a brief opinion of christianity in general

[Morality Games]

Like most of the religious, Christians use double-standard logic in a very ignoble way. They will affirm their religion is true so long as there is a logical possibility it is true, but will not affirm evidence that contradicts their religion's authenticity so long as there is a logical possibility it is false. Since virtually anything can be possible under the conditions of their theoretical logic, they work themselves into a desire-driven paradigm where the only outcome can be their religion is true, irregardless of how implausible this seems scientifically, historically, or psychologically.

Incidentily, this is why debate against the religious is futile. The only way to overcome an idea affirmed through the emotions accompanying desire is not by reason, but with a new desire and accompanying emotions. In effect, they would have to not want to be Christian before could comprehend appeals from secularized reasoning. Otherwise, their desire-driven paradigm will simply keep them distorting information so that it will stack with their religion (which is what they call reason).

[christianmathew]

I have decided not to debate on this, but it seems like its starting to lean towards christians are wrong and christianity is just a worthless cult.

Well, that may or may not be true. I would suppose that there is evidence going both ways.

So, what is the logical cunclusion about christianity?

[Zhavric]

Quote by: christianmathew So, what is the logical cunclusion about christianity?

That you guys are the (indirect) descendents of people who were duped by the first century equivalent of Scientology and use a special set of logical rules to evaluate claims related to your religion.

[christianmathew]

Well that's opinionated. Cool. Although I, and the 2 billion other people like me, don't believe that, it does seem like a logical and supported conclusion. Anyone else have a different theory?

[Zhavric]

Quote by: christianmathew Well that's opinionated. Cool. Although I, and the 2 billion other people like me, don't believe that, it does seem like a logical and supported conclusion.

A) It's not opinion. It's fact which I established here. If you want to call it opinion and NOT look really silly you need to take a crack at my argument. You can't casually discard facts as "opinion" without a rebuttal. That's not how debate works.

B) There was a time where billions of people were sure the earth was flat. There are people living today who are sure Xenu (Scientology) is absolutely true. Truth is not mandated by majority opinion. Truth is what is. It's unfortunate, but your religion is an institutionalized messiah cult that the world would be far better without.

[stevemckay]

Quote by: gela It also divides people, encourages animal cruelty and environmental apathy (because apparently earth is here for humans, and animals don't have souls)....

This may be a topic for another thread but does the Bible specifically say anything about animals not having souls? It's not a baited question. I really don't know.

[JaneDoe321]

My "elevator speech" repsonse is that I think Christianity is a drug. (this is also my opinion of most other religions, tho).

It inspires some *great* art, but it also screws with people's minds and is completely unnecessary and has the potential to do immense harm.

[christianmathew]

Zhavric, maybe you didn't pay attention. I said I wouldn't debate, just put my opinions in, like you did. If you think they are facts, that's your choice. But a debate over whether christianity is true or not could go on forever, because it is a religion based on faith, which you don't seem to have. But, I won't debate. I am just trying to find people's opinions.

Look at what janeDoe wrote, it doesn't attack people, it just states her opinion.

But hell, I'm not the authority of the world, so don't listen to me if you don't want to. I'm just some guy wanting to learn and understand, instead of being an ignorant fool like most of the population.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: zhavric Estimated date range of Mark, the first gospel written which the others were based off of: circa 70 ce.

Yep.

Look at any point in ancient Jewish history and you'll see the same pattern. Jews minding their own business. Jews get conquered. Jews make up story about person who saves them. Moses is a perfect example, but if you need more, let me know.

The romans have a penchant for destroying things they don't like. That included traces of a person's existence. They had done it many times before

but orthodoxy (the gospel myth we know today) won out due to the violent nature of it's earlt adherents.

So they got a date wrong. That isn't enough to prove he didn't exist.

The cult became institutionalized by emperor Constantine for political reasons

No kidding. Still doesn't prove he didn't exist.

I've looked at the rest. All of which may be true, yet none prove he doesn't exist. In fact they only show how His word was spread. (it wasn't always pretty).

But where's the proof he never existed.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: christianmathew Zhavric, maybe you didn't pay attention.

Hi. I'm a debate forum. Have we met?

Seriously, this is a debate forum. I'm not sure if you had in mind some touchy-feely say-what-you-want BBS, but you haven't found it. You need to support what you say or concede. It's that simple. If you don't like it, then don't post.

I said I wouldn't debate, just put my opinions in, like you did.

That's twice you've called the facts I presented "opinion". Why are you lying like that?

If you think they are facts, that's your choice.

Of course it's not my choice. What a silly thing to say? Look, either something is a fact or it isn't. It's not my choice whether the earth is flat. It isn't my choice that Bu$h is president. It isn't my choice that the moon revolves around the earth. They're facts, man.

This thing you're doing where you call facts that you don't like opinions, you have to knock that off. Seriously, it's makes you sound petty and juvenile. The thing to do is to challenge the facts I've presented with your own evidence. All you're doing now is namecalling which is telling everyone here you're not just unwilling to debate: you're incable of debating. And I don't think for a moment that's true. In short, you're too smart to be this dumb.

But a debate over whether christianity is true or not could go on forever, because it is a religion based on faith, which you don't seem to have.

Oh... so, Jesus didn't really exist? Your religion isn't based on the fact that the son of god walked the Earth about 2000 years ago? The problem with Christians like you is that you want the rest of us to treat your religion like a fact, but whenever we call you on it, you guys 180 and call it a matter of "faith". How dumb is that? What would you say to a Scientologist who said, "We are literally descended from aliens who flew here on space ships that looked like Boeing 747's... what? That sounds like nonsense? Well, it's a matter of faith." You'd say the truth: that they want their nonsense to be fact, but when it's pointed out that it's nonsense they try to call it faith.

But, I won't debate. I am just trying to find people's opinions.

Lurk more.

Look at what janeDoe wrote, it doesn't attack people, it just states her opinion.

Learn the difference between attacking a person and attacking an argument.

But hell, I'm not the authority of the world, so don't listen to me if you don't want to. I'm just some guy wanting to learn and understand, instead of being an ignorant fool like most of the population.

Then learn from what I just told you. Learn that your religion is false and that the only reason you believe it is because you've been indoctrinated from birth to do so.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Winter wind The romans have a penchant for destroying things they don't like. That included traces of a person's existence. They had done it many times before

Absolutely false.

The Romans are well known for treating the people they conquer with respect (relatively speaking) and integrating parts of conquered culture into Roman culture. The Jews are unique in that they refused to accept their defeat and kept making trouble for the Romans.

So they got a date wrong. That isn't enough to prove he didn't exist.

ROFLMAO

I'm trying to think of a more disingenuous thing for you to have said. I'm drawing a blank. They didn't "get their date wrong". They invented the story or accepted earlier inventions.

No kidding. Still doesn't prove he didn't exist.

Again, you're being disingenuous. Me mentioning Constantine doesn't prove Jesus' non-existence specifically. It proves why the silly little messiah cult from the ass end of nowhere ended up as the dominant religion of Rome. After ignoring the lion's share of my post, it would have been far better for you to simply stay quiet rather than attempting to snipe at my argument by changing the context around.

I've looked at the rest. All of which may be true, yet none prove he doesn't exist.

Of course it does. The only way you could possibly look at that, admit that it's true, and still believe a self-fathering cosmic Jewish zombie walked the earth as a rock star in a literate country without being mentioned by anyone is if you're using your own set of bogus logical rules. Honestly, I'd laugh if there weren't so many people who believe as you do.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: zhavric The Romans are well known for treating the people they conquer with respect (relatively speaking) and integrating parts of conquered culture into Roman culture.

But they weren't too hot about Christians, also bringing up the question, if the Romans knew Jesus didn't exist, why didn't they say so? Wouldn't have been too difficult to defame him.

I'm trying to think of a more disingenuous thing for you to have said. I'm drawing a blank. They didn't "get their date wrong". They invented the story or accepted earlier inventions.

You said it yourself, Constantine picked and choose what was to be and what wasn't. The Date could have been one. I already know Jesus wasn't born in the winter, that doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

After ignoring the lion's share of my post, it would have been far better for you to simply stay quiet rather than attempting to snipe at my argument by changing the context around.

Not really. If you have something I missed that's importent, restate it. However, it doesn't look like you have decisive evidence.

The only way you could possibly look at that, admit that it's true, and still believe a self-fathering cosmic Jewish zombie walked the earth as a rock star in a literate country without being mentioned by anyone is if you're using your own set of bogus logical rules.

Haa, your "win" is fading.

My logic is simple. Your logic isn't that Jesus didn't exist because...(enter fact).

Your logic is that Jesus didn't exist because there wasn't any proof.

This is called an argument from silence.

I'm looking at how Jesus effected the world. I find it more likely that he existed and gathered a following, rather then a following magically railed around a bunch of rabbis who hated Jesus.

The Romans never tried to disprove him despite the fact they hated him.

According to R. T. France: "even the great histories of Tacitus have survived in only two manuscripts, which together contain scarcely half of what he is believed to have written, the rest is lost"

The life of Jesus, during and immediately his life, was not a major event for the Romans so it's not to hard to believe the records were lost.

This is my evidence. Where is your clean cut proof, unsoiled with anything unimportant? You lack the proof to say he doesn't exist.

Though I could have missed something, if so, make the argument as simple as possible to tear down my own. This is how debate works (I shouldn't have to say this).

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Winter wind But they weren't too hot about Christians, also bringing up the question, if the Romans knew Jesus didn't exist, why didn't they say so? Wouldn't have been too difficult to defame him.

You're assuming he existed. Stop. Go by the evidence. Use your head. If I write a hoax today that's set in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1930, then it's silly to ask, "Well, if the Cleveland police knew it was a hoax, then why didn't they expose it back in the 30's?" Since there was no Jesus, there was no reason for the Romans to "expose" Jesus. Furthermore, Christianity started as a tiny cult. Nothing more. With the Romans, they weren't aware of Christians as anything but a queer branch of Judaism. By the time they realized what Christianity was, it was far too late.

You said it yourself, Constantine picked and choose what was to be and what wasn't. The Date could have been one. I already know Jesus wasn't born in the winter, that doesn't mean he doesn't exist.

Which part of "they invented the story" are you not understanding?

Not really. If you have something I missed that's importent, restate it. However, it doesn't look like you have decisive evidence.

No. I'm not going to repeat myself. You challenged me to prove what I stated. I did. You then ignored most of my post and sniped (poorly) at parts of what I stated. You're not going to re-write the thread and pretend that I didn't prove what I proved. Read it again and this time try replying to the whole thing.

[christianmathew]

Zhavric, calm down. Breathe deeply.
Winter wind is right, you are arguing through silence, claiming tat there is no proof, instad of there is no proof because... Therefore what you right isn't fact. And yes, Jesus did exist. Go talk to anyone who has actually learned about history.

[Morality Games]

Quote by: christianmathew Zhavric, calm down. Breathe deeply. Winter wind is right, you are arguing through silence, claiming tat there is no proof, instad of there is no proof because... Therefore what you right isn't fact. And yes, Jesus did exist. Go talk to anyone who has actually learned about history.

There is a chance a wandering Jewish storyteller and theologian existed, and that this person was the one Jewish-Christians based their faith on, but the account of his life in the Bible is mostly exaggerated mythology that came afterward.

Also, it is high unlikely he de-emphasized the importance of Jewish rituals like not eating non-Kosher foods and circumcision -- the former was never strictly rejected, but Jewish-Christians didn't insist upon it to increase appeal to Gentiles (many of whom would never give up non-Kosher foods), and circumcision was considered completely barbaric by most non-Jewish peoples, hence the necessity of its repudiation.

The Jewish-Christians also abandoned numerous Jewish holidays and festivals celebrating their cultural identity in favor of assimilating those of Pagans (another recruiting ploy). Gradually, Christianity stopped being Jewish altogether, acquiring a much different flavor.

[Winter wind]

Quote by: zhavric You're assuming he existed. Stop. Go by the evidence. Use your head. If I write a hoax today that's set in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1930, then it's silly to ask, "Well, if the Cleveland police knew it was a hoax, then why didn't they expose it back in the 30's?"

Not a wonderful analogy.
Christians were prosecuted by the Romans before it was incorporated. Its like the police banned people from speaking about the hoax, but never disproved it.

No. I'm not going to repeat myself. You challenged me to prove what I stated. I did. You then ignored most of my post and sniped (poorly) at parts of what I stated. You're not going to re-write the thread and pretend that I didn't prove what I proved. Read it again and this time try replying to the whole thing.

You present a ton of irrelevant stuff Zhavric.

Look at any point in ancient Jewish history and you'll see the same pattern. Jews minding their own business. Jews get conquered. Jews make up story about person who saves them. Moses is a perfect example, but if you need more, let me know.

This is the only point that tries to prove that Jesus doesn't exist. The other points I agree with (mostly, though not with the sentiment, which is for another time). The other points have nothing to do with whether Jesus existed or not, but rather a bitter history of the Christianity. I'm not sniping, but if you think one of the other points was relevant please point out which one and why.

And this point above "look at any point...", the base of your argument, is an argument from silence. It doesn't prove Jesus didn't exist. Plus you have historians like Tacitus who wrote about Jesus before Constantine converted.

You seem to hate us so much it's no longer about convincing us. It isn't even about debating. You've degraded to the level of those who hate so much. It's about shouting your points.

[Morality Games]

I think you are both exaggerating Zharvic's aggressiveness. I keep re-reading his posts, and I don't infer the degree of rage you seem to be getting. "Very annoyed and bothered" would be a better description than "hateful".

I have read genuinely wrathful posts, and none of those fall into the category.

[Charlatan]

Christianity is about love, hope, showing the way to a 'purer' life, and instilling fear into people. Loving each other is important, hope that you can amend your wicked ways is important - through forgiveness - and showing people how to live a moral life is also important.

Saying God created love leads me to believe that there is no creation as such, other than a big bang or whatever, as love comes down to instinct, and it can be shown to be that way as you study people. There is no good in people, only living for their needs, but if you need someone you love them maybe in extreme cases. Seeing as how there is no non natural aspects to love, it must be natural, so is not magical, so was not cast upon us by God.

Hope that someone else can forgive you for transgressions againt them is important, as it leads to a moral society. Hope that you can amend your ways through being forgiven by them is also important. Hope that you can appease a God by asking His forgiveness for what you have done has no merit, as it was not about Him. The only case here is one of God saying that you must be forgiven through Him, so He acts as a tributary towards forgiveness, as He has made Himself the end goal. So basically it is because He says so, and maybe it is true.

Christian values are important in making for a good society, one that upholds those values will prosper, but as you can see, it is for the wrong reasons.

[wyoguy]

Quote by: Winter wind Christianity basically tells Adam and all humans in various parts of the Bible that humans are the...crap I'm forgetting the exact word (Some Christian I am), but it was like guardian....vanguard... Whatever, it was synonymous with "renters" The best definition of why Christians should care for the earth was given by Robin Williams: What if God comes back and says (looking at the ceiling) "who the fuck did this?"

Steward

[Hurt]

hm.

Christianity gives me the impression that it was solely created to let people feel warm and special on the inside when they try to accept that someone has created them specially. It gives people comfort in death and in other times of despair. It provides a decent base for morality - though it is too easily manipulated and can often times be extremely narrow-minded.

my take on it.