Beliefs Without Foundation For Christians

112 posts / 0 new
Last post
FishNChips007's picture
@dog: Thank you for your

@dog: Thank you for your reply. Was I incorrect in thinking that this forum was open to response regarding both it's initial post as well as any of the subsequent posts? Is it also not in the section labeled debate? Why have you found my responses offensive? Have you even taken into consideration any of the facts presented? What did you find unhelpful?

Tin-Man's picture
@FishNChips

@FishNChips

First if all, welcome to the AR. Secondly, yes, this is a debate forum. And I can assure you we have a few folks here that are more than capable of going toe-to-toe with you in regards to the gospels. (I'm not one of them, by the way. Matter of fact, the gospels mean very little to me. But I digress...) Anyway, the problem is that you wrote a friggin' thesis on the tail-end of an already overgrown thread. Just a suggestion here, but you will likely get much better results if you start your own thread. Plus, if you were to read back through this thread, you might discover some of your questions have already been answered. Just trying to be helpful.

David Killens's picture
@ FishNChips007

@ FishNChips007

Welcome to Atheist Republic.

I can understand your desire for an honest and open debate. But you did sort of slide in a topic that deserves it's own thread. If not, since this thread is already 4+ pages long, it can get lost and mixed up.

But your topic appears to cover the "No one recorded the actual events at that time, but the Synoptic Gospels are valid because they were written at lest 70 years later by unknown authors."

doG's picture
@magicfishNchips0076

@magicfishNchips007

Not incorrect really, but a little odd. Like presenting the offertory prior to services. Also, a new thread, IMHO, would be more efficient at getting your message across to wider AR readership...assuming that is your goal. In general, failure in reason, by fellow species, is tiresome and disapointing...not offencive. It is unhelpful to rehash dogmatic finepoints without objectively addressing the existence of your version of a god. Kind of like being invited out for coffee, and once you arrive at the starbucks table, finding sugar, milk, cream, a couple chocolate croisants, napkins, two latge cups with teaspoons, but no coffee. Anyways, welcome to AR, enjoy.

Whitefire13's picture
@Fish&chips... did you read

@Fish&chips... did you read anything on this thread before you felt a need to regurgitate?

Nyarlathotep's picture
@FishNChips007

FishNChips007 - If you do not believe Jesus is a historical figure, why then should you believe that Alexander the Great was?

For what it is worth: there is a contemporary source for Alexander the Great. There aren't any (known) contemporary accounts of Jesus.

Nyarlathotep's picture
FishNChips007 -...God can

FishNChips007 -...God can legally dismiss our case and let us live forever...

The Heaven Greed™ is strong in this one.

Tin-Man's picture
@Nyar Re: "The Heaven Greed™

@Nyar Re: "The Heaven Greed™ is strong in this one."

...*pinching nose shut*... *desperately fanning the air in front of face*.... *gag*... Well, I don't know about "Heaven Greed", but there is definitely SOMETHING strong in him... *rushing to open windows and turn on vent fans*... *spraying air freshener*...

doG's picture
LOL.

@funnelnoggin

LOL.

But, in defense, proselytizing his religion on an atheist site, is likely no different from his daily life. Just saying.

cranky47's picture
@Nyarlathotep

@Nyarlathotep

"The Heaven Greed™ is strong in this one."

Yair

I was going to say: "The farce is strong with this one", but I guess that may have become cliched.

FishNChips007's picture
Thanks guys. I appreciate you

Thanks guys. I appreciate you explaining to me the workings of this forum. I will honor your advice in starting a new thread. To answer some of the feedback, I apologize to you for whoever gave you the impression that Christianity is mostly about money collecting, that is not how The Lord teaches those who are His to behave, but rather to give. @Tin man, sorry you didn't appreciate my aromatic nature. Scripture actually predicted that very well.

"For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing. To the one we are the aroma of death leading to death, and to the other the aroma of life leading to life..." -from 2 Corinthians 2:15-16

Thanks for the welcome.

Sheldon's picture
@FishNChips007

@FishNChips007

What objective evidence can you demonstrate for any deity?

The bible cannot validate its own claims, anymore than any other book can, so if its authorship is genuine that doesn't help evidence its claims, but if any of it's authorship is made up, and therefore unknown, then the claim those passages by unknown authors represent eyewitness accounts is risible.

Personally I don't care if every book of both old and new testament has a fucking notarised signature of the author, with a brief bio, that no more validates the claims in it, than J K Rowling can validate fucking wizardry, and she is fucking alive and can be asked in person.

cranky47's picture
@Thread

@Thread

Pickle me grandmother! Yet another christian apologist who seems incapable of thinking for itself. Instead of reasoned thought there is scriptural quotation and at least one strawman .

@ "FishNChips007 I'm afraid you're off to a bad start. Perhaps have another try to present your position without quoting scripture or attacking our members. EG stating or inferring that we don't agree with you because we don't understand you . It's up to you to make yourself clear.

"FishNChips007 - If you do not believe Jesus is a historical figure, why then should you believe that Alexander the Great was?"

The stated argument is about the historicity of Jesus, not Alexander the Great. Two separate discussions. .

"sorry you didn't appreciate my aromatic nature. " -----That's an ad hominem attack. (attacking the person, not the argument)

" Scripture actually predicted that very well."

That is an unfounded claim , not an argument. I have never seen a single accurate biblical prediction, ever .Such claims have invariably been made after experts in biblical hermeneutics and exegesis have pointed them out. It is the job of such people to explain that the bible very often doesn't actually mean what it says.

Grinseed's picture
@FishNChips 007

@FishNChips 007

Welcome to the forum. Hope you learn at least as much as you hope to impart here. I would ask if you would kindly consider the following two requests.

1. Please when you do start your own thread can you limit yourself to one or two questions at a time?

It will help promote reasonably easy to follow lines of argument for each topic. Otherwise you are going to face an eager avalanche of responses and counter claims and you will very quickly lose track and end up not responding to a lot of genuine posts made and inadvertently frustrate a lot of people. I know many of my posts have been ignored simply because the OP (opening poster) was overwhelmed either by my compelling genius or the number of arguments they had to follow.

2. And this is very important, for the sake of avoiding any unnecessary ill will, stop framing questions like a condescending know all twat.

The Atheist Republic is full of exceptionally knowledgeable people with professional expertise in many fields and many are ex-Christians from many denominations. We have closely read and critically studied not only the Bible and its history as well as history in general, and also philosophy, the sciences and comparative theology, which has for the most part been the main reason some are now atheists.
If your hope was to just waltz in and convert a bunch of ignorant godless pagans I suggest you think again and drop all your hubris now.
I say this because nothing in your first post, none of the claims offered, are at all original. I have witnessed and participated in the thorough dismantling and successful refutation of all that you have offered and more. I have seen most of the points you have raised in literally hundreds of similar posts by other theists on many atheist online forums over the past twenty years. In deed there have been irrefutable arguments made against Christian apologetic since its early beginnings as an upstart heresy 2000 years ago.

To qualify my opening welcome, I suggest you might, if you keep an open mind, learn a lot more from this site than you might think you can impart.

Cheers

Tin-Man's picture
@Grin

@Grin

Outstanding welcoming post for FishNChips. Nicely done... *respectfully tipping hat*...

Sheldon's picture
Grinseed "2. And this is very

Grinseed "2. And this is very important, for the sake of avoiding any unnecessary ill will, stop framing questions like a condescending know all twat."

Have an agree sir, I also find the condescending tone some theists open with slightly irksome. Though truth be known, nothing boils my piss as much as faux piety, while being arrogantly preached at.

You guys may have noticed my patience evaporate pretty quickly when that happens. So if you theists out there could limit yourselves to no more than two unevidenced argument from assertion fallacies per post, I'd really appreciate it. What would be best of course is if you actually demonstrated some evidence for each particular claim as you make them, but look at me trying to reinvent the fucking wheel.

My original question to fishnchips still stands, what objective evidence can you demonstrate for any deity? I gave up long ago expecting theists to open with that, rather than attacking atheism and atheists. I am forever unhitching their wheezy old pony from behind their cart, and then trying to force it around the front where it belongs.

Start by justifying your belief, not asking those who don't share it to justify why they don't, as it's the inability to the former that justifies the latter more often than not in my experience.

Grinseed's picture
Thanks Tin,

Thanks Tin,

your praise is always appreciated and respected...,(covers head with wing to stifle guffaw)...LOL..."funnelnogginn"...bad doG!! bad!. LMAO!!

Tin-Man's picture
@Grin Re: "your praise is

@Grin Re: "your praise is always appreciated and respected...,(covers head with wing to stifle guffaw)...LOL..."funnelnogginn"...bad doG!! bad!. LMAO!!"

...ROFLMAO... I have tears in my eyes laughing right now. Damn, that was a good one!... ROFLMAO....

Italianish's picture
I realized that I remembered

I realized that I remembered that God being one in three persons of the trinity.
(Father, Son, Holy Spirit)
Basically saying that God manifested himself in three different forms.
His son Jesus, biblically had a will separate from the father, however it is written that he follows the fathers will, and he implies he has a separate will of his own.
John 6:38
For I have come down from heaven to do the will of God who sent me, not to do my own will.

If God was the father and son, wouldn’t it make sense that they would both have the same will since they’re the same God?

Cognostic's picture
@FishNChips007: OH FOR FUCK

@FishNChips007: OH FOR FUCK SAKE,,,,, START A NEW THREAD....
You are fucking all over the place... Do you even know what a discussion is. Your thoughts are so jumbled it's amazing you can string them together to form the semblance of a sentence.

Sheldon's picture
Cognostic

Cognostic

@FishNChips007: OH FOR FUCK SAKE,,,,, START A NEW THREAD....
You are fucking all over the place... Do you even know what a discussion is. Your thoughts are so jumbled it's amazing you can string them together to form the semblance of a sentence.

I feel your pain, his posts make me want to go clean a Coronavirus ward, in my fucking pants...

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.