[castor]

science WILL explain everything given enough time

What makes you think so? A "feeling" or a belief of sorts?

[Bobboau]

my point in that sentence was more that it is not now, but seems to be perpetually get closer to a full understanding.

[Bobboau]

This may be correct, but still, how about those who suffered for this religion? Why the hell did they risk their lives to preach it?

obviously because they thought it was correct. just because one thinks something is correct does not mean that it is.

Jesus repeatedly claims himself as carrying the Word of God. He says that everything that comes from his mouth comes directly from God. Therefore, why should he edit it to suit his own needs?

because if no one listens to the word of god because it is nonsensical then there is no point in spreading it? maybe Jesus thought god was the one trying to think up ways to convince people? maybe a follower in later centuries put either of those words in his mouth? need I go on?

Because Jesus is someone of supposedly higher intellect than any other human at least in his time, he may have seen and understood things the average person couldn't. This way, the average person might not understand "why" he has to do these things, so Jesus had to tell them to rely on faith rather than actual evidence. For instance, you teach a pet chimpanzee to write "1+1=2". The thing is, he doesn't understand what this actual equation means. He dismisses it as nonsensical. So, the best way you can probably make him do the equation CORRECTLY is to tell him to "just do it", to trust you, because you are the smarter guy. So if he indeed has faith on your direction, and writes "2" after 1+1, then the chimpanzee actually gets correct.

well, then you are not being truthful, the truth is that evidence, reason, logic could lead to an understanding, but the individual is just too mentally deficient to be able to figure it out. a more honest approach would be to try and give a step by step explanation, perhaps it would take thousands of years for one of them to understand, maybe none of them ever would, but at least this would be truthful, and not a lie.

So...you're saying that if they had the power, they would turn their followers into warriors with swords and shields, and bully pagans into worshipping their God? I don't think so. If such would happen, the apostles should have directly THREATENED the people into believing them, whether they like it or not. But no, they did not actually force those pagans into Christianity. They let them decide.

well, it's impossible to say for sure, but the fact that that is exactly what happened after they gained the power to do it later would lead me to think they would have done it much sooner if they could.

and "burn in a lake of fire while daemons **** in your mouth and rip apart your flesh for all eternity if you don't convert" is not an attempt at intimidation?

Well, they claim to have seen him alive 3 days after he was killed. They claim to have seen him literally walking on water. They saw him in the sky. If these didn't occur to them, why would they do all this? Of course it would be hard for them to risk being tortured and brutally murdered if they actually saw none of these magicky things.

I think the important word that you used here was "claim" it would have been better if rather than using the word 'them' you would have said 'the stories'. you see there are many tall tails in the world, you should read some of the stories written about Buddha or some Japanese mythology. you are assuming that what is written in the Bible is historically accurate, rather than exaggerations made after the fact by the followers as they tried to convince people to join their new religion, and told their children the tails of their lord n savior. people would have risked their lives because they had heard convincing stories, not because any of it was based on reality. think about modern cults, think of heavens gate, why would all of those people have killed themselves? simple answer is because they were convinced to.

Because they claim to have done it, because I know they don't lie, because they aren't generally wacky people. Also, what about poltergeist incidents? Books flying? Chairs flying? Lights opening and closing? How can those be mere tricks of the mind?

Seeing a flashy thing for 0.01 seconds can actually be explained away as some sort of mind trick, but...furniture being tossed around?

I have never experienced this, and it has never been recorded in a reproducible way in a controlled environment.
not once.

An intriguing reason.

or he is just pulling the Internet's collective leg for teh lulz.

Possibly. That guy was supposedly "enlightened", so he was very eager to preach it out.

and as mentioned he was not the only one. hell Rome was founded on a fairly elaborate foundation myth... actually... read that, it has a few interesting similarities with the stories of Jesus, like the whole virgin birth thing, and decent from ancient royalty.

[headdie]

science WILL explain everything given enough time

What makes you think so? A "feeling" or a belief of sorts?

I am happy to admit that I "believe" that science will answer everything, eventually, the problem with scientific research is that is it the long haul, no quick fixes like with religion and as for proof, well just look at the progress over the last 100 years, let alone the rest of human history, does this prove science will reveal all, no, but its a damn sight more proof than religion has ever given us.

[castor]

Ok, I guess I should be envious of you. Personally, I cant even bring myself to be convinced that "explanation of everything" is plausible on conceptual level, let alone being sure that it is within our reach.

[Bobboau]

how about "explanation of as much as possible"

[castor]

Well that's easy to accept. Is that what you meant? It sounds very different when inserted in your original assesment.

[Bobboau]

well, like I said, my original comment was meant to imply that I did not hold the opinion that science knew everything.

[QuantumDelta]

We know enough to know that the bible is folk lore and fairy stories.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

Science isn't perfect, nor is humanity, but science is at least based on the foundations of observable truths, meaning, reality.

A lot of religious people can't wrap their heads around Atheism, and Science, Atheism simply being the 'lack' of belief, not 'believing in nothing(read; nothing as something)', and Science is almost the antithesis of religion, it requires critical thinking, asking real questions about reality, things you think you've proven or someone else has proven, (good)Science continually attacks itself and it's own theories are constantly tested and updated or made defunct, it questions itself and improves itself - it adjusts and grows.

Could you imagine religion surviving if the bible were examined by it's own pedallers in the fashion that scientists do their own, and their peers work?

[Mars]

I've actually been looking for critical analysis of the Bible, verse by verse lately, mostly out of my own interest. Does anyone know of such a thing?

[QuantumDelta]

The problem is something like that will always have an agenda behind it, one way or another.

[karajorma]

I've actually been looking for critical analysis of the Bible, verse by verse lately, mostly out of my own interest. Does anyone know of such a thing?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ isn't too bad.

[Marcov]

This may be correct, but still, how about those who suffered for this religion? Why the hell did they risk their lives to preach it?

obviously because they thought it was correct. just because one thinks something is correct does not mean that it is.

Let's say the apostles just THOUGHT it was correct. How about Jesus? The founder of his own religion? Why would he risk his life in preaching something that isn't real?

Jesus repeatedly claims himself as carrying the Word of God. He says that everything that comes from his mouth comes directly from God. Therefore, why should he edit it to suit his own needs?

because if no one listens to the word of god because it is nonsensical then there is no point in spreading it? maybe Jesus thought god was the one trying to think up ways to convince people? maybe a follower in later centuries put either of those words in his mouth? need I go on?

OR because Jesus asked the trust of humanity, because it is too ignorant to decipher at the more spiritual level?

Because Jesus is someone of supposedly higher intellect than any other human at least in his time, he may have seen and understood things the average person couldn't. This way, the average person might not understand "why" he has to do these things, so Jesus had to tell them to rely on faith rather than actual evidence. For instance, you teach a pet chimpanzee to write "1+1=2". The thing is, he doesn't understand what this actual equation means. He dismisses it as nonsensical. So, the best way you can probably make him do the equation CORRECTLY is to tell him to "just do it", to trust you, because you are the smarter guy. So if he indeed has faith on your direction, and writes "2" after 1+1, then the chimpanzee actually gets correct.

well, then you are not being truthful, the truth is that evidence, reason, logic could lead to an understanding, but the individual is just too mentally deficient to be able to figure it out. a more honest approach would be to try and give a step by step explanation, perhaps it would take thousands of years for one of them to understand, maybe none of them ever would, but at least this would be truthful, and not a lie.

Why should this be a "lie"? As I said, Jesus probably did it in this way; "Hey, follow my teachings, based on faith and not evidence, because you do not yet know true spirituality". A learner doesn't have to understand everything that his teacher says at first. A Math teacher could tell students to memorize a certain formula, then tell the students how to understand it later on.

So...you're saying that if they had the power, they would turn their followers into warriors with swords and shields, and bully pagans into worshipping their God? I don't think so. If such would happen, the apostles should have directly THREATENED the people into believing them, whether they like it or not. But no, they did not actually force those pagans into Christianity. They let them decide.

well, it's impossible to say for sure, but the fact that that is exactly what happened after they gained the power to do it later would lead me to think they would have done it much sooner if they could.

and "burn in a lake of fire while daemons **** in your mouth and rip apart your flesh for all eternity if you don't convert" is not an attempt at intimidation?

The apostles were able to convert a fairly large amount of pagans into their religion pretty early. They could have formed an army of several thousand, then used this to threaten village after village to their religion, and then continue spreading this. But that is not their way.

Your latter explanation is more logical. Yes, threatening the people of eternal damnation can make many convert to your philosophy out of fear. But if Jesus himself said this, why would the apostles have to formulate another plan of forcing people into their religion?

Now, you might say that the Biblical writers edited the teachings of Jesus into something that will really SCARE the wits out of many a pagan. True, but as I said, Biblical writers, being believers of Christ's teachings, wouldn't EDIT his teachings to gain more followers. Because, as I said, doing so would give a false message, thus giving a message that will prohibit future Christians from receiving salvation. The Biblical writers, being strong Christians, should have known this fact ever since they met Christ.

Well, they claim to have seen him alive 3 days after he was killed. They claim to have seen him literally walking on water. They saw him in the sky. If these didn't occur to them, why would they do all this? Of course it would be hard for them to risk being tortured and brutally murdered if they actually saw none of these magicky things.

I think the important word that you used here was "claim" it would have been better if rather than using the word 'them' you would have said 'the stories'. you see there are many tall tails in the world, you should read some of the stories written about Buddha or some Japanese mythology. you are assuming that what is written in the Bible is historically accurate, rather than exaggerations made after the fact by the followers as they tried to convince people to join their new religion, and told their children the tails of their lord n savior. people would have risked their lives because they had heard convincing stories, not because any of it was based on reality. think about modern cults, think of heavens gate, why would all of those people have killed themselves? simple answer is because they were convinced to.

As you have already stated, many cults make use of exaggerations to gain more followers. But wow, it just so happened that Christianity did a REALLY BIG number of exaggerations that's why they have SO MANY followers. I don't think so.

Cults don't last long. Why did Christianity last so long? Surely there must be a very large load of motivation that made so many follow such a religion.

We know enough to know that the bible is folk lore and fairy stories.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

Such a one-sided opinion. Think in many ways, sir.

Could you imagine religion surviving if the bible were examined by it's own pedallers in the fashion that scientists do their own, and their peers work?

Because...Christianity is supposed to be based on "faith" and not "scientific evidence"?

[Bobboau]

oops, didn't notice you had responded till just now.

Let's say the apostles just THOUGHT it was correct. How about Jesus? The founder of his own religion? Why would he risk his life in preaching something that isn't real?

As I have said, he might have very well believed everything he was saying, there have been a number of people who have thought they were the offspring of deities. just because he THOUGHT he was the son of god and his followers right after his death THOUGHT they saw him, (or said they saw him, or one of the people writing about it later said they said his followers saw him) doesn't mean any of it is actually true.

OR because Jesus asked the trust of humanity, because it is too ignorant to decipher at the more spiritual level?

So in other words you have no evidence, you are just taking your parents word that you should take your priest's word, that you should take the 2000 year long line of priests word that you should take the counsel of Nicaea's word that you should take the word of the set of books they designated that says you should take Jesus's word that he was God and that you should believe that in spite of any evidence to the contrary. you are just going to base your understanding of the universe on the assumption that on no point along this line was there a single person who lied or was just simply wrong.

and you are going to base the laws you vote for upon the interpretations of what those priests tell you is the word of god.

Why should this be a "lie"? As I said, Jesus probably did it in this way; "Hey, follow my teachings, based on faith and not evidence, because you do not yet know true spirituality". A learner doesn't have to understand everything that his teacher says at first. A Math teacher could tell students to memorize a certain formula, then tell the students how to understand it later on.

and this has proven to be a horrendous way to try and teach people.

it is a lie because if there is evidence that supports what he says then when he says 'it is better to believe via faith than through logic' than that is a lie because he didn't say that, he says "just believe me", not "the truth is to complex for me to explain to your primitive monkey minds, I get back to it later" he basically says there is no evidence, but you should believe him any way. if what you are proposing is true then he was lieing.

The apostles were able to convert a fairly large amount of pagans into their religion pretty early. They could have formed an army of several thousand, then used this to threaten village after village to their religion, and then continue spreading this. But that is not their way.

I disagree with you on the feasibility of this approach, I say they would have been absolutely squashed by the Romans if they had tried this. the only way they managed to survive was by keeping low key.

Your latter explanation is more logical. Yes, threatening the people of eternal damnation can make many convert to your philosophy out of fear. But if Jesus himself said this, why would the apostles have to formulate another plan of forcing people into their religion?

Now, you might say that the Biblical writers edited the teachings of Jesus into something that will really SCARE the wits out of many a pagan. True, but as I said, Biblical writers, being believers of Christ's teachings, wouldn't EDIT his teachings to gain more followers. Because, as I said, doing so would give a false message, thus giving a message that will prohibit future Christians from receiving salvation. The Biblical writers, being strong Christians, should have known this fact ever since they met Christ.

you are ASSUMING the early followers did not embellish, I think this is a foolish assumption.

As you have already stated, many cults make use of exaggerations to gain more followers. But wow, it just so happened that Christianity did a REALLY BIG number of exaggerations that's why they have SO MANY followers. I don't think so.

Cults don't last long. Why did Christianity last so long? Surely there must be a very large load of motivation that made so many follow such a religion.

yeah, that 'motivation' is the political power of the Catholic church, if Chrisianity had not been used as a tool to justify keeping the masses underfoot for the better part of 2000 years, it probably would not have survived as long. I mean you are basically saying 'it has been around for a long time, therefore it must be true' and that is nonsense.

and the only reason why 'cults don't last very long' is because after they are around for a while people start calling them religion, it wasn't that long ago people were calling the Mormons a cult, and Scientology is trying very hard to convince people it's not a cult.

Such a one-sided opinion. Think in many ways, sir.

and your opinions are not one sided? is that not the definition of opinion?

Because...Christianity is supposed to be based on "faith" and not "scientific evidence"?

which is why it is wrong.

[Grizzly]

*sniper moving into position*

...so you really think that individuals NEVER STOPPED until they were tortured and killed just because some guy talked loud and emotional? You think that since there was this one guy who was extra-excited when he talked, an organization that was established worldwide and converted a large chunk of the known population was formed, countless wars on him were fought, for 2,000 years? One guy can do all this?

No. The Roman Catholic Church is not the work of Jesus Christ. It's the work of the Emperor Constantine, who set down along with a few christian groups to form the Great Christian religion which was to become the main religion of the Roman Empire. All scriptures that did not corrolate with the new view were promptly burned.

One man did not do that, and there's nothing supernatural about it either.

[Mobius]

In essence, there are more stars than grains of sand on Earth, most of those stars have a large collection of orbital bodies. I see nothing about the Earth that makes us of particular interest to even one, let alone several alien cultures. We all watch Hollywood movies of Aliens 'coming for our water' or 'coming for our gold' and it's so much rubbish, there's plenty of places in the Universe that are far richer in any material available on Earth. As has been covered before, there's no such thing as stealth in space, and any extra-terrestrial visitor would not only be picked up by official sources, but also by the network of university and privately run sky-watching equipment scattered all over the planet. Such a situation could not be covered up.

Edit: To summarise, I can fully accept that Aliens are 'out there', it's the idea that Aliens are regularly coming here that I have problem with.

Common belief (also "confirmed" by abducted people) among the obsessed is that our DNA is special and aliens need it to do something. A rather anthropocentric view, perhaps the most arrogant ever, that I just cannot tolerate.

[JCDNWarrior]

Maybe it's best to let subjects such as crediting/discrediting religion behind, and consider the bible as a book of wisdom, rather than a book of religion. Learning from historical stories, examples and teachings, there's a lot of good morals to be taught. You can treat it as a fictional piece of work aside from that, but I think it could help people on a personal level.

Maybe that's my rosy opinion having learned a lot from reading it but, who knows? I don't know how it can have a negative effect on anyone if you treat it that way.

[Mobius]

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/bible-atrocities

[Bobboau]

Maybe it's best to let subjects such as crediting/discrediting religion behind, and consider the bible as a book of wisdom, rather than a book of religion. Learning from historical stories, examples and teachings, there's a lot of good morals to be taught. You can treat it as a fictional piece of work aside from that, but I think it could help people on a personal level.

No

It is not a book of wisdom, it is a book of ignorance. the morals it teaches are that people who disobey are to be murdered because they are arbitrarily different and that this is good because a unreachable authority says it is.