Atheism, and ignoring Jesus

[Shredderbeam]

oneGODoneCHURCH:

I see no where that God is not. I find God behind every breath that I take every tree that grows. I see no way of not seeing him there.

To go with my logical worldview, I was looking for something a bit more specific, or empirical.

oneGODoneCHURCH:

No life is tough today in the beginning it would have been near impossible.

The natural world is filled with species that, despite being under-endowed, survive.

oneGODoneCHURCH:

Deluded I guess that it could be possible thought highly unlikely. given that people deemed insane in those days did not find themselves in situations to do much writing normal. Also we had already agreed that people do not let themselves be killed defending what they know to be a lie. So that leaves us with they were either telling the truth or the were insane. And finding 12 people that share the same delusion at the same time about someone other than their self would be i would think very highly improbable.

There are more possibilities than that. Perhaps they were honestly mistaken, but not deluded, perhaps their writings were edited (given the recurring savior motif throughout several religions at that time), or perhaps they intended it to be taken metaphorically.

In any case, my position remains the same: I am loathe to simply take somebody’s word for it.

 

[COLOS]

“X is comforting” does not imply “X is true”.

Honestly, truth to me is based on history and grace. If I had been in control of deciding truth, I dare say without disrespect to the Church, I would have come up with something easy and blatant, not something hard. Not something that calls me to what is unknown but promised to be beyond imagination.

I can read through the 2000 year history of the Church, and I have experienced Grace. Not the protestant understanding of grace, mind you, but real, nearly palpable Grace.

Through history and grace I can say that X is true. This has no meaning for you, though. The conversation must then revolve around another point.

My point is only that we cannot assume that an unlikely reversal in the cancer’s progression is due to God.

Well, given the enormous body of evidence supporting the continuous operation of natural laws, and the fairly sketchy evidence regarding their irregularity, unless an alleged miracle has such a body of proof that its non-happening would be more miraculous than its happening, you would have to assume the natural explanation. It is simply bad logic to attribute a healing to God once such a healing reaches a certain point of improbability. It may seem miraculous, sure, but consider the number of people who do not experience such a healing. The doctor who witnesses such a stroke of luck has simply “won the lottery”.

If God is indeed behind these healings, why would he skip over the amputees? To me, that is evidence that there is no miracle involved, that it is simply a stroke of luck, or an achievement of a great doctor. Could a stroke of luck regrow a limb? No. Could God regrow a limb? Yes.

Very probably, it would be ignored by a large amount of people - however, given proper corroboration of the story, you have my word that I would take it completely seriously, even going to such inconvenient extents as to question my own existence.

Right - it’s a general rule that terminal patients die! But there can be non-divine exceptions to a rule, can there not?

In my opinion, no. Everything tends strongly toward entropy. Getting worse is by far more probable than getting better with a majority of serious medical problems. Terminal patients simply do not spontaneously recover under natural law. They die.

Granted, that’s just an opinion, so I certainly wouldn’t try to force that idea on anyone else. As far as I’m aware, the Church approaches all miraculous events in a very skeptical way. Unlike other assemlies, official approval is not easily granted by the Roman Catholic Church for anything.

If all suffering is designed to be a part of a divine path to holiness, then it follows that rarely would suffering be alleviated by God. When it is, then a person can enjoy the strange mercy. When it isn’t, then there is some spiritual lesson to be learned or example given.

Yes, that would be the position of the dogmatic atheist. Happily, I do not subscribe to any form of dogma - unless rationalism is considered a dogma.

Ah, well that’s good to know then. Yes, you at least seem far more rational than most.

I’ve done a quick bit of research, and I haven’t been able to find anything relating to amputees regrowing their limbs overnight.

A cursory search really doesn’t turn up much. I’m afraid I don’t have too much time to spend on it, but I’ll continue poking around to see what may turn up.

However, the reason I harp on so much about amputees in particular is because an amputee simply cannot grow their limbs back. Sufferers of cancer, diabetes, influenza, and the like are in principle capable of having a full and spontaneous recovery - so miracle stories about such things are tainted, at least to me. A case of an amputee regrowing their limb overnight, though, would literally have no other explanation other than divine intervention (for now, I will leave benevolent aliens/government conspiracy theories aside).

Ah, you’re looking for incontrovertable truth. Absolute proof. Rare are the individuals who are provided with absolute proof.

Yes, I imagine that an amputee having his/her limb restored would be something that could be viewed as proof. I’ll continue looking, simply because I’m interested in the topic now . I would assume that something that profound would be relatively simple to find. Discounting fraud is somewhat problematic, it seems. If a restoration happened in a developed nation, it would quickly be posted somewhere on the net. Less developed nations do not have that luxury, and the event could not be easily verified as being truthful if it did sneak its way onto the web.

Well, my position is that it is not impossible for God to restore an amputated limb. My position also is centered on the necessity for human suffering in this life, so I would really have no personal problem accepting that perhaps no amputee in this modern world has ever been restored…and may never be. Healings and restorations are not reasons to believe or disbelieve in the Living God, in my opinion. It is very nice to see some amazing recoveries, however.

The purpose of life is to purify the heart. This body is not required to be whole. In fact it seems as if many times the body is required to approach death through tragic medical problems and horrible injury either to give a person, family, or community a wake up call to the reality of their own mortality, as a demonstration of God’s total control in mercy and justice, to bring to the forefront vices and virtues, and/or to show exactly why you don’t transgress certain divine laws.

It seems to me that there are three possible outcomes for people who suffer severely in this life:

1. They become bitter, extremely angry, and unstable.
2. They retreat into near complete apathy and total self-absorbtion with the concept of “I, the victim”
3. They become like sunshine. Kindness and compassion seem to radiate from them. They are rendered fully capable of entering the sufferings of others for positive effect.

There may be more than those three, but these are what I’ve personally seen while looking to see what really happens to those who suffer.

 

[COLOS]

Amputee’s leg restored.

In 1874, Emile Zola visited the sanctuary of Lourdes. Standing before the numerous votive offerings in the grotto, **he declared, in a mocking tone, «I see many canes and crutches, but I don’t see a single wooden leg.» He meant that never, at Lourdes or anywhere else, has anyone seen a missing or amputated limb grow back. **Similarly, Jean-Martin Charcot, a famous neurologist of his time (1825-1893), wrote, «In consulting the catalog of cures in Lourdes claimed to be ‘miraculous,’ no one has ever observed that faith has made an amputated limb grow back.» The goal of these defiant declarations is to destroy, in the name of reason and a critical spirit, belief in the existence of the supernatural world. Ernest Renan declared plainly: «We refute the supernatural… To this day, a miracle has never taken place that could be observed by witnesses worthy of credence, and recorded with certainty» (Preface to the Life of Jesus).

Seems that the amputee argument has been seen in other centuries. I’m guessing it’s been seen in at least 19 of them.

Between ten-thirty and eleven o’clock, Miguel’s mother entered the room with an oil lamp in her hand. She immediately smelled «a perfume, a sweet smell.» Intrigued, she raised her lamp — two feet were sticking out, «one over the other, crossed» from under the cloak covering her son, who was fast asleep. Stunned, she went to get her husband, who lifted the cloak. No doubt about it, there were indeed two feet, each at the end of a leg! They managed with some difficulty to wake up their son. Gradually becoming aware of what had happened, Miguel was amazed.

At the end of that April, the Pellicer family decided to go thank the Virgin of the Pillar. In Zaragoza, the council asked for a trial to be opened, so that all light might be shed on the event. On June 5, two months and a week after the event, the canonical process was officially opened. It was open to the public. More than one hundred people of all classes took part in it. Despite the rigor of this process, not one conflicting voice was ever heard. On April 27, 1641, the archbishop solemnly rendered his verdict. He declared the restitution of the formerly amputated right leg of Miguel Juan Pellicer, originally from Calanda, «wonderful and miraculous.»

After a few mins of searching, here is one restored limb from the 1600’s. There are enough names and dates here for you to use in an attempt to verify the information rather than summarily dismiss claims from another century. If it is a fraud, it should be known. If it is true, it should be known.

I’ve found two more, as well.

For me, if the Church has indeed officially approved the miracle, then I don’t really have a need to look further.
*
*No hostility here. Just in a hurry to get out of the door atm.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Shredderbeam;3984899]To go with my logical worldview, I was looking for something a bit more specific, or empirical.

And that puts us right back at the beginning as very thing reconfirms God to me, But you see no more than the what the five senses can experience. what our ever changing science tells us . ans it tells us something different. All the time I mean lets look at the big thing right now is global warming. I don’t know if you recall but in the 70’ it was global cooling and it has gone back and forth like that about every 25 to 30 years since the late 1800 when we started being able to track such things. If you are to really on only what man can prove you are going to find man proves different things at different times depending on what he whats to say at the time.

The natural world is filled with species that, despite being under-endowed, survive.

yes but of those they have some kind of natural defense or ability to reproduce in mass.

There are more possibilities than that. Perhaps they were honestly mistaken, but not deluded, perhaps their writings were edited (given the recurring savior motif throughout several religions at that time), or perhaps they intended it to be taken metaphorically.

they were mistaken about seeing the man that they has spent every day for the previous 3 years risen from then dead. and they went to their death to be witness to a metaphor.

In any case, my position remains the same: I am loathe to simply take somebody’s word for it.

truly if it were but one or even 2 I would not be quick to take there word, but 12 that 11 of them gave there lives for continuing to tell the Gospel gets my attention and weights pretty heavy as truth.

 

[Hobble]

is there evidence outside of the Bible and Church documents that shows that Jesus and the apostles actually existed?

 

[Shredderbeam]

Amputee’s leg restored.

Seems that the amputee argument has been seen in other centuries. I’m guessing it’s been seen in at least 19 of them.

After a few mins of searching, here is one restored limb from the 1600’s. There are enough names and dates here for you to use in an attempt to verify the information rather than summarily dismiss claims from another century. If it is a fraud, it should be known. If it is true, it should be known.

I’ve found two more, as well.

For me, if the Church has indeed officially approved the miracle, then I don’t really have a need to look further.
*
*No hostility here. Just in a hurry to get out of the door atm.

I appreciate the link, but what I was looking for was more of a modern day situation (as in, within the last few years).

The idea scenario would be something like this:

Ben, a well-known member of his American community, is walking home from work, is hit by a car, rushed to a renowned hospital, and has his leg removed. After stitching the wound closed, his doctors allow him to sleep for the night. The next morning, he is found with two healthy legs. The medical team that worked on him is completely baffled, and they reproduce the original leg. Testing of all sorts reveals that the new and old leg
are completely identical.

Do you see what I mean? This would be a non-anecdotal situation where apparently, all possibilities for trickery would be eliminated.

 

[Ronald_E]

is there evidence outside of the Bible and Church documents that shows that Jesus and the apostles actually existed?

Is there anything written outside the Bible that is the truth?

 

[HelenaMT]

is there evidence outside of the Bible and Church documents that shows that Jesus and the apostles actually existed?

There’s lots of info on this topic online, and if you search this forum.

Jesus or very early Christians are mentioned by Josephus, a Jewish historian from the 1st century, Tacitus,a Roman historian, in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan, and of course by the four gospels, which are accepted as having some historical weight even by skeptics (meaning they agree at least that they were written by people who could have possibly known Jesus or his apostles) just to name a few things to search.

Of course, as with any controversy in history, you’ll see people either trying to explain away evidence, or endorse it, and your own point of view will influence your conclusions.

 

[Hobble]

Is there anything written outside the Bible that is the truth?

What is that supposed to mean?

I’m talking about historical records.
I mean surely if Jesus did some of the things he did at that time, there would be loads of historians to write about him, but there isn’t.

 

[Hobble]

There’s lots of info on this topic online, and if you search this forum.

Jesus or very early Christians are mentioned by Josephus, a Jewish historian from the 1st century, Tacitus,a Roman historian, in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan, and of course by the four gospels, which are accepted as having some historical weight even by skeptics (meaning they agree at least that they were written by people who could have possibly known Jesus or his apostles) just to name a few things to search.

Of course, as with any controversy in history, you’ll see people either trying to explain away evidence, or endorse it, and your own point of view will influence your conclusions.

I’ve heard about Josephus’ writings, but I’ve heard they’re also highly debated among historians. Both because Josephus was known for exaggerating, and because there’s apparently evidence that his writings on Jesus could have been a forgery by Eusebius of Caesarea.

I haven’t heard of Tacitus so I’ll look him up.

But still, considering the amazing things Jesus was alleged to have done, you’d think more than two historians would write about him. I mean he cause riots in the Church, that wasn’t a common thing.

 

[1holycatholic]

There’s lots of info on this topic online, and if you search this forum.

Jesus or very early Christians are mentioned by Josephus, a Jewish historian from the 1st century, Tacitus,a Roman historian, in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan, and of course by the four gospels, which are accepted as having some historical weight even by skeptics (meaning they agree at least that they were written by people who could have possibly known Jesus or his apostles) just to name a few things to search.

Of course, as with any controversy in history, you’ll see people either trying to explain away evidence, or endorse it, and your own point of view will influence your conclusions.

Don’t squish his theories with facts. I love a good tinfoil hat conspiracy yarn.

 

[HelenaMT]

I’ve heard about Josephus’ writings, but I’ve heard they’re also highly debated among historians. Both because Josephus was known for exaggerating, and because there’s apparently evidence that his writings on Jesus could have been a forgery.

I haven’t heard of Tacitus so I’ll look him up.

There are 2 references in Josephus, the one where he talks about Jesus in a more "Christian " way(odd because Josephus was a Jew) is the one that’s somewhat questioned.

 

[Hobble]

Don’t squish his theories with facts. I love a good tinfoil hat conspiracy yarn.

don’t worry, I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m just curious and looking for more information.

 

[Hobble]

The other thing I’ve read is that there is little archaeological evidence of crucifixions in rome at that time. It’s told that thousands happened, but there’s only one piece of archaeological evidence of a crucifixions. I find that pretty odd too.

It just seems that there’s a lot of gaps between what the Bible tells, what Historians wrote, and what archaeological evidence tells us.

 

[HelenaMT]

But still, considering the amazing things Jesus was alleged to have done, you’d think more than two historians would write about him. I mean he cause riots in the Church, that wasn’t a common thing.

Just keep in mind that writings of any kind from that period are hard to come by. Also, keep in mind that Jesus was not a subject that Roman or Jewish historians of the time, who mostly wrote for the powers that be,would have been interested in preserving.

The gospels and the few other historical references we have is more evidence than we have for many important figures of the time.

The other thing I’ve read is that there is little archaeological evidence of crucifixions in rome at that time. It’s told that thousands happened, but there’s only one piece of archaeological evidence of a crucifixions. I find that pretty odd too.

It just seems that there’s a lot of gaps between what the Bible tells, what Historians wrote, and what archaeological evidence tells us.

Yes, there was only the one foot with a nail in it found, but that was verification of how crucifixion was done, not really if it was. Crucifixion was pretty well documented by Romans as a means of punishment. Just for one well known account, the slave rebellion of Spartacus around 70 BC ended with about 6000 slaves being crucifed along a major Roman road.

 

[nablaise]

I like to discuss these things because it keeps my mind fresh, attentive, and healthy. Not the best thing for doing so, but better than sitting on a couch all day.

Gump,
This is also called a ‘search’ for God. It is a healty thing as you said. Man was meant to live in the seventh’ day (For the Sabbath, Rest, Paradise…)…And St. Augustine reminds us that our hearts are restless until they rest in God. So I think soon you will come to understand what you don’t understand about God. I am personnally trying to gather some important quotes on my blog about God and Faith. I found that there can be a logical way to navigate in the understanding of God and the Christian Faith. There is nothing more wonderful than to find the greatness of Faith. You should read G.K. Chersterton. He has many well articulated presentations of Faith.

As the Catholic Faith insists, Faith is not against Reason. And Truth can not contradict Truth. This is an example of faith. Faith is what you get as you develop trust for someone. In our case here: God.

God bless

 

[COLOS]

I appreciate the link, but what I was looking for was more of a modern day situation (as in, within the last few years).

The idea scenario would be something like this:

Ben, a well-known member of his American community, is walking home from work, is hit by a car, rushed to a renowned hospital, and has his leg removed. After stitching the wound closed, his doctors allow him to sleep for the night. The next morning, he is found with two healthy legs. The medical team that worked on him is completely baffled, and they reproduce the original leg. Testing of all sorts reveals that the new and old leg
are completely identical.

Do you see what I mean? This would be a non-anecdotal situation where apparently, all possibilities for trickery would be eliminated.

Oh yes, I sort of expected this, or a similar, response. It is necessary to have a modern restoration in order to have all of the medical evidence at hand to eliminate or lessen the possibility of fraud. Certainly understandable from your position; however, completely disounting the information presented isn’t a good thing. The question should now become, “Is the story true or false?” and “How is such a determination to be made for a nearly 400 year old account?”

The fact that we were, until just recently, unaware that there have been some possible examples of restoration in the history of the Church is something that I find interesting, personally. I haven’t looked into whether or not the Church has officially recognized them, but still.

I hadn’t given it much thought before, but now I’m beginning to wonder if perhaps amputees hold a valued place in the path of suffering. Further thought required here, seems like.

In the mean time, the search for a modern day restoration continues! If only in an off and on fashion…

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

is there evidence outside of the Bible and Church documents that shows that Jesus and the apostles actually existed?

Yes

 

[Shredderbeam]

COLOS:

Oh yes, I sort of expected this, or a similar, response. It is necessary to have a modern restoration in order to have all of the medical evidence at hand to eliminate or lessen the possibility of fraud. Certainly understandable from your position; however, completely disounting the information presented isn’t a good thing. The question should now become, “Is the story true or false?” and “How is such a determination to be made for a nearly 400 year old account?”

I’m not automatically discounting the story. To be honest, since those people who were involved are now all dead, and since going to his old home, digging for documents, etc. isn’t a practical option for me, I really cannot say for certain whether it is true or false.

 

[Gump]

Oh, yeah; I was born and raised Christian and decided for myself Religion was not at all, for lack of a better term, ‘worth it’. Consider me your old co-worker.