Jump to content

For the atheists around here...


Guest CTBengalsFan

Recommended Posts

[quote]Here's my Einstein quote:

"My religion consits of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind."[/quote]
That was a good one too. I had trouble deciding.

And you are right about the Bible being a tool. Let's not forget that it is a story though and it seems to have a few embellishments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus

[quote]A story yes, with embelishments most likely. But havn't "they" proven that Jesus, Bhudda, and Muhammad walked the earth?[/quote]


Actually there is NO existing evidence from any historians of the time that Jesus ever even existed

Buddah and Muhammad yes but not Christ.




[quote][u]HISTORY.[/u]
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is said to have done then surely many people would have written about it during and immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common at the time, yet an extensive search by many scholars over centuries has turned up nothing. The very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime are clearly forgeries, forged no doubt hundreds of years later by people who realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified (see Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).

Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very small number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly date back to his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There should be a huge wealth of writing about this person that was written during his lifetime.

Jesus allegedly had crowds of thousands follow him around. Once he fed 5000 people with only a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish (Mark 6:39-44). Later he repeated the miracle again feeding a crowd of 4000 people (Mark 8:1-9). Jesus cured sick people miraculously and raised people from the dead. He changed water into wine at a wedding reception. He exorcised demons. He commanded 2000 pigs to rush into a lake and drown themselves, inciting the people of the nearby town and countryside, who asked him to leave. (No mention is made of what happened to the poor pig hearder whose livelihood must have been ruined. Mark 5:1-20).

Wherever Jesus went a crowd gathered and wondered in amazement who this person was. Jesus was a very controversial person. Finally he got himself into so much trouble that huge crowds of Jews demanded his execution. There was a controversial trial followed by his public execution. Three days later he is seen walking around alive again. And no one wrote any of this down when it allegedly happened?

Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of Mark, is admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70, a full 40 years after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection. (Mark makes reference to an event that happened around A.D. 70, so it could not have been written any earlier. Modern scholars now date the Gospels as being written near A.D. 170, a full 140 years after the alleged event, since no one makes any reference to a Gospel of Mark, or any other Gospel, prior to this time.)

[b]It's inconceivable that no one at the time bothered to write down anything about the most important person in the whole of human history. Writing was common back then. People wrote letters. Historians wrote commentaries on current events. The Romans wrote and kept legal documents about trials. It's considered one of the best documented periods of history. Yet no one wrote anything about this Jesus; no one painted a portrait of this Jesus; no one drew a sketch of this Jesus; no one cast a coin depicting this Jesus; no one made a statue of this Jesus; no one makes any reference whatsoever to this Jesus. The historical evidence is overwhelming—the Jesus of the Bible never existed. [/b]

NEGATIVE EVIDENCE PRINCIPLE
When is absence of evidence, evidence of absence? In general a mere lack of evidence is not sufficient to conclude a proposition is false. We must also demonstrate:
All of the evidence used to support the proposition is untenable.
Adequate tenable evidence should exist.
A thorough search for this tenable evidence has been made and none has been found.
At this point I leave it to the reader to decide for him or her self whether the above three points have been satisfied or not, as every individual must ultimately decide what one chooses to believe. Any counter-argument will be an attack against one of the above three points. We can not prove that Jesus never existed, just as we can not prove that Santa Claus never existed. Quite a lot of people believe Santa Claus exists (mostly young people).

Being suspicious of "The Jesus Story is a Biography" theory frees our thinking and allows us to look in other places for the origin of the story. Indeed we will discover that the Jesus Story is not unique. We will find that the motif of a crucified savor who dies and is resurrected was common in other religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. We will also discover that the story of Jesus' one year ministry parallels that of the Sun's annual journey through the Zodiac and the Sun's apparent death in Autumn and subsequent resurrection in Spring.[/quote]


[color="red"][i][b]if anyone would like to refute this please provide evidence of the existence of Christ from the time he was alive ????

I'll be waiting patiently ;) for the historical breakthrough [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//30.gif[/img] [/b][/i][/color]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BengalBacker
If people survive long enough, I think religions as we know them will eventually disappear. People will still believe in something, but it will probably be based more on scientific probabilities than far fetched stories from the mainstream religions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus
[quote]Where did that come from BJ?[/quote]

[url="http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/appendixd.html"]http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/appendixd.html[/url]


[i][b]I I have read at least 5 books on the same issue... and there are hundreds of websites that speak of the same thing...


[color="red"]the best thing for a believer to do is ask themselves


OK WHAT PROOF other than the bible does exist of Jesus.... and search for it ..... they will find NOTHING !!![/b][/i][/color]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest steggyD
[quote name='BengalBacker' date='Jul 9 2005, 04:09 PM']If people survive long enough, I think religions as we know them will eventually disappear. People will still believe in something, but it will probably be based more on scientific probabilities than far fetched stories from the mainstream religions.
[right][post="112625"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
That already exists... [url="http://www.scientology.org/"]http://www.scientology.org/[/url]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest steggyD
I have a question for you BJ. What does one gain by disproving Jesus' existance? Do you think that the world will be better off without Chrisitianity? As if people are going to suddenly be good, nice to each other, no wars will be fought, etc. I'm sure wars will still be fought and in the name of something else. China is willing to go to war over Taiwan. What does that have to do with Christianity?

If Christianity is practiced how it's taught by every single person in this world, then I'll tell you one thing. It would be a perfect world. However, humans have inherent evil. But, getting rid of Christianity will only force corrupt politicians and/or leaders to use something else to bring the masses of people together, maybe scientology.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus
[quote]If Christianity is practiced how it's taught by every single person in this world, then I'll tell you one thing. It would be a perfect world. However, humans have inherent evil. But, getting rid of Christianity will only force corrupt politicians and/or leaders to use something else to bring the masses of people together, maybe scientology.[/quote]

[i][b]Steegy I appreciate what I interpret to be genuine candor in the post.... As for the answer I am not sure what a world without Christianity would be like... as a whole most likely not much different. However ideally I would prefer a world without religion" all together. I say religion because I have no problem with faith.... (people believing whatever they want privately) .... however when you start creating buildings, raising money, making laws etc based onthat private belief that is when others are impacted negativley. People on these boards wouldn't know it but I have just as much disgust towards Islam or Buddhism as I do christianity... However it doesn't do any good to debate those because noone will debate back since we don't have any Buddhist posters that I know of. Is the story of Jesus an honorable one.... for the most part yes. He believed in charity which I admire and helping the poor and was without a doubt a minimalist communitarian. He also was a rebel of sorts and sort of a peaceful revolutionary. However my admiration is lessemed by the fact that he didn't actually exist. As a concept yes Jesus is an admirable one.... however dickwads have distorted his image and fail to realize the fact that he is a parable =...... and a fictitiuos creation used to passify the population and enrich those shrouded in the lie. [/b][/i]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest steggyD

I share some similar beliefs with Buddhism and Hinduism, probably more than I do with Christianity. There are theories that Jesus studied with the Hindus during the missing days of his history in the Bible. Either them or the Essenes. And that he went back to India after his "death" or faked death, whatever the case may be. So, I may debate you somewhat when you bash the other religions also. The only religions I will not defend, I suppose, are the crazy Mormons and this new scientology crap. If you try to look on their website for information, all roads lead to a book that you have to buy. At least I can get the Bible online for free. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus
[quote]The only religions I will not defend, I suppose, are the crazy Mormons and this new scientology crap. If you try to look on their website for information, all roads lead to a book that you have to buy. At least I can get the Bible online for free.[/quote]

[i][b]
Maybe I will have to whip up some Good Ol Mormon Bashing then.... I have actually visited the Mormon temple (last year on a 5 hr layover in ST Lake city I took the free shuttle to the temple and they put me in this giant room with a huge ass statue of Jesus and tried to convert me)..... I subsequently played along like I was interested and the things they told me were hilarious. Not to mention they had a wax museum of the biblical stories that was freaky as hell. Also they kept calling me for months after my visit and whenever I saw them on Caller ID while I was on the computer I would que up this porn music file I had and right when I answered the girl would yell (shove it in my ass)

Scientology is also a hoot.... Ron Hubbard is basically a fraud... and yes every single theory has a seperate book to buy with it [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/30.gif[/img] [/b][/i]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='bengalrick' date='Jul 9 2005, 11:45 AM'][i]A whole human (like all other mammals) develops from a single cell called a zygote, which results from an [b]oocyte (egg) being fertilized by a single sperm[/b]. The zygote is surrounded by a strong membrane (made of glycoproteins) called the zona pellucida which the successful sperm has managed to penetrate.[/i]

it sounds to me, that the egg is fertilized by a single sperm... that equals life to me.. just my opinion...i keep reading more and more articles, trying to grasp the whole concept and give an honest answer, but i just ain't totally getting it lucid...maybe you can help me...

this week old embryo is just an egg inside of the womans body, that is taken out scientifically, put into a petri dish and fertilized w/ a single sperm... am i right?
in this case, it is not an abortion that creates it... you just have to literally create the life yourself, in a labortory... we're messing w/ life, and it doesn't seem right... like i said in my earlier post though, maybe we need to take the risk... i just don't know... i'm glad i'm not the one having to make that decision, b/c i probably wouldn't allow it either...
[right][post="112553"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Sperm is not used in creating the blastocyst that you would get stem cells from.. If a sperm cell was needed, stem cells would not be a viable treatment for women (since they would not be capable of donating the sperm cell to make the stem cells genetically compatible.).

As I stated before, [b]THERE IS NO FERTILIZATION OF THE EGG[/b]. It's is merely an egg, which has had the nucleus sucked out and replaced with material from a donor cell ([b]NOT[/b] a sperm cell)..

These blastocysts [b]COULD NEVER DEVELOP INTO A FETUS[/b] no matter how hard you tried. They simply lack the genetic material to do so (since they have never been fertilized by a sperm cell). Stem cells are basically "BLANK" cells, that when placed next to other, developed cells (such a muscle cell in a MD patient) "ABSORB" the genetic blueprint of the cells surrounding them, and then proceed to become one of them.

I ask you this question...

What if this process did not involve a human egg (such as adult stem cells or umbilical stem cells). Do you oppose this??

If not, then you must ask yourself... Is an egg a human being??? What about an egg makes it different than other cells in the body??

If a human egg is "human life", then what about the eggs destroyed in the in-vitro process? Or what about just plain menstruation??

Personally, I don't think you can call a bundle of cells "Human Life" unless they contain the genetic material to actually become a human. To me, these blastocysts are no different than any other bundle of cells grown in a petri dish.

Honestly, I think the only reason people have a problem with this because of the name - "[b]Embryonic[/b] Stem Cells". In reality, these blastocysts are not embryos at all... BUT they contain the stem cells that an embryo would.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to stomp onn your parade Lucid, but in order to be called a blastocyst, fertilization has to already have occured. After fertilization, the newly diploid cell begins to divide. A blastocyst is technically a sphere of cells containing a flattened cavity. The embryonic stem cells are simply cells that have not yet begun to differentiate.

An egg cell by itself cant just "absorb" the genetic blueprint of the cells around them. An egg cell by itself is haploid (only 23 chromosomes). The nucleus that is implanted into the egg cell is what gives the cells their genetic material.

Your explaination has about 80% correct info. But some of it is misleading. People who are interested in this subject should read up on it themselves (independently), not just take someone else's word for what happens. And they should especially NOT rely solely on info provided by those who are opposed to it.

All that is not directed at you lucid, as much as the audience in general.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus
[quote]will Christianity ever die out?[/quote]

[i][b]God Willing [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img] [/b][/i]




[i][b]also I saw a great bumper sticker today it said....[/b][/i]

GOD PROTECT US FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Beaker' date='Jul 9 2005, 10:03 PM']Not to stomp onn your parade Lucid, but in order to be called a blastocyst, fertilization has to already have occured. After fertilization, the newly diploid cell begins to divide. A blastocyst is technically a sphere of cells containing a flattened cavity. The embryonic stem cells are simply cells that have not yet begun to differentiate.

An egg cell by itself cant just "absorb" the genetic blueprint of the cells around them. An egg cell by itself is haploid (only 23 chromosomes). The nucleus that is implanted into the egg cell is what gives the cells their genetic material.

Your explaination has about 80% correct info. But some of it is misleading. People who are interested in this subject should read up on it themselves (independently), not just take someone else's word for what happens. And they should especially NOT rely solely on info provided by those who are opposed to it.

All that is not directed at you lucid, as much as the audience in general.
[right][post="112712"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Did you only read part of what I wrote???

Wow.. I can't see where you got this... Where did I state that "an egg would just absorb the genetic blueprint"???? I said THE [b]STEM CELL[/b] ABSORBS THE GENETIC BLUEPRINT OF MATURE CELLS SURROUNDING THEM

[quote]Stem cells are basically "BLANK" cells, that when placed next to other, developed cells (such as a muscle cell in a MD patient) "ABSORB" the genetic blueprint of the cells surrounding them, and then proceed to become one of them[/quote]

[b]I SAID THAT YOU INFUSE THE EGG WITH GENETIC MATERIAL FROM A DONOR CELL[/b]. This creates the blastocyst. Which contains stem cells.

here is the quote I wrote...

[quote]It's is merely an egg, which has had the nucleus sucked out and replaced with material from a donor cell (NOT a sperm cell)..[/quote]

The egg is not fertilized by a sperm cell... Are you trying to say that it is? Because if you are, you are wrong.

I want you to show me where I made it sound as if an egg is simply transplanted to a patient... That would be absurd!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 9 2005, 03:54 PM'][i][b]

Scientology is also a hoot.... Ron Hubbard is basically a fraud... and yes every single theory has a seperate book to buy with it  [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/30.gif[/img] [/b][/i]
[right][post="112647"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

I did some reading up on Scientology...it sounds like the same song many religions sing...we control you for money!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Claptonrocks
[quote name='BengalsOwn' date='Jul 9 2005, 12:31 AM']I'm getting tired of you guys throwing your anti christian views around every chance you get on this board.
[right][post="112442"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
This is America asshole... Everyone has the right to express their views even if it doesnt suit your beliefs.....get used to it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest bengalrick
[quote name='Lucid' date='Jul 9 2005, 10:46 PM']Did you only read part of what I wrote???

Wow.. I can't see where you got this... Where did I state that "an egg would just absorb the genetic blueprint"???? I said THE [b]STEM CELL[/b] ABSORBS THE GENETIC BLUEPRINT OF MATURE CELLS SURROUNDING THEM
[b]I SAID THAT YOU INFUSE THE EGG WITH GENETIC MATERIAL FROM A DONOR CELL[/b]. This creates the blastocyst.  Which contains stem cells.

here is the quote I wrote...
The egg is not fertilized by a sperm cell... Are you trying to say that it is? Because if you are, you are wrong.

I want you to show me where I made it sound as if an egg is simply transplanted to a patient... That would be absurd!
[right][post="112752"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

i'm not speaking for beaker, but this is why i said it in my post... [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blastocyst"]definition of blastocyst[/url]

[quote]A whole human (like all other mammals) develops from a single cell called a zygote, which results from an oocyte (egg) being fertilized by a single sperm. The zygote is surrounded by a strong membrane (made of glycoproteins) called the zona pellucida which the successful sperm has managed to penetrate.

The zygote undergoes cleavage, increasing the number of cells within the zona pellucida. When there are about 4-16 cells this is called the morula. When the number of cells reaches 40-150 cells, a central, fluid-filled cavity (blastocoel) forms. The zona pellucida is still present but is degenerating. This stage in the developing embryo is the blastocyst, and lasts approximately until the implantation in the uterus. The outer cells develop into the placenta.[/quote]

the way i read it, a zygote is created from a single egg and a single sperm... when the number of cells reaches 40-150, a fluid called blatocoel forms... this the the "blastocyst" process, and like beaker said, the fertilization has already taken place...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im choosing not to hijack the thread and get into a pissing match about what I think he's trying to say. I could very well be misreading his point. All Im gonna say about it is that people should read up on it an inform themselves. Form their opinions from information. Then some of these misunderstanding about stem cells and research will go away. The media puts out a very poor verion of the info to base decisions on. America should be leading the way on this issue though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BengalsOwn' date='Jul 9 2005, 12:49 AM']So I guess I'm the only one that notices it going on in the football related forums of this board as well? I have never seen one of us "beleivers" throwing in our pro-christian views when talking about the team.

How many pro-christian threads have you seen in general? Zero, maybe 1? And yet the anti christians complain about us forcing it on them? Give me a break!
[right][post="112463"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Dude, I don't want to be rude or unprofessional, but you should remember this for your next postings..................."I" BEFORE "E" UNLESS AFTER THE LETTER "C"
THUS.........."Believers."

[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/18.gif[/img]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='CmusicINC' date='Jul 10 2005, 04:56 PM']Dude, I don't want to be rude or unprofessional, but you should remember this for your next postings..................."I" BEFORE "E" UNLESS AFTER THE LETTER "C"
THUS.........."Believers."

[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/18.gif[/img]
[right][post="112942"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
CMusic...I notice you're new around here, so let me be the first to welcome you to the best goddamn Bengals board on the internet.
We don't really point out other's misspellings much, at least not seriously.
So, stay awhile, post away and Who Dey...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='BlackJesus' date='Jul 9 2005, 05:40 PM'][i][b]Steegy I appreciate what I interpret to be genuine candor in the post.... As for the answer I am not sure what a world without Christianity would be like... as a whole most likely not much different.  However ideally I would prefer a world without religion" all together.  I say religion because I have no problem with faith.... (people believing whatever they want privately)  .... however when you start creating buildings, raising money, making laws etc based onthat private belief that is when others are impacted negativley.  People on these boards wouldn't know it but I have just as much disgust towards Islam or Buddhism as I do christianity... However it doesn't do any good to debate those because noone will debate back since we don't have any Buddhist posters that I know of.  Is the story of Jesus an honorable one.... for the most part yes.  He believed in charity which I admire and helping the poor and was without a doubt a minimalist communitarian.  He also was a rebel of sorts and sort of a peaceful revolutionary.  However my admiration is lessemed by the fact that he didn't actually exist.  As a concept yes Jesus is an admirable one.... [B]however dickwads have distorted his image and fail to realize the fact that he is a parable =...... and a fictitiuos creation used to passify the population and enrich those shrouded in the lie. [/b] [/b][/i]
[right][post="112641"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

So, are you saying "dickwads" distorted Jesus' image and story. Or, everyone that believes in Jesus is a "dickhead"

You definitely seem to object to any type of organized religion. But, I find it funny that your tag name contains Jesus, you love Marvin who as far as I know is a Christian. And, you recently had a link in your sig for MLK who I am pretty sure believed in Jesus. Is it correct to only take from religious people when it benefits your own agenda?

As to the question posed by the thread....I do not think Christianity will die. The size of it, documentation of it, and the way it is passed down to every generation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus
[quote]You definitely seem to object to any type of organized religion. But, I find it funny that your tag name contains Jesus, you love Marvin who as far as I know is a Christian. And, you recently had a link in your sig for MLK who I am pretty sure believed in Jesus. Is it correct to only take from religious people when it benefits your own agenda?[/quote]

[i][b]If I didn't take knowledge from anyone who called themself a Christian I would be cutting out a huge majority of the population. Can there be smart people who call themselves Christians... sure. As for the dickweeds, I was refering to the people who have co opted Jesus for political Reasons (W and the Gang, Pat Robertson, Falwell) they pay attention to about 30 % of what Jesus talked about and ignore the rest.... especially the chairty, and not casting stones part. As for Marvin being a christian of course he is.... he is the Son of God not that loser on the stained Glass Hey Sues. [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/3.gif[/img] [/b][/i]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...