It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Your mistake is in making Religion culpable for human nature. People throughout history treated eachother horrifically. I don't know how in your mind we could have reached this point of civilisation in a morally righteous and noble manner. It seems a tad naive to me, to think that's even possible. By your logic, we should also blame science for the people who died from Atomic bombs. After all, without Science, those people would not have had an atomic bomb dropped on their head. But of course, in this instance you'll be able to appreciate the distinction and understand that its was humans who choose to use science in destructive ways. So what about the bigheads of Religion who chose to use Religion in destructive ways? No, in this case its the fault of the words on the page.
(Also, if you're going to engage someone in debate its best not to mention how intellectually superior you see yourself in relation to them as part of your opening statement. It makes you sound kinda full of yourself. Just saying.)
We're constantly fighting against the armies of darkness, the people who stubbornly choose to believe in fairy tales rather than to pick up a decent physics book. And in some parts of the world, that can be understood if not condoned; some people just don't have that choice. But in our more developed countries, I see it as mostly an act of intellectual laziness. "I've never been able to make much sense of Pythagoras' theorem so I will dismiss science in total and resort to just believing in something." Because we all try to make sense of the world. But when our failed school systems take away your appetite for science--which I could easily understand seeing how some science teachers throttle every bit of joy out of the science--or when science is pretended to be only for the math geniuses and no-one else, which is yet another mistake, many give up and I can see why. But to then resort to religion, or fortune telling, or stuff from the crystal shop or books about some new age relaxation stuff or whatever, that's a huge 180 I cannot condone.
And those who are clever enough to survive our poor science education--and I mean this unironically, many science teachers see science as an exclusive for the elite, and they are very wrong--and who furthermore also try to squeeze in religion, you know, that infamous "science and religion can go hand in hand" thing, they are the worst. I know that in the backwards regions of the USA many such doctors operate, who call themselves young Earth Creationists even. Those are dangerous people in my opinion. Just looking at the human brain and seeing the evolutionary ascension it's taken from that of a mere reptile, you cannot in your right mind "believe" it was only 6000 years ago that we were dropped here. Also, we know that humans evolve. Since we've been keeping statistics about average height, facial hair growth, IQ and so on, we have also been able to spot evolution in those things. Indeed, one merely has to examine a couple of bacteria to see evolution through spontaneous mutation at work. So those who clearly are educated in that field and yet denounce Darwinism in total, are either frauds or loonies.
As for science and religion serving different purposes, yes, true. Religion offers comfort, hope, peace, ... It doesn't take away nor avoid any of the bad that happens in life though, like loved ones dying for example, but it offers comfort. Now, so does heroin. And I'm told the comfort heroin offers is really good. Heroin also interferes with rational thinking. It also detaches you from reality and forces you to sink deeper and deeper into a self-nurtured delusion. Like saying your prayers in Church every Sunday, a heroin addict is always just one shot away from renewed happiness. And it's at least as addictive.
re the Atomic bomb, it was a tool in the same way that the sword was a tool during the crusades or the suicide jacket is used today as a tool. it was not dropped in the name of science.
It's a useless example to bring to the argument.
@0BradyM0Bondfanatic7 fine words sir, just on the basis of the defence of truth etc (ignoring the cotton wool stuff) these threads are worthwhile just for posts like that
Re social cohesion, governments use fear as one of their biggest tools (also used much within advertising to sell junk), religion is a good example of creating an infrastructure of fear and regimented behavoir in order to make people more compliant. The last thing governments/rulers/kings want is a load of free thinkers coming up with their own ideas. They want a mass of foot soldiers who will just tow the line. Religion is a great tool for discouraging free thought, encouraging "group think" (dangerous stuff) and introducing punishments for poor behavour.
Speaking personally, I have little interest in the debate re is religion true because the debate is pretty much over (pending any new evidence). What I think is much more interesting is why, in the 21st Century, humans still fall for it. That, to me, is a very important discussion.
Exactly. And I've discussed this, along with many other things, in previous posts (see several previous pages). Never, however, has anyone bothered to reply to that. So I guess the debate is indeed over. When we logically approach the subject, no replies.
If only it weren't for Religion we would be a world of free thinking intellectuals. Oh wait, Governments trick people, companies trick people, other people trick people. Turns out erasing Religion actually does nothing to solve the issues with human nature. Deception just takes other forms and people are no less susceptible. Then what is the crusade against Religion really for, exactly? What does it achieve?
Thought is a good thing. The more people think and learn, the better. Religion is one barrier to this so best if we remove that barrier. I dont think anyone is claiming that removing religion will render the World a perfect place, but it will be a big step in the right direction.
Yes, governments and commerce trick people. But these are tiny compared to religion which IMHO is the biggest fraud ever commited on the species. Plus, I can vote a government out every 4/5 years and I can choose not to buy a product. There is some form of interaction with these and, in many cases they do get found out and are punished . With religion, there is no 2 way interaction.
"this is how it is. Believe it or go to hell"
I dont think a gov would be ellected on such a manifesto but it seems to works within religion.
What are you talking about? How is Religion different from Government or commerce in that sense? Either you buy the product or the don't. Either you vote for him/her or you don't. Either you believe in it or you don't.
That is not the same and you know it. There are many evils in the world. Destroying religion isn't going to suddenly turn this place into Utopia. We're all smart enough to understand that, don't worry. So why this crusade?
Well, a few pages ago, we were served Bible quotes as if they presented the actual and factual truth. Many people still do that. Yet they get to vote too, or make harsh decisions as CEO's of powerful companies. I hope they don't lay off 200 workers because they creatively interpreted some Bible quotes. I hope some politician in, oh I don't know, the White House perhaps, doesn't push the button because he believes god or allah or the flying spaghettimonster is on his side. That's why.
Because I have kids (plural) in my classes who suffer, endlessly, because their parents won't have them medically treated since their religion doesn't allow that. Prayer will do the job. Meanwhile, the kids continue to suffer. We, as teachers, are powerless because, well, freedom of religion and such. That's why.
Because the Vatican is sitting on piles of gold they won't use to support the third world; instead, they go around begging the simple people for their life savings. That's why.
Because women worldwide are still kept in an inferior position because in their belief system, that's the way it should be. That's why.
Because in the "greatest nation of the world", several schools are forced to teach Creationism as a perfectly acceptable alternative to the proven fact of evolution, keeping those kids, in the 21st century, dumb as hell. That's why.
Because of all those other really good reasons I summed up in previous pages but were easily overlooked it seems, probably because they were very hard to refute. That's why.
Need I go on?
Does anyone on the forum seriously think that choice of faith can be compared to which brand of Coke they drink or which candidate they vote for?
I bet Coke would love to set up a network of Sunday Schools telling young kids that their brand is best, fact.
Or be brought up by parents who told them as fact from day one that their brand was the best and the other brands were evil. And if you decided to drink another brand, your parents would disown you etc.
Or to dress up in your best cloths once a week to meet up with a group of like minded Coke drinkers.
Or attend the local town "Coke Compreshensive school", where kids met in the hall every day to all agree how great the Coke was.
So thats how I think it's different.
That happens now. ;)
I think having a faith brings comfort to a lot of people and I wouldn't want to begrudge them that, I've got family who are christian. But you can believe what you like while still recognising that the bible, quran, etc, are thousands of years old and severely outdated. A lot of the stuff in there has been proven wrong through science and some of the teachings (e.g. views on homosexuality) are just horrible. These texts aren't the word of God, they're the word of someone who believed in God, except that person was living in a far more barbaric less civilised world and that has to be taken into account.
So believing in God, Jesus, heaven, Allah, etc? Cool. I don't see the evidence for it myself but whatever floats your boat. Freedom of speech and belief and all that, and like I said I can see why it's comforting and helpful for some people and wouldn't want to take that away from them. But the burden of responsibility falls on religious people to reconcile their faith with the more progressive, enlightened world we live in now, not the other way around.
Here's another one many here will not like very much.
@thelivingroyale its very easy to shrug ones shoulders and say "live and let live" if you have not been affected by the negativity of organised religion.
A young man hiding his homosexuality, the parent of a child blown to shreds in a terror attack, a woman in a forced/arranged marriage, a baby not receiving the best medical care, a young girl the victim of FGM, a woman stoned for having an affair, a woman who has to go abroad for an abortion, a journalist who cant publish a cartoon for fear of revenge, etc etc
I doubt if they could equally shrug their shoulders with such ease. Some forum members may be in these groups. I am lucky not to be in any but that does not stop me feeling for them and wishing we could be better.
I have no problem with people of faith (no matter what the faith, including Scientology) choosing to 'believe', even if such beliefs don't fall within logical constructs. As I said, I've seen enough evidence to conclude that religion has benefits for the soul. I am of the belief that 'faith' is possibly necessary for the human spirit and for human health just as much as 'love' is. We are not computers after all. We are humans, with all that entails including natural flaws and capacity for good and tremendous 'evil'.
Where I have a problem is with those who attempt to 'spread' the word. That is taking it too far imho. Keep it private. Keep it personal. Don't attempt to convert.
This thread has degenerated into what normally happens here. The religious have left the building (except for the OP), and we have athiests debating in circles amongst themselves (those who can't 'forgive' religion, and those who can).
@thelivingroyale, I'm with you on this.
Does bringing up (brain washing) your child to a religious doctrine count as conversion? Surely it must as I have yet to find a Muslim or Christian baby?
As I've gotten older I've grown to understand what she gets from it. I can't explain it and I'm not going to try. She's indicated that she's disappointed that she didn't take more effort to instill it in me and I've told her that she probably couldn't have. I am the questioning type and perhaps too scientifically (or logically) minded for it to have worked anyway (I used to be an auditor and that's still how I think). It's up to us what we want to believe. We have free will.
I think 'education' and 'economic prosperity' are the best solutions to tame organized religion's hold on the masses. I'm not sure if any research has been done to see if people become more beholden to 'faith' beliefs (even if not religion) as they age and get closer to death. I'm curious to know.
Does a baby have free will? does a child have free will? Do we believe in Father Christmas or the tooth fairy due to free will? Are we Christened as babies due to free will? Or are we vulnerable and open to suggestion at that age? Especially when the suggesion comes from adults who we love and respect.
All I know is I was a precocious kid and frustrated my mother (and particularly my grandparents) whenever the subject of 'god' came up. They couldn't answer the 'why' to my satisfaction and so I never bought into it. It wasn't for lack of trying on my grandmother's part, I can assure you. She still loved me unconditionally and perhaps that's the only thing that matters.
Very true.
Who is Jesus of Nazareth?
The issue here is I have heard every skeptical argument against him being the Son of God and there are just no argument that holds water but lets go through the top 3 arguments I know Wizard Darth and RC7 will go through
1. While Jesus likely existed in some form or another most of what we know was a legend invented much later on.
Sure if you want to remain ignorant on 1st century history and archaeology you can take this world view but the facts shoot this one down quickly the Apostles Creed is believed to have been recited by early Christians 10 years after Christ's Resurrection. Most literature experts believe it takes 4 generations for a legend to be created. We have more historical evidence for Jesus then ANY OTHER FIGURE IN ANCIENT HISTORY. sorry to use all caps but I need to push this fact. Alexander the great's biography was written 100 years after his life and the earliest versions we have is 200 years after that and yet no one questions the validity of Alexander's existence (even though in his biography he takes on a dinosaur look it up I am not kidding) and even if we ignore the entirety of the new testament (even though all of it was written within a 20-60 years hell Paul even states "if you don't believe me go to Jerusalem and ask those who have seen it) we still have Josephus and Tacitus and various other sources...
also neither Josephus (who was Jewish) nor Tacitus (Tacitus was a patriotic Roman senator and his writings shows no sympathy towards Christians.) were Christian. With just those 2 I can hit all the main points of the Christian faith specifically
Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.
He called disciples.
He had a controversy at the Temple.
Jesus was crucified by the Romans near Jerusalem.
Jesus was a Galilean.
His activities were confined to Galilee and Judea.
After his death his disciples continued and said he rose from the dead.
Some of his disciples were persecuted.
so the legend theory falls flat we have to much written about to close to the events that had anything been wrong someone would of spoken out....
2. The Disciples stole the body and claimed he was resurrected from the dead....
the oldest argument in the book literally (Pontious tells the guard to tell the Jewish leaders exactly that) I have also heard some still believe the ridiculous notion that Disciples just got the wrong tomb... Uhm you do realize the romans could of just paraded Jesus corpse through the streets of Jerusalem and destroyed the religion right then and there. I digress the stolen body theory has 3 issues
1. Some of the followers of Jesus who saw the resurrected Jesus were actually more anti Christian then Wizard of Ice Darth Dimi etc... Saul better known as Paul loved killing Christians. He wasn't the only one. James the brother of Jesus was embarrassed by his brother Jesus of Nazareth. and yet both men became Christian. of course this does remind me of a famous argument in a debate (I don't remember the specifics but..)
"Paul only became Christian that due to his intense hatred of Christ he developed a guilt complex and became Christian" Aethist
"Well be careful otherwise you might become Christian too" Christian
2. Most of the disciples died horrible deaths that could of been avoided and stopped had they said "nope he didn't rise from the dead" honestly why would they willingly go to their death (and painful ones at that) if they didn't truly see the Risen lord?
3. Jesus Appeared to more then just the 12, He appeared to James to Paul (as mentioned above) and over 500 witnesses. As Paul himself writes "Do not take my word for these things but go to jeresuleum and you will see those who have seen it with their own eyes they can attest to the truth" (I want to say this is in romans but I am running on little sleep and at work so excuse me about a lack of a foot note)
3. Jesus didn't really die on the cross he was barely alive and somehow the tomb healed him and that is how he "came back from the dead"
oh boy where do I begin with this piece of sheer lunacy....personally it would be a larger miracle that a man survived the flogging crucifixtion and spear wound (everyone seems to forget about the spear wound at the end) and that the cave would miraculously revive him (why is the cave some sort of alien ship with a healing bay or something why would a cave heal someone?)... this is ignoring the fact the 2 ton stone was rolled away so in his weakend state he did that?
4. "people would assume that an outrageous lie must be true because no one would have the audacity to have made it up." Aolph Hitler Mein Kompf.. figured I would give you guys a fourth argument...
the issue here is Paul consistently says go to Jerusalem and while travel in the Ancient world took a bit longer then modern day it was far from impossible from anyone in the roman world to head to Jerusalem and see what really is going on (again many jews throughout the roman world took the trip to Herod's temple annually) if this was a lie likely it would of been squashed again due to not only people going to investigate it but the brutual deaths of the disciples (except for John who lived under house arrest till he died in his 90's I believe... though one wonders if what the disciples thought was true actually happened and he never did die and lived to the present day... but then he would be looked at as god and yeah... ) one of them would of confessed under brutual torture..
So with all that said sorry it takes more faith to be an atheist then to be a Christian. This is not out of some fear of death or pie in the sky view point either. I don't wish Christianity to be right far from it. Atheism is far more attractive I would argue especially considering my long line of sins and occasional fear that God will say "nice try but down to hell you go" the idea of building the utopia here and that there is no "sin" just degrees of right and wrong... The idea that one can truly "get away" with things. the Idea of creating your own moral code... it's all very attractive and much like I have said with ghosts I would love nothing more then to be proven wrong (of course this also sadly means I wasted a large portion of my 20's but C'est la vie) the idea that I can use finite time of conscious to push for now is again beautiful... the evidence just doesn't support this We would essentially need to ignore every archeological discovery of the last 100 years and pretend the years 3 B.C. (or BCE if you want to be annoying) - 33 A.D. (Again or CE if you want to be annoying) never happened. As one Christian pointed out "If paul wanted to invent a religion he is doing it all wrong as Acts shows the exact wrong way to make a fake religion because to make a fake one you simply say 'yeah he resurrected only to us and you can't see it' nope Paul screams go to Jerusalem if you don't believe me their are tons of witnesses who saw this who still live today"
And because the Son exists so must the Father.. now I know someone is going to make angry claims about the Old Testament and how it's even more antiquatied but lets focus on one argument at a time....
So like I said to me saying I need faith to be a Christian is the same as saying I need faith to believe FDR was the president during World War 2 or that Day follows night etc.. This isn't do to a want of a god or fear of death but simply looking at the evidence and letting it speak for itself this is of course not touching on all the miracles and evidence since that time (NDE, Virgin Mary sighting in Portugal in 1912 I believe...etc)
So Wizard Darth RC7 etc have at it who is Jesus of Nazerth please explain the empty tomb.
@Mendes4Lyfe, I think it's far more naive to assume one's thoughts while you are debating them. I didn't say that without religion the world would be perfect, or noble or "morally righteous." All I have said is that it would have to be better, and I don't think that comment is naive at all.
You say that religion can be excused because people will be evil no matter what the time and we should blame the nature of said human and not what they practice. Well, what sense does that make, really? If a terrorist straps a bomb to his chest and blows up a school of children or hospital to appease their god and get those delicious virgins in paradise, what do you think makes them act so horrifically? That's right, their religious texts and their inspiration to do evil in the name of it. What makes certain folks of the community (certainly not all, thankfully) homophobic and throw hate speech at gays? The religious text that labels any couple who isn't a man and a woman as sinners worthy of the most vile death and condemnation. How do we not blame religion for that homophobia in the person, when the bible was one of the very foundations for homophobia as we know it, a problem we still deal with today because religion has made it acceptable? "It's not I that hates gays as sinners, the bible says it and I must follow it." When a person with impact in the education system of a state in America fights to have the teachings of evolutionary theory (scratch that, fact) replaced by one that tells people the earth is 6,000 years old, again, something proved wrong backwards and forwards, what do we have to blame? That's right, the religious text that planted that asinine idea and countless other geological and social ones in their heads that fester like a virus.
@Mendes4Lyfe, you can go on and on about how great religion is and be a dedicated and rather blind apologist for it, holding that humans must be held accountable for themselves and not what they read or believe, but that makes no sense whatsoever. We see instances every day of what religion drives people to do, terrorists who wouldn't bomb if they didn't have a god to serve in paradise, people who maybe wouldn't hate gays if the bible hadn't taught them to hate, and those who want to repress truth in place of their comforting and empty theories they got from the bible about the natural world as kids are told the wrong things about how we live. Somewhere along the line humans must also be held accountable by what makes them act, what influences their bad action. People commit hideous acts of violence and intellectual dishonesty every day in the name of and because of religion, and to ignore that and excuse it as humans just being humans is truly naive.
I would decry religion for all of this as I would science (ooh, didn't think I'd go there, did you?). It would be intellectually dishonest to say that science hasn't caused as much harm as good, or at least enough to pose a dichotomy. For every finding in the genetic code there is a bomb dropped on a troublesome nation, and that is a sad fact of life. But I think your comparison here is a little lost in itself, and isn't a very sturdy one. It's hard to compare the acts of scientists to those of the religious, because scientists don't spend their days appeasing or serving a being they can only sense. The majority focus on how to make the world better, and how to solve complex issues in every facet of life to improve our understanding of where we're at. It's these people we have to thank for technological advancement, ground-breaking transportation, an understanding of the genome, cures for major diseases that used to be death sentences, and so on. If we depended on the religious and their theories we'd still be banging stones together in caves for all the good their ideas can offer, and that has to count for something. The good that science and its students deal is really staggering, even in comparison to those in history who've used science for evil, but that doesn't remove the need to stand against that evil when it pops up.
And that's really the point: we must always be impartial and stand up when something like science or religion is used for a act that is too vile to condone. When a great medicine used to help the world's ailing population is weaponized as a bacteriological virus to kill as many as it cures, we need to stand against it, just as we need to stand against the use of religion for all the heinous things it has done. I would perhaps be easier on religion if it helped the world even a tenth of how science has, but all I see is a dulling of the minds and a control of those minds that has stemmed since its creation, along with all the evil thoughts and actions it has justified in those weak minds for centuries.
P.S.: My opening comment to you wasn't to assert my own intellect as supreme, but to point out that you are missing pockets of knowledge and context to how the world works that necessitates one having to go into long-winded replies such as this to very obvious statements that shouldn't need backing up or further explanation. I hope you don't believe some of what you say, as it speaks of a very closed world that doesn't see the full picture.
*Sigh*
You're doing that thing again, @Mendes4Lyfe. "Hatred and evil will always exist, so get off religion's back, man!" Nobody here is saying that no religion= zero problems, yet you seem to keep interpreting our responses as such. Read our words and don't jump to such asinine conclusions.
There will have to be bad eggs in society no matter what, as it is a moral inevitability that not everyone can serve the common good. There will always exist those that steal and lie and kill to get ahead or reach selfish goals, so please don't think you're dealing us atheists a rousing revelation that folds in all our life experiences and thoughts into a suitcase and sends it down the river to its eventual sinking. We know of this and think of this already, as it's an obvious thought to have that is easily backed up. We aren't tricked into corners as easily as one might be who prays to a sky god, what do you take us for? ;)
However, just because deception and trickery will inevitably always happen, don't you think that we should do our damnedest to eliminate it where we find it, to make the populations of the world less endangered from vile acts or forces that crush their free thinking? That's why there's a crusade against religion, for all the nasty things it creates and excuses in the minds of weaker humans, who take the bible literally and change the world with their actions for all the wrong reasons. My above post already listed the sins of religion (ooh, see what I did there?) so I won't waste more time going into them.
It's strange that you seem so ready to justify religion and tell people to step off of it in the same moment that you seem to decry and sympathize with the trickery and corruption and lies that are peddled on the human population. Well lad, look no further than religion for the single most powerful and enduring form of mind control, oppression and trickery, the causation of the very shit you hate. The system of "faith" that makes you pay your sins off with your own money, that demands you live a strict and unhealthy life to be free of sin, and that has targeted those in society who don't look, act or think in the way that the ancient tome deems acceptable.
Why do you think that churches throughout history used their power to kill scientists? Because the truth getting out ruined the illusion of religion they were crafting for the human population, a population they wanted to herd like cattle. Organized religion is nothing but a brand, and the sermons are sales meetings where the product of religion and God's salvation through fiery hoops is sold to those gullible enough to lick it up. Many of these people are uneducated and easily led, a sickening thing that speaks to the control of it all, as are some brilliant minds somehow bought by it (as we see in this thread), all motivated by the empty thoughts of a divine heaven and the more aggressive and dominant threat of hell if you do wrong by God and don't live your life in exactly how he says, the way someone from centuries back before modern science and social theory and tools beyond a cave fire and stone wheel would've.
Do you see the complex and aching issue this poses? I hope you do, so that I don't have to waste more time pointing out the absolute obvious. People sometimes get on me for writing long posts, but at times they are needed to lay things out when others seem to want to live an intellectually dulled or suppressed life that is good company to their very closed and safe world view.
Yes, it's far easier to make a joke than actually reply to a response that does yours in with full force. Can your winky face be taken as a sign that you are indeed in on the joke that religion is a delirious and nutty concept that has no basis in reality? Comparing faith to Coke products may on the face of it seem strange, but boy does that metaphor stack up. Frightening stuff, and not something I'd take a sip of if I were you.
I have to say @Mendes4Lyfe, I am both endlessly amused and horrified by these kinds of thoughts. How one can so easily excuse religion and write it off as no different than voting for a state senator or buying a twinkie and bottle of water in the shop downtown. Despite the fact of course that we can vote people out of office if they are damaging and we can return purchases we make at the shop with relative ease and with eventual and assured recompense. But where can I go to vote religion's influence out of the education system or politics, or anywhere else that those closed and delusional thoughts may harm us? Where is my religious receipt to recoup all the time I've lost to debating the topic with folks like you?
When we vote for someone in office, we vote and we wait and see how it goes; sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, but the choice is never permanent and you know that time will move it on either very soon or a little bit later. We buy something in the shop and we like it or we don't, and depending on what we do we either keep it or return it at free will. To compare those kinds of things to religion, a system of manipulation and falsity that has been going on for as long or longer than merchant trading and tribal voting and whose effects continue to be the cancer of a struggling world is a very myopic and strange one to make.
Warping people's minds, targeting populations the bible wants for dead and spreading false ideas about the world in place of those tested by science is more than just checking a line through a voting ballot or ringing yourself up a Coke (I want an endorsement deal from them at this point), it is fundamentally changing the world and how we live in the long, long term. History and its thinkers have always been at the mercy of religion, whether it is in the old heretics who stood against its vile control or those of today who struggle to keep fact alive in exchange for the bible's lies and as we still continue to fight for simple human rights that those beliefs had a deep and nasty hand in restraining or delaying altogether.
The social, psychological and scientific repercussions of religion in the humans it targets and oppresses, the minds it clouds and tricks and the scientific truth and progression it stalls to selfishly and criminally spur itself on are devastating, immense and profound, and how that isn't immediately apparent to so many like yourself is worrying to me. This is why we fight, because otherwise our society and how we live and treat each other, as well as the developments we've made on a moral and technological level would never have been possible. Folks like Copernicus and Galileo started a ball rolling that still keeps going, and as religion dies and free thought rises we'll only see more erosion of the old and asinine ways of thinking to make way for those that should've been supported all along instead of silenced or killed off entirely by that great and vile religious arm. It's no secret why society has moved in the opposite direction of religion over time, to more social awareness, to open gay marriage, to a pro-contraception stance and more freedom for women's rights, to a push for the truth of science in place of the lies of the bible and its metaphors disguised a "facts."
The religious have and always will be behind history and behind advancement, clinging on to the thoughts of an outdated and cruel time while folks like @DarthDimi, @TheWizardOfIce, @patb, @Ludovico and all the rest who aren't afraid to call themselves atheists will keep with the times and march forward more enlightened, informed and clear-thinking men as we adapt with our age and strive for the kind of intellectual and honest debate that the other side wants to suppress or stall. When the religious are ready they can put down their flint rocks and stop rolling their stone wheels to join us of the future in our gas powered cars and with our interconnected laptops as we live life the way it's meant to be: without waste or rose-tinted glasses.
If Jesus is just so well documented and "real" then the argument is not "atheist versus Chrisitianity" - its Christianity versus everyone else who does not "get" Jesus (ie most other religions plus atheists)
Plus , if you want to go down an evidence based route re Jesus, thats fine but as the basic claim as that he was the son of God, you have to use the same route re the God bit. If you dont have decent evidence for his Dad existing, then all the Jesus stuff becomes a little redundant.
I could claim Jesus was a Zombie and thats an easier claim to make as it includes all the stuff you comment on re him dieing on the cross and loads of people seeing him afterwards etc but the Zombie claim does not include God.
Well actually that is the argument Christianity is the one true path... but again there is more then enough evidence for the existence of God as well... but Still Zombie doesn't explain well much of anything as in the literal sense the Zombie is just a walking corpse (no personality etc) yet Christ was very much alive eating with the disciples performing miracles etc.
you have the floor.....
Well, as the scientists believe it is so many millions of years I have to defer to their judgement as I'm not trained in that profession. That is even if it does go against what it is supposed to say on this issue in the Bible.
I'm not sure who has offered the 'legend theory' as an explanation except yourself. I don't think any of us have stated this 'theory' so please don't purport to be speaking for us.
Anyway I don't remember any of us disputing the fact that a man called Jesus probably existed but all of the your 'main points of the Christian faith' remain equally true if he is not the Son of God.
Chortlesome in its inanity as an alleged 'proof'. They 'believed' strongly enough that they were prepared to die. Happens all the time these days if you've ever watched the news. Still its nice to know that if I just believe enough that England will win the World Cup to the point I allow myself to be put to death then that makes it true.
As Blackadder said, 'Take Sir Thomas Moore, put to death for refusing to recant his Catholicism. He must have been kicking himself as the flames licked higher that it never occurred to him to say 'I recant my Catholicism.'
Obviously a magic tomb that healed him is 'sheer lunacy' (although apparently belief in a magic guy who can rise from the dead is not?) but its quite conceivable he wasn't actually dead when they cut him down (heartbeat could be very faint, or he might have even suffered a cardiac arrest only for it to start up again - these things happen and I don't think the average Centurion in 33AD was equipped with an ECG monitor. These are pre medieval peasants not Charlie from Casualty so if you looked in a pretty rough state, were unconscious and bleeding everywhere I dare say they classed you as dead. Maybe Jesus was in a coma at this stage and then recovered. Anything is possible (including him being the Son of God and rising from the dead by the way!) but probability dictates a far more prosaic reason he might have been seen to be strolling about again than he supernaturally brought himself back to life because he was God.
All your spewings seem to have resulted in is a case for the existence of Jesus. I'm not denying that evidence for that exists. You have gone no way towards proving that he was divine, nor the existence of God.
Absolutely. We're all on tenterhooks for the big reveal that I suspect is going to be more disappointing than Waltz saying 'My name is Ernst Stavro Blofeld.'
So where does that leave you then?