah's Ark, which is eerily similar to the much older Babylonian tale (older by some 600 years, I think) of Utnapishtim.

i didnt get your point.

i dont see any evidence that moses really existed and there is some fairly credibly evidence that moses is a story borrowed from other religions.
you said something was the difference, then you prove yourself wrong. the bible teaches some lived 900 years, but i doubt one of them wrote the whole book for obvious reasons.

we'll see whos stupid when im right.
im the opposite, i believe there is a God if not a Cristian one, maybe even the Greeks or Romans were right! i refuse to believe oterwise.
now join the game.

Yeaaaaagh! This is a MAD HOUSE!!!

*waves arms around frantically*

we'll see whos stupid when im right.
im the opposite, i believe there is a God if not a Cristian one, maybe even the Greeks or Romans were right! i refuse to believe oterwise.
now join the game.
im glad you believe that and i dont care i think there is no afterlife it is "nothing" and you belive in heaven and hell so? you have fun with your beliefs i dont think i have to make you believe what i do i only want you to understand that i wont believe what you belive no matter what you do...

we'll see whos stupid when im right.


This, at least, seems highly probable.

Yeah, very much like Noah's Ark, which is eerily similar to the much older Babylonian tale (older by some 600 years, I think) of Utnapishtim.

you are saving me time! i was going to look stuff like that up, Bible tales coming up in the history of Non-JudeoChristian culture. but not as my whoooole defense.

you are saving me time! i was going to look stuff like that up, Bible tales coming up in the history of Non-JudeoChristian culture. but not as my whoooole defense.

So how is christianity using other religion's stories in an attempt to make it easier for those people to convert help your side exactly?

you are saving me time! i was going to look stuff like that up, Bible tales coming up in the history of Non-JudeoChristian culture. but not as my whoooole defense.

Uh, it's not a defense. I'm simply stating that floods happen, and apparently, the "great flood" was actually just the Mediterannean emptying into the Black Sea via the Bosporus.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

We got a PWI in progress, requesting back-up.

ohh, and please find proof for all 5.
and PWI?

ohh, and please find proof for all 5.
and PWI?
purple white indian ;)
We got a PWI in progress, requesting back-up.
Ten-Four 89 over and out

ohh, and please find proof for all 5.
and PWI?

Posting While Intoxicated.

Of course, I'd've gone for PWB...

purple white indian ;)
dont follow..... what does that have to do with the game?

ther is SOME historical evidence that says that SOME of the Characters in the bible were in fact real. However i think you will be hard pressed to find historical evidence of this guys u call "god" jumping down from the sky and kicking Sodom and Gommorahs ass with brimstone and whatnot.

The bible has got some awesome stories, no denying it, as do the greeks romans, norse and the lot. However i think that it would be foolish to take these as anything more than a story.

ther is SOME historical evidence that says that SOME of the Characters in the bible were in fact real. However i think you will be hard pressed to find historical evidence of this guys u call "god" jumping down from the sky and kicking Sodom and Gommorahs ass with brimstone and whatnot.

The bible has got some awesome stories, no denying it, as do the greeks romans, norse and the lot. However i think that it would be foolish to take these as anything more than a story.

Agreed, though the mythology of the Greeks, Romans, and Norse is far more entertaining, especially Valhalla.

You die in glorious battle, and after death, you fight the greatest battle of eternity for all eternity. Good stuff.

you said something was the difference, then you prove yourself wrong. the bible teaches some lived 900 years, but i doubt one of them wrote the whole book for obvious reasons.
the difference was the amount of independant proof. i used different books of the bible as examples because they were all pretty much written by different people or by unknown authors.

if there were only ONE account of the penisula war we might all doubt that it ever happened. we believe it because there is so much independant verification.

not only isnt there independant verification of the most of the bible, especially the old testament, but quite a bit of refutation comes from archeology and geology.

if one who sees God, teaches his child God, and he teaches his, the Religion will last for a long time, as it has.(jew)

Trying to "prove" anything to anyone that does not want something proven to them is an exercise in futility. If there ever was an expert on denial, I would cite Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, former Iraqi Information Minister.

whats up with the little "(jew)" thing?

the difference was the amount of independant proof. i used different books of the bible as examples because they were all pretty much written by different people or by unknown authors.

if there were only ONE account of the penisula war we might all doubt that it ever happened. we believe it because there is so much independant verification.

not only isnt there independant verification of the most of the bible, especially the old testament, but quite a bit of refutation comes from archeology and geology.

you used big words, did they support me?
and your location is female?

Trying to "prove" anything to anyone that does not want something proven to them is an exercise in futility. If there ever was an expert on denial, I would cite Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, former Iraqi Information Minister.

LOL! That guy was fucking hilarious!! Whatever happened to him, anyway?

whats up with the little "(jew)" thing?
refering to the jews, who were here much longer than the Christians.

i see. i still disagree with u but whatever. as the saying goes... "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink"

LOL! That guy was fucking hilarious!! Whatever happened to him, anyway?

Would you believe working for Abu Dhabi TV?

Reference (http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/)

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!

How about we start with you proving that hailstones are stored in a warehouse in the sky, and we'll go from there?

Would you believe working for Abu Dhabi TV?

Reference (http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/)

Hahaha, good stuff.

ill prove the Bible, you prove what Atheist love.... "facts"

How about we start with you proving that hailstones are stored in a warehouse in the sky, and we'll go from there?

Holy shit holy shit holy shit holy shiiiiiiit...

*quickly dismantles cloud-borne warehouse*

*shifts eyes*

ill prove the Bible

I'd love to see that, hot shot.

here's wut bothers me a lot of christianity is stolen from (or extremely similar to) ancient cultural myths... The holy trilogy- father, son, and holy spirit or in hinduism Brahma, Shiva and vishnu,... anyone notice any similarity between the god in the sisteen chapel and Zeus.... Satan has the pitchfork of poseidon, the hairy goat hoaves of pan and dionysus, and is red (color of blood and fire) all to demonify other religion's gods and discourage any other religion... Adam from adam&eve is made out of dirt, there is not a single ancient creation myth where the ancestors of the human race aren't made of eighther dirt, clay, sticks, trees, or rocks... lets face it Jesus was a Jewish Herculese or muhamed... the point of religions, myths, cults, wutever you want to call them is to convey morals to people and give them something to take their minds of their misrable live by making them think once they die they're going to be rewarded... whether or not someone was stapled to a tree 2,000 years ago is irrevelent what realy matters is the way you lead your life... so stop complaining that darwinism isn't real because a 2,000 year old book tried to make you feel good about yourself by saying your speacial... this may come as a surprise but your not speacial and neither am I... the point of the bible was to get people to get along so quit fighting with people... :headbang:

I'd love to see that, hot shot.

id love to prove other religious books and stories, but tooo much work.

so other cultures ADMIT they are made of dirt.... :)

id love to prove other religious books and stories, but tooo much work.

Hahahaha, that sounds like those supposed Vietnam "veterans", who when you ask them about what they did in the war and what it was like, they always say "I don't want to talk about it right now." or "I don't remember much, because of the pain...", etc.

You types never fail to amuse me, that's for sure.

ill prove the Bible, you prove what Atheist love.... "facts"

OK... you're on.

Job 38:22-23 Hast thou entered into the storehouses of the snow? or hast thou seen the storehouses of the hail, which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?

Prove it or conceed.

here's wut bothers me a lot of christianity is stolen from (or extremely similar to) ancient cultural myths... The holy trilogy- father, son, and holy spirit or in hinduism Brahma, Shiva and vishnu,... anyone notice any similarity between the god in the sisteen chapel and Zeus.... Satan has the pitchfork of poseidon, the hairy goat hoaves of pan and dionysus, and is red (color of blood and fire) all to demonify other religion's gods and discourage any other religion... Adam from adam&eve is made out of dirt, there is not a single ancient creation myth where the ancestors of the human race aren't made of eighther dirt, clay, sticks, trees, or rocks... lets face it Jesus was a Jewish Herculese or muhamed... the point of religions, myths, cults, wutever you want to call them is to convey morals to people and give them something to take their minds of their misrable live by making them think once they die they're going to be rewarded... whether or not someone was stapled to a tree 2,000 years ago is irrevelent what realy matters is the way you lead your life... so stop complaining that darwinism isn't real because a 2,000 year old book tried to make you feel good about yourself by saying your speacial... this may come as a surprise but your not speacial and neither am I... the point of the bible was to get people to get along so quit fighting with people... :headbang: comment if you want...

id love to prove other religious books and stories, but tooo much work.Meaning you can't prove it? :p I gone over this thread and you hadn't made a single prove.

Way to copy/paste. You didn't even take the time to clean it up.

For shame.

OK... you're on.

Job 38:22-23 Hast thou entered into the storehouses of the snow? or hast thou seen the storehouses of the hail, which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?

Prove it or conceed.

ok, people use metaphors...

Meaning you can't preov it? :p

i COULD find evidence.

ok, people muse metaphors...

Hahaha, this is gonna get good.

*grabs bag of doritos rather than popcorn, because popcorn is crap in comparison*

here's wut bothers me a lot of christianity is stolen from (or extremely similar to) ancient cultural myths... The holy trilogy- father, son, and holy spirit or in hinduism Brahma, Shiva and vishnu,... anyone notice any similarity between the god in the sisteen chapel and Zeus.... Satan has the pitchfork of poseidon, the hairy goat hoaves of pan and dionysus, and is red (color of blood and fire) all to demonify other religion's gods and discourage any other religion... Adam from adam&eve is made out of dirt, there is not a single ancient creation myth where the ancestors of the human race aren't made of eighther dirt, clay, sticks, trees, or rocks... lets face it Jesus was a Jewish Herculese or muhamed... the point of religions, myths, cults, wutever you want to call them is to convey morals to people and give them something to take their minds of their misrable live by making them think once they die they're going to be rewarded... whether or not someone was stapled to a tree 2,000 years ago is irrevelent what realy matters is the way you lead your life... so stop complaining that darwinism isn't real because a 2,000 year old book tried to make you feel good about yourself by saying your speacial... this may come as a surprise but your not speacial and neither am I... the point of the bible was to get people to get along so quit fighting with people... :headbang:


Alright, mate. Punctuation. Spelling. Carriage returns. The holy trinity of posting legibly. Use them--eyes are not meant to bleed.

<snip> comment if you want...

I think you've covered the bases. I, for one, am content to let this thread stay exactly as-is.

I don't think any further comments from anybody are needed. :)

i COULD find evidence.

You could, but you'd have to fabricate the fuck out of it.

Meaning you can't prove it? :p I gone over this thread and you hadn't made a single prove.

part 2... will come when i make it and get proves myself.

i CAN'T find evidence. Whaaaaaaa!!! :(
ok........

Like the Aeneid. Very much like that.

Oh don't get me started on the Aeneid, the entire story is complete <i>malarkey</i>. Virgil wrote the Aeneid to appease the new Ceaser (Augustus), providing a nice clean line of descendance from the Trojans to the Roman Emperors, and along the way justifying the two Punic Wars.

Like the Aeneid. Very much like that.

Oh don't get me started on the Aeneid, the entire story is complete <i>malarkey</i>. Virgil wrote the Aeneid to appease the new Ceaser (Augustus), providing a nice clean line of descendance from the Trojans to the Roman Emperors, and along the way justifying the two Punic Wars.

Im an agnostic and i belive in the bible. i read it once or twice so therefore i know thw bible exists so i blive in it. i dont believe every word thats in the bible. scientific evidence can prove some events in the bible but it wont prove any 'miracles' which occurred. I belive a man called jesus existed and many people thought he was the messiah, that doesnt prove that he's the son of God sent to earth to die for our sins. Theres scientific evidence to suggest the bble was written by homosapiens many years after jesus would have lived. Theres also scientific evidence to suggest that many of the stories in the old testament are carbon copies of even more ancient religions and civilizations. If you read the Epic of Gilgamesh for example you will find stories very suspiciously similar to Noah's Ark, David and Goliath and numerous more. Theres also scientific evidence to suggest that the writers of the bible editted it into some right-wing propaganda by removing the Gospel of Mary Magdelane, inventing the idea that Mary Magdelane was a prostitute and inventing the idea that Jesus promoted monotheism,

ok, people use metaphors...

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/619/catmouse1bg.jpg

Actually, Shakespeare's authorship of Romeo and Juliet is questionable...

part 2... will come when i make it and get proves myself.

What part two? There has not even been a part one...

part 2... will come when i make it and get proves myself.lol
longhorn, you can't prove "americans are better than canadians" and you can't prove the bible. Maybe you should do a research on certain topics before you make a post or create a thread like this.

How about cutting to the chase here:
God exists because you have a concept of what God is. Fizzglomphyls don't exist because you have no idea what they might be, let alone what they are.

How about cutting to the chase here:
God exists because you have a concept of what God is. Fizzglomphyls don't exist because you have no idea what they might be, let alone what they are.

That is the discredited Cosmological Arguement (considered a logical fallacy).

That is the discredited Cosmological Arguement (considered a logical fallacy).

Could you explain more or provide reference material? If it is a fallacious argument, I would like to understand why so I can avoid it in the future.

Could you explain more or provide reference material? If it is a fallacious argument, I would like to understand why so I can avoid it in the future.

It looks like begging the question to me. You state that A leads to B without explaining why. (So you say concept leads to existence--but why?)

Could you explain more or provide reference material? If it is a fallacious argument, I would like to understand why so I can avoid it in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_Circle

I suggest you do some reading on Descarte's philosophy and the response to it.

1) Napolean never conquered Spain

Reports written at the time by multiple sources both inside and outside Napoleon's Empire detail hjis military conquests. In addition, physical evidence, such as campaign maps, battlefield excavations, and even Marshal Ney's journals exist. Along with that, we have a similarly detailed history of the Spanish Monarchy, which does not include a Napoleonic conquest. We know where the majority of the major players are buried.

2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire

Massive amounts of contemporary writings, artifacts, and the bodies of all those Ottoman soldiers scattered around Asia Minor.

3)there were never Gladiators

Again, reports written by multiple sources, and the existence of numerous stadiums set up for gladitorial combat, the specialized weapons described in the writings have been found in many of these arenas, and we even know the names of the most successful gladiators and their fighting styles since training manuals have survived to this day. Various Roman laws regarding gladiators also survive.

4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet

There is considerable debate among scholars on wether Shakespeare actually wrote many of the play attributed to him.

5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

One more time: Massive physical evidence and first hand reports written on the scene and as the events were happening.

There is no physical evidence to support the Bible. And none of it is first hand evidence.

part one
several discussions on these forums have gone to religion.
there was even a "what kind of Athiest are you?" thread. this gos for Agnostics too.

So you dont believe in the Bible?what if i was to tell you that i dont believe that...
1) Napolean never conquered Spain
2)there was ever an Ottoman Empire
3)there were never Gladiators
4)Shakespear never wrote Romeo and Juliet
5)Cortez ever went to war with the Aztecs

understand i dont mean this in a predjeduce way, but i even had someone call Christianity an "ancient Religion"

if you can find undenyable proof of all five, you Athiest win.
Part 2 i will post link to sites that contain articles about how scientific research found evidence that supports the Bible, and you have to prove it wrong.

good luck!
In the name of all the apathetically religious everywhere, do shut up.

It looks like begging the question to me. You state that A leads to B without explaining why. (So you say concept leads to existence--but why?)

I don't think"Why" is the right question in this case. "How else could it be?" would be a better one.

I don't think"Why" is the right question in this case. "How else could it be?" would be a better one.

That is a statement with no meaning.

Frog blast vent cores.


There are many cultures where the Middle Eastern concept of god never developed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_fallacy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_Circle

I suggest you do some reading on Descarte's philosophy and the response to it.

At least I can see where the problem comes in: making the leap from mind to matter. If I were to insist that mind and matter are different things, then there would be an inconsistency, but to view mind and matter as aspects of the same thing would wrap it up nicely.

I'm deeply entrenched in the idea of dependent origination, so it's difficult to understand why thinking otherwise would be more beneficial.

That is a statement with no meaning.

Frog blast vent cores.


There are many cultures where the Middle Eastern concept of god never developed.

Yes. and Yes.

See? We agreed on something! :fluffle:

At least I can see where the problem comes in: making the leap from mind to matter. If I were to insist that mind and matter are different things, then there would be an inconsistency, but to view mind and matter as aspects of the same thing would wrap it up nicely.


That is still circular reasoning. Link on that fallacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

That is still circular reasoning. Link on that fallacy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

The alternative to circular reasoning is linear reasoning, where one asserts something is true just because it is and goes forward from there.

If anything, I would think something is true because of its consistency with everything else.

The alternative to circular reasoning is linear reasoning, where one asserts something is true just because it is and goes forward from there.

If anything, I would think something is true because of its consistency with everything else.

How! :confused: You have not given any consistency or proof it is true without resorting to long discredited fallacys.

How! :confused: You have not given any consistency or proof it is true without resorting to long discredited fallacys.

What would you accept as proof then? It's impossible to prove anything to anyone that will accept nothing one offers.

What would you accept as proof then? It's impossible to prove anything to anyone that will accept nothing one offers.

You have not offered anything.

You have not offered anything.
If that is the case, then I have nothing to offer you. Be well...

How about cutting to the chase here:
God exists because you have a concept of what God is. Fizzglomphyls don't exist because you have no idea what they might be, let alone what they are.Fizzglomphyls! Those things rock!

Seriously, what are you trying to demonstrate?

I don't think it is reasonable to accept something's existence purely because it can be conceptualized.

For example I can easily imagine a world where speaking magic words caused actual physical results, and I can also imagine a world where this is mealy a delusion. Which is correct?

Here, I'll prove magic exists. HOCUS-POCUS! *turns into frog*

Here, I'll prove magic exists. HOCUS-POCUS! *turns into frog*Well I did just read writen somewhere... and you did say it really happened.

I guess magic is true! Maineiacs really did turn into a frog!

I believe Jesus was actually a small West African sheep.

Can anybody disprove this?

How about cutting to the chase here:
God exists because you have a concept of what God is. Fizzglomphyls don't exist because you have no idea what they might be, let alone what they are.
Well if someone defines them do they exist?

Fizzglomphyls, A tiny, gregarious, non-corporeal entity trillions of which are brought into existance when gods create universes. The Fizzglomphyls then parisitize the god and cause him to suffer uncontrolable itching that leads to the infected god's eventual insanity.

Oops. I just gave god a divine flea infestation.