'What religion are you?' poll discussion

tbourner

CLGoggin wrote: »

thought it was good food for thought...

Not really, you're comparing a possible real life situation with a fictitious Chinese Whispers type story from thousands of years ago.

What's more food for thought is that if you saw a dead man laying next to a living man at a fork in the road, you'd ask one of them for directions rather than phoning the police and finding out what on Earth is going on!!

adrian_clark

CLGoggin wrote: »

i'm a little late in on this one, but I heard a good story/quote by J John the other day (this is slightly paraphrased):

there are 4 main religions that depend on hirstorical personalities: Islam, Buddism, Judaism and Christianity.

You can ask all around the world but you would not find one Muslim that says the founder, Muhammed, once lived and then died, but he's alive today and I have a personal relationship with him.

You can ask all around the world but you would not find one Buddist that says the founder, Buddha, once lived and then died, but he's alive today and I have a personal relationship with him.

You can ask all around the world but you would not find one Jew that says the founder, Abraham, once lived and then died, but he's alive today and I have a personal relationship with him.

However, ask in every country (except 15) around the world and you will find many Christians that say the founder, Jesus, once lived and then died, but he's alive today and I have a personal relationship with him.

Imagine you are walking down the street. You reach a point where the road branches into two and you don’t know which way to go. Two men are lying there – one is dead, one is alive. Which one would you ask for directions?

thought it was good food for thought...

Great thoughts. The extensive historical evidence, along with the testimony of witnesses from the time of Jesus and today, provides weighty evidence for the resurrection of Jesus being a reality. It's intriguing how human history revolves around this homeless guy who lived 2000 years ago. J John's on the money, thanks very much :money:

Quasar

adrian_clark wrote: »

Great thoughts. The extensive historical evidence, along with the testimony of witnesses from the time of Jesus and today, provides weighty evidence for the resurrection of Jesus being a reality. It's intriguing how human history revolves around this homeless guy who lived 2000 years ago. J John's on the money, thanks very much :money:

The "historical evidence" is provided by believers, ie people who had an axe to grind. There is NO independent evidence of a man walking on water, raising the dead and coming back from the dead himself. All there is are the "accounts" of those intent on spreading the faith centered on him.

The reason PART OF human history (ie the West) revolves around this guy is that it so happened that his embellished story and exhortations to believe in him, as the answer to just about everything, circulated at a time of maximum Roman power, and appealed to the oppressed and dispossessed. As this belief grew among the populace, it became rather awkward for the Roman political machine to keep ignoring it. Eventually Constantine made it into the official religion of the Empire, and the fledgling church began to acquire ever greater powers until it came to be regarded as the sole soul-saver and king maker. In fact, no christian king had legitimacy without the Pope's seal of approval. With the reformation and the various splits within the church we begin to see the cracks in the religion, and the very same desire to break the shackles of papal power in the same way as early christian converts saw hope of release from imperial power.

Shaping history indeed. But only because it became expedient to do so and because christianity's inception occurred at a fortuitous time of western history, and its laudable message to the poor was heard very clearly at that oppressive time.

Believe me, if there WERE independent records (ie. outside those written by believers) the world and his wife would know them by heart because they would have been bandied around these past 2000 years. Instead... zilch, zero, zippo. All the "records" are what believers have written.

You look at any other religion out there and there are plenty of "records" about them too, except that some of them have independent confirmation. Ie. the buddha, who was heir to a throne and therefore a record of his birth would have been made and kept as a matter of course. Mohammed was a historical figure too.

Jesus was too, the sense that he was tried and crucified according to Roman Law, but that he was what his believers purport him to be, just won't wash for those who look for evidence dispassionately and without bias. The Romans would have had a field day in recording someone who could feed 5000 with a few loaves and fishes. Instead, nothing. There was the crucifixion of a troublemaker. No doubt the "true believers" have an explanation for this one too, except that's unlikely to wash either.

redux

adrian_clark wrote: »

Great thoughts. The extensive historical evidence, along with the testimony of witnesses from the time of Jesus and today, provides weighty evidence for the resurrection of Jesus being a reality.

Some of the same witness testimony also asserts that the world is only about 4000 years old, and what's more some religions do take that literally, despite extensive historical evidence that it's a lot older.

tpr007

The definition of atheist used by the poll is incorrect. I wonder if that affected the result/

tbourner

tpr007 wrote: »

The definition of atheist used by the poll is incorrect. I wonder if that affected the result/

How would you define it?

tpr007

It's blurred in the original post, it says:
K. Atheist (deities do not exist) - 3,176 votes (21 %)
L. Agnostic (the existence of deities is unknowable) - 1,845 votes (12 %)

Atheists also accept that the existence of deities is unknowable - but that the evidence suggests there is no god. Agnostics tend to place almost equal weight on the argument.

tpr007

adrian_clark wrote: »

Great thoughts. The extensive historical evidence, along with the testimony of witnesses from the time of Jesus and today, provides weighty evidence for the resurrection of Jesus being a reality.

I think you misunderstand the term 'evidence'.

tbourner

tpr007 wrote: »

It's blurred in the original post, it says:
K. Atheist (deities do not exist) - 3,176 votes (21 %)
L. Agnostic (the existence of deities is unknowable) - 1,845 votes (12 %)

Atheists also accept that the existence of deities is unknowable - but that the evidence suggests there is no god. Agnostics tend to place almost equal weight on the argument.

I always thought an Atheist was literally not believing in a god, which is why I've always felt a bit odd putting myself down as Atheist - I usually put 'no religion' if possible.

From Wiki:

Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

Dictionary results come back as:

a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

Also, Theism comes from the greek word Theos, meaning 'God', and defines belief in at least one deity, so logically Atheism must mean the opposite, ie: complete disbelief in the existence of any deity.

There isn't any religion which is 'scientist' and allows for changing beliefs depending on new evidence and proofs is there? Or is that what you're saying Atheist is?

adrian_clark

tpr007 wrote: »

I think you misunderstand the term 'evidence'.

Evidence would be personal testimony that could be presented to a jury for examination. In the case of Jesus having resurrected it would be recorded eye witness testimony, experiential evidence shown in the behaviour of the early church and in the personal experience of people who are in relationship with Jesus today. Add to that historical evidence, collated form secular Roman historians, corroborated through written records and architectural records. All these things contribute to the body of evidence whereby we can make an informed decision on the veracity of the Bible.