Donating = Loving
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.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
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.
Donating = Loving
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.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
@Ricardo: RE: "Jesus is not God"
Choose your religion. Not all Christian faiths think Jesus was a god. Not all Christian faiths think Jesus was a part of a trinity. The Muslims call Jesus a Prophet. The bible itself carries 3 different interpretations of Jesus.
1. Jesus was a man adopted by god at his baptism. (Now you have become the son of god.) Adoptionists believe Jesus was adopted by god.
2. Jesus became god at his resurrection: Jesus the Son of David is raised up by the Spirit and so becomes the first son of the resurrection, arrayed in glorious immortality combined with heavenly royalty, the true meaning of “Son of God
3. God was born Jesus through the impregnation of a virgin. God on earth was always fully human but also fully god.
4. This is a more modern variant - Jesus was the "Word," spoken of in Genesis, and was always co-equal to God.
HOW JESUS BECAME GOD - BART EHERMAN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IPAKsGbqcg
RE: Jesus believed in God. This is true. Jesus prays to god in the bible.
The Bible is a collection of books and different books have different interpretations of God and of Jesus. Sometimes Jesus is praying to God and other times Jesus asserts that he is god. This is one of the reasons Christianity is made up of over 33,000 different sects. It is very difficult to lump them all together. It is very difficult to say, Christians believe this or Christians believe that.
This is one of the main reasons Atheists are generally very careful in talking to a theists and ask them to first define their god. We have no idea what the average Christian means by the idea of God..
RE: "that the mistake of atheists is to think that Jesus and God are the same thing!"
HA HA HA HA HA ..... Atheists do not believe in God or gods. Many do not believe Jesus was even real. At most the story of Jesus is a compilation of stories attributed to a man called Jesus and that is granting a whole lot of unfounded wooo into history. If atheists think God and Jesus are the same thing, they are both MYTH.
You are simply getting caught up and confused in all the various ways of interpreting God and Jesus. It is the theists that argue these points not the atheists. It is the theists arguing with each other over the divinity of Jesus or the superority of their version of god. THE ATHEISTS DO NOT CARE. ATHEISTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD OR GODS. MANY, LIKE MYSELF. DON'T EVEN SEE JESUS AS A REAL PERSON. (THOSE THAT DO SEE JESUS AS REAL WOULD SAY HE WAS JUST A PERSON THAT PEOPLE TOLD STORIES ABOUT.)
YOU ARE CONFOUNDING A LONG TIME DEBATE AMONG THEISTS WITH ATHEISM. ATHEISTS DO NOT CARE ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOD AND JESUS. IF YOU ASSUME THERE WAS ONE, WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE FOR IT?
@Cognostic: I do not believe ! I'm just saying some theists believe this belief that God and Jesus are not the same thing!
I do not believe in the existence of the Historical Jesus.
@Ricardo
"I do not believe in the existence of the Historical Jesus."
Personally, I am inclined to accept that during that period in time there was some dude living in that area, and was executed for being a discontent. Just like stories of Robin Hood, Merlin, and King Arthur, these tales are constructed from some individual, and over the centuries and thanks to the oral tradition, the stories grew gigantic and have no true reflection of the people in that time.
Was there a person we identify as jesus? IMO likely.
But the big question is: was this person as depicted in the bible, performing miracles, walking on water, the son of god, the dude who rose from the dead?
Personally I am of the opinion there was a con man/crime boss/pimp who was eventually captured and executed.
Con man? Anyone with a slight knowledge in magic tricks can be more impressive.
Crime boss? He had an entourage of twelve pretty rough characters.
Pimp? He always had a prostitute always close at hand.
@Ricardo: I don't think there was an assertion that you did believe. Only that you are caught up in thinking about the arguments THEISTS have with one another. ATHEISTS do not believe in God or Gods. These arguments mean nothing to us other than when we are talking to a specific Christian with specific beliefs. This is why we ask them to explain their God and their beliefs. Until they do that, we have no idea at all what they are talking about.
Just one question.
If God was/is all-knowing, and Jesus was/is God, was/is Jesus all-knowing?
My belief:
What Jesus was to his Father,
'I am' is to 'that I am'
thus in 'I am that I am'
Father and Son are One
made whole through/in/as "Christ"
anything less surely being
in the nature of "anti-Christ".
I will defend (and perhaps prove).
________________________________________________________________
******
METHOD PROPOSAL: Transforming BELIEF into KNOWLEDGE
ad infinitum with due respect to possibly being a (the?) Christian equivalent
to the TRUTH (of the) WAY (of the) LIVING:
******
What is (at least one of) the name(s) of the Abrahamic god, to be measured next to (as?) Jesus?
"ehya'asher'ehya"
I am that I am.
What does philosophy say regarding matters related to 'I am'?
Descartes'
"I think, therefor I am."
Query:
Is it because one thinks, one exists?
or is it because one exists, one may be willing to think?
i. One can not think lest they exist, and
ii. One can not even begin to think they exist, less...
...themselves having *had* a beginning in the mind *as* thought!!!
Thus, "I think, therefor I am." is certainly *ABSOLUTELY ABSURD*!!!
and, it is my belief, INSANE!!!
I am,
therefor I may think.
is SANE, and deserves/derives the herein proposed
'FIRST FUNDAMENTAL KNOWLEDGE/IGNORANCE' as being that of:
'I AM'
as in: (I know) I am (able to think).
whereas:
(I believe) I am...(?)
(I think/believe) I am...(?)
I think, therefor, I am...(?)
(etc.)
are all certainly ignorant, rendering the (as I understand) so-standing:
'All knowing is belief, but not all belief is knowing'.
***ABSOLUTELY ABSURD***
so in knowing so deriving:
All belief is ignorance, but not all ignorance is belief.
which ABSOLUTELY undermines any/all "BELIEF"-based 'states'
including (and especially) "BELIEF"-based THEOLOGIES:
***!!! ABSOLUTELY ABSURD AD UNIVERSUM !!!***
*clears throat*
Now then, deriving the two possible knowing/unknowing 'states' as applied to any 'I AM':
__________________________________________
i. (I (ac)know(ledge)) I am...KNOWING
(leads to: knowledge-based living)
ii. (I believe/think/hope etc. (all: less to know)) I am...UNKNOWING
(leads to: ignorance-based suffering/death)
__________________________________________
difference: KNOWING/UNKNOWING
UNKNOWING is IGNORANCE
IGNORANCE begets SUFFERING
and SUFFERING is...
...my own project to solve:
From whence any/all human suffering?
KNOWING what NOT to "BELIEVE"
is certainly KNOWLEDGE UNIVERSUM.
I am, therefor I may think.
I know I am... willing (not) to think
(so in taking no thought):
*uses conscience*
...
...
...
_______________________________________
**********************************************************************************************
METHOD (DERIVED FROM ABOVE CORRECTIONS):
TRIED, TESTED AND TRUE
***I KNOW UNIVERSUM***
**********************************************************************************************
I KNOW 'I AM' <-*FIRST FUNDAMENTAL KNOWLEDGE (less: ignorance)
i. I ACKNOWLEDGE IT: I AM aware of... the "BELIEF"-based such-and-such and am duly in ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.
ii. I TRY IT: to render falsifiable true/false assertion(s) by way of use of the CONSCIENCE.
iii. I TEST IT: subject BELIEFS(s) to KNOWNS(s) and/or labor to KNOW to graduate into KNOWLEDGE.....
......If TRUE: becomes a KNOWN as KNOWINGLY TRUE
......If FALSE: becomes a KNOWN as (*not* to "believe") in which the belief is certainly KNOWINGLY FALSE.
***I KNOW UNIVERSUM***
"Belief" is not a virtue in (and of) itself.
It is the people behind them
who are themselves with or without virtue;
and their virtue(s) is (are) clearly present
in the substance(s) of their beings' "belief(s)",
but 'belief' itself is without virtue
duly owing to any particular "belief" being
possibly certainly false, thus suffered,
as certainly it takes a "believer" to "believe"
what is evil, is good, and/or what is good, is evil.
Their 'true' discernment lies in 'true' knowledge
And the first fundamental knowledge is of that 'I am'.
________________________________________
...
...
...
Any/all BELIEF (theoretically can) become KNOWLEDGE ad infinitum(?)
using this method and/or until any/all "beliefs" are reconciled(?).
Possible amendment to, ahem, (no longer) standing and ***ABSOLUTELY ABSURD***:
All knowing is belief, but not all belief is knowing.
becomes modified to:
All knowing is by way of trying belief, but not all belief is by way of trying to know.
Therefor: "know thy SELF"
(the 'I AM...'; to each, any, of their own)
is found to be necessarily axiomatic.
Therefor, I believe Jesus both: knew of, and must have, practiced this method
to attain the knowledge he supposedly had. Continuing:
All knowing is belief, but not all belief is knowing.
as was just found, and is still, so ABSOLUTELY ABSURD!!! now adding conscience:
All unconscious belief is ignorance, but not all unconscious ignorance is belief.
All knowledge is (in) consciously knowing what *not* to (un)consciously "believe".
and begs a finite/infinite (knowledge) dichotomy which places HUMAN (ie. Jesus) at odds with GOD:
1x1^inf=0, 1
as having two possible solutions as applied to 'I am':
I am...1x1^inf=0 (infinite - no boundaries) <-living (GOD)
I am...1x1^inf=1 (finite - boundary condition) <-death (HUMAN)
and applying the FIRST FUNDAMENTAL KNOWLEDGE/IGNORANCE PRINCIPLE
I know I am... (leads to: knowledge-based living) 1x1x1x1x1......=0 (infinite - no boundaries) <-living
I believe I am... (leads to: ignorance-based suffering/death) 1x1=1 (finite - boundary condition) <-death
whereby "space-time" reveals the gap between the two
as it defines their own "belief"-based ignorance. Follows:
As one tends towards any/all knowledge, one tends towards any/all all-knowing god(s).
These/this may reflect the primordial mythical Abrahamic Edenic trees:
of the living (indefinitely) and of good and evil (suffering/death)
captured/elaborated by the following thought experiment:
THE REFERENCE PROBLEM
Let any being 'I am' exist.
Let all else be 'that I am' relative to 'I am'.
If 'I am' is unknown, 'that I am' can not be relatively inferred.
If 'I am' is known, 'that I am' can be relatively inferred.
Follows:
'I am' must be 'known' to relatively infer 'that I am'.
Else is certainly "belief"-based (ignorance).
Implies: it is impossible to prove/deny the existence of any/all god(s)
LESS KNOWLEDGE of 'I AM'.
Which leaves a re-stating of my "belief":
What Jesus was to his Father,
'I am' is to 'that I am'
thus in 'I am that I am'
Father and Son are One
made whole through/in/as "Christ"
anything less surely being
in the nature of "anti-Christ".
Derives: Christ/anti-Christ dichotomy
which is reconciled as it pertains
to each their own 'I am'.
@Kate: God does not condone any of the evil that goes on in the world today. This is man's doing
So would you consider polio, cholera, measles, etc., evil? They bring pain and death to countless innocent people, including babies, all the time. I consider them evil and applaud the efforts of science to eliminate them.
Were disease pathogens created by your god, like people, elephants, locusts, and cockroaches? What role did humanity (or Satan) play in the creation of bubonic plague, for example?
My colleague at APKNite said precisely the same thing to me. He doesn't know that there is only one God who sent prophets to notify us that he has created the universe and everything; those are the universal ground teachings of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Jesus did not claim to be a God.
Looks like the lovely Kate only likes to preach and not debate. A real intellectual heavyweight no doubt.
Funny this topic is at the top of the board today and this article:
https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2019/10/09/did-pope-francis-really-say...
..is published. Seems Fanks's atheist friend is at it again. Remember, this is the same person who spilled the beans that Pope Frank does not actually believe in a literal hell. Now, he doesn't believe Jesus was god on earth either. Now if he could just get his minions to stop with the abusing of little boys, he would be headed in the right direction.
Pages