There is no evidence for a biblical jesus

[Jaecp]

Awe, I love the smell of burning strawmen in the morning. I see you didn’t bother to educate yourself on the Bible nor bother to actually understand what Polimist is saying. He isn’t saying that the faith of an atheist is necessarily a ‘bad faith’. He is pointing out the irony in those that claim they have no faith and attack those that do, have plenty of faith in their own opinions and ideas. Funny thing is, I didn’t need a road map or a PM to tell me this. Why do you need it drawn out for you several times over, in several different ways?

Is this just the "faith" as "confidence"

If so, then so what?

It’s too bad that mine is based upon proper textual analysis and understanding of the world of the Bible while those that disagree with my definition don’t have the evidence to back their view. Of course, evidence only matters when it works for you, not against you, right Jaecp? Perhaps you can show me educated Christians or where the early church fathers believed that faith was blind because many of them were pretty harsh on what they say as ‘blind faith’ and were pretty condemning of the practice themselves.

I imagine they have their reasons for believing too,

If a simple text based argument was conclusive you wouldn't have thousands of denominations.

I really do not care what your ‘personal definition’ of the Christian faith is or isn’t, I care what the truth is and the truth is you don’t understand what faith means to the educated Christian and thus attack a strawmen of the Christian faith without dealing with what Polimist actually said. Which I’m not surprised you did that, judging by yoru general ignorance.

Again, what the actual definition of Christian faith is doesn't really matter,

What matters is how The Polimist is using the term, a term he needs to hurry up and define because the more the conversation goes on the more it looks like he is accusing atheists of... having confidence in stuff.

That is because you don’t understand the situation and thus read your 21st century views into the text instead of seeing what the text says. Why should Thomas have doubted the words of his friends he was with for 3 years? Did they not earn his trust? Second, what was Jesus trying to do with Thomas? Point out that he was the wise one or that he wasn’t as wise as he thought and should have trusted what his friends had to say? Finally, ever hear of ‘affirmation of honor’ because Jesus was pointing out that others will not have Jesus appearing before them to believe and yet will believe anyway. Not in spite of the evidence, but because the testimony in the form of the disciples and later the Gospel writings is all the evidence they needed. In other words, Jesus is not teaching a ‘blind faith’ at all, but rather, a faith based on God’s performance in the past, to tell us that he will perform for us again. AKA you didn’t read any of the links I gave you, did you? Try this one out and stop using ignorance and promoting ignorance instead of understanding please, thanks.

You have been corrected on your ignorance again, so either refute what you have been given or ignore it and just go on your merry little way, singing your own praises.

Chrystal, I'm not a member of your religion, I don't care about finding my own personal definition of faith because I am not a Christian. I pointed out the plurality of views because The Polimist hasn't defined his terms. It is sufficient for my position to point out John 20 and that people have understood that to mean faith as something besides confidence for a very long time. Is that an incorrect understanding of faith? Maybe. Doesn't matter though.

The Polimist needs to define his terms, maybe you could ask him to get on that?

[The Polimist]

Polimist: "The colour of my hair is bald" "Not stamp collecting, is my hobby"
That said are you saying atheism is a religion.

According to your logic, there is no evidence that you are bertatberts, there is no evidence that you are bald, there is no evidece that you have a hobby. Having said all that, no I am not just saying that atheisim is a religion, I am further saying that atheists live their lives as religious people (crypto theists if oyu will). Atheists haev more faith (blind faith) than any theist I've ever met.

[YourMaster]

"Educated Christian" is an oxymoron (sort of like Army intelligence)

[The Polimist]

Which are not the same as being an atheist Bert. You do not 'lack beliefs' anymore then a Christian, unless of course, you can prove that there is no possible evidence for God, ever. Can you?

Materialistic atheists cannot even account for the foundations of athisim (materialistic origins: universe, life etc...)let alone prove that ther is no God.

[The Polimist]

"Educated Christian" is an oxymoron (sort of like Army intelligence)

What is hilarious is that you cannot even sustain a logical and civil conversation concerning your atheistic worldview, so you have to resort to the Argumentum ad Hominem abusive. So I'll give you another chance to give cogent and fact based answers to my previous questions:

What about our origins?

Do you know where the universe came from, or do you believe you know where the universe came from and that is where you place your faith?

Do you know where life came from, or do you believe you know where life came from and that is where you place your faith?

What is interesting is that the atheistic religionists are so embarrassed by their religion they feel compelled to act like it doesn't exist. They deny it at every turn, as they live by their religon at every turn.

Your answers will provide evidence of your atheistic religiosity...

[Kane]

Christopher31,
Before this conversation can continue in any meaningful way, are you asking for unabridged definitions, or definitions within context of the conversation?

Does your faith, beliefs, and religious convictions change depending on the context of the conversation? I can see how that is at least somewhat possible given that different nuiances of your definitions may come into play depending on the context, but I would think that, overall, your definitions would be strong enough to be applicable across the board.

That said, it's your choice: you can give either the unabridged definitions, or the contextual ones. You could also give both. And in that case, I would hope the two are consistent with each other.

[The Polimist]

oooooo ... where'd you get this line from?

The explanations for this stuff just get dumber and dumber.

There's actually nothing dumber than an internet TROLL that cannot sustain a civil conversation or logical arguement...

[YourMaster]

There's actually nothing dumber than an internet TROLL that cannot sustain a civil conversation or logical arguement...

A troll who's sustaining a civil conversation is sort of an oxymoron isn't it (duhhhhh)

[Kane]

I am not just saying that atheisim is a religion, I am further saying that atheists live their lives as religious people (crypto theists if oyu will). Atheists haev more faith (blind faith) than any theist I've ever met.

Well I suppose as long as you've declared this to be so, we should all just accept it as true.

Doug, Tassman, Jaecp, SMP, SeaOfRed, SarahB, YM, Composer... where do you think we should set up our alter? And do you think we should have three or four part harmonies when we sing praises to the Emptiness? Should we have descants, too? I've always been a fan of those.

I don't mind editing a hymnal. We could use John Cage's wee ditties to get started. Oh, and we can post daily readings from St. Grayling's inspirational "The Good Book: A Humanist Bible."

I'm a big fan of John Galt's Speech. Perhaps we could use that as a creed for special occasions? And anyone who doesn't disbelieve like we do, they'll be condemned to, oh I dunno, Iowa? Maybe Winkler, Manitoba? But those that do disbelieve like us, they'll be the favoured, the elect, and will go on to life ever-laughing.

Or shall we just stay as we are: the faithless, the few, the Zenny? Shall we come out from among the theists and be ye separate? I'm down with that.

[Tassman]

Thousands of fans gathering together, painted up, chanting, jumping up and down, and acting genuinely fanatical in subfreezing weather at a football game is normal. People acknowledging and praising the creator of the universe... yeah that's nuts.

Is there some doubt about the existence of football and football games? No? There is considerable doubt about the existence of supernatural deities who require regular appeasement. There’s the difference.

[bertatberts]

So you have proved, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that every religion in the entire world, is false? If not, do you have a belief that all religions are false? Yes or no?

Lol, No. I don't need too. I just have to have no belief in the claims of people who think there true, it is their burden to prove they are true. Not mine to prove they are not, the onus is their's. So again. "what beliefs do I have, please elaborate."

[Chrawnus]

"what beliefs do I have, please elaborate."

You "belief" in humanity.

lawl.png

[Doug Shaver]

Having said all that, no I am not just saying that atheisim is a religion, I am further saying that atheists live their lives as religious people (crypto theists if oyu will). Atheists haev more faith (blind faith) than any theist I've ever met.

OK, you say so. Why should anybody care what you say about atheism? Why should anybody think you understand the first thing about atheism?

Some atheists have this to say about your belief system:

Christianity is the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

Your assertions about atheism are just as defensible, no more and no less, as this assertion about Christianity.

[Tassman]

You "belief" in humanity.

You DON'T believe humanity exists? There is considerably more evidence for it than there is for supernatural deities. All too much evidence of it in some overcrowded parts of the world.

[Chrawnus]

You DON'T believe humanity exists? There is considerably more evidence for it than there is for supernatural deities. All too much evidence of it in some overcrowded parts of the world.

I'm not sure if you're just trolling here, but I'll humour you anyway. Bertatberts asked The Polimist to elaborate on what beliefs he (bertatberts) had, and since I had checked out BB's profile I knew he had a "belief in humanity" (see picture in my previous post for reference). Now obviously, bertatberts didn't mean belief as in "belief in the existence of humanity" (if he did I don't think there's any hope left for him) but rather as faith in humanity (or something similar).

What reasons or evidence he has for his faith in humanity eludes me though, but that might just be my pessimistic outlook on humanity in general clouding my judgement.