The Foundation of Christianity

[donquixote99]

More compressed time sequence, but you can watch the story grow in the telling in the New. Compare the crucifixion/resurrection accounts in the four gospels.

[nailer]

Even today, eyewitnesses have different stories to tell. Then there's the retelling, the author's original draft and then the editing before we get the published version. Forgot to mention the bias. Same as it ever was and still is.

[Yggdrasill]

Nailer, I have to contest your claim that atheism is a religion. As donquixote and watsup pointed out, atheism is evidence based, not belief based. Belief or faith (in this context) by definition is the acceptance of something without evidence. Science is evidence based; it's not perfect but is it not a belief system. An atheist could be religious if they are a deist, but most atheists I know see no evidence to suggest the existence of any "God", interventionist or otherwise.
Science and evidentialism are ways to approach an understanding of the world, to evaluate information and organize knowledge.

[nailer]

Which post # of mine are you referencing?

Also, prove God doesn't exist. BTW no evidence does not prove nonexistance. If I were a god creating a universe, I would leave no evidence tieing my creation to me. Plausible deniability.

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by nailer

Which post # of mine are you referencing?

Also, prove God doesn't exist. BTW no evidence does not prove nonexistance. If I were a god creating a universe, I would leave no evidence tieing my creation to me. Plausible deniability.

Very interesting.

Why would you, as god, desire or require plausible deniability ?

You would want to 'leave room' for alternate explanations. Why is that ?

[nailer]

How dare you question me, the Creator!!!

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by nailer

How dare you question me, the Creator!!!

Clever answer.

You wouldn't have any need for plausible deniability, because nothing (or no one) could even begin to hold you accountable for anything.

God has been sued in USA courts a couple of times, but that was just grandstanding for the lawyers involved.

[Yggdrasill]

Originally Posted by nailer

Which post # of mine are you referencing?

Also, prove God doesn't exist. BTW no evidence does not prove nonexistance. If I were a god creating a universe, I would leave no evidence tieing my creation to me. Plausible deniability.

Of course no evidence does not prove nonexistence. But I don't need to prove that God doesn't exist any more than I need to prove that the Easter Bunny doesn't exist. Atheism, at least my atheism, does not claim to disprove the existence of God (and anyway how does one prove a negative?). I'm simply saying that I have seen no evidence that God - or any supernatural being - does exist. The burden of proof, as it were, is on those who claim religion to be true. As it is with anyone making a positive claim.

[Yggdrasill]

Originally Posted by BigElCat

Very interesting.

Why would you, as god, desire or require plausible deniability ?

You would want to 'leave room' for alternate explanations. Why is that ?

BigElCat, that is exactly one of the arguments one could use against, say, christian apologists, who make, among others, the claim that without God there is no morality. The existence of thousands of religions, all with different moral precepts, make it impossible for a believer to choose, with certainty, the "correct" religion. Even within Christianity, many believers claim a personal relationship with God that allows them to interpret the Bible as they like.

[nailer]

First, what does the Easter Bunny have to with this? Is belief or non belief in EB the same as belief or non belief in God?

Regarding post 84 ... what post of mine were you referencing?