The existence of God

Originally Posted by harmitage

He can hardly be described as being normal. Whether you believe he is the son of God or not, his short time on earth can hardly be described as normal. How many normal people in the last couple of thousand years have had screeds written about their life and had such a significant effect on people that he is still important to millions of so long after his death.

I've never heard of a major religion being built around all those other normal people around at that time.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

There are just too much reference about him for him to have been made up.

Screeds and documentation, like that of Flavius Josephus you mean?

Virtually all sources are the four gospels written several years after his life by people who had particular beliefs about its importance

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Because of several historical references about him

There are just too much reference about him for him to have been made up

But other than we have to believe because it has to be true?

---------- Post added at 13:27 ---------- Previous post was at 13:23 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Being an athiest for some time I sidestepped the issue..they have a right to believe what they like about a deity.However when dealing with an actual historical figure I'm on steadier ground.

But others who are not an atheist might have not. I think a lot of people who believe are only believers because they were taught to from an impressionable age.

No one has said that - once again you seem to be twisting what posters state to back up your proposition.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

No one has said that - once again you seem to be twisting what posters state to back up your proposition.

No one has said what? what has no one said that I am twisting in order to make people back up my proposition?
and why do you keep shouting it has to be about sides, when I speak for myself?

[idi banashapan]

Originally Posted by Gary L

No one has said what? what has no one said that I am twisting in order to make people back up my proposition?
and why do you keep shouting it has to be about sides, when I speak for myself?

black or white, with or against.... no grey areas, no sitting on the fence please...

[LondonRoad]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Do you think he was magic then?
He could have been normal at the time, and it was only a graduation of exaggerations built up over time that lead us to believe he was more than normal.

How do we know that Jesus wasn't just a made up character to reinforce the existence of God?
The significant effect is just time and the build up.

A child is born into the world everyday. and have been for the last 2 thousand years. each and everyone of them could if taught be part of the such significant effect on people that makes him still important to millions or so. long after his death.

But only one has been.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Bender

black or white, with or against.... no grey areas, no sitting on the fence please...

Or as he said, your either with us or against us

---------- Post added at 14:34 ---------- Previous post was at 14:32 ----------

Originally Posted by harmitage

But only one has been.

And I have given you my thoughts as to why that could be

Originally Posted by Gary L

But other than we have to believe because it has to be true?

---------- Post added at 13:27 ---------- Previous post was at 13:23 ----------



But others who are not an atheist might have not. I think a lot of people who believe are only believers because they were taught to from an impressionable age.

Ok you win..I've no longer got any clue what you are trying to debate..and frankly this toothache is making me rather tetchy so I'll bow out before I say something I regret..

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Ok you win..I've no longer got any clue what you are trying to debate..and frankly this toothache is making me rather tetchy so I'll bow out before I say something I regret..

Ok.

Do I get a choice of prize or isn't there one because it wasn't a competition?

[lucy7]

Originally Posted by Bender

black or white, with or against.... no grey areas, no sitting on the fence please...

Bender, why can one not sit on a fence?

I did for many a year!!

---------- Post added at 15:58 ---------- Previous post was at 15:56 ----------

Well, I bet all of these posts have confused the heck out of folk, coz they sure have me!

---------- Post added at 16:03 ---------- Previous post was at 15:58 ----------

Some folk on here seem to think if you type something it is your own personal thought and opinion.

I think not personally!

Are they just not putting a thought in for us all to ponder on? Like I tried to do with the book by Stephen Hawkings.

It has got to be like personal attacks on various posters responses on here.

P.s Not sticking up for anyone on here in particular, just a general observation.


IN EDIT.......Anyone reading all this will now run a mile from what they class as religion, and faith in God.
What a shame!

Originally Posted by Gary L

Ok.

Do I get a choice of prize or isn't there one because it wasn't a competition?

The prize is knowledge, grasp it with both hands.

Originally Posted by Gary L

But other than we have to believe because it has to be true?

---------- Post added at 13:27 ---------- Previous post was at 13:23 ----------



But others who are not an atheist might have not. I think a lot of people who believe are only believers because they were taught to from an impressionable age.

Originally Posted by foreverwar

No one has said that - once again you seem to be twisting what posters state to back up your proposition.

Originally Posted by Gary L

No one has said what? what has no one said that I am twisting in order to make people back up my proposition?
and why do you keep shouting it has to be about sides, when I speak for myself?

Maggy pointed out there were lots of historical documentation proving that the person Jesus actually existed - you responded by saying "But other than we have to believe because it has to be true?" No one said that we had to believe because it has to be true, people were saying (imho) we should believe Jesus existed because of historical documentation; which I why pointed out to you that you were (imho) twisting what posters had said by raising a "straw man" as if they had.

Originally Posted by Bender

black or white, with or against.... no grey areas, no sitting on the fence please...

- Get over it..........

There is a major difference, imho, between "sitting on the fence" and being deliberately provocative, obtuse, and twisting peoples statements to try and back up the poster's shifting positions.

Some posters seem to use "sitting on the fence" to post outlandish or ill-informed viewpoints, and then use the "sitting on the fence" defence to mitigate any negative response by stating "but I don't really believe one way or the other, I am just being even-handed and open-minded".

Helluva get-out clause, again imho.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Maggy pointed out there were lots of historical documentation proving that the person Jesus actually existed - you responded by saying "But other than we have to believe because it has to be true?" No on said that we had to believe because it has to be true, people were saying (imho) we should believe Jesus existed because of historical documentation; which I why pointed out to you that you were (imho) twisting what posters had said.

No you are reading it the way you want it to read.

Maggy says there were lots of documentation proving

I said so apart from it has to be true because of this documentational proof, what else is there to prove it.

You don't want to see that. you want it to say something to suit your argument.

---------- Post added at 16:25 ---------- Previous post was at 16:23 ----------

Originally Posted by foreverwar

There is a major difference, imho, between "sitting on the fence" and being deliberately provocative, obtuse, and twisting peoples statements to try and back up the poster's shifting positions.

You just come across as a bad loser. you constantly keep trying to influence others to your way of thinking of what isn't happening

In what way is he a "bad loser"? The gentleman has made no claims for or against, though submitted links to documentation, yes.
I see no influence being used, however, I see a request for clarity not obtuseness, correct quotation rather than contextomy.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by xocemp

In what way is he a "bad loser"? The gentleman has made no claims for or against, though submitted links to documentation, yes.
I see no influence being used, however, I see a request for clarity not obtuseness, correct quotation rather than contextomy.

Why the sudden use of the word Gentleman? it's not to make your post look more credible is it?

and are you going to go off topic for the umpteenth time again?