How would you respond to this common argument from atheist?

[PRmerger]

Doesn’t the same problem apply to God?

How so?

 

[aclausen]

Well, there ya go, folks!

In no other events of antiquity is this level of denial asserted.

QED.

Actually, many other events of Antiquity are viewed with at least some suspicion. Verification of ancient events is a tough business, mainly because ancient accounts can be so garbled and interpolated with claims for which no evidence can be found.

An area of interest for me is early Medieval Britain, during the period of the Anglo-Saxon invasions, when the last Celto-Romanic peoples were subsumed or pushed out of England. Even the Venerable Bede’s accounts of that period have to be carefully weighed.

It is many Christians who seem to give considerably more weight to the Gospel than scholars tend to give to ancient documents, particularly ones with as an obscured history as the Gospels.

That there was a man named Jesus, who founded a Jewish sect, or at least unified a number of movements in 1st Century Judaism, and who was put to death by the Romans can’t be disputed in my view. Between that time and the Gospels being written is at least sixty or seventy years, and at least one progenitor Gospel that is lost.

 

[aclausen]

How so?

He is supposedly eternal, right?

 

[PRmerger]

Other matters of antiquity are treated with similar caution unless multiple independent sources can be found. We can talk with some certainty about events like the Peloponnesian War, Alexander the Great, or Augustus Caesar because there were multiple accounts that do not appear to have been constructed from the same writer

This. This…^^…

I can’t even.

I am sorry, aclausen, but I…

Must.
Not.
Roll.
Eyes.

Ok.

I think I am just going to pretend that I never read this.

 

[PRmerger]

He is supposedly eternal, right?

Yes, indeed…

So…finish your argument, please?

 

[aclausen]

This. This…^^…

I can’t even.

I am sorry, aclausen, but I…

Must.
Not.
Roll.
Eyes.

Ok.

I think I am just going to pretend that I never read this.

And I’m going to pretend you actually offered a critiquie.

 

[PRmerger]

I think I am just going to pretend that I never read this.

I think this will make Daddy Girl so happy that I am seeking succor in the Emperor’s New Clothes paradigm.

I will choose to pretend, and be happy, rather than live my life with an incredulous, “he did not just say something that hurts my eyes and brain to read”.

 

[PRmerger]

This. This…^^…

I can’t even.

I am sorry, aclausen, but I…

Must.
Not.
Roll.
Eyes.

Ok.

I think I am just going to pretend that I never read this.

I think this will make Daddy Girl so happy that I am seeking succor in the Emperor’s New Clothes paradigm.

I will choose to pretend, and be happy, rather than live my life with an incredulous, “he did not just say something that hurts my eyes and brain to read”.

Gack! I can’t live my life in denial of truth.

I read it.

I can’t unread it.

<sigh!>

And I’m going to pretend you actually offered a critiquie.

Fair enough. Fair enough.

So let’s see you put your money to your mouth.

I need 4 independently written accounts of the Peloponnesian War
Written by eye witnesses.
Within 60 years of the event.
With copies dating to 60 years of the event.

NB: you will note, of course, the source of the criteria come from NT criteria.

aclausen’s claim:

We can talk with some certainty about events like the Peloponnesian War, Alexander the Great, or Augustus Caesar because there were multiple accounts that do not appear to have been constructed from the same writer.

 

[aclausen]

Gack! I can’t live my life in denial of truth.

I read it.

I can’t unread it.

<sigh!>

Fair enough. Fair enough.

So let’s see you put your money to your mouth.

I need 4 independently written accounts of the Peloponnesian War
Written by eye witnesses.
Within 60 years of the event.
With copies dating to 60 years of the event.

NB: you will note, of course, the source of the criteria come from NT criteria.

aclausen’s claim:

How about Thucydides, who actually lived through it and was a participant.

That seems to weigh a good deal more than anonymous accounts, the earliest of which can’t be pushed back further than over a half century after the events in question.

Thucydides also didn’t go around claiming the participants were gods and came back from the dead. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Give me even two first hand accounts that you can demonstrate were given by people who were near Christ after he allegedly rose, and then we’ll talk.

 

[PRmerger]

How about Thucydides, who actually lived through it and was a participant.

That seems to weigh a good deal more than anonymous accounts, the earliest of which can’t be pushed back further than over a half century after the events in question.

Thucydides also didn’t go around claiming the participants were gods and came back from the dead. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Give me even two first hand accounts that you can demonstrate were given by people who were near Christ after he allegedly rose, and then we’ll talk.

That’s 1. Good.

You need 3 more. Independent eye witnesses, please.

Has anyone corroborated that these were actually written by Thucydides?

How do you know?

 

[aclausen]

That’s 1. Good.

You need 3 more. Independent eye witnesses, please.

Has anyone corroborated that these were actually written by Thucydides?

How do you know?

Off the top Herodotus. And as to how I know, in general I know that scholars even take Thucydides’ account with a grain of salt. And yet you would have me believe that the Gospels, for which no link to an actual identified eye witness must be true on every detail.

 

[PRmerger]

Off the top Herodotus.

Please offer some texts with his documentation of the PW. Thanks.

And as to how I know, in general I know that scholars even take Thucydides’ account with a grain of salt.

What the what???

Seriously?

Must I remind you what you just said, not even 2 hours ago?

We can talk with some certainty about events like the Peloponnesian War, Alexander the Great, or Augustus Caesar because there were multiple accounts that do not appear to have been constructed from the same writer.

So, which is it? “With a grain of salt” or “with some certainty”?

 

[aclausen]

Please offer some texts with his documentation of the PW. Thanks.

What the what???

Seriously?

Must I remind you what you just said, not even 2 hours ago?

So, which is it? “With a grain of salt” or “with some certainty”?

As with all claims, with skepticism. In Thucydides’ case, a major area of concern is his apparent biases and, indeed, no mention of his sources.

But tell me, do you believe Joseph Smith actually got scrolls from an angel? After all we have many historical records that the man existed, and he had lots of followers who he recounted the origins of his holy book to. Or is incredulity only suspended for certain historical claims?

 

[Reepicheep]

I would say that even without any organized religion at all the American Indians recognized the Great Spirit and were full of thanks, praise and awe for God and all his creation. People who do not recognize God are spiritually empty and blind.

This is the sort of thing that really grates me. I try not to consider people who believe in God as somehow being inferior and blind, and yet certain people seem quite happy to go around saying “I think atheists are damaged ignoramuses.” Christians here spend a good deal of time going on about how they’re mistreated by non-believers, how they’re put upon and insulted, but then immediately turn around and say the most patronizing and demeaning things in return.

Aclausen has a point. We can’t have a respectful discussion if we start by calling the other person “empty and blind”.

 

[Reepicheep]

I always enjoy Christians telling me I have a problem… It just makes me feel so very open-minded to know that many of faith believe I’m broken in some way.

And this predisposes that atheists are automatically ignorant of arguments for the existence of God. Certainly some are, perhaps more now than in the past. But certainly that does not apply to all atheists, and I think it’s fairly patronizing to just assume that if someone is an atheist, they haven’t explored other world views.

Answer the point instead of being snarky.

Aclausen may be guilty of snark but he’s not the only one. As I said already, he has a point.

 

[Solmyr]

History is always somewhat uncertain. But there is no need for history here.

God and Jesus are supposed to be “alive” today (whatever that word means in conjunction with them). No need to go back 2000 years. Present your argument for their existence here and now. With actual evidence, of course. Evidence which can be examined by the skeptics. It does not matter what kind of evidence you will provide, except for one important criterion: “it must be objective and verifiable”. No need for “trust”, no need for “faith”. As old Dragnet saying went: “Just the facts ma’am”.

 

[PRmerger]

As with all claims, with skepticism. In Thucydides’ case, a major area of concern is his apparent biases and, indeed, no mention of his sources.

So you are of the same position: it is doubtful that the gospel narratives document a true historical event AND it is doubtful that the Peloponnesian Wars occurred?

 

[PRmerger]

History is always somewhat uncertain. But there is no need for history here.

God and Jesus are supposed to be “alive” today (whatever that word means in conjunction with them). No need to go back 2000 years. Present your argument for their existence here and now. With actual evidence, of course. Evidence which can be examined by the skeptics. It does not matter what kind of evidence you will provide, except for one important criterion: “it must be objective and verifiable”. No need for “trust”, no need for “faith”. As old Dragnet saying went: “Just the facts ma’am”.

Will do.

But before I begin, let me ask you: do you verify that the pilot who’s flying your aircraft has actually passed her pilot’s license and didn’t cheat on any of her exams?

Your answer will determine what route I go to offer you evidence for God’s existence.

 

[PRmerger]

But tell me, do you believe Joseph Smith actually got scrolls from an angel? After all we have many historical records that the man existed, and he had lots of followers who he recounted the origins of his holy book to. Or is incredulity only suspended for certain historical claims?

This presuppose that all evidence for religious texts are the same.

You believe this presupposition based on faith. Amusingly.

Let me assure you that you have been duped into believing a lie.

Here is the correct premise: not all evidence for religious texts’ veracity is the same.

The evidence for the reliability and credibility of the Christian Scriptures far exceeds any putative evidence for Mormon religious manuscripts.

 

[Reepicheep]

The actual quote is: "People who do not recognize God are spiritually empty and blind.
You, on purpose or otherwise, omitted the word “spiritually”.
Please see post #23.
It makes a bit of a difference.

Still disrespectful in this context. You’re asking Aclausen to be respectful to the believers while you make blanket statements dismissive of all non-believers.