Friends Pressuring Me to Go To Church
coldec
<k.norak@gmail.com>religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
about Christianity. It seems very complex.
I am a church virgin in that I have never been to church before. My
friends are pressuring me to go to a church sermon for the first time.
They seem to be using Pascal's Wager and saying that I have nothing to
use. They say that they will bring me along and if I experience in my
heart connection with Jesus Christ then I will get a lot out of that,
but even if I don't feel any connection with Jesus Christ then it's no
loss.
Because I am a church virgin then I feel uncomfortable about going to
church. I also don't see how sitting in a room and listening to
someone talk about the Bible will benefit me, but my friends say that
the benefit of my going to church cannot be explained. Rather, it is
something that you feel when you experience it. I have to go there and
try it out. Then they went on about how I have so much to gain from
connection to Christ, salvation, going to heaven, etc, and they said
there is no loss. All I have to do is walk into a building and listen
to someone talk. I already do that when I go to work and go to
meetings, so if I can go to work and go to meetings then I can go to a
sermon.
I caved in and said that so long as I just sit there and listen then I
will go. I don't want to have to do anything extra like participate in
rituals or anything else. They were happy and told me they may ring me
up soon to bring me along.
I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
Is the argument they used logical? Do they make good points? Are they
correct?
Simon Ewins
<sjewins@gmail.com>> There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> about Christianity. It seems very complex.
It's not. It is the simplest idiocy in the world.
1: If in doubt, God did it.
2: Good thing happens, praise God.
3: Bad thing happens, God's will, praise God.
4: God had a son.
5: Son was actually God and walked around like a person.
5: Did ridiculous things, and then died, but didn't.
Believe all that and beside being gullible, naive and a bit stupid, you
will be a Christian and can praise God on a full-time basis until you
get to Heaven where you have to keep on praising God for ever and ever
and ever.
> I am a church virgin in that I have never been to church before. My
> friends are pressuring me to go to a church sermon for the first time.
> They seem to be using Pascal's Wager and saying that I have nothing to
> use.
So you choose to bet on believing and then find out there is a God but
it is different from what you thought. You lose.
> They say that they will bring me along and if I experience in my
> heart connection with Jesus Christ then I will get a lot out of that,
> but even if I don't feel any connection with Jesus Christ then it's no
> loss.
Wasted an hour of your life you'll never get back.
> Because I am a church virgin then I feel uncomfortable about going to
> church. I also don't see how sitting in a room and listening to
> someone talk about the Bible will benefit me, but my friends say that
> the benefit of my going to church cannot be explained. Rather, it is
> something that you feel when you experience it. I have to go there and
> try it out. Then they went on about how I have so much to gain from
> connection to Christ, salvation, going to heaven, etc, and they said
> there is no loss. All I have to do is walk into a building and listen
> to someone talk. I already do that when I go to work and go to
> meetings, so if I can go to work and go to meetings then I can go to a
> sermon.
>
> I caved in and said that so long as I just sit there and listen then I
> will go. I don't want to have to do anything extra like participate in
> rituals or anything else. They were happy and told me they may ring me
> up soon to bring me along.
When they ring you up, tell them to keep their magic to themselves.
> I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
> Is the argument they used logical? Do they make good points? Are they
> correct?
No. They are spiritual vampires sucking the vestiges of rationality from
you until you become brain-dead enough to buy into their imaginary
solutions to an imaginary problem that they originally invented.
--
Virtual Gods: http://users3.jabry.com/sjewins/library/__philorelig.htm
"[T]hings are entirely what they appear to be and behind them... there
is nothing."
[Jean Paul Sartre, Nausea]
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 1, 2:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> about Christianity. It seems very complex.
As Simon says, it's not.
It's no more complex than any other religion, like Islam. Islam is
based on Christianity.
>
> I am a church virgin in that I have never been to church before. My
> friends
Mate, they are NOT your friends. They are very selfish people who
are only interested in claiming "your soul" for their denomination of
Christianity. Somewhere it states there are 39,000 denominations
of Christianity (and growing) - they can't all be "right".
> are pressuring me to go to a church sermon for the first time.
If you want to, go along. Just be aware of their methodology.
In order to believe in this magic nonsense, one has to be able to
lie to oneself, and by default to others.
> They seem to be using Pascal's Wager and saying that I have nothing to
> use. They say that they will bring me along and if I experience in my
> heart connection with Jesus Christ then I will get a lot out of that,
> but even if I don't feel any connection with Jesus Christ then it's no
> loss.
>
> Because I am a church virgin then I feel uncomfortable about going to
> church. I also don't see how sitting in a room and listening to
> someone talk about the Bible will benefit me, but my friends say that
> the benefit of my going to church cannot be explained. Rather, it is
> something that you feel when you experience it. I have to go there and
> try it out. Then they went on about how I have so much to gain from
> connection to Christ, salvation, going to heaven, etc, and they said
> there is no loss. All I have to do is walk into a building and listen
> to someone talk. I already do that when I go to work and go to
> meetings, so if I can go to work and go to meetings then I can go to a
> sermon.
>
> I caved in and said that so long as I just sit there and listen then I
> will go. I don't want to have to do anything extra like participate in
> rituals or anything else. They were happy and told me they may ring me
> up soon to bring me along.
>
> I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
> Is the argument they used logical? Do they make good points? Are they
> correct?
Personally, I use their crap against themselves. When they come
banging
on the door, and I can't get rid of them, I tell them I have all the
pastoral
care I need through the televangelists, thank them for their interest,
and
say goodbye.
Should you go to church and listen?
That's up to you. I wouldn't bother.
Is the argument they used logical?
Only to them. You have to consider why they have so much disrespect
for you, trying to get you to do something you are obviously
uncomfortable
doing.
Do they make good points?
No....... see above.
Are they correct?
No. Why should they be? It's all myths and magic.
Now, if you want some firm science to look at:
http://mkaku.org/
or Google his name and include Multiverse, and the
YouTube stuff will come up.
After you've listened to some "facts", then decide.
From my perspective God does not exist. Even if you were to
explore some of the new age stuff, s/he/it is still not there.
Read some of Robert Munroes books on consciousness, and
even he dismisses the idea of God.
God is simply an idea developed by ancient man to
explain his own place in the universe, and the gravy train
has been chugging along ever since. Use your brains. If
you do, you won't buy into the nonsense.
Happy new year.
LL
<llpens@aol.com>LL: Go if it makes you happy, but also read the bible, with all of its
contradictions and fallacies, and don't be afraid to read it with
logic and ask a lot of questions.
As for Pascal's wager, it's one of the biggest fallacies you'll come
across. Pascal claimed people only had a choice between the Catholic
Church (or at least Christianity) and no belief. He was wrong. There
are other religions to consider,any of which could be right. If there
is a non-Christian god and it is as jealous and savage as the
Christian one, a person who chooses Christianity certainly has plenty
to lose!
Consider humanism instead. If you want to know more about humanism, go
to: http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism.
You'd be a lot better off checking that out than going to church!
********************************
Drafterman
<drafterman@gmail.com>then pick a Mosque.
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>I'd agree to go to church, but only if you get to pick the church,
then pick a Mosque.
Good idea but I'd stipulate that the Christians had to go with me to the Mosque as well as a Synogogue, Gurudwara, Ashram ....
And, maybe an Atheist meet up group or speech by Dawkins, Myers, et al.
And then sit down and have a comparative discussion about all of them.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
--
-------------------------
Demagogue: "one who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -- H.L. Mencken.
Imagination: "He who has imagination without learning has wings but no feet." ~Joseph Joubert
thea
<thea.nob4@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Drafterman <draft...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd agree to go to church, but only if you get to pick the church,
then pick a Mosque.
Good idea but I'd stipulate that the Christians had to go with me to the Mosque as well as a Synogogue, Gurudwara, Ashram ....
And, maybe an Atheist meet up group or speech by Dawkins, Myers, et al.
And then sit down and have a comparative discussion about all of them.
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Drafterman <draft...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd agree to go to church, but only if you get to pick the church,
then pick a Mosque.
Good idea but I'd stipulate that the Christians had to go with me to the Mosque as well as a Synogogue, Gurudwara, Ashram ....
And, maybe an Atheist meet up group or speech by Dawkins, Myers, et al.
And then sit down and have a comparative discussion about all of them.Good answer, Trance.I took Philosophy 101 at a State college, and had a prof. who was determined to de-program me as he knew I was brainwashed into a denominational churches thinking. (He played devil's advocate all semester -- looking back, it was quite ridiculous.)I still think about the guy and would love to be able to thank him for the encouragement he gave me as a 20 something, in that he said *you have started searching for the truth, and you will find it.*
It's important to question one's beliefs all of the time.
If they're solid they'll withstand the challenge. If they're not they won't :-)
dj Briscoe
<sandsands.briscoe4@gmail.com>dj Briscoe
<sandsands.briscoe4@gmail.com>
Sebastian
<meznaric@gmail.com>prop up any belief. Imagine that a group of atheists believe that
there is no god (as any atheist would) but that the universe is made
in such a way that atheists go to heaven and non-atheists go to hell.
Now they come to you and say: "You should be an atheist. You have
nothing to loose, you can only gain!" On the other side, you have a
christian, telling you the exact opposite. You cannot be both an
atheist and a christian. Thus validity of Pascal's wager leads to
logical contradictions. Thus it cannot be used to argue either in
favour or against christianity - this form of an argument is not
valid.
As for the practical question of whether you should go to church or
not. I think seeing it for yourself is OK. If you go to church once,
then afterwards you can tell them that you've been and you felt
nothing. Maybe they'll stop pressuring you.
dj Briscoe
<sandsands.briscoe4@gmail.com>
FossilFan
<fossilfanfan@gmail.com>> I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
Yes, you will learn a lot by going and you lose anything.
> Is the argument they used logical?
Very logical. Most intellectual people are Christians.
> Do they make good points? Are they correct?
The make very good and brilliant points and they can't go wrong. Go
find out.
Simon Ewins
<sjewins@gmail.com>
Observer
<mayorskid@gmail.com>On Jan 1, 11:11 am, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Check it out for your on self...If you have not been ...It would be
> good...dj
> I have walked into chruches and went by myself,sit on the last pue,and
> enjoyed the fellowship and giving God who I believe in homage and honor...I
> think every chruch is God's and I have that honor to walk in any
> chruch....The ones that are in chruch and in Authority,is God's
> servents....dj
Observer
Please provide us with the scientifically verifiable substantiating
data which persuades you that your personal definition of a god is
more accurate than the billions of other concepts in as many human
minds. And that such either exists or ever committed any act in or on
this universe.
When you have done so, I will ask you to explain what scientifically
verifiable substantiating data persuades you that there is not a far
superior reason to trust in the scientific knowledge( the product of
scientific method and the art of critical thought) of things and
conditions which we can prove to be actual and which when examined
with out bias provide alternative explanations to the childish concept
of a god thing and the attending fetishistic , dark art of magic
attendant therewith?
What god and why a god ?Have you so fully attended to your education
as to the scientifically verifiable data explaining our universe and
all there in that you feel vindicated is decrying such as less useful
that the nonsense of superstition , ignorance and belief in magic?
Please ,please open your mind , explore the wonders of the universe
learn to learn so that you may share in the wondrous beauty thereof.
The superstitious filth of the past produced the hideous misadventures
thereof resulting in the horrors which are represented so thoroughly
in the history of the world. Such included endless fratricidal wars
death by torture for tens of millions of innocent men women and
children the retardation of scientific progress by which had science
been left to flourish without hideous attacks hatched in the
monstrous minds of the criminal clergy could have by now allowed us to
share a world wherein plenitude, and good health were the rule.
First , my friend I, suggest that you endeavor to learn of the
actualities of this universe as is available to us by the application
of critical thought and scientific method . When you have accomplished
this task then by all means look to see if there is need to
conceptualize such nonsense as is proposed by the compendium of myths
refereed to as the bible or other such wild ass flights of fancy.
I Invite you to investigate to learn to learn and to share the
associated joys there of with those of us who are traversing from
greater to lesser ignorance with consistency .
Regards
Psychonomist
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 2, 6:59 am, FossilFan <fossilfan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> > I should do? Should I justgotochurchand just sit there and listen?
>
> Yes, you will learn a lot by going and you lose anything.
Do you mean nothing, or everything?
>
> > Is the argument they used logical?
>
> Very logical. Most intellectual people are Christians.
Well, you're not one of them. So how would you know?
>
> > Do they make good points? Are they correct?
>
> The make very good and brilliant points and they can'tgowrong.Go
> find out.
I'd go and look at the architecture.
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 2, 8:17 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 1, 11:11 am, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Check it out for your on self...If you have not been ...It would be
> > good...dj
> > I have walked into chruches and went by myself,sit on the last pue,and
> > enjoyed the fellowship and giving God who I believe in homage and honor...I
> > think every chruch is God's and I have that honor to walk in any
> > chruch....The ones that are in chruch and in Authority,is God's
> > servents....dj
>
> Observer
> Please provide us with the scientifically verifiable substantiating
> data which persuades you that your personal definition of a god is
> more accurate than the billions of other concepts in as many human
> minds. And that such either exists or ever committed any act in or on
> this universe.
>
> When you have done so, I will ask you to explain what scientifically
> verifiable substantiating data persuades you that there is not a far
> superior reason to trust in the scientific knowledge( the product of
> scientific method and the art of critical thought) of things and
> conditions which we can prove to be actual and which when examined
> with out bias provide alternative explanations to the childish concept
> of a god thing and the attending fetishistic , dark art of magic
> attendant therewith?
And that is what really gets me about them.
Most Christians are fearful of "Satan, witches, dark magic, warlocks
etc. etc" - all figments of their imagination, just like their God is.
But, they can't see it. They stop their kids from reading Harry
Potter
and all those sorts of books, and yet they tell their kids bible
stories.
Historically they have burned people who have their self-imposed
labels. They still are - look at what is happening to those children
in Africa. I just shake my head in disbelief:
The logic just escapes me..............
> > > in such a way that atheistsgoto heaven and non-atheistsgoto hell.
> > > Now they come to you and say: "You should be an atheist. You have
> > > nothing to loose, you can only gain!" On the other side, you have a
> > > christian, telling you the exact opposite. You cannot be both an
> > > atheist and a christian. Thus validity of Pascal's wager leads to
> > > logical contradictions. Thus it cannot be used to argue either in
> > > favour or against christianity - this form of an argument is not
> > > valid.
>
> > > As for the practical question of whether you shouldgotochurchor
> > > not. I think seeing it for yourself is OK. If yougotochurchonce,
> > > then afterwards you can tell them that you've been and you felt
> > > nothing. Maybe they'll stoppressuringyou.
>
> > > On Jan 1, 4:06 am, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> > > > religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> > > > much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> > > > about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> > > > I am achurchvirgin in that I have never been tochurchbefore. My
> > > >friendsarepressuringmetogoto achurchsermon for the first time.
> > > > They seem to be using Pascal's Wager and saying that I have nothing to
> > > > use. They say that they will bringmealong and if I experience in my
> > > > heart connection with Jesus Christ then I will get a lot out of that,
> > > > but even if I don't feel any connection with Jesus Christ then it's no
> > > > loss.
>
> > > > Because I am achurchvirgin then I feel uncomfortable about going to
> > > >church. I also don't see how sitting in a room and listening to
> > > > someone talk about the Bible will benefitme, but myfriendssay that
> > > > the benefit of my going tochurchcannot be explained. Rather, it is
> > > > something that you feel when you experience it. I have togothere and
> > > > try it out. Then they went on about how I have so much to gain from
> > > > connection to Christ, salvation, going to heaven, etc, and they said
> > > > there is no loss. All I have to do is walk into a building and listen
> > > > to someone talk. I already do that when Igoto work andgoto
> > > > meetings, so if I cangoto work andgoto meetings then I cangoto a
> > > > sermon.
>
> > > > I caved in and said that so long as I just sit there and listen then I
> > > > willgo. I don't want to have to do anything extra like participate in
> > > > rituals or anything else. They were happy and toldmethey may ringme
> > > > up soon to bringmealong.
>
> > > > I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> > > > I should do? Should I justgotochurchand just sit there and listen?
Rupert
<rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>On Jan 2, 12:15 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'd agree to go to church, but only if you get to pick the church,
> > then pick a Mosque.
>
> Good idea but I'd stipulate that the Christians had to go with me to the
> Mosque as well as a Synogogue, Gurudwara, Ashram ....
>
> And, maybe an Atheist meet up group or speech by Dawkins, Myers, et al.
>
> And then sit down and have a comparative discussion about all of them.
>
And a meeting of Animal Liberation, too?
You know how I respond to evangelists who come knocking at my
door... ;)
Rupert
<rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>On Jan 2, 2:34 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 10:13 AM, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> I'd agree to go to church, but only if you get to pick the church,
> >>> then pick a Mosque.
>
> >> Good idea but I'd stipulate that the Christians had to go with me to the
> >> Mosque as well as a Synogogue, Gurudwara, Ashram ....
>
> >> And, maybe an Atheist meet up group or speech by Dawkins, Myers, et al.
>
> >> And then sit down and have a comparative discussion about all of them.
>
> > Good answer, Trance.
> > I took Philosophy 101 at a State college, and had a prof. who was
> > determined to de-program me as he knew I was brainwashed into a
> > denominational churches thinking. (He played devil's advocate all semester
> > -- looking back, it was quite ridiculous.)
> > I still think about the guy and would love to be able to thank him for the
> > encouragement he gave me as a 20 something, in that he said *you have
> > started searching for the truth, and you will find it.*
>
> It's important to question one's beliefs all of the time.
>
> If they're solid they'll withstand the challenge. If they're not they won't
> :-)
>
My very first philosophy lecturer told me "Every position worth
holding is also worth subjecting to critical examination."
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>
On Jan 2, 2:34 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 10:13 AM, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I still think about the guy and would love to be able to thank him for theMy very first philosophy lecturer told me "Every position worth
> > encouragement he gave me as a 20 something, in that he said *you have
> > started searching for the truth, and you will find it.*
>
> It's important to question one's beliefs all of the time.
>
> If they're solid they'll withstand the challenge. If they're not they won't
> :-)
>
holding is also worth subjecting to critical examination."
Yup. Exactly.
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>Haha! Why not? :-)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
JFG
<thelemiccatholic@gmail.com>LL
<llpens@aol.com>On Jan 1, 12:59 pm, FossilFan <fossilfan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> > I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
>
> Yes, you will learn a lot by going and you lose anything.
>
> > Is the argument they used logical?
>
> Very logical. Most intellectual people are Christians.\
LL: Which means exactly nothing. Most people in the US and most of
Europe identify themselves as Christians. To know if there is a
difference in the rate of intellectuals who embrace a particular
religion you'd have to find out the percentage of intellectuals among
Christians and the percentage of intellectuals among Jews and among
atheists or any other group, not the sheer number in the population as
a whole.
********************************
LL
<llpens@aol.com>LL: I have a feeling it has something to do with a projectile. ;-)
********************
Rupert
<rupertmccallum@yahoo.com>To be honest, I usually just politely say I'm not interested, but I
was jokingly suggesting that I bring out my copy of "Animal
Liberation" and various other texts and try to explain to them why
they shouldn't be eating meat. Sort of tit-for-tat.
Medusa
<Medusa4303@yahoo.com>On Jan 1, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just go. What have you got to lose?
Time and effort.
Medusa
Observer
<mayorskid@gmail.com>On Jan 1, 12:59 pm, FossilFan <fossilfan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> > I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
>
> Yes, you will learn a lot by going and you lose anything.
Observer
Absorbing the horrific ignorance , sadomasochism, belief in the
fetishistic magic, necromancy, and the ignorance which is the
greatest of all things malevolently effecting human kind is scarcely
to be considered a learning experience of value.
>
> > Is the argument they used logical?
>
> Very logical. Most intellectual people are Christians.
Observer
What utter nonsense.
Quote
Leading scientists still reject God
Nature, Vol. 394, No. 6691, p. 313 (1998) © Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Sir — The question of religious belief among US scientists has been
debated since early in the century. Our latest survey finds that,
among the top natural scientists, disbelief is greater than ever —
almost total.
Research on this topic began with the eminent US psychologist James H.
Leuba and his landmark survey of 1914. He found that 58% of 1,000
randomly selected US scientists expressed disbelief or doubt in the
existence of God, and that this figure rose to near 70% among the 400
"greater" scientists within his sample [1]. Leuba repeated his survey
in somewhat different form 20 years later, and found that these
percentages had increased to 67 and 85, respectively [2].
In 1996, we repeated Leuba's 1914 survey and reported our results in
Nature [3]. We found little change from 1914 for American scientists
generally, with 60.7% expressing disbelief or doubt. This year, we
closely imitated the second phase of Leuba's 1914 survey to gauge
belief among "greater" scientists, and find the rate of belief lower
than ever — a mere 7% of respondents.
Leuba attributed the higher level of disbelief and doubt among
"greater" scientists to their "superior knowledge, understanding, and
experience" [3]. Similarly, Oxford University scientist Peter Atkins
commented on our 1996 survey, "You clearly can be a scientist and have
religious beliefs. But I don't think you can be a real scientist in
the deepest sense of the word because they are such alien categories
of knowledge." [4] Such comments led us to repeat the second phase of
Leuba's study for an up-to-date comparison of the religious beliefs of
"greater" and "lesser" scientists.
Our chosen group of "greater" scientists were members of the National
Academy of Sciences (NAS). Our survey found near universal rejection
of the transcendent by NAS natural scientists. Disbelief in God and
immortality among NAS biological scientists was 65.2% and 69.0%,
respectively, and among NAS physical scientists it was 79.0% and
76.3%. Most of the rest were agnostics on both issues, with few
believers. We found the highest percentage of belief among NAS
mathematicians (14.3% in God, 15.0% in immortality). Biological
scientists had the lowest rate of belief (5.5% in God, 7.1% in
immortality), with physicists and astronomers slightly higher (7.5% in
God, 7.5% in immortality).
End quote
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
Now where does one go to find the best educated, most intelligent
selection of all intellectuals but here?
>
> > Do they make good points? Are they correct?
Observer
These poor uneducated intellectually challenged christians are unable
to provide even the smallest piece of scientifically verifiable
substantiating data for either the EXISTENCE of or any ACT of a god.
Nor is there such data available substantiating the veracity of the
biblical nonsense they spew.
Why not study what can be shown to exist and to be consistent with the
most dependable and useful information available to human kind?
The only problems which emerge in relation to the utter stupidity of
superstitious belief systems such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam
and all such misanthropic attempts to practice fetishistic black,
magic, sadomasochistic perversion, is that such has never simply
does not work and has been instrumental in tearing the world apart
through fratricidal war, the torture deaths of tens of millions of
innocent people, the gross opposition to science which had it been
left alone could have ,over the past 1500 years have produced a world
with substantially less disease , hunger , poverty wherein men could
have learned by the practice of critical thought as applied to the
social sciences and controlled by scientific method have achieved a
world wherein the idealism produced of human wisdom could have brought
peace , prosperity, and general good health.
Superstitions , including those of crackpot other social beliefs has
been productive of little nut horrors for humankind.
>
> The make very good and brilliant points and they can't go wrong. Go
> find out.
Observer
That is an opinion much to be questioned based upon the results
produced by the psychotic filth of Christian history.
If you take time to study what is real, and have applied due
intelligence thereto , when you are done there will be sufficient
opportunity to ask questions about the idiotic imaginary nonsense
residing only in the uneducated minds of undisciplined and terribly
superstitious primitives.
I wish you well , choose carefully you are being asked to risk what
little sanity we were individual born with.
Learn to ask the hard questions and require that you get satisfactory
answers which can be scientifically verified , your very life and the
future of human kind depend on it.
Enough superstitious filth !
Regards
Psychonomist
Observer
<mayorskid@gmail.com>Observer
Along with your very humanity!
Psychonomist
>
> Medusa
Max
<assent@pcfin.net>Why is that?
This is fairly important in the scheme of things, because from what
you say in your OP, as you've not made up your mind on matters
'religion' and you're also a 'church virgin', then there is no reason
why you shouldn't go, just to 'check it out' so to speak.
But as your work mates put the pressure on you, why not put the
pressure on them.
Ask them to comment here on AvC about why they felt the need to
pressure you to go to church and to defend their beliefs here. If they
have the courage of their convictions, then they shouldn't be 'scared'
to face up to the odd atheist or two.
It works both ways matey!
> I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
> Is the argument they used logical? Do they make good points? Are they
> correct?
e_space
<espace1984@gmail.com>with them if they go to an athiest convention with you. if they do not
want to, tell em to take a hike...
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> I am a church virgin in that I have never been to church before. My
> friends are pressuring me to go to a church sermon for the first time.
Gandhi too was invited to church:
http://www.hvk.org/specialrepo/mkg/index.html
Gandhi's first exposure to a Christian missionary, while studying in
school, was not a very happy event. It left, it seems, a lasting
impression on his mind as childhood impressions often do. Gandhi has
described this incident in his Autobiography (1929) in the following
words:
In those days Christian missionaries used to stand in a corner near
the high school and hold forth, pouring abuse on Hindus and their
gods. I could not endure this. I must have stood there to hear them
once only, but that was enough to dissuade me from repeating the
experiment. About the same time, I heard of a well-known Hindu having
been converted to Christianity. It was the talk of the town that, when
he was baptized, he had to eat beef and drink liquor, that he also had
to change his clothes, and that thenceforth he began to go about in
European costume including a hat. These things got on my nerves.
Surely, thought I, a religion that compelled one to eat beef, drink
liquor, and change one's own clothes did not deserve the name. I also
heard that the new convert had already begun abusing the religion of
his ancestors, their customs and their country. All these things
created in me a dislike for Christianity.
While in England as a student (1888-91) Gandhi met several Christians,
made a few friends but most of them were more interested in vegetarian
diet than religious matters. Gandhi had become a member of the
Vegetarian Society and discussed with other members matters diatary.
The real confrontation with Christian missionaries started in 1893
while Gandhi was in South Africa. (This confrontation continued till
almost the last days of his life). Gandhi has described these first
attempts in detail in his Autobiography thus:
The first to come in contact was one Mr. A.W. Baker. He, besides being
an attorney, was a staunch lay preacher.
He (Mr. Baker) upholds the excellence of Christianity from various
points of view, and contends that it is impossible to find eternal
peace, unless one accepts Jesus as the only son of God and the Saviour
of mankind.
During the very first interview Mr. Baker ascertained my religious
views. I said to him: "I am a Hindu by birth. And yet I do not know
much of Hinduism, and I know less of other religions. In fact I do not
know where I am, and what is and what should be my belief. I intend to
make a careful study of my own religion and, as far as I can, of other
religions as well."
Mr. Baker was happy to hear that and offered to introduce me to his co-
workers in the church which he had built at his own expense. He also
gave some religious books to Gandhi to read, including the Holy Bible,
of course. Mr. Baker had invited Gandhi to a prayer meeting next day
which Gandhi attended. Apart from the general prayer, Gandhi records:
"A prayer was now added for my welfare: Lord, show the path to the new
brother who has come amongst us. Give him, Lord, the peace that thou
has given us. May the Lord Jesus who has saved us save him too. We ask
all this in the name of Jesus."
One of the group was a young man Mr. Coates, a Quaker. He had given
Gandhi quite a few books on Christianity and had hoped that he would
come round and embrace Christianity. Gandhi continues in the
Autobiography:
"He (Mr. Coates) was looking forward to delivering me from the abyss
of ignorance. He wanted to convince me that, no matter whether there
was some truth in other religions, salvation was impossible for me
unless I accepted Christianity which represented the truth, and that
my sins would not be washed away except by the intercession of Jesus,
and that all good works were useless."
Gandhi was introduced to several other practicing Christians,
including a family belonging to Plymouth Brethren, a Christian sect.
One of the Plymouth Brethren confronted Gandhi with an argument for
which he A-as not prepared. He said:
"How can this ceaseless cycle of action bring you redemption? You can
never have peace. You admit that we are all sinners. Now look at the
perfection of our belief. Our attempts at improvement and atonement
are futile. And yet redemption we must have. How can we bear the
burden of sin? We can but throw it on Jesus. He is the only sinless
son of God. It is His word that those who believe in Him shall have
everlasting life. Therein lies God's infinite mercy. And as we believe
in the atonement of Jesus, our own sins do not bind us. Sin we must.
It is impossible to five in this world sinless. And therefore Jesus
suffered and atoned for all the sins of mankind. Only he who accepts
His great redemption can have eternal peace. Think what a life of
restless is yours, and what a promise of peace we have."
Gandhi's reaction to this offer is typical of him and is oft quoted by
his western biographers like Erik Erikson and Geoffrey Ash:
"The argument utterly failed to convince me. I humbly replied: If this
be the Christianity acknowledged by all Christians, I cannot accept
it. I do not seek redemption from the consequences of my sin. I seek
to be redeemed from sin itself or rather from the very thought of sin.
Until I have attained that end, I shall be content to be restless."
Gandhi was troubled with what was written in the Bible itself after he
started reading it. Gandhi narrates another experience:
"Mr. Baker was getting anxious about my future. He took me to the
Wellington Convention. The Protestant Christian organize such
gatherings every few years for religious enlightenment or, in other
words, self-purification. --- Mr. Baker had hoped that the atmosphere
of religious exaltation at the Convention, and the enthusiasm and
earnestness of the people attending it, would inevitably lead me to
embrace Christianity. --- The Convention lasted for three days. I
could understand and appreciate the devoutness of those who attended
it. But I saw no reason for changing my belief - my religion. It was
impossible for me to believe that I could go to heaven or attain
salvation only by becoming a Christian. When I frankly said so to some
of the good Christian friends, they were shocked. But there was no
help for it."
Gandhi continues:
"My difficulties lay deeper. It was more than I could believe that
Jesus was the only incarnate son of God, and that only he who believed
in him would have everlasting life. If God could have sons, all of us
were His sons. If Jesus was like God or God himself, then all men were
like God and could be God himself. My reason was not ready to believe
literally that Jesus by his death and by his blood redeemed the sins
of the world. Metaphorically there might be some truth in it. Again
according to Christianity only human beings had souls, and not other
living beings, for whom death meant complete extinction; while I held
a contrary belief. I could accept Jesus as a martyr, an embodiment of
sacrifice, and a divine teacher, but not as the most perfect man ever
born. His death on the cross was a great example to the world, but
that there was anything like a mysterious or miraculous virtue in it
my heart could not accept. The pious lives of Christians did not give
me anything that the lives of men of other faiths had failed to give.
I had seen in other lives just the same reformation that I had heard
of among Christians. Philosophically there was nothing extraordinary
in Christian principles. From the point of view of sacrifice, it
seemed to me that the Hindus greatly surpassed the Christians. It was
impossible for me to regard Christianity as a perfect religion or the
greatest of all religions.
I shared this mental churning with my Christian friends whenever there
was an opportunity, but their answers could not satisfy me.�"
LL
<llpens@aol.com>with Christianity before reading this.
******************************
On Jan 2, 10:32 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
thea
<thea.nob4@gmail.com>
Harry
<HarryHigginbloom@live.com>> There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> about Christianity. It seems very complex.
No, it's not that complex at all. All you need to know is Jesus Christ.
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > My very first philosophy lecturer told me "Every position worth
> > holding is also worth subjecting to critical examination."
>
> The truth well spoken!
> If your god cannot have been a married man with children -- because he is a
> high priest, and fulfilled all the law and the prophets - and your god has
> to be a *white* man, with golden blond hair and a halo - you are in
> trouble?!!
Following Isaiah 53:2, most early theologians, such as Justin Martyr,
insisted that Jesus was physically unprepossessing, with "no beauty
that we should desire him." The anti-Christian author Celsus states
that he was "short and ugly", an assertion that his Christian opponent
Origen does not dispute. Whether these early debates reflect a purely
scriptural view or a continuing oral tradition about his actual
physique and physiognomy is not known.
In later centuries this early view was reversed. The Church Fathers
Saint Jerome and Saint Augustine of Hippo argued that Jesus must have
been ideally beautiful in face and body. For Augustine he was
"beautiful as a child, beautiful on earth, beautiful in heaven."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_of_Jesus
Here's one reconstruction of Jesus' appearance:
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/images/savior/jesusbbc.jpg
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/christ/physical_appearance.htm
Harry
<HarryHigginbloom@live.com>and then you'll live happily forever and ever.
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>That's a stupid comment.
How can you prove any of that, particularly when you look at the US
which has a large Christian Population, and has homelessness, was the
cause behind the global monetary problems, etc. many of the people
causing that, I might add, being Christians.
You really have bought into a bill of unsubstantiated goods, haven't
you Harry? Methinks you need to think again.
Harry
<HarryHigginbloom@live.com>> On Jan 3, 6:10�am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> > > religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> > > much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> > > about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> > No, it's not that complex at all. All you need to know is Jesus Christ
> > and then you'll live happily forever and ever.
>
> That's a stupid comment.
Whoa, why is that?
> How can you prove any of that, particularly when you look at the US
> which has a large Christian Population, and has homelessness, was the
> cause behind the global monetary problems, etc. many of the people
> causing that, I might add, being Christians.
Now that's an obtuse statement. The monetary problem, all over the
world, is not caused by Christians but by the economy.
> You really have bought into a bill of unsubstantiated goods, haven't
> you Harry? �Methinks you need to think again.
Har har.
JFG
<thelemiccatholic@gmail.com>Now *THAT* is paranoia!!!
>
>
> > Medusa
Sebastian
<meznaric@gmail.com>Christians here have to say about it.
On Jan 2, 6:32 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
LL
<llpens@aol.com>LL: I suspected "Coldec" was a troll, and now I'm sure of it. He, she,
it has never responded after the original trolling. I wouldn't be
surprised to learn that Harry is Coldec!
**************************
Observer
<mayorskid@gmail.com>Observer
And just why would anyone want to do that?
Psychonomist
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>I checked (legally). :-)
Different parts of the world and no proxy that I could detect.
So, I'd say they are different. Not the same person.
**************************
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
Harry
<HarryHigginbloom@live.com>Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth, that's
why. And there are others like Gandhi, who was a very good person and
Budhha, who was exceptional. If you can emulate these great person or
any other, you will live happily ever after.
Do you have somebody in mind who is greater than any of the three
mentioned above?
Harry
<HarryHigginbloom@live.com>Please, no.
Harry
<HarryHigginbloom@live.com>Thank you. I have no idea how you can check that. You must be the
system administrator of this site.
>
> > **************************
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
>
> --
> -------------------------
> Demagogue: "one who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he
> knows to be idiots." �-- H.L. Mencken.
>
> Imagination: "He who has imagination without learning has wings but no
> feet." �~Joseph Joubert- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>No problem and no information will be publicly disclosed.
I have no idea how you can check that. You must be the
system administrator of this site.
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
>
> > **************************
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > .> feet." �~Joseph Joubert- Hide quoted text -
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
>
> --
> -------------------------
> Demagogue: "one who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he
> knows to be idiots." �-- H.L. Mencken.
>
> Imagination: "He who has imagination without learning has wings but no
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
LL
<llpens@aol.com>LL: Albert Einstein, Francis Crick . . .
LL
<llpens@aol.com>LL: OK, Trance persuaded me that it isn't you.
****************
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 4, 1:53 am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 12:50 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 2, 12:07 pm, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> > > > religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> > > > much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> > > > about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> > > No, it's not that complex at all. All you need to know is Jesus Christ.
>
> > Observer
> > And just why would anyone want to do that?
>
> Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth, that's
> why.
I'm glad you refer to him as a person. Obviously you regard him
highly,
and that is fine. Good people deserve recognition. What I object to
is
making him out to be God.
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>> On Jan 4, 1:53�am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 3, 12:50 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 2, 12:07 pm, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> > > > > religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> > > > > much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> > > > > about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> > > > No, it's not that complex at all. All you need to know is Jesus Christ.
>
> > > Observer
> > > And just why would anyone want to do that?
>
> > Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth, that's
> > why.
>
> I'm glad you refer to him as a person. �Obviously you regard him
So, do you believe that he walked the face of this earth?
> What I object to ismaking him out to be God.
>
>
> > And there are others like Gandhi, who was a very good person and
> > Budhha, who was exceptional. If you can emulate these great person or
> > any other, you will live happily ever after.
>
> > Do you have somebody in mind who is greater than any of the three
> > mentioned above?- Hide quoted text -
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 4, 7:44 am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
Belief? No, I have no belief in this. He may have lived just like
many others have lived. I have no proof of his life or death.
A set of mythical stories are not proof. IF he existed as a human
being, then I see no problem in respecting him as a human.
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>> On Jan 4, 7:44�am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Belief? �No, I have no belief in this. �He may have lived just like
> many others have lived. �I have no proof of his life or death.
Do you have proof of the life and death of Herodotus?
> A set of mythical stories are not proof. �IF he existed as a human
> being, then I see no problem in respecting him as a human.
What are you saying, throw away all the books pertaining to people who
lived even before the birth of Jesus Christ? What kind of proof do you
suggest in the existence of Zenophon?
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> On Jan 3, 4:01 pm, philosophy <catswhisker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 4, 7:44 am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Belief? No, I have no belief in this. He may have lived just like
> > many others have lived. I have no proof of his life or death.
>
> Do you have proof of the life and death of Herodotus?
>
> > A set of mythical stories are not proof. IF he existed as a human
> > being, then I see no problem in respecting him as a human.
>
> What are you saying, throw away all the books pertaining to people who
> lived even before the birth of Jesus Christ? What kind of proof do you
> suggest in the existence of Zenophon?
FWIW, Herodotus and Xenophon authored books whereas Jesus didn't.
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 4, 8:08 am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 4:01 pm, philosophy <catswhisker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 4, 7:44 am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Belief? No, I have no belief in this. He may have lived just like
> > many others have lived. I have no proof of his life or death.
>
> Do you have proof of the life and death of Herodotus?
>
> What are you saying, throw away all the books pertaining to people who
> lived even before the birth of Jesus Christ? What kind of proof do you
> suggest in the existence of Zenophon?
Oh, here we go, another Joe.
Look, Logan, or whoever you are. Herodotus was an historian. We have
his work.
I am presuming you mean Xenophon. He was a Greek soldier and
mercenary
who was a contemporary of Socrates.
They were historical writers, and there is historical evidence of
their existence.
Where are the writings of Jesus? Where is the evidence of his
existence.
You guys, and I am presuming you are a Catholic (because you talk like
one)
can't even get the birth date right.
I was being generous. Obviously you don't know what that word means.
In relation to your quip about throwing out books - what are you on
about.
Obviously this is how you think, and it has no relation to me.
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 4, 8:41 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
EXACTLY!!!!
Oh, and thanks for the correct spelling. Logan didn't even spell
his name correctly. Poor old Xenophon.
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> On Jan 4, 8:41 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com" <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 5:08 pm, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > FWIW, Herodotus and Xenophon authored books whereas Jesus didn't.
> EXACTLY!!!!
> Oh, and thanks for the correct spelling. Logan didn't even spell
> his name correctly. Poor old Xenophon.
That's okay; what Xenophon doesn't know won't hurt him, and my
spelling is still not correct; it's Xenophontas. No one pronounces him
correctly any more, as Ksenno pawntess, anyway.
xeno
<69blacklab@gmail.com>On Jan 3, 7:53 am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
> Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth...
That's a matter of opinion. How are you going to prove that as a fact?
xeno
<69blacklab@gmail.com>On Jan 3, 1:09 pm, philosophy <catswhisker...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good people deserve recognition.
This Jesus guy was a mixed bag. Talked out of both sides of his mouth.
When it comes to this Jesus guy
it all boils down to how people overload this guy with their own
notion of him. He wasn't the greatest guy that ever walked the earth.
He's the greatest guy people imagine who walked the earth.
xeno
<69blacklab@gmail.com>On Jan 3, 1:44 pm, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, do you believe that he walked the face of this earth?
Maybe Jesus is like Kilroy. Kilroy was here, there & wherever somebody
put up the graffiti. We can throw a contest on writing the gospel of
the greatest guy who ever walked the earth. This time, instead of
being the son of god, he's just a cousin visiting from some other
universe.
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> On Jan 3, 7:53 am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth...
>
> That's a matter of opinion.
How about a compromise? Would you settle for his being the greatest
person who ever walked on water?
dj Briscoe
<sandsands.briscoe4@gmail.com>ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> What made Jesus the greatest was he gave his life and did not sin
> once....can you say this..To the antheist can you say you have never done no
> wrong..and if you say give me proof...The proof that I have for this fact is
> written and recorded. dj
Where is it recorded that Jesus said "I have never done any wrong"?
dj Briscoe
<sandsands.briscoe4@gmail.com>ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> The Bible..King James version...
In which verse does Jesus say this?
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 8:36 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 11:23 pm, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What made Jesus the greatest was he gave his life and did not sin
> > > once....can you say this..To the antheist can you say you have never done
> > no
> > > wrong..and if you say give me proof...The proof that I have for this fact
> > is
> > > written and recorded. dj
>
> > Where is it recorded that Jesus said "I have never done any wrong"?
>
> > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 4:36 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <
> > ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 3, 7:10 pm, xeno <69black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Jan 3, 7:53 am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth...
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
Observer
<mayorskid@gmail.com>On Jan 3, 7:53 am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 12:50 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 2, 12:07 pm, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 31 2009, 10:06 pm, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> > > > religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> > > > much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> > > > about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> > > No, it's not that complex at all. All you need to know is Jesus Christ.
>
> > Observer
> > And just why would anyone want to do that?
>
> Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth, that's
> why.
Observer
I challenge that statement in as much as you can not even proved that
this mythological man ever existed.
All you have is the superstitious filth contained in your buy bull.
Where are the roman records of his execution?
Not to worry the poor stupid bastard, if he had lived and if he did
and said the mindless shit he was purported to have said and done by
the bible would scarcely have been my role model.
And there are others like Gandhi, who was a very good person and
> Budhha, who was exceptional. If you can emulate these great person or
> any other, you will live happily ever after.
Observer
What utter shit. You claim that emulating a decent person like
Siddhartha will grant you magical power to be eternally happy. He
would have vomited were he alive and had he read what you said.
There is much to be learned by simply reading the compassionate Buddha
and following the suggestions therein are productive but there is no
such as the idiotic claim to magic you made.
It is apparent that you know little of either of these men and nothing
of Jesus the god fraud.
>
> Do you have somebody in mind who is greater than any of the three
> mentioned above?
Observer
There have been few people in the history , who were entitled by
virtue of their educations good works or intelligence to rank among
the truly brilliant and productive of this world but there are and
have been tens of thousands of people who have been their equals and
remained unsung for their feats accomplishment .
If you would like to examine the real heroes of this world then study
the founding fathers of the United States of America. Then study the
wonderful, very long line of magnificent scientists who have brought
this world from the dark ages to this time of relative enlightenment.
Study the many world leaders who have participated in the growth and
culture of human kind.
To be brief Get your head out of your ass and smell other that the
shit therein.
Humanity has produced wondrous people for eons it is only that their
numbers are relatively few and their access to other minds so limited
that you think otherwise .
It is much the setting that created the myth of a humans greatness as
it is the actual superiority of the man or woman.
What is important is that you take responsibility to learn what is
actual and how to properly adjust to that, which will be the measure
of you as a man or woman.
The only source of reliable , dependable , and useful information
available to human kind is attainable through the application of
critical thought to the broadest selection of scientific data produced
of the disciplines of scientific method upon which we can depend.
Having done due diligence therein, one can determine what other
questions should be asked, and how to frame them to produce further
edification that will matter.
Psychonomist
Observer
<mayorskid@gmail.com>On Jan 3, 8:23 pm, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What made Jesus the greatest was he gave his life and did not sin
> once....can you say this.
Observer
Of course I can . In order to sin there must exist a god who gave our
commands which were known and disobeyed.
There is no scientifically verifiable substantiating data for the
existence of or any act of any god.
No god no sin.
I have therefore never sinned.
.To the antheist can you say you have never done no
> wrong..and if you say give me proof...The proof that I have for this fact is
> written and recorded. dj
The above is so poorly constructed as to be unintelligible . Would
you care to try again?
Psychonomist
>
> On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 4:36 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <
>
> ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 7:10 pm, xeno <69black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 3, 7:53 am, Harry <HarryHigginbl...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Jesus Christ is the greatest person who ever walked the earth...
>
> > > That's a matter of opinion.
>
> > How about a compromise? Would you settle for his being the greatest
> > person who ever walked on water?
>
> > > How are you going to prove that as a fact?
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
LL
<llpens@aol.com>On Jan 3, 2:08 pm, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 4:01 pm, philosophy <catswhisker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 4, 7:44 am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Belief? No, I have no belief in this. He may have lived just like
> > many others have lived. I have no proof of his life or death.
>
> Do you have proof of the life and death of Herodotus?
>
> > A set of mythical stories are not proof. IF he existed as a human
> > being, then I see no problem in respecting him as a human.
>
> What are you saying, throw away all the books pertaining to people who
> lived even before the birth of Jesus Christ? What kind of proof do you
> suggest in the existence of Zenophon?
LL: It isn't the existence of any historical figure that should be
doubted. It's whether any of them were divine. It doesn't matter
whether the person called Jesus ever existed. It's the claims that he
was more than a mere mortal for which there is no evidence whatsoever.
Since no one has ever shown any person to be divine, we are on
rational grounds to assume that no divine person ever existed. That
doesn't mean that a person named Jesus in the bible didn't exist--as
an ordinary human being. Anything beyond that would require
extraordinary evidence--and none has ever been presented.
****************
*******************
LL
<llpens@aol.com>On Jan 3, 3:40 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 3, 6:16 pm, philosophy <catswhisker...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 4, 8:41 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com" <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 3, 5:08 pm, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ... Zenophon ...
> > > FWIW, Herodotus and Xenophon authored books whereas Jesus didn't.
> > EXACTLY!!!!
> > Oh, and thanks for the correct spelling. Logan didn't even spell
> > his name correctly. Poor old Xenophon.
>
> That's okay; what Xenophon doesn't know won't hurt him, and my
> spelling is still not correct; it's Xenophontas. No one pronounces him
> correctly any more, as Ksenno pawntess, anyway.
LL: I thought it was xylophone ;-)
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>Good point, but what about Buddha, Muhhamad, Cleopatra, Augustus
Caesar, Alexander the Great to name just a few?
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>What about Genhis Khan, Attila the Hun, Rimush, Sargon, Shulgi, to
name just a few?
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>LOL, What about Genhis Khan, Attila the Hun, Rimush, Sargon, Shulgi,
to name just a few? Do you have proofs of their lives and deaths?
thea
<thea.nob4@gmail.com>On Jan 2, 2:49 pm, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:Following Isaiah 53:2, most early theologians, such as Justin Martyr,
> > My very first philosophy lecturer told me "Every position worth
> > holding is also worth subjecting to critical examination."
>
> The truth well spoken!
> If your god cannot have been a married man with children -- because he is a
> high priest, and fulfilled all the law and the prophets - and your god has
> to be a *white* man, with golden blond hair and a halo - you are in
> trouble?!!
insisted that Jesus was physically unprepossessing, with "no beauty
that we should desire him." The anti-Christian author Celsus states
that he was "short and ugly", an assertion that his Christian opponent
Origen does not dispute. Whether these early debates reflect a purely
scriptural view or a continuing oral tradition about his actual
physique and physiognomy is not known.
In later centuries this early view was reversed. The Church Fathers
Saint Jerome and Saint Augustine of Hippo argued that Jesus must have
been ideally beautiful in face and body. For Augustine he was
"beautiful as a child, beautiful on earth, beautiful in heaven."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_of_Jesus
Here's one reconstruction of Jesus' appearance:
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/images/savior/jesusbbc.jpg
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/christ/physical_appearance.htm
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>You are kicking a dead horse. What about these people? You've
tried this argument before, can't you think of anything more original?
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>They existed historically, and that can be proven.
Try something else.
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> LOL, What about Genhis Khan, Attila the Hun, Rimush, Sargon, Shulgi,
> to name just a few? Do you have proofs of their lives and deaths?
We have state records of the conquests and rule of the first four.
Even if we don't have proof of the accuracy of accounts of their
deaths, we presume that they can't still be alive. As for the last, we
have both praises and cusses of his rule but we have no proof that he
was a god as he claimed and we have no proof that he really did run
the equivalent of four marathons at a stretch as he claimed. You're
welcome to believe that he was a god and did accomplish such a run,
though (can any mere human run 100 miles nonstop?).
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> to name just a few? Do you have proofs of their lives and deaths?
We have state records of the conquests and rule of the first four.
dj Briscoe
<sandsands.briscoe4@gmail.com>You gonna share whatever drugs you're using?
>> I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
>> I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
>
> Yes, you will learn a lot by going and you lose anything.
>
>> Is the argument they used logical?
>
> Very logical. Most intellectual people are Christians.
>
>> Do they make good points? Are they correct?
>
> The make very good and brilliant points and they can't go wrong. Go
> find out.
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>You argument on Zenophon was that he was a writer but not Christ,
therefore you can prove through writings that Xenophon existed.
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>Let's try Jesus Christ historically.
Logan
<loganbranford@gmail.com>What about Jesus Christ, the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords?
Simon Ewins
<sjewins@gmail.com>Badly written fiction.
--
Virtual Gods: http://users3.jabry.com/sjewins/library/__philorelig.htm
"What we think, we become."
[Buddha]
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>He didn't run four marathons at a stretch either. Oh, and BTW, he
didn't call himself King of kings or Lord of lords either.
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>Does Christ appear in the expansion of INRI?
> the King of the Jews?
Do you have a list of kings of the Jews? Who was king before Jesus and
who was king after him, on your list?
Try asking again with simply "what about Jesus?"
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>Welcome to AvC Logan.
IMO, the Christus Sect obviously had a leader and his name may have been Jesus so in that respect he probably existed.
The Biblical Jesus who performed miracles, healings, etc. and "rose from the dead" is unlikely to have existed IMO.
This is irrespective of whether events, places, people etc existed/occurred in the Bible or not.
Essentially both the Bible and the biblical character of Christ are written as a mythology.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
--
-------------------------
"Belief shuts the mind and inquiry opens it." --Observer
Demagogue: "one who will preach doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -- H.L. Mencken.
Imagination: "He who has imagination without learning has wings but no feet." ~Joseph Joubert
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>Depending on what you mean, this might better express what you're
trying to say:
The Bible has been written as a mythology.
The biblical character of Christ is written as a hagiography.
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>On Jan 5, 12:14 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snipped>
Depending on what you mean, this might better express what you're>
> > Let's try Jesus Christ historically.
>
> Welcome to AvC Logan.
>
> IMO, the Christus Sect obviously had a leader and his name may have been
> Jesus so in that respect he probably existed.
>
> The Biblical Jesus who performed miracles, healings, etc. and "rose from the
> dead" is unlikely to have existed IMO.
>
> This is irrespective of whether events, places, people etc existed/occurred
> in the Bible or not.
>
> Essentially both the Bible and the biblical character of Christ are written
> as a mythology.
trying to say:
The Bible has been written as a mythology.
The biblical character of Christ is written as a hagiography.the
Not really. That assumes that the "biographical" information ("facts" such birthplace, etc.) about the leader of of the Christus is true and it's too contradictory for everything to be true.
The "idealization" or "idolization" is so extreme that it couldn't be considered a biography by any stretch of the imagination.
I suspect much of the biblical life of Jesus was re-written to to make it consistent with the ancient prophecies of the messiah to come.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
philosophy
<catswhiskers09@gmail.com>On Jan 6, 12:48 am, Logan <loganbranf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's try Jesus Christ historically.
Okay, let's.
Now, apart from the writings in the Bible ABOUT JC,
show me historically that he existed.
LL
<llpens@aol.com>LL: That's what people--both believers and non believers or those who
take a dispassionate position have been trying to do for close to
2,000 years. The problem is there is almost NO historical record about
Jesus--that is no writings that have survived that were written in his
lifetime by people who had even seen him.
********************************
ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:53 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <
> > this might better express what you're trying to say:
> > The biblical character of Christ is written as a hagiography.
> Not really. That assumes that the "biographical" information is true.
> The "idealization" or "idolization" is so extreme that it couldn't be
> considered a biography by any stretch of the imagination.
I said hagiography:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hagiography
2 : idealizing or idolizing biography
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>I know what you said and I know what you mean.
Definition 2 as you quoted above says it's an "idealizing or idolizing" biography.
The term biography implies that the historicity provided is true.
According to current knowledge and science one can't make wine out of water, etc.
Therefore it's not true, therefore it's not a biography, "idealizing or Idolizing" or otherwise.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
Trance Gemini
<trancegemini7@gmail.com>ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 10:46 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <
>
> ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 5, 3:01 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 2:53 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <
>
> > > > this might better express what you're trying to say:
> > > > The biblical character of Christ is written as a hagiography.
>
> > > Not really. That assumes that the "biographical" information is true.
> > > The "idealization" or "idolization" is so extreme that it couldn't be
> > > considered a biography by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> > I said hagiography:
> >http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hagiography
> > 2 : idealizing or idolizing biography
>
> I know what you said and I know what you mean.
>
> Definition 2 as you quoted above says it's an "idealizing or idolizing"
> biography.
>
> The term biography implies that the historicity provided is true.
No; in a hagiography, only the person's existence is presumed; the
idealizing or idolizing biography can be completely made up.
> According to current knowledge and science one can't make wine out of water,
> etc.
>
> Therefore it's not true, therefore it's not a biography, "idealizing or
> Idolizing" or otherwise.
>
>
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
thea
<thea.nob4@gmail.com>ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com>> > Depending on what you mean, this might better express what you're
> > trying to say:
> > The Bible has been written as a mythology.
> > The biblical character of Christ is written as a hagiography.
>
> For a True Christian what you are saying just proves that you are not a
> Chrisitian.
Suppose you tell someone <<a better way to express what you said is "I
am an atheist">>.
Would that indicate that you're not a Christian? Or would it, rather,
indicate that the other person is not a Christian?
thea
<thea.nob4@gmail.com>On Jan 6, 9:22 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 1:53 PM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:Suppose you tell someone <<a better way to express what you said is "I
> > Depending on what you mean, this might better express what you're
> > trying to say:
> > The Bible has been written as a mythology.
> > The biblical character of Christ is written as a hagiography.
>
> For a True Christian what you are saying just proves that you are not a
> Chrisitian.
am an atheist">>.
Would that indicate that you're not a Christian? Or would it, rather,
indicate that the other person is not a Christian?
> Because, the Bible has a lot in it that has come true -- prophecy fulfilled
> - and has the keys to having the power and the Holy Spirit in your life now.
chazwin
<chazwyman@yahoo.com>It's bloody easy. Just politely tell them to go a fuck themselves.
Just because they have thrown their lives away is not reason for them
to impose the same idiocy on you.
If you have managed to live without religion thus far then I suggest
you continue in that vein.
What you will hear is dogma and rhetoric. There is no reason behind
it. But indoctrination is dangerous and insidious.
The nazi party managed to convince millions of Germans: religions use
exactly the same techniques - Hitler and his cronies modelled there
politics on religious methods.
The danger is that you are likely to succumb to group think. So if I
was you I'd avoid it. Don't even go.
I'm serious. How old are you?
On Jan 1, 4:06 am, coldec <k.no...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There are three people at my work who are Christians. I am not
> religious. I am very ignorant of religion. I just haven't studied it
> much. Many Christians I see seem very happy, but I don't know too much
> about Christianity. It seems very complex.
>
> I am a church virgin in that I have never been to church before. My
> friends are pressuring me to go to a church sermon for the first time.
> They seem to be using Pascal's Wager and saying that I have nothing to
> use. They say that they will bring me along and if I experience in my
> heart connection with Jesus Christ then I will get a lot out of that,
> but even if I don't feel any connection with Jesus Christ then it's no
> loss.
>
> Because I am a church virgin then I feel uncomfortable about going to
> church. I also don't see how sitting in a room and listening to
> someone talk about the Bible will benefit me, but my friends say that
> the benefit of my going to church cannot be explained. Rather, it is
> something that you feel when you experience it. I have to go there and
> try it out. Then they went on about how I have so much to gain from
> connection to Christ, salvation, going to heaven, etc, and they said
> there is no loss. All I have to do is walk into a building and listen
> to someone talk. I already do that when I go to work and go to
> meetings, so if I can go to work and go to meetings then I can go to a
> sermon.
>
> I caved in and said that so long as I just sit there and listen then I
> will go. I don't want to have to do anything extra like participate in
> rituals or anything else. They were happy and told me they may ring me
> up soon to bring me along.
>
> I am a little nervous. Anyone here have any tips and pointers on what
> I should do? Should I just go to church and just sit there and listen?
> Is the argument they used logical? Do they make good points? Are they
> correct?