Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
noticed an error ... when I put my glasses on.
In the face of the exonerations there is no reason to question if he was real.
should have been ...
In the face of the embellishments and exaggerations there is no reason to question if he was real at this point.
In the face of the embellishments and exaggerations there is no reason to consider he was real at this point.
"it provides you with comfort and encouragement because of the attitude you bring to it.
but it has no value in and of itself"
In the face of the embellishments and exaggerations there is no reason to consider he is real at this point.
"it provides you with comfort and encouragement because of the attitude you bring to it.
but it has no value in and of itself"
Oh for Pete's sake, even the myths about George Washington and the stupid cherry tree. tossing coins etc. were embellishments. Are they reasons to consider George Washington is not real????? Such absurd illogic is driven by an almost pathological defense of magical thinking, traditions, and superstitions.
In the face of the embellishments and exaggerations there is no reason to consider he was real at this point.
"it provides you with comfort and encouragement because of the attitude you bring to it.
but it has no value in and of itself"
Not me trap, I don't care if jesus was real or not. at this point it is totally fine to say is was a real person. I am even ok with saying is wasn't. It just doesn't matter to me. I only do how the universe works.
you are not focusing on the important part(you bolded the wrong part of my statement) . The important part is addressing the exaggerations and embellishments, not weather jesus is real or not. you are basically taking a perfect reasonable statement made by nate and twisting it back on anything said.
would you like to compare your claims about jesus to mine? Or will you say that we both use "comfort and encouragement" so both statements are equally valid?
Oh for Pete's sake, even the myths about George Washington and the stupid cherry tree. tossing coins etc. were embellishments. Are they reasons to consider George Washington is not real????? Such absurd illogic is driven by an almost pathological defense of magical thinking, traditions, and superstitions.
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
"The objective of such courtroom antics is to distract and try to pretend that there is some legitimacy to magical thinking and superstition in religion."
regarding logic and clarity in thinking, regarding "absurd illogic" and "pathological defense of magical thinking traditions and superstitions" in your religious and spirituality belief system, we are still waiting MPD for you to answer these questions:
Quote:
questions for anyone / in your own personal view-belief-opinion which of these are "magical thinking and superstition"
"visit from Jesus"
"visit by angels"
"visit by any dead person"
"heard a message from God"
God
God created the universe and everything in it
every human has an eternal soul
reincarnation
prayer
placebo
miracle healing
Divine intervention
acupuncture
chi
there is an unseen energy that gives life and animates life
if you answered "some are" , why aren't they ALL?
in your view belief opinion
Oh for Pete's sake, even the myths about George Washington and the stupid cherry tree. tossing coins etc. were embellishments. Are they reasons to consider George Washington is not real????? Such absurd illogic is driven by an almost pathological defense of magical thinking, traditions, and superstitions.
This thread has got wide -ranging in topic, hasn't it? No, I'm not going to preach my pet Theory. I'm just going to observe that you made (irascibility aside) a valid point. Unlike Arach, who is just cheeky, denialist and irritating as usual.
This thread has got wide -ranging in topic, hasn't it? No, I'm not going to preach my pet Theory. I'm just going to observe that you made (irascibility aside) a valid point. Unlike Arach, who is just cheeky, denialist and irritating as usual.
lmao, denialist ... stole yet another notion from me.
thank you.
try being more honest. You dismiss ideas based on how you feel about religion and not on observations. You dismiss idea's based on words like "apologetics" and semantics" instead of observations. You hide idea's based on "theist can use them and make atheism harder to sell.' and not observations.
and when you listed everything I said atheists do after ripping me for saying it, it was just, well, gratifying to tell you the truth. People were, and are, hurt by religion, it doesn't give you the right to deceive people intentionally.
Oh for Pete's sake, even the myths about George Washington and the stupid cherry tree. tossing coins etc. were embellishments. Are they reasons to consider George Washington is not real????? Such absurd illogic is driven by an almost pathological defense of magical thinking, traditions, and superstitions.
Nate and Tzaph appear to be overlooking your argument that your experience is more to do with Yoga exercises than religious ceremonies, though the effects may be more closely related than may at first appear.
However they seem to have got onto the historicity of Jesus.
And you make a valid point - that legendary elements do not in themselves make a real person legendary. As always, it comes down to the evidence. Was Alexander, Agamemnon, King Arthur and Robin Hood real or totally legendary? Perhaps that doesn't matter in respect of the latter two so long as we realise that the possible historical figure underneath does not validate the legend.
Jesus? It is possible that I could be wrong and it is purely mythical. But I think not. I think Paul was real (you couldn't make the fellow up ) and he attests to a messiah that was crucified. And by the Romans, too, I'm sure. He knew the Jews hadn't done it, but the "Lords of this world" -the Romans. He also knew two disciples - named significant ones, too. That's a sight more evidence than we have for Robin Hood and better than we have for King Arthur.
Nate and Tzaph appear to be overlooking your argument that your experience is more to do with Yoga exercises than religious ceremonies, though the effects may be more closely related than may at first appear.
However they seem to have got onto the historicity of Jesus....
If it was yoga he would stick with generic and universal and yoga terms. He however attaches deliberate specific religious significance to his magical thinking superstitious religious experience by insisting a specfic religious personality from a primitive religious text visited him.
The opening post and thread topic focus on his repugnance and objection and disdain for "ancient ignorance" and "magical thinkimg." I am pointing out he clings to and practices those very things himself "primitive magical thinking superstition" by insisting he had a "visit from Jesus" and stubbornly clinging to primitive religious texts.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 11-12-2018 at 05:13 PM..
If it was yoga he would stick with generic and universal and yoga terms. He however attaches deliberate specific religious significance to his magical thinking superstitious religious experience by insisting a specfic religious personality from a primitive religious text visited him.
The opening post and thread topic focus on his repugnance and objection and disdain for "ancient ignorance" and "magical thinkimg." I am pointing out he clings to and practices those very things himself "primitive magical thinking superstition" by insisting he had a "visit from Jesus" and stubbornly clinging to primitive religious texts.
You do not get to define what my thread and post are about just because you may not understand it. Claiming it is the opposite of what it states reveals a complete lack of comprehension of the science behind it (or a reading deficit).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, I'm not going to preach my pet Theory. I'm just going to observe that you made (irascibility aside) a valid point. Unlike Arach, who is just cheeky, denialist and irritating as usual.
) and he attests to a messiah that was crucified. And by the Romans, too, I'm sure. He knew the Jews hadn't done it, but the "Lords of this world" -the Romans. He also knew two disciples - named significant ones, too. That's a sight more evidence than we have for Robin Hood and better than we have for King Arthur.