Why are some people so adamant that God does exist?

[ASimon]

Did you see my answer to that question earlier? And obviously it can’t convince those who do not believe it happened, but to those who believe that the Gospels are historically accurate, it is compelling.

It is halfway down on my link. I don’t know how to directly link it to my post.

Here it is:

They typically contradict themselves, and none (as far as I know) carried the belief with them as they were being brutally crucified, and none continued preaching just before their death on a cross (as far as I know), and, speaking of the cross, nobody accurately predicted their death (as far as I know), and none rose from the dead and appeared to many Apostles (as far as I know), and none have been inspirational enough to have followers confess their beliefs until their brutal deaths (as far as I know).

So if I found a historical man who claimed to have been God, and every condition you set above for divinity was met, with the exception that this particular man was thrown into a volcano rather than crucified, would you then dismiss this as an obvious case of some charisamtic, but deluded whack-job?

 

[karebear92]

Here it is:

So if I found a historical man who claimed to have been God, and every condition you set above for divinity was met, with the exception that this particular man was thrown into a volcano rather than crucified, would you then dismiss this as an obvious case of some charisamtic, but deluded whack-job?

Willingly thrown in (i.e. Jesus knew what would happen and still don’t run or fight) and rose from the dead, with the claim of being saw by thousands. Oh, and he has to say, as he is falling, something along the lines of “it is accomplished.” I would say that that man has a strong case for being God. But I really don’t think that exists outside of Jesus.

 

[ASimon]

Willingly thrown in (i.e. Jesus knew what would happen and still don’t run or fight) and rose from the dead, with the claim of being saw by thousands. Oh, and he has to say, as he is falling, something along the lines of “it is accomplished.” I would say that that man has a strong case for being God. But I really don’t think that exists outside of Jesus.

So, if he meets every single condition you set above (including the coming back from the dead, remember), but doesn’t meet this condition, then he’d be insane at best. But if he did meet this condition, then he’s probably God?

 

[karebear92]

So, if he meets every single condition you set above (including the coming back from the dead, remember), but doesn’t meet this condition, then he’d be insane at best. But if he did meet this condition, then he’s probably God?

Hahahahahahahahaha, YES!!! I just realized how silly that sounded. The point I was trying to make is that he had to carry it all the way through, even right before he died. On the cross, Jesus had time to suffer and come clean in hopes that they would take him down or something.

 

[ASimon]

Hahahahahahahahaha, YES!!! I just realized how silly that sounded. The point I was trying to make is that he had to carry it all the way through, even right before he died. On the cross, Jesus had time to suffer and come clean in hopes that they would take him down or something.

Fair enough. I would still argue that in the long history of Men claiming to be God, the conditions that Jesus supposedly met have likely been met before, or since. Afterall, claims that someone could perform miracles are extremely common, even today. And being born of a virgin is so common a claim throughout history, it’s almost a pre-requisite for divinity in itself. As for the resurrection bit, there are people out there who claim to have seen Elvis Presley alive at some point since 1977.

 

[karebear92]

Fair enough. I would still argue that in the long history of Men claiming to be God, the conditions that Jesus supposedly met have likely been met before, or since. Afterall, claims that someone could perform miracles are extremely common, even today. And being born of a virgin is so common a claim throughout history, it’s almost a pre-requisite for divinity in itself. As for the resurrection bit, there are people out there who claim to have seen Elvis Presley alive at some point since 1977.

Agreed, but usually not thousands at a time. And to be fair, with modern day makeup and costumes, they probably have. Not the actual guy, obviously, but probably a close replica. So I guess that could have happened, but I find it very hard to believe that someone was able to fake stigmata at the time. That would be some incredible ancient special effects.

 

[atheistgirl]

Eucharist.

But that would then raise the question of whether it was Orthodoxy, Catholicism or Lutherism that had the ‘‘fullness of truth’’ in the Christian God?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

ASimon

**Fair enough. I would still argue that in the long history of Men claiming to be God, the conditions that Jesus supposedly met have likely been met before, or since. Afterall, claims that someone could perform miracles are extremely common, even today. And being born of a virgin is so common a claim throughout history, it’s almost a pre-requisite for divinity in itself. As for the resurrection bit, there are people out there who claim to have seen Elvis Presley alive at some point since 1977. **

All you have pointed out is that there are imitations and frauds. You have not proven that every single one of those who made the claim was an imitator or a fraud.

Moreover, you need to supply a list of those who made claims comparable to those of Jesus before anyone can take you seriously. You seem to be snatching “facts” out of thin air.

 

[Jcnava15]

Fair enough. I would still argue that in the long history of Men claiming to be God, the conditions that Jesus supposedly met have likely been met before, or since. Afterall, claims that someone could perform miracles are extremely common, even today. And being born of a virgin is so common a claim throughout history, it’s almost a pre-requisite for divinity in itself. As for the resurrection bit, there are people out there who claim to have seen Elvis Presley alive at some point since 1977.

This type of objection is so common, it’s almost pre-requisite for being an atheist.

How does the fact that some people claim to have seen Elvis alive in any way do anything to undermine the resurrection? This is a false assocation.

 

[ASimon]

ASimon
All you have pointed out is that there are imitations and frauds. You have not proven that every single one of those who made the claim was an imitator or a fraud.

What an odd statement. If I can’t, does that mean we must assume these folks was neither an imitator or a fraud? That seems an awfully big concession for a Christian to be making. Not that this is my problem.

Moreover, you need to supply a list of those who made claims comparable to those of Jesus before anyone can take you seriously. You seem to be snatching “facts” out of thin air.

If you don’t believe such people exist, and can’t figure out how Google works, there’s very little I can do for you.

 

[ASimon]

This type of objection is so common, it’s almost pre-requisite for being an atheist.

How does the fact that some people claim to have seen Elvis alive in any way do anything to undermine the resurrection? This is a false assocation.

It doesn’t. If anything, it supports it. Afterall, that so many people have seen Elvis lends evidence (however tenuous) to the claim that Elvis did in fact rise from the dead. And if Elvis did rise from the dead, that means it’s slightly more probable that Jesus could have done the same. So don’t go hatin’ on Elvis.

Now then, my point initially was that the claim that people claim to have seen Jesus alive, post-crucifixtion isn’t a compelling bit of evidence, given that, for one example, hundreds (if not thousands) of people have claimed to have seen Elvis Presley in the flesh in the last 35 years.

 

[Jcnava15]

It doesn’t. If anything, it supports it. Afterall, that so many people have seen Elvis lends evidence (however tenuous) to the claim that Elvis did in fact rise from the dead. And if Elvis did rise from the dead, that means it’s slightly more probable that Jesus could have done the same. So don’t go hatin’ on Elvis.

Now then, my point initially was that the claim that people claim to have seen Jesus alive, post-crucifixtion isn’t a compelling bit of evidence, given that, for one example, hundreds (if not thousands) of people have claimed to have seen Elvis Presley in the flesh in the last 35 years.

How is this not committing the fallacy of false association?

You are in effect saying; people make outrageous claims, therefore Jesus did not rise from the dead.

More than that, where are these thousands of people who have claimed this? You are citing it as if it’s common knowledge, and we should be well aware of these cults of Elvis devotees.

 

[ASimon]

How is this not committing the fallacy of false association?

You are in effect saying; people make outrageous claims, therefore Jesus did not rise from the dead.

No. I’m saying that people make outrageous claims. Most of the time we don’t credit them, nor do we lose sleep over not crediting them. Again, the claim was, that since Jesus’s Apostles (whom we’re not sure existed, but let’s say they did) claimed that they saw Jesus (whom we’re not sure existed, but let’s say he did) alive, three days after his crucifixtion nearly 20 centuries ago, we’re supposed to give this account extraordinary weight.

But Elvis Presley, whom we know existed, whom supposedly died only 35 years ago, has thousands of living eyewitnesses who would claim they’ve since seen him alive. But this isn’t even tabloid fodder. It’s the “Weird and Wacky Story of the Week” on the 11 o’clock news once a year, if they can’t get the farmer who was abducted and probed by aliens.

Incidentally, I say “thousands” as a reasoned guesstimate. The man had a lot of fans, some of them fairly intense. Graceland is considered Mecca to some people. There are 300+ million people in America today, plus all the others that have been here in the last 35 years. So “thousands” seems like a reasoned guess.

 

[karebear92]

No. I’m saying that people make outrageous claims. Most of the time we don’t credit them, nor do we lose sleep over not crediting them. Again, the claim was, that since Jesus’s Apostles (whom we’re not sure existed, but let’s say they did) claimed that they saw Jesus (whom we’re not sure existed, but let’s say he did) alive, three days after his crucifixtion nearly 20 centuries ago, we’re supposed to give this account extraordinary weight.

But Elvis Presley, whom we know existed, whom supposedly died only 35 years ago, has thousands of living eyewitnesses who would claim they’ve since seen him alive. But this isn’t even tabloid fodder. It’s the “Weird and Wacky Story of the Week” on the 11 o’clock news once a year, if they can’t get the farmer who was abducted and probed by aliens.

Incidentally, I say “thousands” as a reasoned guesstimate. The man had a lot of fans, some of them fairly intense. Graceland is considered Mecca to some people. There are 300+ million people in America today, plus all the others that have been here in the last 35 years. So “thousands” seems like a reasoned guess.

Well, the thousands of Apostles founded Churches, many of which still exist. So either those Apostles were frauds or they really saw Him.

 

[ASimon]

Well, the thousands of Apostles founded Churches, many of which still exist. So either those Apostles were frauds or they really saw Him.

Or there weren’t thousands of them. A contention supported by The Bible.

 

[Jcnava15]

No. I’m saying that people make outrageous claims. Most of the time we don’t credit them, nor do we lose sleep over not crediting them. Again, the claim was, that since Jesus’s Apostles (whom we’re not sure existed, but let’s say they did) claimed that they saw Jesus (whom we’re not sure existed, but let’s say he did) alive, three days after his crucifixtion nearly 20 centuries ago, we’re supposed to give this account extraordinary weight.

But Elvis Presley, whom we know existed, whom supposedly died only 35 years ago, has thousands of living eyewitnesses who would claim they’ve since seen him alive. But this isn’t even tabloid fodder. It’s the “Weird and Wacky Story of the Week” on the 11 o’clock news once a year, if they can’t get the farmer who was abducted and probed by aliens.

Incidentally, I say “thousands” as a reasoned guesstimate. The man had a lot of fans, some of them fairly intense. Graceland is considered Mecca to some people. There are 300+ million people in America today, plus all the others that have been here in the last 35 years. So “thousands” seems like a reasoned guess.

Again, how is this not committing the fallacy of false association? Rather than explaining why your line of logic deserves an exemption, you went further into it.

As it stands, you haven’t done anything but appeal to circumstantial “guesstimates”, delivered in a logically invalid manner.

For example, taking your line of reasoning, let’s say tommorow Elvis comes out and says that he faked his death and has in fact been alive this whole time, would people say “Wow Jesus did rise from the dead!”?

So again please explain why you deserve an exemption.

 

[greylorn]

It was said many centuries ago (and I forget right now who said it),
that MOST of those who deny the existence of God,
do so
because to ADMIT the existence of God
would be to admit their OBLIGATION to OBEY God as best they can,
and THAT would
interfere, primarily, with their SEXUAL MORES (or lack thereof).

And when you boil it right down to it, that is the case.
Mary herself said it at Fatima, more people are going to Hell
for sins of the flesh (sexual sins) than for ANY OTHER REASON.

This opinion has the reek of opinion. In my experience, atheists and agnostics have better morals than Catholics (for just one example) because they cannot drop into a confessional and have God “forgive” their sins every Saturday. Therefore they must take absolute personal responsibility for their choices.

This applies not only to sexual activities, but to other aspects of personal integrity, such as honesty, truthfulness even in business, and the fair treatment of others. I’ve learned that if someone points out his Bible-fearing beliefs to me, I can count upon this as preliminary to lies, deceit, misrepresentation, and thievery.

Methinks your judgment mostly represents your beliefs— real people in the real world, not so much.

 

[ASimon]

Again, how is this not committing the fallacy of false association? Rather than explaining why your line of logic deserves an exemption, you went further into it.

As it stands, you haven’t done anything but appeal to circumstantial “guesstimates”, delivered in a logically invalid manner.

For example, taking your line of reasoning, let’s say tommorow Elvis comes out and says that he faked his death and has in fact been alive this whole time, would people say “Wow Jesus did rise from the dead!”?

So again please explain why you deserve an exemption.

I’m not - your side is. If your most trusted friend in all the world came to you claiming that he/she saw a man on the street today that he/she says was seen dead 3 days earlier, you would not (I hope) automatically assume that a miraculous suspension of the laws of nature had occurred. You would give far greater weight to any number of alternative explanations before you’d seriously consider that possibility.

And that’s if the witness was your trusted friend. Now replace that friend with a book, written 20 centuries ago, translated into English from copies and copies and copies of Greek manuscript, describing events that happened decades before they were written about, involving people we have no reliable reason to believe existed in the first place. And you would take this seriously as an accurate representation of historical events.

 

[Jcnava15]

I’m not - your side is. If your most trusted friend in all the world came to you claiming that he/she saw a man on the street today that he/she says was seen dead 3 days earlier, you would not (I hope) automatically assume that a miraculous suspension of the laws of nature had occurred. You would give far greater weight to any number of alternative explanations before you’d seriously consider that possibility.

And that’s if the witness was your trusted friend. Now replace that friend with a book, written 20 centuries ago, translated into English from copies and copies and copies of Greek manuscript, describing events that happened decades before they were written about, involving people we have no reliable reason to believe existed in the first place. And you would take this seriously as an accurate representation of historical events.

It really isn’t that unprecedented for a man to come back alive after a period of death. In fact doctors call it, I believe, “Lazarus syndrome”. So it really isn’t a violation of any “laws of the universe”. It happens.

And you are wrong that I would give far greater weight to any number of things. I would take the case as it is, on it’s own.

 

[karebear92]

Or there weren’t thousands of them. A contention supported by The Bible.

An Apostle is someone who saw Jesus after His resurrection, which there were thousands of. The twelve are separate.

Unless you are talking about churches, I don’t know what you are talking about. I am not saying that every Apostle founded a church.