Nice using pictures to express the clarity and harmony of your thoughts for the purpose of argument, I always knew you were a genius and a brilliant man!, everyone can see it now too. Im proud of you.
*Whispers to FdFederation*
<.<
>.>
"Psst. Between you and I. Uneducated bs said in those pictures is uneducated bs!"
-_-
You're still being influenced by the taint of religion. Once you have fully cleansed yourself of the taint of religion and devote your life to the pursuit of science, you will understand.
I know, colorful pictures are like the only things those uneducated religious folks can even remotely understand. I'm so glad you understand that the religions contained in the subtext of those pictures are entirely made of uneducated BS. You have begun your journey on the path of science! You get a sticker! :)
I know, colorful pictures are like the only things those uneducated religious folks can even remotely understand. I'm so glad you understand that the religions contained in the subtext of those pictures are entirely made of uneducated BS. You have begun your journey on the path of science! You get a sticker! :)
Actually, I know more science than you think I know. Im willing to grant that you know your science too.
But I also happen to know the bible more than you and most other people. This is our point of difference. Which naturally leaves you at a disadvantage for your arguments, or atleast should place you on a humble stance of inquiry and curiosity. Which you dont demonstrate at all.
Thanks for the sticker, might just return it to and for you, someday.
Aww, that's so cute, you think you know something about science. I give you another sticker for trying to think, little buddy! So, which science subjects/topics/areas with which you are most comfortable? Chemistry, biology, biochemistry, materials science, physics, anthropology, etc?
P.S. I guess your pride isn't a convenient sin in your religion, huh, little buddy?
Actually, I know more science than you think I know.
You already expressed a fundamental misunderstanding of big bang cosmology and thermodynamics. I'd wager you don't understand evolution too well either (though this is a guess, feel free to prove me wrong). There really aren't many other fields of science relevant to this debate.
There's plenty of evidence that Caesar and Abraham Lincoln existed. I don't think you thought that through.
Secondly, I'm not denying that Jesus existed. He probably did. However, there's no evidence for it.
What's your definition of 'evidence' here? 99% of our historical anything is eyewitness accounts. I think these exist for Jesus just as they do for Caesar. I don't think we have any 'physical', touchable evidence that Caesar existed (i.e. a piece of his body or such). I find myself agreeing with 95% of the things you've been saying the last 2-3 pages (except some historical details, but that's mostly semantics), but I am a bit puzzled by these statements.
MODERATOR MODE: Another reminder to keep it nice, people. Specifically talking to FDFederation right now (the post above this one is just downright demeaning, serves no function and is uncalled for), but I've seen some more of that these last few pages.
What's your definition of 'evidence' here? 99% of our historical anything is eyewitness accounts. I think these exist for Jesus just as they do for Caesar. I don't think we have any 'physical', touchable evidence that Caesar existed (i.e. a piece of his body or such). I find myself agreeing with 95% of the things you've been saying the last 2-3 pages (except some historical details, but that's mostly semantics), but I am a bit puzzled by these statements.
Pretty simple. Mention the guy in more than one book.
No, really. This is why we can pass the resurrection of an entire city off as bullshit; because no contemporary historian (and yes, we do have works written by people in the area) mentions a such a noteworthy event.
There is no reason that the Governors couldnt have erased him from history, and at that time there were also Several other False Prophets claiming to be the Messiah that would use god to try to overthrow the Romans. So even if it was noted, it might not have even been by name due to the multitude of others.
Makes sense... it's the primary reason why for example Thucydides is treated as a vague/corrupt/possibly-non-existent source. Don't we have more than one mention of Jesus, though? I recall some of my professors casually mentioning that we know he probably did exist from smaller/lesser known sources who just talked about 'a religious guy calling himself a prophet by the name of Jesus' from that time. Could be wrong, though.
Tbf, I don't think you need more than a simple google for that. The list of Roman works we have is small (just a couple of bookcases), let alone the list of Roman historians. If Eiviyn'd claim he has read all of them I'd probably believe him.
On another note, Eiviyn isn't saying he didn't exist - read back page 42 and 41.
What evil are you talking about?
Some examples could be nice.
Image 1 - Image 2 - Image 3 - Image 4 - Image 5 - Image 6 - Image 7 - Image 8 - Image 9 - Image 10 - Image 11 - Image 12 - Image 13 - Image 14 - Image 15 - Image 16 - Image 17 - Image 18 - Image 19 - Image 20 - Image 21 - Image 22 - Image 23 - Image 24 - Image 25 - Image 26 - Image 27 - Image 28 - Image 29 - Image 30 - Image 31 - Image 32 - Image 33 - Image 34 - Image 35 - Image 36
http://forum.grasscity.com/religion-beliefs-spirituality/1056448-anti-religion-meme-thread.html
I really don't see what that accomplished.
[reply=1001254]
Nice using pictures to express the clarity and harmony of your thoughts for the purpose of argument, I always knew you were a genius and a brilliant man!, everyone can see it now too. Im proud of you.
*Whispers to FdFederation*
<.<
>.>
"Psst. Between you and I. Uneducated bs said in those pictures is uneducated bs!"
-_-
@Eiviyn: Go
You're still being influenced by the taint of religion. Once you have fully cleansed yourself of the taint of religion and devote your life to the pursuit of science, you will understand.
@EternalWraith: Go
I know, colorful pictures are like the only things those uneducated religious folks can even remotely understand. I'm so glad you understand that the religions contained in the subtext of those pictures are entirely made of uneducated BS. You have begun your journey on the path of science! You get a sticker! :)
Actually, I know more science than you think I know. Im willing to grant that you know your science too.
But I also happen to know the bible more than you and most other people. This is our point of difference. Which naturally leaves you at a disadvantage for your arguments, or atleast should place you on a humble stance of inquiry and curiosity. Which you dont demonstrate at all.
Thanks for the sticker, might just return it to and for you, someday.
@EternalWraith: Go
Aww, that's so cute, you think you know something about science. I give you another sticker for trying to think, little buddy! So, which science subjects/topics/areas with which you are most comfortable? Chemistry, biology, biochemistry, materials science, physics, anthropology, etc?
P.S. I guess your pride isn't a convenient sin in your religion, huh, little buddy?
You already expressed a fundamental misunderstanding of big bang cosmology and thermodynamics. I'd wager you don't understand evolution too well either (though this is a guess, feel free to prove me wrong). There really aren't many other fields of science relevant to this debate.
@Eiviyn: Go
I wager he thinks scientology, astrology, and tautology are fields of science. LOL
What's your definition of 'evidence' here? 99% of our historical anything is eyewitness accounts. I think these exist for Jesus just as they do for Caesar. I don't think we have any 'physical', touchable evidence that Caesar existed (i.e. a piece of his body or such). I find myself agreeing with 95% of the things you've been saying the last 2-3 pages (except some historical details, but that's mostly semantics), but I am a bit puzzled by these statements.
MODERATOR MODE: Another reminder to keep it nice, people. Specifically talking to FDFederation right now (the post above this one is just downright demeaning, serves no function and is uncalled for), but I've seen some more of that these last few pages.
@Mozared: Go
Yeah...it was just a tiny bit demeaning.
"I wager he thinks scientology, astrology, and tautology are fields of science."
There, fixed, I removed "LOL".
Pretty simple. Mention the guy in more than one book.
No, really. This is why we can pass the resurrection of an entire city off as bullshit; because no contemporary historian (and yes, we do have works written by people in the area) mentions a such a noteworthy event.
@Eiviyn: Go
There is no reason that the Governors couldnt have erased him from history, and at that time there were also Several other False Prophets claiming to be the Messiah that would use god to try to overthrow the Romans. So even if it was noted, it might not have even been by name due to the multitude of others.
@Eiviyn: Go
"...because no contemporary historian (and yes, we do have works written by people in the area) mentions a such a noteworthy event."
Not participating or anything, but that would be a good spot for sources. Also not appropriate to use "we."
@Eiviyn: Go
"Pretty simple. Mention the guy in more than one book."
Are you implying he didn't exist?
@Eiviyn: Go
Makes sense... it's the primary reason why for example Thucydides is treated as a vague/corrupt/possibly-non-existent source. Don't we have more than one mention of Jesus, though? I recall some of my professors casually mentioning that we know he probably did exist from smaller/lesser known sources who just talked about 'a religious guy calling himself a prophet by the name of Jesus' from that time. Could be wrong, though.
@Charysmatic: Go
Tbf, I don't think you need more than a simple google for that. The list of Roman works we have is small (just a couple of bookcases), let alone the list of Roman historians. If Eiviyn'd claim he has read all of them I'd probably believe him.
On another note, Eiviyn isn't saying he didn't exist - read back page 42 and 41.
No.
Solved
edit: Post removed for being more a theological question rather than in line with the debate/discussion.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Wow, new complex survey on religion in US