Original Sin?

Quote: FrGamble

Ace - I thought I gave three reasons why they didn't exist just a few posts up, do you disagree with them?

You gave reasons...reasons are not tangible proof.

Quote: aceofspades

You gave reasons...reasons are not tangible proof.

Touche.

Now somoene ought to bring up confirmation bias. Just to complete the rhetorical round.

Quote: aceofspades

You gave reasons...reasons are not tangible proof.

I don't follow you. When you mean tangible proof do you mean to say that the only things that matter, that are true, or can be truly considered proof are those things that we can touch, see, or observe?

Quote: TheCesspit

This comment does not follow logically at all.

More over your third case against rainbows and unicorns is a fallacy. It presupposes that things have to exist to make our lives better or understandable. That's a large stretch, and certainly a huge underlying assumption in the way the world 'works'. Its one you often make as justification for the existence of God... but it requires a leap of faith, not a logical step.

Good point. My third argument against unicorns is really just to say that they aren't worth speaking about not that they don't exist.

Quote: FrGamble

I don't follow you. When you mean tangible proof do you mean to say that the only things that matter, that are true, or can be truly considered proof are those things that we can touch, see, or observe?

You are confusing the issue by adding in the phrase "the only things that matter". Of course, emotions matter BUT, we can also view emotions as a release of chemicals in the brain (i.e. oxytocin - the feeling of love - which one can also feel by eating a bar of dark chocolate)
So for tangible proof, yes…touch, see, observe by some means…


I ask you this FrG - do you believe people when they say God is talking to them…? What about schizophrenics who hear voices - do you dismiss the voices as imaginary or merely "in their heads? What if God told them to kill their own son? Surely a loving God would never, even if only a test, ask a father to kill their own son…?

Quote: FrGamble

not that they don't exist.

They do?

Quote: FrGamble

However, I don't think any of you will doubt that the person of Jesus Christ truly existed.

So much talk about faeries and unicorns, I think we missed an important point.

I don't think Jesus didn't exist. I have no reason to think he wasn't the great person as described. And it just feels like there's something missing here. Something wrong.

I wish I had had more time to think about this, as the idea is still sort of incomplete in my head. But I feel that religion's failure is turning something great into a mockery by trying to make it "better".

Jesus and his teachings don't need the extra fluff and bother. They stand for themselves. He needs not be supernatural. He needs not be God, or the Son of God, or some odd, magic owning zombie Jew. His person, his mortal, natural person, is all that is required, and that alone would still make him one of the most influential humans to have ever existed.

There are plenty of great philosophers that have existed, and their teachings and their lessons are just as relevant today as they were in the time of their writing. So why have we attached the supernatural to this one?

I think that is my own personal area of contention. I suppose it sort of angers me, as I've often said that despite my atheism, that I try to be "Christ-like" in my actions. I think doing so is "good". And I suppose I look at it that religion only serves to harm the message.

Because the message of Christ is in the Bible. It is a truth. But the Bible is filled with stuff that just can't and couldn't be true. Talking snakes, all man from two people, humans that lived several hundred years, floods that are physically impossible,... the list is long. And to get around that, we talk of allegory and other tools to reconcile, which only serve to obfuscate what is in my opinion a very important message.

It irks me. The message is real. The message is true. But the attachment of the superstitious and the supernatural just feels corrupt. It feels as though an important and heartfelt message has been usurped so that unjust men could wield its power and use it for control.

Quote: aceofspades

So for tangible proof, yes…touch, see, observe by some means…

Man, Ace talk about confusing the issue. Let's just dwell on this point for a second. If I understand you correctly you are saying that the only thing you will accept for determining the existence or non-existence of something is tangible proof, something you can touch, see, or observe. Do I have that right? I hope I don't because I believe that is a very silly thing to hold. If you do in fact believe that then please provide me with the tangible proof you have to support the idea that the only proof we can accept is tangible?

FrGamble,

Nothing to add to the discussion, but wanted to pass on get well soon wishes. Sorry you're feeling awful, and I hope the antibiotics do kick in soon.

Quote: Face

So much talk about faeries and unicorns, I think we missed an important point.

I don't think Jesus didn't exist. I have no reason to think he wasn't the great person as described. And it just feels like there's something missing here. Something wrong.

I wish I had had more time to think about this, as the idea is still sort of incomplete in my head. But I feel that religion's failure is turning something great into a mockery by trying to make it "better".

Jesus and his teachings don't need the extra fluff and bother. They stand for themselves. He needs not be supernatural. He needs not be God, or the Son of God, or some odd, magic owning zombie Jew. His person, his mortal, natural person, is all that is required, and that alone would still make him one of the most influential humans to have ever existed.

There are plenty of great philosophers that have existed, and their teachings and their lessons are just as relevant today as they were in the time of their writing. So why have we attached the supernatural to this one?

I think that is my own personal area of contention. I suppose it sort of angers me, as I've often said that despite my atheism, that I try to be "Christ-like" in my actions. I think doing so is "good". And I suppose I look at it that religion only serves to harm the message.

Because the message of Christ is in the Bible. It is a truth. But the Bible is filled with stuff that just can't and couldn't be true. Talking snakes, all man from two people, humans that lived several hundred years, floods that are physically impossible,... the list is long. And to get around that, we talk of allegory and other tools to reconcile, which only serve to obfuscate what is in my opinion a very important message.

It irks me. The message is real. The message is true. But the attachment of the superstitious and the supernatural just feels corrupt. It feels as though an important and heartfelt message has been usurped so that unjust men could wield its power and use it for control.

Face I think this is what we all want to think about Jesus. I don't mind stripping away some of the trappings and using allegory to convey deeper spiritual truths and not scientific or historical facts. Heck, if the Church is really about wielding power and control then let's toss it too. We are left with a good, no a great guy, who gives us a very important message and way to live life.

The problem though lies with Jesus Himself. As C.S. Lewis famously put it in his "Lord, Liar, or Lunatic" argument the one position Jesus wants to remove from the equation is the middle of the road - he's a good moral teacher position. When Jesus makes it clear that He is NOT just another nice guy with good advice but that He is God. Take away the miracles and he still teaches that He has the power to forgive sins, that He and the Father are one, that He came to sacrifice His life in the ultimate act of love to save us. It's uncomfortable to be forced by Jesus Himself to say either I am God or I am not worth following. And if I am God than just following haphazardly and halfway doesn't make a lot of sense. I believe Jesus is who He says He is and I think we have a hard time cherry picking the things He said we agree with and ignoring the rest.

In regards to religion and its corruption, the evidence abounds. Thank God in my experience there is much more evidence that the Church is following very closely the humble and sacrificial teachings of its founder. My mom just got back from Detroit where she stayed with a good priest friend in the worst part of that city. The Franciscans there would do your heart good, Face. They are all about service and love, they are not just Christ-like they are Christ to so many people in that parish.