AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → [concluded] Was Jesus real?

453 74735
holt24
offline
holt24
1,133 posts
Nomad

This is not about whether or not he was the son of God but whether he actually existed.Most atheists agree that he did live but there are some who don't so what are you're thoughts?

  • 453 Replies
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,001 posts
Shepherd

Only a fool disregards the bible. Even if you dont believe in it, you shouldnt just tag it as "false".


Arrogance and ignorance is not a pretty picture. Where do you get your evidence that the Bible should be held in such regard?

Touch a tree. There's god. Touch the grass. There he is again. He may not be here in person, but he's here in nature.


This is based on what? Just a "feeling" you have? This is not evidence of your god.
Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

Considering Atheism came before religion - I'd argue that it was theistic beliefs in general that started the argument.

slimmyfeet
offline
slimmyfeet
59 posts
Nomad

While I don't completely disregard the Bible - It has so many flaws that it's best to take anything you read in it with a pillar- pinch of salt.
Directly from your site:These lists are meant to identify possible problems in the Bible, especially problems which are inherent in a literalist or fundamentalist interpretation. Notice the word "literally"? Didnt i just say that you guys take the bible too literally? And yeah exaggerations are lies, and you are probably going to say "But that means the bible is a lie! Derrrr...." But the stories arent lie and neither is the message. Just the people who exaggerated them in the first place are liars
Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

Look, if it deals in half-truths and exaggerations (and you can't separate the half-truths and exaggerations from fact), then I'd hold it in high suspicion and low regard as a factual document.

samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

I mean honestly, I've watched these threads time and time again. It ends up with the religious side reiterating what has already been said.


Honestly, I've yet to see a Christian enter a debate here and give a decent run. It ends like you said, Freak.


Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and chalk that, frank, you are pretty new, and ash you had a massive hiatus. Not that there's anything wrong with that but most of you came back at the point in time when the majority of our WEPR were atheist. In the past myself, parsat, adios, leviathan, and cinna have all been able to provide thought provoking arguments that, if not winning the point, could bring the debate to a stand still. Now, this was simply because we all made it clear that while we were a 100% sure we were correct we weren't beyond listening to others points, something both sides could work on these days.
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,504 posts
Jester

Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and chalk that, frank, you are pretty new, and ash you had a massive hiatus. Not that there's anything wrong with that but most of you came back at the point in time when the majority of our WEPR were atheist.


Of course.

In the past myself, parsat, adios, leviathan, and cinna have all been able to provide thought provoking arguments that, if not winning the point, could bring the debate to a stand still.


Cinna registered in '10 though O_o
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,001 posts
Shepherd

I'd be interested to see some of these debates.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

He said that becuase God wasnt relieving any of the pain that he was suffering.


Still not making any sense. if he was God then there would be no point in asking that question.

He's not crazy considering that he had so many followers


As logantheking pointed out there have been many crazy people with a large following.

and hes not a liar since the roman empire was afraid of him.


Yeah wouldn't have had anything to do with him stirring up trouble... I always got the impression they were more pissed off with him then afraid.

So we can conclude that he was telling the truth.


Even if they were I don't see how we can conclude that.

Also, he is perfect.


This is nothing but assertion.

Just because he came to earth as a mortal doesnt automatically cancel out the option of him as a god. It's like a doctor. He checks up on us, or in this case, the planet. You can't say "Oh hes a doctor so he cant be a normal person" or vice versa. Its bad logic


Not what I'm or anyone else is saying. You also have no room to point fingers with bad logic.

Jesus proved this when he performed all of those miracles (i.e. the lepers).


The only source claiming he did miracles is the Bible. No the hundreds of witnesses are not sources, as they are also only in the Bible. Given there were suppose to be so many witnesses to some of the miracles and the only source of these miracles is the Bible this puts into question the claim if said miracles.

Two, It does say in the bible that jesus is gods only son.


So he's both God and God's son?

You guys are using nothing but bad logic.


Again no room to point fingers. Also using the Bible to prove the Bible is a fallacy.

Jesus was sent to forgive us of our sins and in the process he made us gods children, but only if you believe in him.


This requirement of belief seems pointless. Especially if there is an afterlife we will know once we are dead.

If you dont, it doesnt mean you are going to hell. Jesus is simply an alternate, improved way of entering heaven.


That's funny I could have sworn there was something in there about him being the only way.

God probably knows every possible route you could take in life, but doesnt know how you are going to choose them. That is life in essence


Then God is not omniscient.

He respects our decisions, no matter what we did or what we look like.


"I respect your decision now go to hell" makes perfect sense.

No you wouldnt go to hell. As with most religions, man tends to slur what the actual god said.


So we can't trust what the Bible says?

And so what if i base my logic off of christianity?


The problem here you are basing your logic off something that isn't based in logic.

My answers do have some scientific research in them btw


Show me, and I reserve the option to laugh at you if you present a Christian apologetic or other similar site.

Religion is the same, except we learn through events in life (and a little from books).


Personal experience can be flawed evidence.

these threads do throw curve balls from time to time.


That's the fun part.

Touch a tree. There's god. Touch the grass. There he is again. He may not be here in person, but he's here in nature.


Touch yourself there's... umm yeah. Really this wouldn't tell us if God exists, this would only tell us trees, grass, and mr.winky is there.

Besides we come into this world knowing one thing for certain: that we'll die.


No we don't, infants don't have knowledge of death, they learn about it through experience.

If we enjoyed life as a whole then wasn't it worth it


This is the first thing you've said that makes any sense.

And if we are certain that we are not evil and are remorseful about our actions, then wouldnt death be a good thing, a new beginning?


If we haven't been evil then what would we have to be remorseful about? And no it doesn't stand to reason that there will be a nice afterlife to go to.

If i am correct, which i know i am, atheists started the argument.


Yeah why don't those atheists just blindly follow Christianity like you do.

Plus, it might just be me, but ive noticed that all of you atheists seem to take the bible too literally. Like every single word is the truth about how exactly things took place. You fail to realize that most of the old testament was at first passed down orally. In that sense, there are a lot of exaggerations in most of the bible stories in order to get the point across.


If we are going to bring this down to some parts are metaphor then we could just as easily claim God was just a metaphor.
samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Cinna registered in '10 though O_o


You were absent from the WEPR section for quite some time.

I'd be interested to see some of these debates.


Here's one scroll back a few pages and find some of the threads created in 08/09; there's some good stuff.
slimmyfeet
offline
slimmyfeet
59 posts
Nomad

[/quote]Look, if it deals in half-truths and exaggerations (and you can't separate the half-truths and exaggerations from fact), then I'd hold it in high suspicion and low regard as a factual document.[quote] Well its not half-truth. I just explained that. The message is real and relevant to modern times, and there is scientific evidence that a lot of the stories couldve happened. If you want any, just ask because i have a lot to tell you.

Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,001 posts
Shepherd

Slimmy, I'd like to direct you to a topic.

When you make claims, you need to back them up.

slimmyfeet
offline
slimmyfeet
59 posts
Nomad

haha me and my quoting.... switch the quotes around....

samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Well its not half-truth. I just explained that. The message is real and relevant to modern times, and there is scientific evidence that a lot of the stories couldve happened.


Talking burning bush, go!
MRWalker82
offline
MRWalker82
4,005 posts
Shepherd

Only a fool disregards the bible. Even if you dont believe in it, you shouldnt just tag it as "false".


Ok, done that one already. Next?

Touch a tree. There's god. Touch the grass. There he is again. He may not be here in person, but he's here in nature.


How so? Can you show this to be true? In what manner would one find him then, or know that what they are seeing/feeling isn't some other deity playing trickster?

You called yourself a loyal christian? Yet for some strange reason you stopped believing... Hm maybe god threw you all of those curve balls to test your faith? Besides we come into this world knowing one thing for certain: that we'll die. So just because someone dies doesnt mean god did it to be mean, it was going to happen anyways. As for praying, maybe it was there time to go? Maybe god knew that even if your close friends died, you'd be strong even to move on and not ponder about the past? Have you ever heard the saying dont fix a car if it isnt broken? Sure we would all like to live 100 healthy years, but when we don't, we shouldnt whine about it. If we enjoyed life as a whole then wasn't it worth it, regardless of us leaving our friends? And if we are certain that we are not evil and are remorseful about our actions, then wouldnt death be a good thing, a new beginning?


I always find arguments like this interesting. You see, the Bible teaches us that without a belief in Jesus that we will go to hell and suffer a fate worse than death. It also teaches that God loves us all and doesn't wish for anyone to be punished. Yet he is also omniscient and knows each of our hearts. So why, then, would a loving God intentionally do exactly what he knows will cause one to turn from him and be forced to suffer hell? That isn't the mark of a loving deity, that's the mark of an egomaniacal and sadistic tyrant.

If i am correct, which i know i am, atheists started the argument.


Really? When was the last Atheist Crusade? The last Atheist Holocaust? The last Atheist Inquisition? When did you last hear atheists teaching young children that if they didn't follow their rules that they'd go to hell or anything like that? Who teaches that their way is the only right way and that all others will be punished?

Plus, it might just be me, but ive noticed that all of you atheists seem to take the bible too literally. Like every single word is the truth about how exactly things took place.


Probably because the Bible is touted as, and claims to be, the inerrant word of God. Inerrant means perfect. If it's perfect then it's right, and for it to be right we must know what is meant as figurative and literal, yet there is nothing in the Bible which discerns, or shows us how to discern which is which.

Furthermore it can't get even the most basic stories right. Take a look at the story of David and Goliath. There are 3 different stories, all by the same author! First, David slew him with a stone. Second, David hit him with a stone, but killed him with his sword (even though he left his sword in his tent) and third, it was David's brother Elhanan who killed Goliath. Shouldn't the inerrant word of God at least get something simple like that right?

You probably think "Oh a boat that holds a pair of every single animal and a flood that flooded the whole world? Preposterous!" You have to look at these stories reasonably. Of course there wasnt a flood that covered the WHOLE world, but what was earth back then? Most of civilization was in that part of the earth. That was the "world" in Noah's time. And two of every animal? Probably not. Noah probably just boarded on the essential animals, like his flock and maybe some woodland critters.


Eh, probably because that is what is said. Furthermore, there is nothing in scripture which gives us any reason to think this story is intended metaphorically. You are simply using logic and education to understand that this story is preposterous so you are attempting to justify it so that it fits with logic, yet doesn't displace your faith.

While I applaud that you at least have enough logic and reason left to do so, it is nothing more than an attempt to justify an obvious falsehood so that you don't have to accept the fact that your beliefs could possibly be wrong.
Avorne
offline
Avorne
3,085 posts
Nomad

Slimmy - just accept that the Bible is out of date and hardly factual. You're not explaining your position very well. You say that the bible isn't meant to be taken too literally and now you're saying that the bible is all true and backed up by scientific evidence - I'd love to see some of that supposed evidence and then knock it down.

Showing 241-255 of 453