On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 12:53:25 -0700 (PDT), Roger Pearse
<roger.pearse@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
==>On 2 Jul, 16:38, Ivan Gowch <ivango...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
==>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:25:35 -0700 (PDT),Roger Pearse
IG:
==>> ==>> In the total absence of any evidence of Jesus
==>> ==>> historicity, it is not unreasonable to assume
that
==>> ==>> the legend of Jesus is just myth.
RP:
==>> ==>There is no absence. Those to try to assert it (dishonestly) have
to
==>> ==>find excuses to ignore the evidence.
IG:
==>> What evidence? Outside of the New Testament, there
==>> isn't a single credible historical source that offers
==>> any evidence that the Jesus of the New Testament
==>> actually lived.
==>>
==>> You can babble all you like about Josephus and
Tacitus
==>> and anonymous people who may have "known" the
==>> apostles, but none of that is more than wild
==>> speculation -- part of the desperate effort to prove
==>> the unprovable.
==>I see. So the NT isn't evidence, for some reason;
For the same reason that nothing that cannot
be sup****ted by other sources can be
considered "evidence." Without sup****t,
the NT is folklore, and folklore only.
==> and statements by
==>pagans aren't evidence;
Alleged "statements" re****ted hundreds of
years after the events they supposedly relate
to and without any independent evidence to
sup****t them, are not evidence, but only rumour
and hearsay -- and you know it as well as I.
==>and statements by the fathers aren't
==>evidence...
Whose "fathers?"
==>The fact is that all of these are evidence of the existence of a man.
You have not cited a single thing a reasonable,
even moderately educated person would consider
"evidence." Folklore, rumour, anonymous scribblings
and yarns passed along for centuries are not
evidence of anything at all.
(And, of course, even if there once was a notable
preacher known in his time as Jesus of Nazareth,
there isn't a single sane reason to believe that he
was supernatural or anything more than a human
like all others, except, perhaps, mouthier.)
==>The ability to find excuses to ignore data is not evidence.
Nothing in the Bible is "data." Anonymously written
stories are never "evidence."
[snip]
==>Considering the tiny number of atheists, and their lack of distinction
"Tiny number?" I think not. There are a whole
lot more atheists than dare to declare themselves,
for well-placed fear of retaliation by religious
fascists.
"The immense majority of intellectually eminent men
disbelieve in Christian religion, but conceal the fact
in public, because they are afraid of losing their
incomes." -Bertrand Russell
A study in the leading journal Nature by Larson and
Whitham in 1998 showed that of those American
scientists considered eminent enough by their peers to
have been elected to the National Academy of Sciences
only about seven per cent believe in a personal god.
==>Atheists in practice live by some subset
==>of the societal values of the period of history in which they happened
==>to be born.
"Subset of societal values?" This is utter gibberish.
Besides, ALL people are at least affected by the
societal values of the period of history in which they
were born. What's your problem with that?
Do you seriously believe we should all live by the
"societal values" of a flea-ridden population of
sheepherders and nomads who lived 5,000-2,000
years ago and didn't have the tiniest scrap of
scientific knowledge or understanding of the
nature of the universe they inhabited? Are you
that insane?
==>Such conformity, never discussed or made explicit,
What "conformity?" Atheism is very nearly the
opposite of conformity. But your transparent
attempt at childish slander is noted and found
to be amusing, if dishonest.
==> is the
==>choice that you are pu****ng here (for your hatreds are neither here
==>nor there, and merely beg this question).
"Hatreds?" What "hatreds" do you fantasize that
I've expressed (except, perhaps for hatred
of lies, delusions and brainwa****ng)?
==>I suggest that such a
==>position only has to be stated to be shown to be false.
You wish it were so. But a host of eminent,
intelligent folks have found it to be otherwise.
"All thinking men are atheists." - Ernest Hemingway
"It is an interesting and demonstrable fact, that all
children are atheists and were religion not inculcated
into their minds, they would remain so” -Ernestine
Rose
"Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable
people make in the presence of unjustified religious
beliefs." -Sam Harris
"Religion is all bunk." -Thomas Edison
The fact is that the world’s most intelligent and
creative people have always been atheists, leaving
religious belief to the dumb, the deluded and the
pathetically brainwashed.
Or perhaps you think Thomas Edison was no more
than a man of "little distinction," a conformist
living "by some subset of the societal values of the
period of history in which he happened to be born."
Thanks for the chuckle.
==>All the best,
==>
==>Roger Pearse
Indeed.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com
**
|
