|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Feb 4, 2005 0:45:52 GMT 1
To my knowledge I have not seen anyone present hard evidence of the existence of God or Jesus. As I see it, a collection of stories, anecdotes and alleged witness statements that may or may not have happened at the time do not satisfy my questions (a cheap shot I know here but would you build a criminal prosecution on the same basis?, we'll leave various 70's & 80's police practises out of this ). How often do you hear stories start one day and by the next day they have been horrendously changed and exagerated? Can I recommend to you this book? www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0310209307/qid=1107473682/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl/202-9635650-4187053It is written by a journalist who set out to prove the claims of Christ were junk Well worth a read and fascinating in places. I reckon buy one and share it with Phil An interesting perspective anyway, and it had a big influence on the way I think about stuff like this The author introduces it with this... "Not too many years ago, I was an atheist. My agnostic wife's conversion to Christianity prompted me to use my legal training (M.S.L., Yale Law School) and journalism experience (I was the legal editor of "The Chicago Tribune") to systematically investigate whether there's any credible evidence that Jesus is the unique Son of God. "The Case for Christ" retraces the two-year quest that rocked my world."
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Feb 4, 2005 0:54:24 GMT 1
I am a non practising catholic, had a convant/catholic education for many years and was put through all the usual catholic ceremonies, confesion, holy communion, confirmation.
I pray before going to bed EVERY night, and have done since a very young child. Dont say them out load, just to myself as im dropping off to sleep.
If its all a myth is irrelevant to me.
I cant say I practise a particularly pios life, at some time or other i have broken all the ten commandments with the exception i think of killing and coveting my nieghbours ox ( although i did boot his cat up the arse once ;D )
Thing is, i want to believe in God, I want to believe in heaven, i want my nan to be somewhere better now rather than just in a graveyard.
I will not go to church. I think that the whole modern idea of the church is so far removed from what jesus originaly intended its untrue. Would i be right in thinking that most regular church goers come from the middle and upper classes? Dont have figures to substantiate that, just my memories of the people we went with when we where young.
The modern church has huge wealth and yet they still hand around a plate collecting money off sinners. Supposed to make you feel better about yourself after walking past beggars in the street all week and turning a blind eye.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Feb 4, 2005 1:02:42 GMT 1
I will not go to church. I think that the whole modern idea of the church is so far removed from what jesus originaly intended its untrue. Would i be right in thinking that most regular church goers come from the middle and upper classes? Dont have figures to substantiate that, just my memories of the people we went with when we where young. There was a traditional view that to be a good educated englishman one also went to Church but that is all but dying out If you came to my Church you might be sitting by a doctor or a teacher, or a former heroine addict or someone in severe debt One of my good friends used to be a Paratrooper, another was basically a nightclub owner / doorman and general nasty piece of work, by his own admission your statement about the original church is something I would wholeheartedly agree with, that Jesus would weep if he saw some of the abuse and practise of man made structures and political systems
|
|
|
Post by rob on Feb 4, 2005 1:52:09 GMT 1
not at all, I know many people who go to church as dave said ranging from people in severe debt, students, single mothers, divorces, social workers, rich buggers and people who were "scummers" (debt collectors, drug takers, door men etc...)
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Feb 4, 2005 1:57:19 GMT 1
not at all, I know many people who go to church as dave said ranging from people in severe debt, students, single mothers, divorces, social workers, rich buggers and people who were "scummers" (debt collectors, drug takers, door men etc...) Just out of curiousity, and i ask in all seriousness, why are door men scummers.
|
|
|
Post by mysticmurray on Feb 4, 2005 3:38:11 GMT 1
It's all a load of bollocks really*
*the whole debate
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2005 9:24:03 GMT 1
Dave - I could read that book and be convinced and then read the Da vinci Code and not be convinced. How in that book does the author go about proving Jesus is the sun of God? (Yes, I am too tight to buy the book )
|
|
|
Post by blue 44 on Feb 4, 2005 10:14:27 GMT 1
really enjoyed the programme last night a very effective hatchet job on on the whole Da Vinci code rubbish which has taken in so many people who was it who said when people stop believing in God they dont believe in nothing they believe in anything( Chesterton?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2005 10:17:01 GMT 1
who was it who said when people stop believing in God they dont believe in nothing they believe in anything( Chesterton?)Whoever said that made a bit of an idiot comment IMO.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Feb 4, 2005 10:19:55 GMT 1
Dave - I could read that book and be convinced and then read the Da vinci Code and not be convinced. How in that book does the author go about proving Jesus is the sun of God? (Yes, I am too tight to buy the book ) If you saw the programme last night you wouldn;t give the Da Vinci code a second glance as a serious work As for this book, well Strobel was a sceptical journalist who author interviewed about a dozen leading theologians and makes them defend their claims and I have a copy if you'd rather borrow one From the Author "Is there credible evidence that Jesus is the Son of God? Not too many years ago, I was an atheist. My agnostic wife's conversion to Christianity prompted me to use my legal training (M.S.L., Yale Law School) and journalism experience (I was the legal editor of "The Chicago Tribune") to systematically investigate whether there's any credible evidence that Jesus is the unique Son of God. "The Case for Christ" retraces the two-year quest that rocked my world. But instead of me merely describing the evidence that convinced me Christianity is true, I interviewed thirteen leading scholars and experts, posing to them the tough questions I had when I was a skeptic. These authorities, with doctorates from Cambridge, Princeton, Brandeis, and other prestigious institutions, were forced to defend their positions with compelling evidence and persuasive logic. Among the topics I cover are: € Historical evidence: Are there really enough reliable documents supporting the life, teachings, and resurrection of Jesus? € Scientific evidence: Do archaeological findings support or contradict the historical accounts of Jesus? € Psychiatric evidence: Did Jesus ever claim to be God? If he did, was he crazy? And does he fulfill all of the attributes of God? € Fingerprint evidence: Do ancient prophecies -- written hundreds of years before Jesus was born -- really point to him alone as being the Messiah of Israel and the world? € Plus powerful evidence from four leading authorities on the ultimate authentication of Jesus' claim to being God: his resurrection from the dead. I wanted the book to be both reliable and readable. I have been extremely gratified by the reaction of renowned law professor Phillip Johnson of the University of California at Berkeley, who wrote: "Lee Strobel asks the questions a tough-minded skeptic would ask. His book is so good I read it out loud to my wife evenings after dinner. Every inquirer should have it." Hank Hanegraaff, the nationally syndicated "Bible Answer Man" and president of the Christian Research Institute, was especially gracious in his review: "This is not a dry-as-dust theological treatise. 'The Case for Christ' is a supreme example of investigative journalism that reads like a fast-paced novel. I couldn't put it down. I will go so far as to say that 'The Case for Christ' is the best presentation of the historical evidence for Jesus, in print at a popular level, that I have ever read."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2005 10:27:48 GMT 1
But is there any solid evidence in the book?
I'm sorry Dave but I just can't take 'eye-whitness accounts' to be a reliable source from something that happened 2000 years ago.
My flat mate is very religious, when I ask him about proof of God he says he doesn't need any as he knows God exists - this seems to be apparent in a lot of Christians. That's fair enough for my flat mate and other believers but not for me.
Personally, I need to see something to believe it.
I'm not trying to slag off Christians here, after all I could be wrong or they could be wrong. The exsistence of God (or any other supernatural being) will always be debated and we will, as simple human beings, never be able to prove the actual answer.
|
|
|
Post by rob on Feb 4, 2005 10:35:29 GMT 1
Sorry Pab "Scummers" is just what those sorts of people are labelled as down here in Reading. If I'd have had my thinking cap on (which rarely fits at the best of times) I'd not have written that as I'm sure some of my friends let alone strangers would find it offensive As for the davinci code- now that does look like a pile of old balls
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2005 11:18:10 GMT 1
At the end of the day none of us can confirm or deny the existence of God and Heaven until we die... surely?
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Feb 4, 2005 11:31:57 GMT 1
A prerequisite of any religeon is absolute faith. By its very definition, there is no absolute proof that God or Jesus exists( existed). If you believe and have faith then you will be saved, in other words if you dont demand some concrete evidence your ok, which works very well for the church cos no matter what books peepil ( ;D ) write, there never will be any definative proof till you die. If you dont have faith, and need some kind of concrete evidence you will be damned, which again works very well for the church cos no one wants to spend an eternity rotting in the fires of hell. Like i have said, i do have faith, but in God, not in the Church. To me, they are two very seperate things. The church to me, (and i sincerely apologise to chucrch goers amongst us, i dont mean to offend), is something invented by man to make money, and to control and have power over people. Not so much in modern times, im sure the priests and vicars of today have little interest in that, but certainly in the past, God was used as a weapon of control. Only man could possibly take something so good and turn it into something so wrong.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Feb 4, 2005 12:11:32 GMT 1
A prerequisite of any religeon is absolute faith. By its very definition, there is no absolute proof that God or Jesus exists( existed). There is more evidence from a greater number and variety of historical sources that Jesus existed than there is for any other event or person in the history of the ancient world. Greek, Roman, Jewish, Syrian, Christian, North African historians ... Jesus the man / prophet is found in Judaism, Islam, Christianity and some forms of Hinduism. the question is who was he, what did he claim, and what can we learn? I respect anyone holding an opinion on that having looked into it, but that for me is the big question. The rest of it comes from that central question. I agree about the abuse of man made structures and political power. It is true that many things that should have been good in history have been abused. From chemical weapons to the railways that took people to Auschwitz. When people want to do evil then they do. Your comments on the Church do not offend me at all, but nor does it distract me from wanting to find out who this figure, Jesus, really was.
|
|
|
Post by tattooshrew on Feb 4, 2005 13:34:56 GMT 1
Only about 10 or 11 weeks ago i was a confirmed non believer and would take every opportunity to diss christianity and every other religion. I wasnt even prepared to admit that a man called jesus christ existed. I would certainly include myself in at least several of the catagories that TBH mentioned earlier. My life changed for ever when a series of events that i first put down as coinsidences proved the existance of God to me, including a very close encounter with Him! My life has changed beyond all recognition since that day and is so much better. Proof enough for me. I dont want to beat anybody over the head with my faith but wish lots of others could share the experience... its great. Also in reply to an earlier post about the case for christianity not standing up in court a prominent lawyer once examined the evidence and came to the conclusion that the evidence was overwhelmingly in favour of it. Would also like to say that religion dont start wars, people do. Really enjoyed this thread and its nice to see respect being shown for other peoples beliefs. ;D
|
|
|
Post by blue 44 on Feb 4, 2005 13:54:29 GMT 1
Whoever said that made a bit of an idiot comment IMO. well your entitled to your opinion but IMO its your response thats idiotic and betrays a lack of analysis of todays soceity btw tatooshrew great post
|
|
|
Post by loyalshrew nli on Feb 4, 2005 14:35:13 GMT 1
well your entitled to your opinion but IMO its your response thats idiotic and betrays a lack of analysis of todays soceity btw tatooshrew great post Fair enough comment. The reason I gave that bitter response is that the quote appeared to mock anyone who didn't believe in God-seems very narrow minded to me
|
|
|
Post by blue 44 on Feb 4, 2005 15:32:39 GMT 1
No offense taken loyalshrew It wasnt aimed at individuals it was a comment on soceirty as a whole the point Chesterton was making (I think it was him) was we often say we dont believe in God because were so modern and then believe in Feng shui horoscopes various other superstitions etc etc This is not a commment about you personally of course
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Feb 4, 2005 16:10:50 GMT 1
There is only one religious guru that loyalshrew bows down to, his first name is Ronald, he's dressed as a clown and he gives out Burgers, fries and milkshakes to the needy masses.
|
|
|
Post by somersetshrew on Feb 4, 2005 18:47:50 GMT 1
Why are people condemning the DaVinci Code as b******s?
it seems that they are saying this because it isn't true. The Author doesn't claim it to be true, or even based on fact.
If this is the case, then all of Shakespeares work is b******s too, and Fleming, and anyone with Bronte in their name.
Its just a story, with "real" places in it.
a bloody good story too.
|
|
|
Post by wiganshrew2 on Feb 4, 2005 21:40:42 GMT 1
Someone said he wants to believe- and wishes his nan was somewhere better- not in a graveyard. That really said something to me. There's a lot in that reply I can relate to. I have a friend who feels just that way about the Church. (The Church should take note- and do something about it - some have, in fact.Especially the "younger" churches with a will to reach out and help people in the local community) You're so right- Jesus felt for those who were marginalised by the society of the day. That's what churches should do. That's where I was. I got to the point where I couldn't believe, but thought the Judeo/ Christian guidelines for living were sensible - and aimed to make people happier- things like loving others as you love yourself (which implies self-respect, too!) I'd gone so very, stupidly wrong at one point, and let so many people down, that I felt God wouldn't want me, even if he existed. But some amazing things happened to me- and, although some may put it down to coincidence- well it changed my life. I can't explain or prove everything, of course not. It's a mystery we view "through a glass darkly." We won't know yet, that's for sure. But certainly no real Christian would regard ANYONE as second-class citizen- whether they're athiests, muslims, Hindus.. whatever. It's just that, if you've found something that makes your life better- you want to tell people! (AND- incidentally- the one Christian whose words really had an impact on me- was - a Footballer. I can't even remember his name even- only that he was speaking at Roker Park on a T.V. programme i the early 1980s (does that even exist now?Roker Park_ Tyneside, I think?) So- who says it has nothing to do with Football?!!!
|
|
|
Post by somersetshrew on Feb 4, 2005 22:04:47 GMT 1
Im sure Bernard NcNally would never play on a Sunday because of his religious beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by ShrewsAde on Feb 4, 2005 22:13:55 GMT 1
blimey only just started reading this thread - had to power-read (i e just read the funny bits) - my conclusion on the discussion is (not necesarly well researched): - Dave/TBH( in the BlueCorner) - Ok it's apparant that Jesus existed, and as a nice bloke wanted to calm thinks down in the middle-east (what a bunch of hot-heads - not undeniable) so used the God thing (very topical in the day) and preached a lot - because people were having a hard time - Romans and all, they like him, so seemed his ideas looked good - people then wrote down what god had done and going back a few thousand years seemed like a long enough time - but a few more million to mop up the dinasaurs woulld have been better - but hind-sight is a good thing! - Phil / LoyalShew's (in the BlueCorner too) I'm not saying that it's just because of a science education - but science / physics really states that everything is black and white (by proof) so because the existance of God has not / cannot be proven - he doesn't exist - fair point?. - ShrewsAde: - there is sooooo much we don't understand about the universe we have to keep an open mind about stuff - the creation of the universe defies explaination - ie we can't work out what went on - there can't just be nothing and then something - we don't understand because we can't - try explaining to a dog that the light on the floor actually comes from the torch, you can even show it the torch, and smack it with the torch, there will never be a dog that understands that light on the floor comes from a torch (I tried!) - hense we will never know where the universe came from imho - and there is maybe a god up there holding a torch - and beating us over the head with it. - that might explain the Multiverse according to Michio Kaku - www.mkaku.org/ now that would explain a lot Ant - well and truly off the fence and the scouser selling trinkets in the car boot sale - Come get your Crosses only £1, or £1.50 with a little fella on. ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by mr1972 on Feb 4, 2005 22:14:58 GMT 1
One of the first comments in the book it that it is based on fact .....
|
|
|
Post by rob on Feb 4, 2005 23:33:01 GMT 1
yep the first thing the book says is that the Priory of Sion has been a secret group since 1089 (or something) when infact there is significant proof that shows that this group was made up as long ago as 1950 (and forged documents etc... to prove the "fantasy". Have to say one of the authers (from a previous Holy Grail book) didnt come out of it to well and neither did Dan Brown (they kept replaying a bit of an interview where he said it was based on historical fact etc...) which it blatently wasnt. Found it quite ironic he was unavailable for interview as he was "researching" his new book
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Feb 4, 2005 23:50:39 GMT 1
Your comments on the Church do not offend me at all, but nor does it distract me from wanting to find out who this figure, Jesus, really was. And niether would i want to. No one wants to believe more than me
|
|
|
Post by somersetshrew on Feb 5, 2005 0:33:28 GMT 1
I actually think that this documentary was completely biased. Whilst they spent 10 minutes disproving facts, they only spent 30 seconds on the "for" argument.
Also editing interviews is a proven way to make a person or persons look as though they dont come out of the interview well. Watchdog use it a lot. my boss was interviewed for an hour by Anne Robinson, they just used the 30 seconds that made our company look bad.
as an example. Monsignor Saunier became rich by selling masses. utter nonsense, yes, he did sell masses, but he also became very rich overnight. that wasn't explained. There is a lot more to the renne la chateau story than they told last night, they just told the bits that supported their argument.
I believe the priory of Sion has existed for over 900 years. ask a mason about their activities, whilst not quite the same, they will be secretive about it.
Im not saying everything in the DaVinci code is fact. in fact, most of it isn't. Im just saying theat the documentary wasn't fair.
So what if Dan Brown wasn't available. he may actually have been doing some research. God knows he did enough for the DaVinci code, either from legend, or fact.
|
|
|
Post by Amy on Feb 5, 2005 1:15:24 GMT 1
What poo, Dan Brown clearly states on the very first page of the book that all the stuff in his book is true. I don't think the channel 4 prog was entirely biased - it poo-pooed what was unjustified (priory of sion, connection between grail and knights templar) but you could see the excitement on tony robinsons face when presented with the Da Vinci painting and I too was compelled by the idea of a female prescence at the last supper - whether the theory surrounding it that Dan Brown suggests is true is another matter. I don't believe that humans and dinosaurs co-existed, I do not believe there is evidence to support this in the old testiment. I'd rather look upon the old testament as a series of lessons, fables even, guidelines to suggest the right thing to do without being taken literally in all circumstances (incest anyone?) I think that christianity is exploited all over the place - I despise the C.U. who operate at university who have tried to preach to me on numerous occasions and evidently pity me when I fall over in drunken (immoral) giggles at the end of a night out. Not all of us find that faith can heal all wounds, I've known 2 people die in the last few years, in the first incidence it took me a long time to realise that prayer was a helpful tool in getting through it, in the second I realised that the christians I encountered were offensive to my beliefs and that I will never be able to believe in the God that they believe in. It's all bloody confusing, I was disappointed with the findings of the C4 prog - I wanted to believe and found it to be exactly what made it a bestseller - a cracking work of fiction (I say cracking, the story was actually pretty pants and lacking in a good dose of a reality - you can't just get in your plane and fly across international borders however pompous and british you might be.) I try not to put faith in anything too freely, and try not to believe everything anybody tells me, velosaur raptors WOULD have eaten adam (or eve) and I have a few other questions to end with; was jesus a woman? he did wear long robes and the feeding of the 5000 illustrates a huge aptitude for domestic science and home economics how come there aren't disproportinally large amounts of ducks in the world? surely more than two of them survived the apocalyptic flood? - they didnt need the ark Why is monogamy so important? Abraham had two wives and children by each of them separatley and then he sent one away because she was inconvenient How can you pick an answer?? all the buddhists pity the hindus for believing the wrong thing, the christians pity the muslims, the jews pity the sikhs, blah blah blah everybody believes they are right - how many identities does God have? does he have a hundred mailboxes for all the different kinds of prayer? Maybe we're all right! Dan Brown is a silly American ;D
|
|
|
Post by wiganshrew2 on Feb 5, 2005 10:04:55 GMT 1
And niether would i want to. No one wants to believe more than me I have far more reason to believe than not believe. One day, I will tell my story. (And maybe in Shropshire. Why not? I was born there and that's where my story begins.)
|
|