OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism.

I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had.

You only have one name to remember, and how long would you be at church on Sundays if you had to pray to each one of a dozen major deities? All day?

issuevoter wrote on Feb 8^th, 2017 at 7:28pm:

OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism. I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had.

My intial thought is that with a pantheon, the question of "if gods made man, who made the gods?" remains.  Most (all?) pantheons had a "king of the gods" that was above the others, but still - where did that come from?
The very nature of the universe is the ultimate secret, so an explanation calls for an ultimate power.  Anything less than that will always leave questions unanswered. 

in short:  "god did it" can explain everything.

issuevoter wrote on Feb 8^th, 2017 at 7:28pm:

OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism. I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had.

Ask him.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Feb 8^th, 2017 at 7:54pm:

issuevoter wrote on Feb 8th, 2017 at 7:28pm: OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism. I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had. Ask him.

Ask who?

... wrote on Feb 8^th, 2017 at 7:47pm:

issuevoter wrote on Feb 8th, 2017 at 7:28pm: OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism. I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had. My intial thought is that with a pantheon, the question of "if gods made man, who made the gods?" remains.  Most (all?) pantheons had a "king of the gods" that was above the others, but still - where did that come from? The very nature of the universe is the ultimate secret, so an explanation calls for an ultimate power.  Anything less than that will always leave questions unanswered.  in short:  "god did it" can explain everything.

You have considered the question. So your conclusions deserve some thought too. I have to admit I have yet to see an interesting God concept. By inference, Sprint, using the personal pronoun "him," regards God as a personality, and a male. That explanation would have been better in the previous thread where no one seemed to be prepared to be quoted. If no one is prepared to explain what they mean by God, the whole business is moot. But we do a forum here.

I recognise the King of Gods in a Pantheon, ends up making the Pantheon redundant. However, that type of belief was not in my thoughts when I wrote the OP. I was getting at the superiority of the "one versus many" fundamental, which the Abrahamic religions taut as the greatest thing since cosmic sliced bread. The multiple God universe does not have to be Greco-Roman. Questions like that of the origin of the universe, and who made man, are somewhat further down the line of inquiry.
The explanation of reality as "god did it," is tidy. The problem is that "doing" is a human concept.

issuevoter wrote on Feb 9^th, 2017 at 10:53am:

... wrote on Feb 8th, 2017 at 7:47pm: issuevoter wrote on Feb 8th, 2017 at 7:28pm: OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism. I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had. My intial thought is that with a pantheon, the question of "if gods made man, who made the gods?" remains.  Most (all?) pantheons had a "king of the gods" that was above the others, but still - where did that come from? The very nature of the universe is the ultimate secret, so an explanation calls for an ultimate power.  Anything less than that will always leave questions unanswered.  in short:  "god did it" can explain everything. You have considered the question. So your conclusions deserve some thought too. I have to admit I have yet to see an interesting God concept. By inference, Sprint, using the personal pronoun "him," regards God as a personality, and a male. That explanation would have been better in the previous thread where no one seemed to be prepared to be quoted. If no one is prepared to explain what they mean by God, the whole business is moot. But we do a forum here. I recognise the King of Gods in a Pantheon, ends up making the Pantheon redundant. However, that type of belief was not in my thoughts when I wrote the OP. I was getting at the superiority of the "one versus many" fundamental, which the Abrahamic religions taut as the greatest thing since cosmic sliced bread. The multiple God universe does not have to be Greco-Roman. Questions like that of the origin of the universe, and who made man, are somewhat further down the line of inquiry. The explanation of reality as "god did it," is tidy. The problem is that "doing" is a human concept.

You have answered your own question.

Setanta wrote on Feb 9^th, 2017 at 7:39pm:

issuevoter wrote on Feb 9th, 2017 at 10:53am: ... wrote on Feb 8th, 2017 at 7:47pm: issuevoter wrote on Feb 8th, 2017 at 7:28pm: OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism. I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had. My intial thought is that with a pantheon, the question of "if gods made man, who made the gods?" remains.  Most (all?) pantheons had a "king of the gods" that was above the others, but still - where did that come from? The very nature of the universe is the ultimate secret, so an explanation calls for an ultimate power.  Anything less than that will always leave questions unanswered.  in short:  "god did it" can explain everything. You have considered the question. So your conclusions deserve some thought too. I have to admit I have yet to see an interesting God concept. By inference, Sprint, using the personal pronoun "him," regards God as a personality, and a male. That explanation would have been better in the previous thread where no one seemed to be prepared to be quoted. If no one is prepared to explain what they mean by God, the whole business is moot. But we do a forum here. I recognise the King of Gods in a Pantheon, ends up making the Pantheon redundant. However, that type of belief was not in my thoughts when I wrote the OP. I was getting at the superiority of the "one versus many" fundamental, which the Abrahamic religions taut as the greatest thing since cosmic sliced bread. The multiple God universe does not have to be Greco-Roman. Questions like that of the origin of the universe, and who made man, are somewhat further down the line of inquiry. The explanation of reality as "god did it," is tidy. The problem is that "doing" is a human concept. You have answered your own question.

Damn, I'm clever!

issuevoter wrote on Feb 9^th, 2017 at 9:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Feb 9th, 2017 at 7:39pm: You have answered your own question. Damn, I'm clever!

You already knew that too. ;)

Yeah, do the frikin' math..(if you are able).

I have graphs and charts to back me up, so bugger off!  ;D

I also have historical evidence that Jesus (as accepted in religiosity) never really existed at all.

Unfortunately, it takes empathy and a thirst for knowledge to realise that religion is aimed at the selfish losers to make the selfish winners more rich.

It's far more easy to sell a bogus product to a selfish person than a thinking person. That is true.

Religious followers have been lied to, taken advantage of, exploited and bastardised for centuries whilst their Gods (the ones who exploit) keep them poor and submissive.

;D

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 12:43am:

Yeah, do the frikin' math..(if you are able). I have graphs and charts to back me up, so bugger off!  ;D I also have historical evidence that Jesus (as accepted in religiosity) never really existed at all. Unfortunately, it takes empathy and a thirst for knowledge to realise that religion is aimed at the selfish losers to make the selfish winners more rich. It's far more easy to sell a bogus product to a selfish person than a thinking person. That is true. Religious followers have been lied to, taken advantage of, exploited and bastardised for centuries whilst their Gods (the ones who exploit) keep them poor and submissive. ;D

You are an angry laddie.

There is no one god. Psalm 82 makes that clear

A Psalm of Asaph. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

Setanta wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:14am:

Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 12:43am: Yeah, do the frikin' math..(if you are able). I have graphs and charts to back me up, so bugger off!  ;D I also have historical evidence that Jesus (as accepted in religiosity) never really existed at all. Unfortunately, it takes empathy and a thirst for knowledge to realise that religion is aimed at the selfish losers to make the selfish winners more rich. It's far more easy to sell a bogus product to a selfish person than a thinking person. That is true. Religious followers have been lied to, taken advantage of, exploited and bastardised for centuries whilst their Gods (the ones who exploit) keep them poor and submissive. ;D You are an angry laddie.

Is that the best reply that you can achieve? Do you somehow think that calling me angry will exempt a reply of reason?

Does being angry with untruths make a debate (in an atheist room) null and void?

Nah mate, I want you to provide some real validity of the existence of Jesus frikin' Christ.
Then when you realise that you cannot. Then you should bow your head to the real God of reason.

Provide me some facts of the Jesus Christ existence puhlease!

To be honest, I need these idiots around, else I would not make such a good living. I need the illogical, the morons, the hopeless in order to live the dreams that I should. Without the dimwits, I would be buggered.

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 1:14am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 12:43am: Yeah, do the frikin' math..(if you are able). I have graphs and charts to back me up, so bugger off!  ;D I also have historical evidence that Jesus (as accepted in religiosity) never really existed at all. Unfortunately, it takes empathy and a thirst for knowledge to realise that religion is aimed at the selfish losers to make the selfish winners more rich. It's far more easy to sell a bogus product to a selfish person than a thinking person. That is true. Religious followers have been lied to, taken advantage of, exploited and bastardised for centuries whilst their Gods (the ones who exploit) keep them poor and submissive. ;D You are an angry laddie. Is that the best reply that you can achieve? Do you somehow think that calling me angry will exempt a reply of reason? Does being angry with untruths make a debate (in an atheist room) null and void? Nah mate, I want you to provide some real validity of the existence of Jesus frikin' Christ. Then when you realise that you cannot. Then you should bow your head to the real God of reason. Provide me some facts of the Jesus Christ existence puhlease! To be honest, I need these idiots around, else I would not make such a good living. I need the illogical, the nice people, the hopeless in order to live the dreams that I should. Without the dimwits, I would be buggered.

I think we have been through this, I don't believe in gods. Your attitude about your non beliefs is very angry.

Raven wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:17am:

There is no one god. Psalm 82 makes that clear A Psalm of Asaph. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

Oh no! More of them? Really? ;D
Thanks Raven.

Setanta wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:37am:

Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 1:25am: Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 1:14am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 12:43am: Yeah, do the frikin' math..(if you are able). I have graphs and charts to back me up, so bugger off!  ;D I also have historical evidence that Jesus (as accepted in religiosity) never really existed at all. Unfortunately, it takes empathy and a thirst for knowledge to realise that religion is aimed at the selfish losers to make the selfish winners more rich. It's far more easy to sell a bogus product to a selfish person than a thinking person. That is true. Religious followers have been lied to, taken advantage of, exploited and bastardised for centuries whilst their Gods (the ones who exploit) keep them poor and submissive. ;D You are an angry laddie. Is that the best reply that you can achieve? Do you somehow think that calling me angry will exempt a reply of reason? Does being angry with untruths make a debate (in an atheist room) null and void? Nah mate, I want you to provide some real validity of the existence of Jesus frikin' Christ. Then when you realise that you cannot. Then you should bow your head to the real God of reason. Provide me some facts of the Jesus Christ existence puhlease! To be honest, I need these idiots around, else I would not make such a good living. I need the illogical, the nice people, the hopeless in order to live the dreams that I should. Without the dimwits, I would be buggered. I think we have been through this, I don't believe in gods. Your attitude about your non beliefs is very angry.

Umm...no. Actually, I am looking for a reasonable response ...in an atheist room. Do you have one at all?

Or...What is your reason for being here?

Can you please provide me some valid proof of the existence of the said "Jesus Christ" ?

This is what you are implying. So prove your worth mate. Tell me all about it.

This is what I cannot stand, especially in Australia.
Dickheads who think that they are it and a bit, but cannot, for the life of them, prove a single smacking point.

When you get to the end of the game mate, you will wish that you had been more honest mate. Believe you me.!

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:47am:

Umm...no. Actually, I am looking for a reasonable response ...in an atheist room. Do you have one at all?

You want a reasonable response from a atheist beyond disbelief?

I think you may be a believer, a backsliding believer, a believer that...What would you expect from a non believer?

Oh what the hell.
Message Gandalf or  Yadda, I see no point in someone that does not believe arguing with you.
What would you expect from a non believer? What should I prove? I make no claims.

Setanta wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:54am:

Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 1:47am: Umm...no. Actually, I am looking for a reasonable response ...in an atheist room. Do you have one at all? You want a reasonable response from a atheist beyond disbelief? I think you may be a believer, a backsliding believer, a believer that...What would you expect from a non believer? Oh what the hell. Message Gandalf or  Yadda, I see no point in someone that does not believe arguing with you. What would you expect from a non believer? What should I prove? I make no claims.

Ummm...This is an atheist room buddy. Do I need to remind you again? We believe in logic and reason here ...Get it?

Stop skirting the issue. Tell me of your logical and reasonable Jesus frikin' Christ  :P

Because, you are in an atheist room, and you should be logical and reasonable here ....OK?

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 1:56am:

Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 1:54am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 1:47am: Umm...no. Actually, I am looking for a reasonable response ...in an atheist room. Do you have one at all? You want a reasonable response from a atheist beyond disbelief? I think you may be a believer, a backsliding believer, a believer that...What would you expect from a non believer? Oh what the hell. Message Gandalf or  Yadda, I see no point in someone that does not believe arguing with you. What would you expect from a non believer? What should I prove? I make no claims. Ummm...This is an atheist room buddy. Do I need to remind you again? We believe in logic and reason here ...Get it?

So what are you trying to say? Are you trying to convert me? Argue my non-belief?

From what viewpoint are you interpreting my questions?

This is an athiest room buddy.

I am an atheist and I have all the proof in the world for myself that Jesus Christ never existed.

It's up to you to prove to me that he (it) actually did exist.

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:03am:

From what viewpoint are you interpreting my questions? This is an athiest room buddy. I am an atheist and I have all the proof in the world for myself that Jesus Christ never existed. It's up to you to prove to me that he (it) actually did exist.

No I don't, because I don't make that claim. You're pissed again aren't you?

I know, you love it. But hows about some rational response instead of personal attacks?

Did personal attacks ever procreate reason? I don't think so.

So where is your proof of Jesus Christ that you have promising me?


C'mon mate. Look it up. Study hard, then you will find the voice of reason.

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:07am:

I know, you love it. But hows about some rational response instead of personal attacks?

My responses are perfectly rational. You want me to be a religious nut so you can pay out on me and I'm not the religious nut you are looking for.

Setanta wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:10am:

Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:07am: I know, you love it. But hows about some rational response instead of personal attacks? My responses are perfectly rational. You want me to be a religious nut so you can pay out on me and I'm not the religious nut you are looking for.

Is that really the way you read it? Or is that some pathetic attempt at debate?
I think that you are continually avoiding the question that I ask of you....and that is that I want some proof of the said "Jesus Christ" to validate yourself.
You are merely validating yourself to me as a moron that I should make a living from. Goodo  ;D

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:15am:

Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:10am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:07am: I know, you love it. But hows about some rational response instead of personal attacks? My responses are perfectly rational. You want me to be a religious nut so you can pay out on me and I'm not the religious nut you are looking for. Is that really the way you read it? Or is that some pathetic attempt at debate? I think that you are continually avoiding the question that I ask of you....and that is that I want some proof of the said "Jesus Christ" to validate yourself.

How can I give you proof something that I myself have no faith in? You keep missing that point. That is why I think you do believe and want someone to validate your rebellion against something you believe in but can't make up your mind about and don't want to. I think you should seek out Yadda.

I'm off to bed Amadd, you'll have to be mad all by yourself because I'm tired. You should share your piss with me, that might squeeze another couple of hours out of me.

Setanta wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:20am:

Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:15am: Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:10am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:07am: I know, you love it. But hows about some rational response instead of personal attacks? My responses are perfectly rational. You want me to be a religious nut so you can pay out on me and I'm not the religious nut you are looking for. Is that really the way you read it? Or is that some pathetic attempt at debate? I think that you are continually avoiding the question that I ask of you....and that is that I want some proof of the said "Jesus Christ" to validate yourself. How can I give you proof something that I myself have no faith in? You keep missing that point. That is why I think you do believe and want someone to validate your rebellion against something you believe in but can't make up your mind about and don't want to. I think you should seek out Yadda.

Huh? Rebellion? What rebellion? What rebellion is it that you are talking about?

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:30am:

Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:20am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:15am: Setanta wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:10am: Amadd wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 2:07am: I know, you love it. But hows about some rational response instead of personal attacks? My responses are perfectly rational. You want me to be a religious nut so you can pay out on me and I'm not the religious nut you are looking for. Is that really the way you read it? Or is that some pathetic attempt at debate? I think that you are continually avoiding the question that I ask of you....and that is that I want some proof of the said "Jesus Christ" to validate yourself. How can I give you proof something that I myself have no faith in? You keep missing that point. That is why I think you do believe and want someone to validate your rebellion against something you believe in but can't make up your mind about and don't want to. I think you should seek out Yadda. Huh? Rebellion? What rebellion? What rebellion is it that you are talking about? Wtf are you talking about? Go away clown.  You have no interest in truth, you are just a frikin' useless tryhard who hasn't won a debate in his useless meagre existence. Trying to gain an extra point thinking that I am pissed and an easy target, OMFG. Are you for real?

OK, 'night.

In the absence of Sappho, the moderator, who may have died, and would have consequently settled the matter once and for all, I don't believe this forum is for Atheists. It is for the discussion of Atheism from any point of view, and as such, logic is not a prerequisite. And anyway, Atheists allow themselves to be categorised by what they don't believe. Not exactly logical, if you call it a belief.

As for the proof that Jesus Christ actually lived, it is reasonable to say that with references from Roman, Jewish and Islamic sources, a figure of fitting those descriptions probably did live. If we discount Jesus purely on the absence of a birth certificate, we can discount most of humanity. What is not reasonable, is to believe in that person as superhuman. Christians were in competition with other religions, many of which had crowd pleasing gimmicks. It is therefore reasonable to suggest such feats as walking on water, the bread and fish routine, and rising from the dead, were the stock in trade of charlatans interested in perpetuating Christ's charismatic oratory; an oratory before a rather simple and superstitious population. 

issuevoter wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 9:02am:

In the absence of Sappho, the moderator, who may have died, and would have consequently settled the matter once and for all, I don't believe this forum is for Atheists. It is for the discussion of Atheism from any point of view, and as such, logic is not a prerequisite. And anyway, Atheists allow themselves to be categorised by what they don't believe. Not exactly logical, if you call it a belief. As for the proof that Jesus Christ actually lived, it is reasonable to say that with references from Roman, Jewish and Islamic sources, a figure of fitting those descriptions probably did live. If we discount Jesus purely on the absence of a birth certificate, we can discount most of humanity. What is not reasonable, is to believe in that person as superhuman. Christians were in competition with other religions, many of which had crowd pleasing gimmicks. It is therefore reasonable to suggest such feats as walking on water, the bread and fish routine, and rising from the dead, were the stock in trade of charlatans interested in perpetuating Christ's charismatic oratory; an oratory before a rather simple and superstitious population.

You are right. The forum is open to anybody, however, it's atheist discussion.

You are wrong. There is no proof at all that Jesus Christ ever existed as a human being. He is actually an allegorical figure that represents the sun.
Any famous human being of that period would have multitudes of literature written about them.

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 11:38am:

issuevoter wrote on Feb 13th, 2017 at 9:02am: In the absence of Sappho, the moderator, who may have died, and would have consequently settled the matter once and for all, I don't believe this forum is for Atheists. It is for the discussion of Atheism from any point of view, and as such, logic is not a prerequisite. And anyway, Atheists allow themselves to be categorised by what they don't believe. Not exactly logical, if you call it a belief. As for the proof that Jesus Christ actually lived, it is reasonable to say that with references from Roman, Jewish and Islamic sources, a figure of fitting those descriptions probably did live. If we discount Jesus purely on the absence of a birth certificate, we can discount most of humanity. What is not reasonable, is to believe in that person as superhuman. Christians were in competition with other religions, many of which had crowd pleasing gimmicks. It is therefore reasonable to suggest such feats as walking on water, the bread and fish routine, and rising from the dead, were the stock in trade of charlatans interested in perpetuating Christ's charismatic oratory; an oratory before a rather simple and superstitious population.  You are right. The forum is open to anybody, however, it's atheist discussion. You are wrong. There is no proof at all that Jesus Christ ever existed as a human being. He is actually an allegorical figure that represents the sun. Any famous human being of that period would have multitudes of literature written about them.

I am not wrong. I did not say Christ existed, I said it is reasonable to think someone fitting the references did exist.
If you are the slightest bit interested in those references, here is a good place to start.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus



As to it being an "Atheist discussion," make it so if you wish, but here is my opening post again:

OK. In the absence of a Religion forum, I am posting this here, even though its got nothing to do with Atheism.

I would like someone to explain why one God is better than a Pantheon of dieties, like the Greeks and Romans had.

Quote:

I am not wrong. I did not say Christ existed, I said it is reasonable to think someone fitting the references did exist. If you are the slightest bit interested in those references, here is a good place to start. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

Goodo. Now we're getting somewhere.
It amazes me that even atheists are afraid to discuss the high probability that Jesus Christ never existed.

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 12:05pm:

Quote: I am not wrong. I did not say Christ existed, I said it is reasonable to think someone fitting the references did exist. If you are the slightest bit interested in those references, here is a good place to start. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus Goodo. Now we're getting somewhere. It amazes me that even atheists are afraid to discuss the high probability that Jesus Christ never existed.

Start a thread on the subject.

I thought that this is a thread on the subject.

What am I allowed to discuss here?

Jesus is God? Is he really?

Of course  I've already read all of that (non) information which seems to me to conclude that a lack of evidence is evidence enough of his non-existence. I've read about it over and over. Why do you think I'm so certain that Jesus Christ never existed?

In reply to your initial question, my answer is that no God means anything to me. Nothing more than a leaf, a rock, or indeed a dog turd on the pavement.

It's probable perhaps even highly likely that a Jesus figure or figures existed. All myths have a basis in truth.

It was a time when there were many preachers wondering the land. Jesus is most likely an amalgamation of various preachers rolled into one.

Amadd wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 12:22pm:

I thought that this is a thread on the subject. What am I allowed to discuss here? Jesus is God? Is he really? Of course  I've already read all of that (non) information which seems to me to conclude that a lack of evidence is evidence enough of his non-existence. I've read about it over and over. Why do you think I'm so certain that Jesus Christ never existed? In reply to your initial question, my answer is that no God means anything to me. Nothing more than a leaf, a rock, or indeed a dog turd on the pavement.

How about I start a new thread on the plurality of Gods, and you keep this one?

Nah it's OK. Thanks for the offer.

Maybe I am a bit off topic here, however, considering that Jesus is widely considered "God", it's not so much off-topic IMHO.

In regards to the plurality of gods....all I can say is pfft!...I don't believe in one or all. They are all merely control mechanisms to me.

Most people who believe in a supernatural controlling entities believe in only one god these days.
I just choose to believe in one less.

...and not that I haven't experienced many unusual happenings. I have experienced plenty that defy
any known logical explanation. However, I choose to look to the brilliant scientific minds out there who have devoted their lives to explaining through tough, toil and amazing thought processes.

In the future, maybe we will see it as "natural" to experience some things which defy our current  logic.
When the nature of the universe is more understood, it may just be "par for the course" that some people with close attachments are going to experience unusual happenings like I have many times.

Personally, I look to the great logical minds for answers if I so require them rather than those who I see as peddlers of lies.
Because, if you look at it logically, it's plain to see that religions are merely a bastardization of logical truths and good intention in order to usurp power.
Not that I think that all people of the cloth are intent this way, I don't. However, I think that they've been led up the garden path somewhat and they are lackeys for their higher power.

So, the truth that Jesus Christ, as a living breathing person sent down in god's image...or whatever, is most certainly just a bunch of crap IMO.

Maybe you will read what you posted to me sometime with an open mind and realise that there is a total lack of evidence that such an amazing being ever existed, or indeed even a run of the mill person.
Yes I've seen all that before and it's been ripped to shreads over and over.
Still, even the so-called atheists choose to believe that there was an actual person named "Jesus Christ" without even reading logically that this is just an allegorical depiction of something else.

I need to ask you...are you doing the math?

Do you see it yet mate?

I'm fine and dandy to not kick up a stink about which god or gods are better than one another, however, you are bringing up this topic in an atheist room where, any God is not even a belief.

So, if you think that you have the right to "put me into line" and exert your authority over me for posting "on topic" debates, regarding this room, then go ahead and do so.

Amadd wrote on Feb 17^th, 2017 at 12:06am:

Do you see it yet mate? I'm fine and dandy to not kick up a stink about which god or gods are better than one another, however, you are bringing up this topic in an atheist room where, any God is not even a belief. So, if you think that you have the right to "put me into line" and exert your authority over me for posting "on topic" debates, regarding this room, then go ahead and do so.

Using logic, playing the hand I've been dealt, I see you Aremad. ;)

Raven wrote on Feb 13^th, 2017 at 2:07pm:

It's probable perhaps even highly likely that a Jesus figure or figures existed. All myths have a basis in truth. It was a time when there were many preachers wondering the land. Jesus is most likely an amalgamation of various preachers rolled into one.

Keep going, and keep pressing. It was a world largely without literature. Where stories were the vehicle of truth, not lies.

The scientists of the time told stories to convey their truths. These were real truths, not bastardized lies.

Scientists in every corner of the earth had come to realise the movement of the planets and the importance of this knowledge upon all humanity. The only way to convey this knowledge at the time was through storytelling. Not surprisingly, these scientists (or physicists) were thought of as the magi, because they could predict the future by looking at the movement of the stars and planets.

They could tell the masses when to reap and when to sow. And they shared this freely through the best vehicle available, which was storytelling. Pagan festivals are still what we celebrate to this day for the times of significance.

When literature became more widespread, the need for storytelling became less of a necessity.
Hence, the bastardization of truth for political endeavors took it's course.

Look into it some more and realise that religion was born from the bastardization of these stories, not from honest intent.

The problem with our generation is that we had the vehicle to truth, but chose to ignore. It's a pity what you do to your children, it's your fault.

Amadd, you claim logic but your logic is not rational. Because you disbelieve in Jesus does not mean there is no god. I don't not believe in any god man has told me about but could there be a god we have not been told about? One not a petty tyrant? A creator of the universe?

I won't take the label of atheist I have been given that far, although I'm happy enough to wear it. I just disbelieve in all the gods man has proposed. I cannot know all, therefore cannot discount there is a god somewhere, it would be the height of arrogance to think one could know there is none although it is quite reasonable not to believe in any that we have been told about.

Your fixation on Jesus is telling. Why do you not talk about YHWY, Allah, Thor, Zeus or Taranis? What are you trying to prove? Are you an apostate Christian trying to convince yourself, or are you trying to convince us?

The reasonable and logical man would not presume to know all, he would understand the limitations imposed by his(lack of) knowledge. There would always be a maybe, even though he may well be able discount all the gods he has been informed about.

"Doubt 'til thou canst doubt no more . . . doubt is thought and thought is life. Systems which end doubt are devices for drugging thought." Albert Guerard

Doubt yourself also, doubt is the beginning of wisdom.

Now I'm done being serious with you.

Quote:

Amadd, you claim logic but your logic is not rational. Because you disbelieve in Jesus does not mean there is no god.

Let's break this down a little shall we?

Take it one step at a time and realise that you are making connections illogically.
Did I ever say that because there was no Jesus, therefore no God? (There is no "Jesus is God". I think that's a given).

You seem to be making irrational assumptions there.
Yes, I am totally open to any real evidence that some supernatural controlling power exists, however, I have seen no evidence of that beyond what may be scientifically explained someday.

For now, I would like people to look more into the origins of Christianity and realise that it is based upon planetary movements and the stories within which were the best vehicle at the time for spreading knowledge.
Hence, we still celebrate dates which align with seasonal changes, not any supernatural happenings.

FYI, I have great respect for the hard working, hard thinking truth tellers throughout history and I have little or no respect for those who have bastardised that for self-gain.

Amadd wrote on Feb 17^th, 2017 at 11:15pm:

Quote: Amadd, you claim logic but your logic is not rational. Because you disbelieve in Jesus does not mean there is no god. Let's break this down a little shall we? Take it one step at a time and realise that you are making connections illogically. Did I ever say that because there was no Jesus, therefore no God? (There is no "Jesus is God". I think that's a given). You seem to be making irrational assumptions there. Yes, I am totally open to any real evidence that some supernatural controlling power exists, however, I have seen no evidence of that beyond what may be scientifically explained someday. For now, I would like people to look more into the origins of Christianity and realise that it is based upon planetary movements and the stories within which were the best vehicle at the time for spreading knowledge. Hence, we still celebrate dates which align with seasonal changes, not any supernatural happenings. FYI, I have great respect for the hard working, hard thinking truth tellers throughout history and I have little or no respect for those who have bastardised that for self-gain.

  It's the only sane approach.

So your fixation is on Christianity? Why?

Quote:

So your fixation is on Christianity? Why?

The obvious there would be that I was raised in a christian nation and therefore have experienced enough of what christianity has to offer.

From the time that I was dragged over the coals by my Sunday school teacher for drawing comparisons between Joseph and Jesus, I had been apathetic at best towards Christianity, and religion in general.

Not that I ever cared too much, however, for many years I believed that Jesus was an actual person with superhuman powers, because that's what the general consensus was.

In later years I have drawn many more comparisons of this jesus character, with not just with Joseph, but with many sun-gods such as: Mythra (the mythical), Horus, Krishna, Dionysus, ..etc etc.

Well enough similarities to conclude that this jesus character is nothing unique at all. In fact, he is merely a "run of the mill' re-hash of so many other sun-gods before him.

The truth of the matter IMO, is that these sun-gods all concern (once very important) astrological information which were relayed in an allegorical manner to the masses.

Not surprisingly, the allegorical, informational stories were politicised for personal gain with the advent of more widespread literature. People were led to believe that these allegorical depictions were actual human beings, when in fact, this was the common (and still effective) method of exchanging information.

If you are having problems with understanding the once common methods of exchanging information, then think of the American Indians, our aboriginals..etc., and the stories that they told to pass down information. This is how life was before literature.

Some people even seem to think that smart phones have always existed  ::)i

What is your point.

You have just shown it dickhead  ;D

It's called "ignorance of the masses".

I was answering a question numb nuts.  ::)

Has anybody done the math yet?

It's just not possible that this Jesus fellow could have existed as a real person. Any semi-sane person could attest to that.
A little empathy as to how knowledge was exchanged 2000+ yrs ago will fill in the gaps.

Quote:

I think we have been through this, I don't believe in gods. Your attitude about your non beliefs is very angry.

That's what I think, that honest science has been bastardised for the political greed of the clergy.

I think we need to get more angry about this.

They molest children fuks sake!

This Topic was moved here from Atheism by freediver.